Ahmed Draia University – Adrar

Faculty of Letters and Languages

Department of English Letters and Language

A Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for a Master’s Degree in Literature and Civilization

Presented by: Supervised by: Bodemaa Okbaoui Mr. Tahar Abbou

Academic Year: 2015 – 2016 DEDICATION

This work is dedicated with gratitude and love to my beloved parents, and to my eldest brother, who has always believed in my abilities.

Acknowledgement

Above all, thanks to God for providing me with material and mental capacity whereby I could conduct this research. Then I would like to thank Mr

Tahar Abbou for allotting time to this work to be properly accomplished, and for his supervision throughout the academic year. I am also honoured to address special thanks to Dr Aziz Mostefaoui for his generosity by providing me with valuable sources and allowing me to keep using them until I have my work done. Finally, grateful thanks are presented to each one to whom this work owes some of its accomplishment, including teachers and students of the Department of English.

Abstract

The thesis of this dissertation is that the aspects of relations among the various ethnic groups in modern Nigeria thwart the resurgence of nationalism. Ethnic relations in Nigeria had been deteriorated by virtue of the subjection of the British colonial power to the region of present-day Nigeria, and on account of the introduction of new social and political systems into Nigerian societies. Thereafter, ethnicity and nationalism have become a focus of interest in Nigerian and in many African social and political studies, for they lay much emphasis on the legacies of colonialism in African societies. The aim of this study is to find out whether the ethnic composition impedes the unification of national interests. The work relies on some existing literature on Nigerian history to provide historical events that conclude Nigerians‟ abilities to integrate and possess common cultural identities. Hence, the work is an attempt to analyse the interrelation between ethnicity and nationalism in Nigeria from a historical standpoint. It concludes that ethnicity does not impede the acquisition of common cultural and national identity, for pre-colonial Nigerians showed the abilities of possessing common national identities notwithstanding ethnic diversity. The study also concludes that the advent of the British marked a watershed in the history of the country as it interrupted the normal formation of common identities.

Key Words: ethnic relations, nationalism, colonial power, ethnicity, national identities.

List of Maps

Map 1 Nigeria

Map 2 Major Cities and Ethnic Groups in Present-Day Nigeria

Map 3 Nigeria Administrative Boundaries in 1960

List of Abbreviations

AG: Action Group

CDW: Colonial Development and Welfare

LAAAPS Lagos Auxiliary of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society

NCNC: National Council for Nigeria and the Cameroons

NNA: Nigerian National Alliance

NNDP: Nigerian National Democratic Party

NPC: Northern People‟s Congress

NYM: Nigerian Youth Movement

UPGA: United Progressive Grand Alien

Table of Content

Dedication...…………………………………………………….……………………...…ii Acknowledgement …………………………………………………………………..…...iii Abstract………………………………………………………………….………….....…iv List of Maps…... ……… ……………………………………………………...………....v List of Abbreviations……………………..…………………………………….….…….vi Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………...... vii

General Introduction……………...………………………………………………..……..1 Chapter One: Factors of Ethnic Relations and Ethnicity Formation in Pre-Colonial Nigeria Introduction…………………………………………………………….……...4 1.1. Hausa-Fulani Ethnicity…………………………………………….……...4 1.1.1 The Socio-Economic Factor……………………………….………5 1.1.2 The Cultural Factors…………………………………………….…7 1.1.2.1 The Myth of Common Origin……………………………...6 1.1.2.2 The Spread of Islam………………………………………..7 1.2. The Yoruba Ethnicity……………………………………………………...8 1.2.1. The Economic Factor……………………………………………..…8 1.2.2. The Cultural Factors……………………………………….…….…..9 1.2.2.1 The Linguistic Factor…………………….……………..…….9 1.2.2.2 The Myth of Oduduwa…………………..…………….……10 1.2.3. The Political Factor………………………………..………….…….11 1.2.4. Migration………………………………………..…………….…….11 1.2.5. Wars and Conflicts……………………………..…………….……..12 1.3. Igbo Ethnicity…………………………………………..……………….….13 1.3.1. The Socio-Economic Factor…………………………..…….…….….14 Conclusion…………………………………………………………….…...….....15 Chapter Two: Colonial Nigeria: The Advent of the British and the Rise of Nationalism 1851- 1960 Introduction…………………………………………………….…………..16 2.1. The Colonization Proces1851-1914…………………….....….………...16 2.1.1. The Establishment of the Southern Protectorate…...……..……..17 2.1.2. The Establishment of the Northern Protectorate……...……..…..18 2.1.3. The Amalgamation of Nigeria………………………...………..19 2.2. The Socio-Economic Changes……………….……………………..….21 2.3. The Rise of Nationalism in Nigeria…………………...... ………….…..23 2.3.1. Early Thoughts of Nationalism…………………...………….……25 2.3.2. Early Nigerian Nationalist Movements…………..……………….26 2.3.3. The Impact of the Second World War…………………...……….29 2.3.4. The External Influences on the British Policies………….…...…...30 2.3.5. The Political and the Nationalist Development…….………....…..31 2.3.6. Regional Conflicts and Political Independence….…….………….33 Conclusion………………………………………………….………………....36 Chapter Three: Challenges of Nation-Building in Post-Colonial Nigeria 1960-1970 Introduction………………………………….…………………………....37 3.1. Nation-Building………………………….……….…………...….…...37 3.1.1. State Creation………………………...……………….…………39 3.2. Challenges of Nation-Building……………...…………..……………41 3.2.1. Ethnic Resentments……………………...………………….……41 3.2.2. The Political Crises of the First Republic...…………….………...43 3.2.3. Ethnic Conflicts……………………….….…………….………...47 3.2.3.1. Nigerian Civil War 1967-1970………………………..…..49 Conclusion………………………………………………..……….……….…52

