Introduction: It is well known that insecurity is one of the greatest problems confronting Nigeria today. Consequently, the incoming government of All Progressives Congress(APC) has prioritized security in its manifesto. Among other things, it has promised to employ an extra 100,000 police officers and establish a properly trained and equipped Federal Anti-Terrorism Multi-Agency Task Force to destroy Boko Haram and any form of insurgency; introduce an immediate pay rise and improved conditions of service for all five security agencies among others. However, it is necessary to understand the concept of security in all its ramifications, the nature and character of the Nigerian State and the major threat to national security to be able to map out a programme to promote peace and security.
The concept of national security has been defined in different ways by different scholars and has undergone fundamental changes since the end of the Second World War when the usage of the term became popular and lately since the end of the cold war in the last two decades. Walter Lippmann (1943) points out that a nation has security when it does not have to sacrifice its legitimate interests to avoid war and is able if challenged to maintain them by war.[i] Arnold Wolfers (1962) argues that security in an objective sense, measures the absence of threats to acquired values, in a subjective sense, the absence of fear that such values will be attacked.[ii] Amos Jordan and William Taylor (1981) opines that national security has a more extensive meaning than protection from physical harm; it also implies protection, through a variety of means, of vital economic and political interests, the loss of which could threaten fundamental values and the vitality of the state.[iii] But to Charles Maier (1990), national security is best defined as the capacity to control those domestic and foreign conditions that the public opinion of a given community believes necessary to enjoy its own self-determination or autonomy, prosperity and well being.[iv] However, as Waltrand Morales has argued, national security as defined by defence specialists, first entails defence in its narrowest concept- the protection of a nation’s people and territories from physical attack; and second, the more extensive concept of the protection of political and economic interests considered essential by those who exercise political power to the fundamental values and vitality of the state. [v]
From the definitions, we can delineate some clear directions. First and foremost, over time especially since the end of the cold war, there has been a move at broadening the definition of national security beyond the narrow military conception to include human security which combines elements of national security, economic development and basic human rights.[vi] Secondly, national security is an expansive concept with several dimensions. Some scholars have argued that national security has three dimensions namely military security; political stability or governance (security of the government) and resource security.[vii] Thirdly, although military security has not vanished as a key element of national security, it has certainly declined in importance relative to the issues of economic, energy and environmental security.[viii] Finally, the people have come to the centre of contemporary conception of national security. Therefore, emphasis is now put not on regime security but on human security. Maintaining regime security through coercive force is unstable as can be seen from recent uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen.
NATURE AND CHARACTER OF THE NIGERIAN STATE
The nature and character of a state can affect the national security and define the pattern of threat to security. Scholars have theorized on the nature and character of the state. Liberal scholars posit that the state is a neutral institution that balances competing interests between elite groups.[ix] This has been roundly criticized by a lot of scholars leading to different postulations. Marx and Engels argue that the state emerges as a result of class struggle and is used as an instrument of a ruling class to assert its interests. According to them,
Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance of that class… the executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.[x]
Following in the same tradition, Lenin argued that states arose, as society became divided into classes. The State became a “machine” not only of maintaining the rule of a class, but also for the oppression of one class by another, a machine for holding in obedience to one class by other subordinated classes.[xi] Ralph Miliband and other “instrumentalist” theorists see the state as an instrument in the hands of the ruling class (the bourgeoisie) for the exploitation and oppression of the working class.[xii] But Nicos Poulantzas and other “structuralist” theorists criticized the instrumentalists for overlooking the structural linkage between the capitalist state and the bourgeoisie. The structuralists contend that once all state structures are capitalist, they will ensure the domination of the capitalist class without the class necessarily participating in government.[xiii]
