Political History of Nigeria - Coursework Example

Running Head: Political History of Nigeria Political History of Nigeria: An Analysis of the Political and Economic Realities of Africa’s Largest Oil Reserve Name Course Title and Description Date of Submission Name of University I. Introduction Nigerian modern history is a troubled one, distinguished not by accomplishment in forging a strong nation-state, but by the remarkable failure to surpass the twin predicaments of political disorder and economic underdevelopment. With immense natural resources, an educated middle class, and a diligent population, the nation has no justification for being in such a wretched position. Nigeria welcomes the new century as an impoverished country, not that better off than when it gained its independence in 1960, and its population have turned out to be disheartened and miserable. Thousands of its youth think that going abroad is the only solution to escape their hardships. A society of jobless people resorts to criminal acts and gangs; others go to religion for consolation. Oil riches has not been cautiously managed to diminish the effect of reliance on a single commodity, produce enormous domestic capital and foreign capital or investments, and improve in general productive capability and social capital (Falola, 1999). A thriving class of manufacturers is yet to surface, as it is at all times more lucrative to acquire access to power, or to endeavor in commerce, oil bunkering, land assessment, currency changing, smuggling, drug trafficking and other illegal activities. Domestic industries, with highly significant contents, carry on resisting for cold cash while foreign investments lingered essentially restricted to the oil industry (ibid). Despite of its plentiful resources, including an energetic and literate population, and the largest oil reserve in whole of Africa, Nigeria has been in a miserable condition for a long time now because of a combination of incidences, namely, the colonial heritage, mediocre leadership, political authoritarianism, governmental ineffectiveness, mishandling of oil revenues, legitimated corruption, the exploitation of ethnicity by the political groups, protracted military administrations, an absolutist politics where the victor gets everything, and manipulation by outside forces. Up until now, the country has fell short to design feasible political foundations, particularly a mechanism to lessen abuse of authority and power and permit a truthful changeover from military to democratic regime (Ejiogu, 2002). Oil revenues have facilitated the survival of the country and its populations to contemplate of a prosperous future. However, oil wealth has permitted a few political personalities to take pleasure on a high level of political independence while stepping on the rights of the common people (ibid). Politics is fundamental to Nigeria’s development. Without an established political environment, progress will be unlikely. The objective of the political class is doubtful; to obtain power is to pursue the means to steal on the people’s money, never to alleviate the poor. The military has been dishonored, both as a security foundation and as a political administrator. Democracy, despite of its setbacks, provides a route to seek for. Yet, democracy in Nigeria must place economic concerns at its core (Falola, 1999). Simply transferring power form the military to the common people without dealing with the issues of corruption, integrating the demands of most of the rural folks, and enhancing a collapsing economy will not usher in permanent solutions. II. Unsettled Dilemmas Up until now, the nation has yet to solve concerns revolving around its sustained existence as a nation-state, the safeguarding of human rights, the upholding of the law, terminating military incursion, and applying improved economic management strategies to upgrade living standards (ibid). To begin with the economy, reliance on oil with irregular revenues will carry on creating predicaments for planning and development. For several years, a number of multinational oil firms manipulated the industry and the royalties given to the nation were far below the average. Since the 1970s the nation has resettled numerous contracts, improved its bargaining influence, and become included in most stages of the process. Yet, it has still to acquire complete control of production, choose prices, decrease reliance on the multinational firms, obtain appropriate technology, and branch out the economy (Olayiwola, 1987). The federal administration exercised the authority to distribute and allocate the revenues from oil. National and local governments are inadequate in resources to sustain themselves with the consequence that, so as to share in oil proceeds, all of them have to agree to manipulation by the federal government. Where a state does not generate oil, a way in to the oil proceeds has facilitated it to sustain a level of public spending far from the accessible domestic resources. No state lingers contented with the proceed-sharing modus operandi, as each clamors for mote. In the perspective of the oil-producing nations, a principle of source will provide them further and generate impartiality (Ejiogu, 2002). Those insufficient in oil do discuss about the necessity to apply fiscal regulations to incorporate the nation and are uneager to support any action to reallocate oil revenues; nations with oil reserve sense that they are being cheated since they do not have power over the revenues, and, since they are inclined to be marginal groups, they are accurate in also complaining about ethnic dominance. The influence of the center is unwarranted, used to recompense and reprimand. As expected, the rivalry for the center is severe, if only to manipulate oil revenues. The powerlessness to solve economic setbacks has generated lots of connected calamities. For example, inflation is brought about by, among other things, little productivity, an adverse symmetry of payments, and external reliance. Inflation has carried over social and political disorder and amplified the cost of progress (ibid). There are also the concerns of joblessness, smuggling, and migration from the rural to urban areas. All governments have mixed-up along, misleading the public with deceiving statistics and expression of assurance that all is going on the right way (Falola, 1999). On the other hand, regarding political issues, situations for secession and civil war continue and political rivalry is about who gets what, why, how and when. As the nation has taken on a federal structure, the center is extremely powerful as to establish state sovereignty more of a falsehood than a reality. While the mainstream carries on demanding a democratic government, the military has declined to separate. Those who go for democracy have appealed for an array of alternatives from a multi-party system to a single-party or a zero-party, each given with its own dilemmas (ibid). When the government of Babangida legislated a dual-party system, it fell short to generate a wide enough ideological space between the parties, and politics practically disintegrated into a south-north, Christian-Muslim dichotomy (Davis, 2003). Irrespective of the political framework or the structure, the foremost political concern is how resources and wealth are distributed among rivaling interests groups. The prevailing property-owning group has amassed through right to use power and has also steadily moved into indemnity, banking systems, construction, production, and other sectors already managed by foreign motives. This small class recognizes that to lose