General Conclusion…………………………………………….………………...………...53 Works Cited………………………………………………….………………………….. ..55

Appendix

General Introduction In times that predated colonialism, diverse communities inhabited the area known nowadays as Nigeria. These communities developed integrative mechanisms and common cultural traits which brought about the formation of homogenous groups labelled in modern terms „ethnic groups‟. They established systems and maintained relations that tended to link individuals with one another, and to establish culturally homogenous and economically complementary societies. However, this trend was interrupted by the advent of the British power to the area, introducing new economic and social systems and meanwhile raising awareness of cultural and ethnic diversity. Such awareness affected relations among ethnic groups, particularly when Nigeria gained its political independence in 1960. Once the British handed power to indigenous people, ethnic affiliation expressed itself explicitly in the politics of the country by virtue of suspicious and mistrustful relations the ethnic groups came to inherit from colonial powers. Thereafter, on account of the aspects of relations between ethnic groups, Nigerian nationalism could not be revived in post-colonial epoch.

In this sense, ethnicity came to be defined as aspects of “relations among” ethnic groups, whereas nationalism is conceptualized as a common political interest among the ruling elite of a country. Thomas Hylland Eriksen argues that ethnicity is basically an aspect of relationship between communities, be it aspects of gain or aspects of loss, as he argues that these aspects of relations are functional in the formation of identities (17) Therefore, ethnic relations could be political and social as well as symbolic (Eriksen 17). On this standard, the first chapter of this work tackles the various factors of interconnection that led to the formation of the three dominant ethnic groups in Nigeria –the Hausa-Fulani, the Yoruba and the Igbo. The chapter illustrates how communities developed integrative and complementary mechanisms notwithstanding cultural differentiation. In fact, in the chapter it is argued that culture in pre-colonial Nigeria was developed by virtue of people‟s struggle to adopt their environments.

Moreover, it is noteworthy to state that the formation of ethnic identities in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa is not only a pre-colonial phenomenon. Anikpo states that ethnicity is a historical process that is developed by virtue of “historical transformations” which makes it an “enduring phenomenon” (21). Further, Anikpo notes that ethnicity exceeds the historical socio-economic and political factors that brought about its formation to become an identity (21). Therefore, ethnicity involves an attachment to formerly formed communities. Modern Nigeria is ethnically subdivided into three major ethnic groups which are Hausa-Fulani in the northern region, Igbo in the south-east, and Yoruba in the south-west (see map 2). These groups have inhabited the territory of Nigeria centuries before the advent of the British. Besides economic and social relations, these groups developed cultural features that reflected their ideals on unification. Thus, the myth of common origin that each of the Yoruba and the Hausa-Fulani peoples created had a symbolic meaning in strengthening relations among individuals. In addition, the spread of Islam beyond Hausa land also tended to unify the various states in the region so as to be ruled by a single dynasty. Furthermore, there were other manifestations of identities formation and ethnic relations such as migration, trade and even wars.

Nationalism involves unifying political interests so as to fulfil the integrity of a nation. This political integrity emerged in Nigeria during colonial times when a number of intellectuals could put aside their conflicting ethnic interests and unify their goal towards self- government. Therefore, defining nationalism as common political interests is left to the second chapter of this work, which deals with the colonial epoch.

As early as the second half of the nineteenth century, Britain had launched its colonization process in the area she later named the Colony of Nigeria. Due to their early commercial contacts with coastal areas, and by virtue of the Christian missionaries‟ pressure to abolish slave trade in the areas where they had started their Christianization missions, the British started their colonization process in the south-west of modern Nigeria. By the 1910s the Nigerian territory became under the power of the British Empire. The process of power shifting into the British hands mobilized a number of indigenous intellectuals and Christian educated elements to response to the various British colonial policies by establishing cultural and ethnic organizations or launching military resistances. Such reactions were inspired by thoughts and writings of autochthonous intellectuals such as Edward Wilmot Blyden and John Payne Jackson whose thoughts also led to the emergence of nationalist leaders, who transformed cultural and ethnic organizations into political parties so as to unify their political interests and lead Nigeria towards self-government. Further, both the first and the second chapters argue that the ethnic composition does not impede the formation of unique national and political interests since each of the three modern major ethnicities in Nigeria is a composition of minor ethnic groups that could establish a unified community due to developing common culture and socio-economic interrelations. The third chapter of this work handles the first decade of independent Nigeria and the number of obstacles that impeded nation-building in the country. When the independent Nigerian Federation was established in 1960, a number of intellectuals agreed that building nation-state required a common cultural and historical identity. Thus, they inaugurated attempts to unify Nigerian culture and history through authoring academic and literary works. Yet, these attempts were interrupted by a number of political crises that reflected political disagreements because of the conflicting ethnic interests. The involvement of ethnicity in national politics engendered thuggery and ethnic conflicts in the country. The chapter argues that politicizing ethnicity brought about instability to the politics of Nigeria so that the country was deteriorated on account of its elites‟ conflicting interests, which led to a decade of instability.

Chapter One: Factors of Ethnic Relations and Ethnicity Formation in Pre-Colonial Nigeria

Introduction

Different social and economic links generated relations among pre-colonial Nigerians, and were enhanced by different manifestations including wars and migration, which often brought about forming boundaries and defining communities that were linked by either blood relations or mutual economic interests. The factors of contacts between pre-colonial peoples not only helped in maintaining relations among communities, but also brought about the formation of ethnic identities. Thus, the economic factor brought the Hausa and Fulani into contact with each other, and formed the ethnicity known nowadays as Hausa-Fulani. In addition, the commercial factor also enhanced the identity of the Hausa, for they established trade networks that tended to maintain their contacts with each other. Moreover, as Okpeh notes, the factors of contact between people in pre-colonial times were multi-dimensional and inter-related (127). Therefore, the social factor was the ground on which individuals established economic links. On this standard, this chapter encompasses the various factors that engendered the formation of the three major Nigerian ethnic groups. Tackling the formation of each ethnic group, each section begins with providing factors of ethnicity formation then gradually it moves to the case of one of major Nigerian ethnic groups.