Some scholars have alluded to the historical and structural uniqueness or specificity of the postcolonial state. According to Alavi,
“The essential problem about the state in the post colonial societies stems from the fact that it is not established by an ascendant native bourgeoisie but instead by a foreign capitalist bourgeoisie… The class basis of the postcolonial state is, therefore complex…the state in postcolonial society is not the instrument of a single class. It is relatively autonomous and it mediates between the competing interests of the three propertied classes, namely, the metropolitan bourgeoisie, the indigenous bourgeoisie and the landed classes, while at the same time acting on behalf of them all to preserve the social order in which their interests are embedded…[xiv]
Alavi further argue that the postcolonial state is over-developed in relation to the economic structure over which it presides in the sense that it is characterized by a strong relatively autonomous, military-bureaucratic oligarchy. Colin Leys dismissed the notion of over-developed state arguing that in order to understand the significance of any state for the class struggles, the starting point of such analysis must begin with class struggle and not the state itself[xv]. Similarly, Ziemann and Lanzendorfer (1977) attacked the notion of the over-developed state pointing out that “for so long as the state is fitted for its main function, to secure the societal reproduction, the extent of its influence on society is neither too great or too small but adequate’.[xvi]
Edigheji has provided a framework for a democratic developmental state, one that is autonomous and coherent; takes on board the attributes of procedural democracy and forges broad based alliances with society while ensuring popular participation in the governance and transformation process.[xvii]
The Nigerian State has been described variously as “neo-colonial”’ “comprador”, “rentier”, “fragile”’ “neo-patrimonial”’ “prebendal”’ “predatory” etc [xviii]. In 2002, Prof. Richard Joseph described the state in Nigeria as catastrophic[xix]. Jibrin Ibrahim pointed out that Nigeria was transformed into a neopatrimonial state on the promotion of booty capitalism. According to him, the neopatrimonial bourgeosie is parasitic and predatory and has no interest in transparency, in accountability, in the existence of political opposition or the culture of public debate that democracy breeds.[xx] Ekekwe showed how the locally dominant classes in Africa use corruption and manipulation as mechanism of accumulation.[xxi] Bjorn Beckman argued that the primary role of the Nigerian State is to establish, maintain, protect and expand the conditions of capitalist accumulation in general, without which neither foreign nor Nigerian capitalist can prosper.[xxii] According to Osaghae, Nigeria is a crippled state.[xxiii] The state was crippled by the nature of its colonial creation, integration into the global economy, corrupt and authoritarian regimes, divisiveness and hegemonic world order. Peter Ekeh propounded the theory of the two publics in Africa. According to the theory,
One was the civic public which is roughly coterminous with the sphere of government, and the other was the primordial public, comprising ethnic and regional promotional associations, which was nurtured by the values of the indigenous society or private realm. While the former public operated in an essentially amoral milieu, the latter retained an abiding morality which emphasized the obligations of the individual to his extended family and community. Problems of corruption, ethnicity and their like are then attributed to the fact that the same individuals operate in the two publics working at cross purposes.[xxiv]
We argue that the state is not neutral and that beyond its use as an instrument to serve the interest of the ruling class and its collaborators (both foreign and local), it has become an instrument of deceit.[xxv] The modern contemporary state is a deceitful state. The Nigerian state is a deceitful state.
The nature and character of the Nigerian state has made the state and all its institutions to focus on regime security to the neglect of human security and this is the greatest threat to national security in Nigeria.
THREAT TO NIGERIA’S NATIONAL SECURITY
Threat to national security has been defined as an action or sequence of events that threatens drastically and over a relatively brief span of time to degrade the quality of life for the inhabitants of a state or threatens significantly to narrow the range of policy choices available to the government of a state or to private nongovernmental entities (persons, groups, corporations) within the state.[xxvi] Simply put and in our view, threat to Nigeria’s national security are those actions or sequence of events that threaten to decrease the quality of life of Nigerians and prevent the people from making choices that will improve their conditions. This will ultimately lead to conflicts and breakdown of law and order.
The conduct, (in) actions, policies and programmes of the ruling class in Nigeria is decreasing the quality of life of Nigerians, increasing the criminogenic factors and generating internal conflicts.
