Nigeria and Commonwealth (1960-1980)
Chapter One
Objective of the study
- To appraise Nigeria’s (foreign policy) membership in the Commonwealth of Nations
- To examine different eras of Nigeria’s foreign policy
- To examine the objectives of the Commonwealth of Nations
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Conceptual review
Concept of Foreign policy
A simple and clear meaning of foreign policy as given by Chibundu (2003;1), and Northedge (1968:18) is “a country‟s response to the world outside or beyond its own frontier or boundaries”. We add that it is a country‟s pattern of response to the outside world or events outside its own frontiers. Such response is a “product of environmental factors”. These factors comprise many elements like diplomacy, military, trade and other economic issues, socio-cultural relations, education and sports, to mention but seven. The response, may be friendly or aggressive, casual or intense, and simple or complex, hence foreign policy constitutes the actions of a state towards another state. The foreign policy strands of the developing states towards the industrialized states have been generally classified as lowkeyed as a result of certain practical determinants of foreign policy. For the purposes of this work, the Vernom Mckay‟s general classification of the determinants of African foreign policy framework will be adopted. The framework inter alia:
- National interest
- Ideology
- Military influence
- Political factors (internal and external)
- Political pressures
- Cultural and psychological factors (Mckay, 1966:31).
National Interest
National interest generally is a concept often used in understanding the foreign policy of a particular state. It is in principle, taken to be geared towards the overall political, economic, social and cultural developments of the sovereign state. But in concrete terms, national interest has often times, been taken to reflect the interests of a few group of national leaders, or even the interests of the head of state or government, or in general terms, the interest of the elites of the political system. Thus, the question on whose national interest, political leaders based their foreign policy decisions have generated controversy among scholars. For instance, Kaplan (1957:151) and Reynolds (1971:36) have posed those questions respectively: “Is there an objective national interest?” “Is there a real national interest?”
Ideology
Ideology in all essential points, has been viewed as a body of doctrines, or beliefs and symbols that purport to explain reality, and hence, prescribe political, and justified national behaviour. Thus, Mazrui (1977:20) has inferred that ideology in contemporary sense, “deals with the dissemination of ideas and values of direct political implications”.
In the African perspective, the concepts of “Afro-centritism”, “self-reliance”, “autonomy” among others, have one way or the other, constituted issues of national concern and continental interest. The character and ideological orientations of the African ruling class determine, therefore, their relationships with the world powers.
Economic Determinants
Economic factors are probably, the most important influencing factors in the formulation and implementation of African foreign policy. This economic force depends greatly on the structure and nature of Africa‟s domestic economy and its external economic and financial relations. This is in consonant with the views of Aforka Nweke, when he postulates that economic strength as an instrument of political power and foreign policy can be determined by the “quantity and quality of human and natural endowments, national production capacity and the extent to which the populace of a given state are actually in control by themselves of the means of production and distribution” (Nweke, 1986: 39). In Africa, the economies of the states have remained neo-colonial ones. They have been structurally fashioned by the imperial masters specifically for the interests of their economies. In this process, the indigenous African economy was distorted and disarticulated and got integrated into the capitalist economy of the advanced states through integration by subjugation and by integration. Although most African states are rich in natural resources, they do lack in comparison to the western economy, the needed capital and technology to exploit and develop the abundant natural resources;
CHAPTER THREE
HISTORY OF COMMONWEALTH
THE CREATION
Fifty-four independent nations freely associate in the Commonwealth of Nations. All but two of them (Mozambique (1954) and Rwanda (2009)) were at some stage, bound together in varying forms of allegiance to the British Crown.
The admissions of Mozambique and Rwanda wre exceptional. And yet, not every past colony or possession of Britain is a member of the Commonwealth. Thus, Hanover (and if one goes back further, parts of France) were once historically bound in allegiance to the British monarch. Yet they are not part of the Commonwealth and never have been. Nor is the United States of America, which, in 1781, prevailed in its War of Independence against Britain: upholding the right of its people to enjoy basic liberties in its territories that were enjoyed by British subjects at home. That war was the have a profound influence on the long-term evolution of democracy and civil rights in the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations. The British Crown learnt, sometimes slowly and reluctantly, from its mistakes.
CHAPTER FOUR
NIGERIA AND COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS
The Balewa era – 1960-1966: Dating British rule over the country from the time of annexation of Lagos in 1861, to the time of her independence on 1st October, 1960, Nigeria had been under British tutelage for virtually a century. During the period, Nigeria was systematically linked to Britain and the West politically, economically and, to an extent culturally. The country’s economy was planned to complement that of Britain and, to a lesser degree, British’s Western Allies. Britain’s stronghold on the country’s economy was consolidated by what the British rulers called the Imperial Preference: A policy under which Britain closed its colonies and dominions against outside competitors for many years.