1.1. Hausa-Fulani Ethnicity The ethnic composition in modern Nigeria is partly due to the pre-colonial social structure that was based on lineages and kinship networks. Generally, writers who undertook the task of seeking Nigerians origin agree that Nigerians‟ early ancestors had existed centuries before colonialism in the areas they inhabit nowadays in forms of tribes and clans. The aspects of relations between individuals were determined by their blood relations so that they intermarried and expanded their communities. Individual identities were determined according to these kinship ties as they believed that they were connected by blood and common ancestor (Falola & Heaton 41). Communities were established and defined on the basis of these social relations, and then they came to be categorized according to their common ancestor or ancestors.

Peoples categorized their communities according to social ties, i. e. lineages and kinship networks whereby individuals came to form their identities. As the population of a kinship network increased, its members defined their community either by establishing boundaries or through migrating to occupy other areas, maintaining their relations by intermarriage and other aspects of social interaction. The members of a kinship network, therefore, were interdependent, and they made their living collectively. Social relations were also maintained by economic contacts which linked individuals who occupied different activities. Farming, hunting, crafting and other survival activities prompted ethnicity maintenance and increased the rate of interdependence within ethnic groups. Okepeh quotes: “These relationships . . . sometimes took the form of war and enslavement. But they expressed themselves also through diplomacy, treaties, the visits of wandering scholars, the diffusion of political and religious ideas, the borrowing of techniques and above all, trade” (qtd.in 126).

1.1.1. The Economic Factor Fredrick Barth argues that the formation of ethnic identities in a „non-modern setting‟ is partly due to the principle of complementarity since the latter engendered ethnic relations, and that culture variation is a historical development that takes place by virtue of environmental and situational circumstances (Eriksen 96). These views suggest that a community in general increases to form an ethnicity on account of environmental circumstances that bring about relations between people who have been already culturally heterogeneous. Once people maintain ethnic affiliations on the ground of the awareness that they complete each other, they develop common traditions and lifestyle. Complementarity brought about cultural assimilation among distinct pre-colonial Nigerian communities. Therefore, Fulani‟s adoption of Hausa culture and social life was due to survival conditions. Fulani originally came to Hausa land from the state of Borno, after the famine that touched all of the Sahel (see map 1) during the 1750s, and which led to the collapse of Borno state (Metz 14-15). Fulani brought with them their survival mechanism i.e. the experience of raising cattle and sheep, which encouraged Hausa to provide them with lands where they could live and raise their cattle. The Fulani then started exchanging goods and commodities with the original settlers, and meanwhile assimilating their culture. They soon converted to Islam, for most of Hausa rulers were Muslims at that time, and also they learned Hausa language to achieve communication with them. They even learned Hausa trade techniques and got involved in Hausa commercial institutions and networks. Therefore, cultural assimilation was part of Fulani‟s process of adopting their new environment. Moreover, Fulani contributed to the formation of the Hausa-Fulani identity via establishing a unified kingdom known as Sokoto Caliphat, as it is shown in the coming paragraphs. As the Fulani Caliphate was established, various commercial routs were constructed in order to link the Hausa states. Traders could establish and broaden commercial networks so that they had contacts not only with one another but also with other non-Hausa states. The Hausa established a commercial network that is still working nowadays and links Hausa traders with the Yoruba state of Ibadan, in Yoruba land, where they manipulate cattle and kola nuts trade. This network was primarily established to strengthen the socio-economic bondage between Hausa traders diaspora in Yoruba land. That is, the earlier traders who established this network provided Hausa traders with settlements in Yoruba land through populating areas among Yoruba, where they received their ethnic fellows and hosted them till they finished their business. Thereafter, the ethnic-based trade organization the Hausa established showed the mutual utility, and strengthened the development of their own traditions and customs. Inspired by their Tijinayah brotherhood, the Hausa created a powerful Hausa culture, which provided them with high prestige. Cohen describes a Hausa merchant in Yoruba towns:

aloof and distinct in his white robes, proud of his customs, Islamic belief and practices

of his Arabic learning, he is often regarded by the host people among whom he lives or

moves as an exploiter, a monopolist, rogue and trouble maker... His high degree of

mobility, skill and shrewdness in business are widely acknowledged and have earned

him a reputation of having a special genius for trade. (8-9)

Hausa ethnicity in this sense did not remain merely a cultural homogeneity based on blood relations and social interaction, but it rather had practical function that was based on the principle of complementarity and mutual benefit. In other terms, as Cohen argues, Hausa diaspora would have lost their Hausa identity in Yoruba towns if they did not establish an ethnic solidarity, manipulating profitable goods, i.e. cattle and kola nuts (10).

1.1.2. Cultural Factors Okpeh argues that some aspects of culture such as religion, language and myths of origin engendered interdependence and complementarity among individuals, as they fostered inter-relations between communities (125).

1.1.2.1. The Myth of Common Origin Myths of origin connected communities that had common borders and contributed to some extent in defining communal boundaries. According to an oral story, all Hausa are descendants from one man called Bayajiidda who had settled in Borno before he killed a sacred snake in Doura –an area located in west Borno. As a reward for his bravery, the Queen of Doura married him, and they had a child named Bawo. The latter had seven children who separately established the early fourteen Hausa states (Falola and Heaton 28). The myth of Bayajidda came to regroup Hausa people within unique borders because the Hausa people considered the land they populated their own by inheritance since this myth was considered as having a real foundation in life. Furthermore, the myth of Bayajidda strengthened Hausa social and political structure as it served to hold neighbouring communities within common borders. Moreover, the social bondage among the Hausa communities was further strengthened by the coming of Islam to Hausa states, particularly after the establishment of the Fulani Empire.