It is important to take cognisance of the fact that the nature of violent conflict in the world, which is one of the key events that decrease the quality of life of people is changing particularly in terms of the causes of the conflict and the form of its expression.[xxvii] According to Harris and Reilly, one of the most dramatic changes has been the trend away from traditional inter-State conflict (that is, a war between sovereign States) and towards intra- State conflict (that is one which takes place between factions within an existing State).[xxviii]. They argued that conflicts originating largely within states combines two powerful elements: potent identity based factors, based on differences in race, religion, culture, language and so on with perceived imbalance in the distribution of economic, political and social resources.[xxix] The threat to the security of Nigeria is therefore not external but internal. This was aptly captured by the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) when it stated that:
Nigeria has been embroiled in military and intra-state civil wars, the most notable of which was the Biafra civil war. These civil conflicts have partly retarded the emergence of political democracy and economic development within Nigeria. The major causes of intra-state conflicts include pervasive social and economic inequality and wealth distribution (especially regarding petroleum resources), religious intolerance, and political manipulation and representation. Issues of identity and ethnicity have their own dynamics which contribute to such conflicts. In the absence of an effective early warning system, the effectiveness of conflict resolution interventions at the national and inter-state levels is limited. [xxx]
From the above, it is obvious that the threat to Nigeria’s national security is internal rather than external.[xxxi] It can be located in the nature and character of the Nigerian state which has manifested itself in absence of a dynamic, strategic and visionary leadership; absence of or inappropriate strategies and inappropriate development approaches. As Esiemokhai has argued, in states where the interests of the ruling elite are put above that of the people, the police, the army and security formations are expected to defend the government, its personnel and its property.[xxxii] The end result is increasing poverty, crime rate, ethno-religious crisis, Niger Delta crisis and election violence. It is in the legitimate interest of Nigeria to transform the nature and character of the Nigerian state so as to remove the threat to national security. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria expouses the ideals of “Freedom, Equality and Justice” with the national ethics of discipline, integrity, dignity of labour, social justice, religious tolerance, self-reliance and patriotism.[xxxiii] These values are being threatened by the conduct of the ruling class. The economic and political interest of the country is being undermined by corruption, election irregularities, election violence and manipulation of religion. The capacity of institutions to deliver political and economic security has been weakened by primitive accumulation, corruption and inefficient bureaucracy. The focus of the ruling class is on regime security rather than the need for the more sustainable protection of the political and economic interest of the country.
Therefore, the threat to Nigeria’s national security has manifested itself in five problems that are capable of compromising the peace and security of Nigeria. These are:
- Ethno-religious conflicts: The ethnic and religious composition of Nigeria and its manipulation by the political elite has posed a lot of challenges to governance and security in Nigeria. This has been aggravated by the failure of the State to perform its core duties of maintaining law and order, justice and providing social services to the people. For instance, the failure of the State has led to the emergence of ethnic militias in several parts of the country such as the Odua Peoples’ Congress (OPC) and Baakasi Boys.
[xxxiv]Various Scholars have written on the politicization and manipulation of ethnic and religious identities in Nigeria.[xxxv] In the past twenty years, there is a resurgence of ethnic and religious violence in Nigeria. It is instructive to note that this resurgence coincided with economic crisis experienced in Nigeria and the introduction of Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP).[xxxvi] Shawalu has argued that the sources of conflict in Nigeria include militarism, absence and distortions of democracy, economic problem, collapse of the educational sector, the growing army of almajirai[xxxvii], security inadequacy, intensification of micronationalism, absence of justice and equity and weakness of Civil Society groups.[xxxviii] One common thread that runs through the writings of scholars is the argument that most ethnic clashes in Nigeria often have religious dimensions.[xxxix]
It is important to examine in some details two of the recent manifestations of ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria namely the Jos crisis and the Boko Haram challenge to the state.