influence is to lose possessions. More usurpers than producers, their objective in acquiring power is not to provide benefit for the mainstream population but merely a few. As the economy collapses, the contest for power has amplified (ibid). The real power that every individual desires is the power to be in charge over the allocation of permits to take advantage of oil reserves and plunge hands deeply into the treasury of the federal government. The political players are classified into different groups. The foremost player has been the military, which has usurped power since 1965 save for the short-lived period. Greatly autocratic and hard to challenge, the military is a menace to the nation; it is against the emergence of a perpetual democracy, it is corrupt, and it embezzles a sizable portion of the budget. If the political actors are corrupt and voracious, years of worthless mismanagement under the military have harm the reputation of the army and drawn progressively to the masses to a democratic alternative (Ejiogu, 2002). The subsequent group of players is the politicians who have headed over two disastrous republics and competed for power in all the changeover programs since 1970. Many among them desire wealth, not the prospect of serving the people (ibid). Other groups pursue the ways for collaboration. The bureaucrats are at all times willing to repossess influence, and a number of them favor military administration, which confers them a greater influence in management. There are also the scholars or intellectuals, commonly estranged and bitter about the collapse of educational institutions. Numerous have abandoned the country and most of those who stayed behind merely seek the means to continue living (Cohen, 1974). Finally there are the conventional leaders, some of whom are wealthy, influential and literate. They carry on seeking a contribution in politics, with a few supporting a meticulous combination of republicanism and monarchy. As several of them, take pleasure on trustworthiness and support among the masses, those in authority have always sense a wanting to control them so as to reach the public (ibid). The process of pursuing and maintaining power are extremely destructive and normally put the country on a descending pattern. Thus far, the most widespread has been through coercion, in coup détats that overthrow generals. The ideology has stayed the same with modifications only in approach, degree of integrity, and extent of responsibility. When the military was alleged of not being educated enough, it acted in the 1980s to establish its own educational institution, administer advanced seminars, and request guest speakers. The military is not excluded from ethnic politics, occasionally abiding by an allocation system in staffing and promotion. Since the middle of the 1960s it has been governed by northerners, along the similar trend as civilian politics (Davis, 2003). Due to its enduring concentration in politics, there has been a regular dispute as to its significance. Recently, ethnic chiefs in the southwest have summoned for provincial armies, obviously to facilitate secession (ibid). Another important technique is the exploitation of ethnicity. Dedication to the ethno-nations is successful in forging alliances, unions, and political parties. It can assume the outline of a north-south partition or of Igbo against Yoruba. Regardless of the party arrangement, ethnicity is definitely a setback. The domain of politics is perplexing and far-reaching, while crosscutting bonds are complicated to create. Ethnicity permits leaders to be prejudice, rationalize corruption, and stand to wrong administration tactics as long as these are committed by fellow ethnic-group affiliates (Davis, 2003). The establishment of states, at present standing at thirty-six and more being pressured, has not answered the concern of ethnic conflict as expected. If the center apportions wealth to the states, the deliberation is that the most certain means to obtain more resources is to keep dividing up present states so as to increase every one’s allocation of federal revenues. Nevertheless, ethnic identity affects states, and political movements can easily suggest collective and ethnic commitment (ibid). Lastly, civilian actors are mobilized into political organizations and parties when the military facilitates them. Political parties control religion and ethnicity and take advantage of the influence of the media to disseminate their opinions and perspectives. As a rule, all the political parties create identical demands, restricting their differences to qualities and campaign approaches. Political principles are fluid, adopted for expediency and devoid of stability. When a politician is incapable to acquire power through elections, he is rapid to support a military administration as long as there will be an incentive or advantage for him (Falola, 1999). III. Conclusion Political unions will remain irregular and flexible as old and new competitors pursue the ways to amass power. All layers of government will persist to compete over the distribution and allocation of oil revenues. The social foundation of power will stay critical, as workers, capitalists, occupants and landlords make different claims. While the privileged will carry on usurping power, it will be challenged by the pressures coming from the demands of the despondent and oppressed (Davis, 2003). As the disparity between the wealthy and the impoverished broadens and prospects for upward mobility disappear, the nation will witness an epidemic of riots, some appealing for a revolution and others jeopardizing the entire foundation of society. The menace of the military is unending. The army took pleasure from authority and power disproportionate to its function in defense. It will persist to demand that its economic interest be fed. It has declined all proposals to be active in socially favorable operations, while the politicians have declined including it in administration on a long-term basis. Military detachment from politics is a predicament. The military has been popular for breaking its pledges. The two republics have been brief, and prospective ones may have similar fates. The army cannot be apolitical (Ejiogu, 2002). Separated by ethnicity and religion, and with a battalion of officers gluttonous for wealth and power, it will remain a hazard to political order. Social conflict will continue to develop as millions of people do not have access to the means of production and employment and are rejected opportunities for sufficient accommodation, education and leisure. As the wealthy showcases their wealth, the impoverished will demand their own share of the national resources and push for a more just distribution. Antagonism by the underprivileged will find expression in criminal acts such as robbery, drug trafficking and other illegal activities. Therefore, the real question that Nigeria is trying to answer since the time the nation has acquired a sense of independence is, is there still hope for the country? Works Cited Cohen, R. (1974). Labour and Politics in Nigeria. London: Heinemann US. Davis, T. (2003). Education, Ethnicity and National Integration in the History of Nigeria. The Journal of Negro History , 1+. Ejiogu, E. (2002). The Roots of Political Instability in an Artificial Nation-State: The Case of Nigeria. International Journal of Comparative Sociology , 323. Falola, T. (1999). The History of Nigeria. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Olayiwola, P. O. (1987). Petroleum and Structural Change in Developing Country: The Case of Nigeria. New York: Praeger. Read More