1.1.2.2. The Fulani Jihad and the Spread of Islam (1804-1808) Islam played a crucial role in unifying the conflicting Hausa states that, after the collapse of the Songhai Empire, engaged in several internecine wars over power. Yet, except for the case of Borno state, no single dynasty could have domination over all other states. The Hausa subjection to other external powers was due to two causes. The first one was power equilibrium between Hausa states. In effect, Borno‟s domination over Hausa land occurred mainly on account of the fact that Borno had not been captured by Songhai military, whose seizure stretched over more than the half of Hausa land. The second cause of Hausa inability to be ruled by a single sovereign was related to Hausa tendency and culture. That is to say, the Hausa people lacked the principles of leadership, and their ambitions were related only to commercial success. Cohen argues: “For a Hausa man, a good life is a combination of success in trade and the progressive attainment of Islamic learning” (11). Thus Cohen argues that Islam brought about forging common identity among the Hausa people. Furthermore, by the coming of Islam to Hausa land, dynasties started practicing polities that tended to engender citizens‟ loyalty to their rulers.

Islam had been introduced to Hausa states by the expansion of the Songhai Empire westward to most of Hausa land -centuries before the Fulani first settlement in Hausa land- offering a new political system to the leaders of the Hausa states. They used Islamic knowledge and instructions about social life to rule their subjects and to strengthen the commercial relations between states. Islam also linked them to the other wealthy Islamic nations in the Sahara and the North African states, thereby creating a collective consciousness about the importance of such religion. However, before the Jihad of Usman dan Fodio, only Hausa dynasties converted to Islam because they believed that Islam‟s ideals and laws provided commercially profitable and politically practical systems. Islam bounded dynasties and strengthened relations among them as most of them had converted to it. Yet, it was the Jihad of Usman dan Fodio that spread Islam beyond the region of Hausa, maintaining their identity and strengthening their relations.

By the increase of internecine conflicts and the lack of autonomy in Hausa land, Fulani Muslims came to think that it was time to wage a “holy” war on the non-Muslims in order to demonstrate peace in the region, and to convert non-believers to Islam. This idea was supported by some Muslim scholars who tended to spread their Quadiryah “brotherhood” (Metz 19). Most of these Muslims were Fulani groups led by scholar Usman Dan Fodio. The war started in Gobir in 1804, and after four years Fulani dominated the Hausa states, and overthrew their rulers. Usman Dan Fodio established a large state on Hausa land and named it Sokoto Caliphate, which stretched beyond the city of Ibadan in Yoruba land. The new Caliphate promoted economic and social relations among Hausa communities, and contributed to enforcing commercial systems through establishing trade roads, which facilitated transportation and movement among states. Moreover, in addition to cultural factors, other integrative mechanisms maintained intra-relations among Yoruba and Igbo ethnicities.

1.2. Yoruba Ethnicity Ethnic identities are pre-colonial phenomena that were based on common origin, and contributed to the establishment of political systems of communities. Falola points out that ethnic identities pre-dated the European occupation of Africa since the present day ethnicities had been found centuries before the colonial period. (“The Power” 128).

1.2.1. The Economic Factor Nigerian communities developed various activities that were associated with the emergence of agriculture in the region since 5000 B.C. (Falola, “Key Events” 26). These activities maintained complementary relations and socio-cultural integration among peoples. Individuals heavily relied on cultivating and raising cattle for making their living, which brought about other occupations that were either needed for production process or resulted eventually from it. For example, responding to agricultural requirements, blacksmiths developed an economic activity that coincided with the need of iron tools for the process of land cultivating and production harvesting (Falola and Heaton 20). Due to their experience in the field of iron-working, blacksmiths came to be seen as a distinctive community, though they did not account for a major one. Blacksmiths did not share a common culture. They rather practiced traditions and lifestyle of the communities they interacted with, and often integrated socially with them. They established links with various communities and categories of peoples, particularly in Yoruba land as the latter witnessed a variety of activities that needed blacksmiths‟ iron production, such as agriculture and sculpting. The occupational variation among Yoruba people who were farmers, artisans, blacksmiths and craftsmen brought the various Yoruba communities in contact with each other. Activities such as sculpting objects and harvesting lands required tools that had were by blacksmiths. Thus communication resulted from interdependence among communities.

1.2.2. The Cultural factors On the ground of Cohen‟s work1 on Ibadan –Yoruba main city- Eriksen comes to argue that the formation of Yoruba identity had been maintained centuries ago before the arrival of the British by virtue of common cultural features between the people came to be known as Yoruba (Eriksen 113). Eriksen believes that the Yoruba in pre-colonial times would recognize their “affinity” through shared language and customs whereby they maintained relationships with each other. Yet, since customs were usually shared with other non-Yoruba communities, language remained the most significant element whereby Yoruba identity has been formed (Eriksen 113). Eriksen uses as evidence the fact that Yoruba language was the language used by missionaries to spread Christianity, which provided it with a form of writing. Furthermore, Eriksen notes that the politico-regional division of Nigeria during the colonial epoch took place on the ground of cultural differentiation (114).

1.2.2.1. The Linguistic Factor Although Eriksen points out that the Yoruba people recognized each other through the fact that they spoke the same language, neither he nor Toyin Falola undertook the task of explaining how language can be considered as a factor that led to the formation of Yoruba identity.2 Both writers do not go beyond suggesting that Yoruba freed slaves who had already met in diasporas would return to their homelands to establish a linguistic-based community.