The term Boko Haram comes from the Hausa word boko meaning western or non-islamic education and the Arabic word haram meaning sin.[xl] It literally means western education or non-islamic education is a sin. Boko Haram is made up of a group of people that reject western education and are opposed to the state. They attack institutions of the state especially police stations and prisons killing police officers and releasing prisoners. The group was founded in 2002 in Maiduguri, Borno State in Northeastern Nigeria. The group said to have about 2000 members first attacked police stations in 2003.[xli]
On Sunday 20th July, 2009, the sect launched an attack on instruments of the state. Several police stations, government offices and schools were destroyed. The main prison was invaded and prisoners set free. By the sixth day, official report put the number of the dead at over 800 people.[xlii] On 30th July, 2009 the founder Utzaz Mohammed Yusuf was allegedly killed by security forces.
It is instructive to note that prominent members of the sect allegedly send their children to school, some to western schools abroad against the basic philosophy of the sect. As noted above, the Boko Haram phenomenon is part of manipulation of religion by the ruling class fueled by pervasive poverty. Over the last few months, the membership has increased astronomically with the insurgency becoming full blown.
- Niger Delta crisis: We have argued elsewhere that the Niger Delta has slipped into crisis as a result of the political economy of oil characterized by destruction of the environment, crisis of governance, unjust revenue allocation formula, infrastructural decay, poor regulation of the oil and gas sector with its attendant vulnerability and human suffering. [xliii] This led to the amnesty programme announced by the Federal Government on 25th June, 2009 to all militants in the Niger Delta to surrender their arms and unconditionally renounce militancy. The amnesty period lasted for 60 days from 6th August-4th October, 2009 at the end of which 20,178 militants registered and 2,760 weapons, 18 gun boats and 287,445 rounds of ammunition were collected. The success of the amnesty programme has been commended by all. The programme consists essentially of disarmament, demobilization and re-integration (DDR). The disarmament phase was achieved at the end of the amnesty period. The demobilization and transformational training (which is part of peace education) is going on in Obubra in Cross River State. The achievement of sustainable peace however will depend on effective re-integration.
- Electoral violence: Electoral violence is any act of violence perpetuated in the course of political activities, including pre, during and post-election periods, and may include any of the following acts: thuggery, use of force to disrupt political meetings or voting at polling stations, or the use of dangerous weapons to intimidate voters and other electoral process or to cause bodily harm or injury to any person connected with electoral processes. Electoral violence can be physical violence manifesting in physical attack resulting into assault, grievous bodily harm, disruption of meetings/campaigns and death or psychological violence in the form of tearing of posters, intimidation, use of media, reckless driving by those in procession to campaign rallies.
Meanwhile, it is recognized all over the world that the electoral process is an alternative to violence as a means of achieving governance. When conflict or violence occurs, it is not a result of an electoral process. It is the breakdown of an electoral process. Lack of credible, free and fair elections lead to electoral violence which can occur at any stage of the electoral process: registration, campaigns, voting on Election Day, announcement of result and post-election violence. Electoral violence is usually a reaction to electoral abuses, rigging of election and falsification of results. Elections in Nigeria have been marked with violence from the general election of 1959 and 1964 which led to massive violence in Western Nigeria leading to the coinage of Wild wild west to the destruction in Ondo state that followed the announcement of Akin Omoboriowo of the NPN as the winner of the election in Ondo State in 1983 to the pockets of violence that followed the direct capture of the peoples’ mandate in 2007. A lot of violence has preceded the April 2011 elections and there is the need for adequate preparations to prevent wide scale violence in the elections through good election management, adequate security arrangements and monitoring of the conduct of security officers.
- Terrorism and Insurgency: The challenge of terrorism in Nigeria became a public discourse with the alleged involvement of Mutallab in the Christmas day attempt to blow up a plane going to the United States of America. In the last few years, there is full blown insurgency in Nigeria. Dealing with terrorism and insurgency requires a comprehensive approach including education, counter-insurgency and re-orientation.