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION
The political wind of change which ushered in independence brought in remarkable changes. However, the character of the Nigerian state and indeed the emerging leadership remained much as it was in the colonial era. It continues to be totalistic in scope, constituting statist economy, to the effect that even at independence the emerging Nigerian leaders were in no position to vigorously pursue fundamental developments (both national and international) that were of strategic concern to the people and the emerging state. Thus even the Nigerian foreign policy at independence commenced on a moderately low level and without a particular direction. As a result, from 1960 to date, Nigeria’s foreign policy trends witnessed a progressive upward and downward slide with each successive regime adopting different strategies and emphasis for the promotion of her national interest and the policy of afro-centricity. Notwithstanding the complicated domestic situation which they inherited, successive Nigerian leaders nonetheless sought an active role in world affairs commensurate with their country’s aspirations for itself, its interests, and its perceived stature vis-a-vis the three concentric circles that Nigeria’s foreign policy can be said to operate: the West African sub-region, the African continent, and the larger international community. The Murtala/Obasanjo’s era however, exceptionally witnessed a period when foreign policy was moved out of the realm of regime self-interest and personalized decision-making into one of national debate guided by a sense of national interest.
Recommendations/Future Challenges:
Since national interest dictates the course of a country’s foreign policy and indeed its very foundation, Nigeria national interest ought to be jealously guarded by all (future) government in power irrespective of their political or ideological inclinations. Nigerian government needs to articulate a clear foreign policy that is clearly focused on the country’s national interests as exemplified in the terrible days of the civil war – the primacy of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, assured through a stable sub-region and guaranteed by strong pan-African institutions, balanced with an extensive network of bilateral and multilateral international relationships – while being firmly anchored in the domestic political realities of the Federal Republic. In addition, since a sound economic base is the pre-requisite for conducting an effective and dynamic foreign policy, the country’s economic base need to be re-structured and realigned from its present mono-cultural and Western dependency status to sustain a realistic foreign policy goal in future.
Apart from its less-than-perfect sense of nationhood and its troubled democratic transition, corruption is another major factor from Nigeria’s internal historical experience which unfortunately influences the foreign policy of the country’s well-deserved reputation. Nigerian notions of corruption including everything from government bribery and graft, rigged elections, and fraudulent business deals, to the diabolical abuse of occult powers, medical quackery, cheating in school, and even deceiving a lover (Rawlence and Albin-Lackey, 2007: 505). The effects of corruption on such a large scale cannot but be deleterious. It not only affects the country’s international image, but also its economic and political development. In terms of the economy, the failure to attract foreign investment, especially in areas other than the hydrocarbon sector, coupled with the flight of domestic capital, necessarily hampers Nigeria’s growth. One need not belabour the implication of this as the inability to make economic and political progress is, of course, a constraint on any country’s hard power as well as its soft power and, thus limits Nigeria’s diplomatic reach regionally and internationally.
Finally, a stable political environment devoid of military coups, ethnic gangsterism, electoral fraud etc. etc., a stable polity and an accountable and visionary leadership are added imperatives not only to restore Nigeria’s good will in the international community but in the conduct of a credible dynamic foreign policy in future. This course alone will secure for the Nigeria of the 21st century its fundamental national interests, the assurance of which is the measure par excellence of a successful foreign policy.
REFERENCES:
- Abiola, O. (1987) Constitutional Law and Military Rule in Nigeria. Ibadan: Evans Brothers Limited.
- Adefolarin, A. (1981) Political Science and Government of West Africa. Lagos:
- Agbese, D. (2009) Newswatch, Nigeria’s Weekly Magazine,October 12 Vol. 50 No. 15
- Agbi, O. (1980) Selected Issues on Nigeria’s Foreign Policy: From Balewa to Obasanjo. Nigerian Journal of Political Science Vol. 2 No. 1 June
- Akindele, R.A. (2006) Nigeria’s Foreign Policy in the Global, Diplomatic and Diplomatic Marketplace,1999-2003; in A.T. Ghana and Omelle Y.B.C. (Ed) Democratic Rebirth in Nigeria, Vol 1 1993-2003, African Centre for Democratic Governance
- Akinyemi, A.B. (1987) Address to a Cross-section of the Nigerian Foreign Policy Intelligentsia, 27th April
- Akinyemi, B.A. (1989) Nigeria Since Independence: The First 25 Years (Ed) Vol. X, Ibadan: Heinemann Books Limited
- Akinbobola, A. (1999) International Politics in R. Anifowose and Enemuo, F. (Ed) Elements of Politics, Lagos: Sam Iroanusi Publication
- Akinboye, S.O. (1999) Nigeria’s Foreign Policy R. Anifowose, and Enemuo, F. (Ed) Elements of Politics. Lagos: Sam Iroanusi Publication