1 The work is Custom and Politics in Urban Africa. 2 the works being cited in the Work-Cited page do not provide further explanation for this claim; but these two writers probably prove them in other works In addition to Falola and Eriksen, there is also Andrew Apter3 who argues that the origin of Yoruba ethnicity can be studied within “cultural semantic” framework, and that the factors that led to the formation of ethnic identities are engendered by linguistic mutual understanding (357). What Apter here implies is that studying Yoruba language provides deep understanding of the formation of Yoruba ethnicity. For example, a close study of the word „home‟ in Yoruba language reveals that it encompasses a variety of conceptions including compound in which a family lives, pawn and slaves (Apter 158). Therefore, a Yoruba person might include different members in his family, including descendants, slaves, pawns, and even strangers. Thus, Apter negates the claim that ethnicity and ethnic groups are formed primarily on the ground of blood relations. However, even the study being conducted by Apter does not provide a deep explanation of the linguistic contribution in the maintenance of Yoruba identities. In addition to language the Yoruba people formed common identity through telling myths on common ancestors.

1.2.2.2. The Myth of Oduduwa The ancestors of Yoruba people, especially those who are backed to the era that preceded colonialism, did not consider their community as a multi tribal group, though it actually was. They created various myths that linked them to a common ancestor named Oduduwa, and who was credited as the founder of the city of Ife (see map 2). Communities raised commitment to these myths that served various lineages to become the ruling members of Yoruba states. Due to this commitment, various communities who claimed that they were descendant from Oduduwa came to be dynasties and established kingdoms and Empires. Moreover, the myth of Oduduwa strengthened the link between the members of ruling class in Yoruba states. The aspect of relations between dynasties determined the kind of relations between citizens so that intermarriage within the ruling class engendered social ties between their subjects as well. Furthermore, Yoruba myth forged relations between communities, and led to the establishment of the political systems that not only had been exercised in pre- colonial setting, but they have also been reactivated by Yoruba post-colonial politicians in modern Nigeria.

1.2.3. The Political Factor The pre-colonial intra-ethnic relations have been reactivated in post-colonial era in order to create a common consciousness within a given ethnic group. As Eriksen states, John

3 Andrew Apter is a professor in Department of History. He conducted an ethnographic research on Yoruba culture in order to understand their origin. Peel has noted that maintaining ethnic boundaries in pre-colonial times has contributed in the formation of modern ethnic politics (113). Besides Peel, Falola also claims that the presence of traditional political rules in the modern setting unified Yoruba identity, and that the common history has been reinvented by elites in order to bind their communities (“The Power” 130).

The common history to which Falola refers is both the similarity of the political systems that Yoruba states had witnessed before the arrival of the British and the socio- economic interdependence, although, except for the case of Alaafin (king) of Oyo, no common ruler had claim on all Yoruba states. The political ruling system of Yoruba states had been typical so that each state had been ruled by a sovereign, supported by chiefs and representatives of clans and lineages. The latter served as an executive authority the main task of which was to pull fines from punished citizens, whereas king and chiefs were the legislative authority that depended on the system of lineages to speak to their subjects. Elders and traders of states constituted associations in which they discussed social and moral affairs.

Yoruba political system had some sort of democracy. When citizens refused the ruling system of a given king, they would demonstrate in streets, and then chiefs would gather and tell the king that citizens were not satisfied with his ruling system. The king would therefore quit the kingdom ruling.

1.2.4. Migration Migration was a dynamic mechanism of people‟s integration with each other. It engendered social differentiation as migrators often travelled in forms of tribes and clans and settled on the border lands of other communities. In other terms, migration brought discrete groups in contact with each other. Migrators often assimilated and adopted the host communities‟ culture and they socially interacted with each other through intermarriage, and other social ties, which eventually led to the increase of population and, therefore, the demarcation of boundaries. The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries witnessed several migrations among the different territories of Nigeria, particularly in the southern part of the region; in Igbo and Yoruba lands.

In the nineteenth century, Yoruba land witnessed a good number of internal migrations (Falola “The Power” 146). Yoruba states engaged in wars over land and power which persuaded people to leave their land and inhabit other areas. This migration generated cultural borrowing and social integration among Yoruba communities. The Yoruba cultural homogeneity could be seen in the similarity of artefacts of institution models. For example, Oyo masquerade and deities as well as agriculture techniques could be found in the whole region of the Yoruba land and among all Yoruba groups. Moreover, among other factors that affected intergroup relations were conflicts over land and ascendancy.

1.2.5. Wars and Conflicts It could be assumed that wars and conflicts in pre-colonial Nigeria were the outcome of cultural differentiations. However, the fact is that wars in pre-colonial times were sparked over lands and basically for survival reasons. Various communities over history raised the sense that their members should govern other ethnic groups. As Okpeh notes, “wars were sparked to occupy and dominate over others‟ territories” (125). Internecine wars culminated in either domination by a single state that became the ruling state of all other states, or none of the disputing parts won the war and engaged in peaceful communication, leading to the demarcation of boundaries for each community to define its land. Falola points out that expansion led to establishing boundaries which were maintained on the basis of lineages and kinship networks. Once these boundaries were demarcated, individuals shared the land they demarcated with each other (Falola “the power” 145-146). Therefore, wars led to classifying communities according to their lineages and also brought about organizing societies.

Among the internecine wars that pre-dated the Jihad of Usman dan Fodio in 1883, two regional conflicts are documented by the various works that tackle the history of Nigeria i.e. the northern region conflicts and Yoruba land wars. The Jihad of Usman dan Fodio was the last tribal war in pre-colonial Nigeria, which culminated in establishing an empire on both Hausa and Yoruba lands.