- Climate Change: Climate Change has been recognized as one of the major constraints to development in the world today. The level of climate change has reached dramatic proportions in recent years and all projections point to the fact that if present trend continues, there is potential for catastrophic consequences. Already, it has been documented that all over the world, there is clearly a rising trend of climate disasters manifesting in various forms and shapes including rising sea levels, changes in deep water ocean flows, loss of melt-waters from high mountain ranges, droughts, floods, heat waves, landslides etc.[xliv] This underscores the importance for all countries to have clear adaptation strategies to deal with the threat of climate change. Adaptation is meant to enable people manage climate related risks and shocks. Adaptation are the actions that people take in response to, or in anticipation of projected or actual changes in climate, to reduce adverse impacts or take advantage of opportunities posed by climate change.[xlv] It involves providing information, building resilience, investment in infrastructure for climate proofing, insurance for social protection, improved disaster management and integration of adaptation into national poverty eradication strategy. Unfortunately, Nigeria seems ill prepared to deal with the challenges of climate change.
THE WAY FORWARD FOR SECURITY
Every state has a responsibility to use state power to protect life and property, improve the quality of life of citizens and remove threat to national security. The concept of national security has undergone fundamental changes since the end of the Second World War and more recently since the end of the cold war. The conceptualization of national security has been broadened beyond military and regime security to include political, economic and environmental security of the country and its people.
It is clear to us that the nature and character of a state can affect national security and define the pattern of threat. The nature and character of the Nigerian State has made the government and all its institutions to focus on military and regime security to the neglect of human security. The greatest threat to Nigerian security is therefore the actions, policies and programmes of the ruling class that are decreasing the quality of life; increasing crime wave and generating internal conflict. The concrete manifestation of this is ethno-religious conflicts, Niger Delta crisis, electoral violence and terrorist attacks.
Meanwhile, there is a direct relationship between increasing poverty and insecurity. Whenever there is conflict and insecurity, poverty increases. The increased poverty fuels more insecurity and the vicious cycle continue. The Brookings Institute in its study noted that only 10 percent of the global poor live in stable, low income countries, 40 percent live in fragile and conflict-affected countries and 50 percent in middle income countries.[xlvi] This means that poverty is low is stable low income countries but high in conflict affected countries. It also means that poverty is prevalent in middle income countries because of inequality.
The way forward is transformation of the nature and character of the Nigerian state; transforming the problems that compromise peace and security; peace and security education, management of anger by security agencies and the people and a new approach to the conceptualization, policy formulation and implementation of security policy and programmes. The new APC administration should therefore focus on the following issues if it wants to achieve sustainable peace in Nigeria:
- Transforming the nature and character of the Nigerian state in a way that will bring about dynamic and visionary leadership, appropriate strategy and development approaches. This can be done through the mobilization and organization of the people for the transformation of the nature and conduct of politics and training a new breed of leaders who will understand and advocate for human security and human centred development.
- Transforming the problems that compromise peace and security namely ethno-religious crisis, Niger Delta crisis, violence and terrorism. The beginning point is to identify the root causes of these problems which can be located in systematic and structural arrangement of society in social, cultural, economic, religious and political frameworks that perpetuate injustice and inequality. These systems must be transformed to a more humane and equitable arrangements that are sustainable.
- Peace and security education: Peace and security education is a critical factor in producing sustainable peace. Peace and security education is a multi-disciplinary enterprise involving political science, sociology, philosophy, psychology, law, history, economics, international relations and development studies. It is ironic that the African continent have been faced with different forms of conflict, yet peace and security education and research have languished behind, irrespective of the progress recorded in other parts of the world.[xlvii] Peace and security education should challenge the dominant paradigm where decisions on peace and security are monopolized by the state and its institutions such as the arms industry, security agencies and politicians. It should create a movement of peace activists that will help to create a culture of peace based on the universal values of respect for life, liberty, justice, solidarity, tolerance, human rights and equality between men and women.[xlviii] The peace activists so created must be people with values of peace. The values of peace include among other things respect for life, sharing with others, rejection of violence, sense of justice, listening ability and solidarity.
- Management of anger by security agencies and the people: For there to be a change in any society, the people must be sufficiently angry against injustice and be prepared to take action within organizational context. Anger is very important in fighting for peace and justice. As Nelson Mandela noted:
“I had no epiphany, no singular revelation, no moment of truth, but a steady accumulation of a thousand slights, a thousand indignities and a thousand unremembered moments produced in me an anger, a rebelliousness, a desire to fight the system that imprisoned my people. There was no particular day on which I said, Henceforth I will devote myself to the liberation of my people; instead, I simply found myself doing so, and could not do otherwise.”
According to Martin Luther King, Jr (1968), the harnessing of anger is the greatest of tasks:
“The supreme task is to organize and unite people so that their anger becomes a transforming force.”
Gandhi (1929) also talks about the harnessing of anger as a powerful force for justice:
“I have learned through bitter experience the one supreme lesson to conserve my anger, and as heat conserved is transmuted into energy, even so, our anger controlled can be transmuted into a power which can move the world.”
There is no doubt that many Nigerians are angry about the threat to national security in the country. This anger must be managed and directed properly. The level of consciousness must be developed to the phase of taking action. Peace and security education should help to build that level of consciousness.
It is important to point out that while anger is necessary for the citizens, security officials need to be trained to ignore their emotions, especially fear and act rationally.[xlix] This is the only way that we can avoid the reoccurrence of Odi and Zaki Ibaim.[l]
- New Approach to Security Conceptualisation, Policy Formulation and Implementation
There is the need for a new approach to security conceptualization, policy formulation and implementation in Nigeria. The concept of national security must be broadened to include the political, economic, energy and environmental/climate change dimensions. The formulation of security policy should involve the civil society and parliament. The content of the policy should be broadened to take into consideration the threat to national security. The subordination of the security forces to civil authority should be operationalised in the formulation and implementation of security policies.
Dr. Otive Igbuzor is a Human Rights Activist, Policy Analyst, Development Expert and Strategist. He holds a doctorate degree in Public Administration.
ENDNOTES
[i] Lippmann, Walter (1943), Quoted in Berkowitz, Morton and Bock, P. G, National Security on Sills, D. L. (Ed), International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vol 11. New York, Macmillan. P.40
[ii] Wolfers, Arnold (1962), Quoted in Romm, J. J. (1993), Defining National Security: The Non military Aspects. New York, Council on Foreign Relations Press
[iii] Jordan, A. A. and Taylor Jr., (1981), National Security. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. P.3
[iv] Maier, C. S. (1990), Peace and Security Studies for the 1990s. Unpublished paper for MacArthur Fellowship program, Social Science Research Council, 12 June, 1990. P.12
[v] Morales, Waltrand, Quoted in Romm, J.J. (1993)
[vi] Ball, Nicole and Fayemi, Kayode (2004), Security Sector Governance in Africa: A Handbook. Lagos, Centre for Democracy & Development.
[vii] Romm, J. J. (1993), Defining National Security: The nonmilitary Aspects. New York, Council on Foreign Relations Press. Resource security refers to the broad socioeconomic framework supporting the state in terms of overall contextual and structural viability. The absence of this type of security will be manifested in trouble and disaster in political security due to internal pressures and the inability of the government to contain, manage or export pressures on the resource base.
[viii] Romm, J. J. (1993)
[ix] Dahl, R. (1956), A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
[x] Marx , K. and Engels, F. (1982), Selected Works. Moscow, Progress Publishers. p 37)
[xi] Marx, K., Engels, F. and Lenin, V. I. (1976), On Historical Materialism: A Collection. Moscow Publishers.
[xii] (Miliband, R (1975), The State in Capitalist Society. London, Quarter Books.
[xiii] (Poulantzas, N. (1973), Political Power and Social Classes. London, New Left Books
[xiv] (Alavi, 1979:41-43) Alavi, H. (1979), “The State in Postcolonial Society: Pakistan and Bangladesh” in Goulbourne, H. (Ed), Politics and State in the Third World. London, Macmillan Press
[xv]Leys, C. (1976), “The Overdeveloped Postcolonial State: A Reevaluation” in ROAPE No. 5 London
[xvi] Ziemann, W. and Lanzendorfer, M. (1977), “The State in Peripheral Capitalist Societies” in Milliband, R. and Saville, J. (Eds), The Socialist Register. London, Merlin Press.