Before the Civil War in Yoruba land in 1817, Oyo state rulers in Yoruba land established an empire which dominated over all other Yoruba states during the seventeenth century. Oyo rulers wished to control trade and other economic resources in Yoruba land as well as Yoruba slavery institutions. As previous kings, Alafin of Oyo claimed descent from Oduduwa. Alafin became the most powerful dynasty in Yoruba land, and the only authority that made policy. Alafin established an advisory council constituted of the heads of the different clans, and used military force to dominate his subjects, to practice law and to control the trade system and slavery institutions. Nevertheless, conflicts that followed the decline of Oyo Empire in 1833 threatened Yoruba ethnic nationalism, as the Yoruba sub-groups engaged in competitions over resources and markets. Moreover, Yoruba land became targeted by various states before it was finally seized by the Fulani Caliphate.

1.3. Igbo Ethnicity John Nwachimereze argues that works being written on Igbo history lay much emphasis on the period from the Atlantic slave trade onwards and, thus, little is known about social, cultural and economic aspects of Igbo life before the arrival of European traders and missionaries (4). Nwachimereze reviewed some of the few archaeological and anthropological works that have been written since Nigerian civil war (1967-1970) tackling Igbo origin and early culture. Furthermore, according to Nwachimereze, some researchers explored the etymology of the word „Igbo‟ so as to trace the origin of Igbo people. For example, M.D. Jeffreys agrees that „Igbo‟ means „forest dwellers‟ or the „indigenous habitants of the forest region‟, whereas C. Ifemesia states that it means ancients (Ndi-gbo) who lived in the forest region (5).

Other researchers studied Igbo origin from anthropological and archaeological perspectives. A. E. Afigbo claims that Igbo people are originally a mixture of kwa-speakers, the Niger-Congo phyla and Nok Complex who eventually came into clash with each other and populated what is in present day Igbo land. Other anthropological studies tended to rely on oral traditions to deduct Igbo origin. Isuama, an Igbo community, for example, tells a myth about a common ancestor named Igbo who lived in an area called Amaigbo.

In respect to this tradition, A. E. Afigbo affirms that Amaigbo contained a massive Igbo immigrants and settlers (Nwachemereze 8). As far as archaeological perspective is concerned, it is argued that the early settlers of Igbo land were foragers who occupied the region centuries before Nok Complex, whereas V. Uchundu and E. Isichei focus their studies on the regions of Igbo heartland individually, indicating that people who lived in the central areas are the origin settlers, whereas those who lived on the border lands were immigrants. (Nwachimereze 5-6). However, border land immigrants were not only arrivals from other parts of present-day Nigeria, but also they were early Igbo settlers who due to the increase of population had left the core areas of Igbo land looking for other ecological zones.

Migration caused an ethnic and cultural diversity in Igbo land, which persuaded minority communities to assimilate majority culture. Igbo influences were obvious in Bonny, Kalabari and other villages even before the beginning of the Atlantic slave trade. Their kings and chiefs bore Igbo names and married Igbo women. They also acquired Igbo language on account of commercial relations and disagreements over boundaries (Nwachimereze 8). Furthermore, Nwachimereze claims that even before they migrated to boundaries, Igbo received small communities from their neighbouring towns and villages because Igbo land attracted some minutiae groups from different parts of Nigeria.

This multi-ethnicity generated culture diversity and engendered socio-economic interdependence. The diverse ethnicities collaborated with each other, and established common social and economic institutions, including trade networks and slavery institutions. The intermixed groups shared the beliefs and ideas of each other, while immigrants consulted the “oracle” of original settlers. For example, Kanum –an Igbo sub-group- oracle influenced Calabar and other coastal states.

1.3.1. The Socio-Economic Factor As Igbo populations increased and defined their community in relation to each other either by kinship ties or by their occupations, their contacts became intra-ethnic ones. Socio- economic interconnection played a major role in the maintenance of economic contacts among Igbo people. Nwachimereze describes how an Igbo sub-group could play a crucial role in the maintenance of Igbo ethnicity. He describes at length the Aro community and how they contributed in linking among Igbo various states from coastal lands till the northern states of Igbo land. In the period that predated the Atlantic slave trade, Aro had developed systematic trade institutions. They established trade networks and constituted commercial communities, including sellers, purchasers and middlemen who settled near to markets, where they arrange deals between traders. They also transported slaves from Igbo interior states to the coastal Igbo people, who in return sold them to European traders. By the arrival of the European traders at the coastal areas, seeking African slaves, Igbo became dynamic slave traders. Aro merchants would chase and raid communities and hand them to middlemen traders who were from other Igbo communities in order to transport them to coastal Igbo settlers. This commercial network was increased by an Igbo social organization known as Oknoko organization. This association had been at first a social organization founded by the ruling class of Igbo; but later when Aro traders became members in it, because they had been attracted by its system, Okonko involved in commercial affairs. Okonko contributed in intra-ethnic relations between Igbo traders and ruling classes. The organization comprised different social categories -headmen, traders and even priests. It had institutions in various Igbo villages and most of Igbo traders joined it. In effect, even traders who were not members of the association used to join their fellows in Okonko‟s infrastructures. Furthermore, Okonko society was commercially and socio-politically exclusive to Igbo people. Its elders managed social affairs that were related to divorce and inheritance. It enforced relations between the different categories of Igbo society. Okonko association even decreased the rate of Aro‟s wars and invasions that had already been waged beyond Igbo land in order to enslave people.

Conclusion Ethnic relations in pre-colonial times were the outcomes of survival complementarity, and were attained by inter-related socio-economic and cultural factors as well as integrative mechanisms such as migrations and, sometimes, wars. The socio-economic complementarity brought about cultural assimilation and social integration. These factors were complex and inter-connected, which reflected pre-colonial Nigerians‟ struggle to adopt their environments and capacity to organize their societies. Moreover, by the advent of the colonial power to the territory of modern day Nigeria, Nigerian societies had been deprived of all the causes of contacts that linked people. In an attempt to regain control over their country, an indigenous social category known as Westernized elites endeavoured political activities conceptualized in the term of nationalism, to regain control over their lands. The following chapter tackles the colonial period and struggle over regaining power.

Chapter Two: The Advent of the British and the Rise of Nationalism 1851-1960

Introduction The advent of the British Colonial power in the 1850s to the area known as Nigeria deprived autochthonous people of all factors of integration and interrelation, for the British deteriorated locals‟ socio-political systems and dominated their economies via establishing a colonial government to shift power into their hands. The different colonial administrations were collectively established on the concept of “dual mandate” theory and indirect rule system. The former involved the exploitation of the indigenous resources for the benefit of both the colonizer and the colonized, whereas the latter was a system whereby traditional authorities would continue ruling their subjects, but under the supervision of the British government. However, it was not before the post-war period when the British undertook the task of instituting developmental policies that aimed to foster indigenous economies and societies. Nevertheless, the colonial awareness of duty coincided with a national awareness among natives who eventually launched different national activities to regain power over their land; that is, to achieve self-government. The early sections of this chapter contain some aspects of changes that occurred in Nigerian economies and societies by virtue of shifting power into the British hands and its aftermath on relations among individuals and communities. The remaining sections tackle the political aspect of colonial Nigeria and the sequence of factors that led to the emergence of common political interests among the British subjects in the Colony of Nigeria

2.1. The Process of Colonization The colonization process was encouraged by economic impetus, which brought about the removal of local authorities and their replacement by British governments on the territory later known as Nigeria. Due to the fierce competition among the European traders, and which had attained its peak by establishing the British National Company, the British sought to maintain a colonial state that enabled them to take control over local economies and societies. The establishment of the colonial political power took a gradual process that started from the attack of Lagos in 1851 and ended with the establishment of a central government for the whole territory known as Nigeria.

2.1.1. Establishing the Southern Protectorate The British intervention within the areas of Nigeria started when the House of Parliament in London enacted the legislation of slave trade prohibition. This enactment was driven primarily by Christian missionaries‟ pressure to eradicate slavery in the areas they interested in, and where they wished to build what they called „Christian Civilization‟ (Falola & Heaton 86). Gradually, the British politicians also saw the necessity to establish a colonial power whereby they transformed the indigenous economies and politics into the hands of British government. The abolition of slavery gave the British power the exact excuse they needed to take domination over the coastal areas. Hence, in 1851 the British military attacked and overthrew King Kosoko of Lagos, replacing him with his rival Akitoye. When the latter failed in abolishing slavery and slave trade in the area, the British launched the process of transforming power into their hands via signing a treaty of protection with the local authority. Thus, in 1861 they announced that the region became officially a Crown Colony named the Protectorate and Colony of Lagos. By this time the colonization process officially began so that the British colonial power started having systematic domination over the rest of Yoruba lands.

The British then gradually made their ways to Igbo land, bringing it under the colonial rule. Doing so, the British found themselves involved in the European scramble for Africa. Thus the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, and which was held to settle European conflicts over Africa, provided the British with the coastal areas that had been already controlled by a commercial company known as the Royal Niger Company. This company had established its headquarters at Lakoja where from it signed treaties of protection with all areas along Niger and Benue Rivers (see map 1). Therefore, colonizing Igbo coastal areas was partly made peacefully.

Despite the peaceful consolidation of the colonial government in the south-eastern region, the British did not refrain from leading military invasions in the region, aiming to overthrow the paramount indigenous chiefs and kings, especially those who had shown their refusal to the British occupation to their land. By the first two decades of the nineteenth century the British led military occupations against the most powerful and influencing ethnic groups in the region. The British sought not only to damage social relations between the various ethnic groups but also to destroy the social structure of indigenous people. As Falola relates, Afigbo has noted that the British sought unimportant members in communities or members who lacked political experience to be appointed as representatives, charging them with authorities they had never held and that crossed their communities (“Development Planning” 114). That is to say, these representatives were placed as authorities over communities that they did not recognize and consider as members of their groups. Moreover, in Igbo land even chiefs lacked political experience as Igbo political system was structured around a system of village or village-group councils. Igbo chiefs also lacked political experience because they were merely „figure heads‟ whose duties were only to perform religious and traditional rituals (Martin 39). Besides, the British continued their process of metamorphosing the Nigerian societies in the Northern part, using military force to subjugate indigenous under the command of Fredrick Lugard. In 1910s British military forces defeated the Sokoto Caliphate in the north and established the Northern Protectorate, as a part of abolishing slave trade, for Sokoto Empire had been the largest source of slaves since the seventeenth century (Campbell 2). 2.1.2. The Establishment of the Northern Protectorate In the Northern region of Nigeria, the presence of the colonial power generated a long- running feud among societies that had considered peaceful communication between communities as the primary driver to foster social and economic relations between ethnic groups. According to Akene, for pre-colonial Ebira people –a community located at the furthermost Nigerian north- the purpose of maintaining law and order in societies was mainly to consolidate socio-economic relations between individuals of the same group and to enhance their economies notwithstanding the physical features of Ebira land (18).