[xvii] Edigheji, O.(2005), A Developmental State in Africa? A research report prepared for Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg.
[xviii] Sha, D. P (1999), “Theorising the Nigerian State: Pitfalls and the Search for an Alternative Framework of Analysis” in Proceedings of the 11th General Assembly of the Nigerian Social Science Academy held at the National Women Development Centre, Abuja from 5-7 July, 1999
[xix] Joseph, R (2002), “State, Governance and Insecurity in Africa” A Lecture delivered at the 5th Anniversary Celebration of Centre for Democracy and Development in Lagos on 29th November 2002. According to Joseph, catastrophic governance can be defined as endemic practices that steadily undermine a country’s capacity to increase the supply of public goods.
[xx] Ibrahim, J. (1997), “The Military and the Programme of Transition to Democratic Rule” in Ibrahim, J. (Ed), Expanding Democratic Space in Nigeria. Dakar, CODESRIA
[xxi] Ekekwe, E. (1986), Class and State in Nigeria. London, Longman.
[xxii] Beckman, B. (1982), “Whose State? State and Capitalist Development in Nigeria” in Review of African Political Economy. No 3
[xxiii] Osaghae, E. E. (1998), Nigeria since Independence: Crippled Giant. Bloomington, Indiana University Press
[xxiv] Ekeh, P. P. (1975), “Colonialism and the Two Publics in Africa: A theoretical Statement” in Comparative Studies in Society and History. Vol. 17, No. 1. Cited in Osaghae, E. E. (1998) ibid
[xxv] Igbuzor, O (2009), Challenges of Development in Nigeria. Lagos, Robitos Alliance Publishers.
[xxvi] Ullman, R. H. (1983), Redefining Security. International Security. Vo. 8 (Summer 1983). P.133
[xxvii] Blomfield and Reilly, 1998
[xxviii] Harris and Reily, 1998
[xxix] Ibid
[xxx] African Peer Review Meachnaism (2008), Country Review Report: Federal Republic of Nigeria. APRM Country Review Report No. 8, May, 2008
[xxxi] The size, population, economic strength and military capability of Nigeria makes it a dominant regional power. It is surrounded by smaller and weaker states. The armed forces is among the largest in Africa.
[xxxii] Esiomokhai, E. O. (2010), National Security in Nigeria.
[xxxiii] The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)
[xxxiv] Mele, Abdulrahman (2009), Boko Haram: A new face of Militancy.
[xxxv] Otite, 1990 and Nnoli, 1978
[xxxvi] Ihonvbere, 1993, Osaghae, 1995 and Egwu, 1998
[xxxvii] Children that are given to experienced Islamic clerics for the purposes of Koranic lessons. In most cases, they are left to fend for themselves through begging.
[xxxviii] Shawalu, 2000
[xxxix] Okafor, 1997, Alemika, 2000 and Okoye, 2000
[xl] Wikipedia
[xli] Africa Confidential Vol 50, No 16, 7th August, 2009.
[xlii] Mele, Abdulrahman (2009), Boko Haram: A new face of Militancy in Nigeria.
[xliii] Igbuzor, O (2008), Leadership and Empowerment in the Niger Delta. Abuja, The Ejiro & Otive Igbuzor Foundation.
[xliv] Igbuzor, O (2009) Op cit
[xlv] Tompkins and Adger (2003)
[xlvi] Joe Costello T. D. Beyond 2015: Where Next for the MDGs
[xlvii] Best, Shedrack G. (Ed), Introduction to Peace and Conflict Studies in West Africa. Abuja, Spectrum Books Ltd
[xlviii] www.culture-of-peace.info
[xlix] ibid
[l] In Odi town in Bayelsa State and Zaki Ibiam in Benue State, soldiers leveled communities and killed a lot of people in response to the killing of Soldiers by some citizens.