By establishing their colonial government, the British sought to dominate all territories of what they had already considered as the British Northern Protectorate. Their plan was to maintain relations with the most powerful ethnic groups while showing no interest in developing relationships with lesser communities. Akene notes that an Ebira powerful chief named Ohinda Avogede Okomanyi refused Fredrick Ludgard‟s request for shifting the power of controlling over Ebira land into the hands of the British unless they guaranteed equal relationships with the British for all Ebira chiefs (24). However, Ebira leading men disagreed over shifting power into the hands of the British, and this bred communal resentment among Ebira people. On one hand, some local authorities advocated the existence of British administrations on their land hoping for economic benefits via a peaceful contact with them. Among these chiefs there were Atta Omadivi, Ozigzigi Opoh and Owdah Adidi. On the other hand some Ebira leading men opposed a foreign intervention in their local affairs. Furthermore, the anti-British chiefs, namely Achegido, Okino, Agbo and Orich, arranged attacks on Lugard‟s messengers to Ebira chiefs as they also attacked the British supporters in different occasions, which led to ethnic resentment and communal disgrace. In effect, these raids led to a violent British invasion in the region because the raided angry leading men cooperated with the colonizer so as to react to their neighbours‟ invasions. The indigenous provided the British military forces with knowledge of the physical features of their land which facilitated the British task and guaranteed the British domination over Ebira land. In 1903, two military groups under the command of eight Lieutenants invaded Ebira land, attacking the anti-British. Moreover, The British led more invasions on the neighbouring territories of Ebira land.

Similar processes of colonization were expedited by the colonial government so as to conquer other parts of Nigeria such as Igala land. As in Ebira land, Igala people quarrelled among each other over the British governance and putting local economic and political affairs under the British management. Such tribal disagreements led to communal dispute that brought about the death of two British military leaders, Captain O‟Riodan and Mr. Burney. The colonial power seized opportunity of such inter-ethnic hatred to mobilize autochthonous people against each other. By 1904 the British government equipped 262 African soldiers with two guns and two maxims for each soldier to conquer Igala land (Akene 26).

The colonization of both Ebira and Igala lands led to social chaos in the region in form of crimes and anxieties. Further, establishing a colonial government on an African land bred social mistrust and political disintegration as indigenous people did not accept being governed by an alien power. Akene states that Mr Greavs, the Division Officer of Ebira land at that time, observed: “not each community, not each district, or town but each family was a law itself” (27).

2.1.3. The Amalgamation of Nigeria (1914) Unifying British Southern Protectorate and the Northern Protectorate of Nigeria as an attempt to establish a unified nation on the ground of British economic interests also had its share in transforming social and political life of Nigerians. Generally speaking, the amalgamation of Nigeria simply meant unifying the colonial apparatus to rule the range number of ethnically distinct communities under a single administration. However, the main driver that led the British to think about unifying the Northern Protectorate of Nigeria with the Southern Protectorate was to finance the Northern region as the latter‟s revenues from taxation on various activities were inadequate to cover all administrative needs (Falola and Heaton 117). Besides, the Northern Protectorate was far from the coast which meant slow advancement in international trade in the region. Therefore, the amalgamation would balance the expense of the revenue of the colony and maintain a unique administration in charge of managing the financial system of the country.

Unifying the central government would also permit centralizing the developmental programmes being designed by the colonial government so as to economically and socially develop the colony. Nevertheless, while replacing the southern administrative system, which Lugard considered too indirect, with his indirect rule system of the Northern Protectorate, Lugard, unlike other colonial officers, sought powerful traditional authorities through whom he could effectively rule, charging them with more power and authority over their subjects, which brought about serious resentments between autochthonous people and their rulers (Falola & Heaton 118). Furthermore, Lugard sought to impose direct taxation system on the Yoruba and the Igbo peoples as he did in in Northern Provinces. Taxation system had been successful in the Northern region mainly because of the fact that the Hausa-Fulani were acquainted with paying taxation even before the establishment of the colonial power.

When Lugard became the first Colonial Governor of the newly established colony of Nigeria he received reports from the preceding officers indicating that imposing direct taxations on the population of the Southern region was ineffective in most areas. Lugard introduced his taxation system notwithstanding these reports, bringing social and economic changes to indigenous people. Furthermore, aiming to maintain law and order in their colonies the British tended to keep indigenous traditional authorities, charging them with new responsibilities, such as collecting taxes.

This job of collecting taxes soured relations between local chiefs and their subjects as the chiefs were considered by their subjects as a part of foreign power. Moreover, the process of colonization was accompanied by different transformations which tended to deteriorate indigenous socio-political institutions, economic patterns and cultural traits.

2.2. Socio-Economic Changes Eriksen notes that few studies have been carried out on “the process of social upheaval” which occurred in African societies since the advent of the European powers to Africans areas. He argues that colonial governments introduced various social and political systems into African territories, and these systems had little aftermath on locals‟ daily lives. He proves his claim by the fact that until the first decades of the twenty-first century, many African societies are still for “practical purposes socially and culturally integrated at the village level” (104) “However”, Eriksen goes on, “capitalism and the state represented new systemic parameters with profound consequences for social organization and individual life- paths.” (104). Further, he suggested that Jay O‟Brien, after carrying out a study on ethnicity in Gezira area of east-central Sudan, has concluded that ethnic categorization was not the outcome of cultural differentiation, but rather it emerged by virtue of the introduction of capitalist system of production into this area (106). O‟Brien also argues that the foundation of ethnic identities is the outcome of both the pre-colonial features of categorization and distinctiveness and the foundation of a capitalist society within African settings (106). Therefore, imposing a system of taxation on indigenous people was a part of the plan of transforming Nigerian societies and economies. The British initiated a transformation of Nigerian societies and economy so as to achieve their goals which were the constant exploitation of autochthonous resources and making Nigeria a consumer of their industrial production. Martin notes that the British government designed schemes for transforming the local economies notwithstanding the financial difficulties they encountered (36). The British planned for social and economic transformation, creating a capitalist society and building markets for imported items from European industries. The capitalist system introduced by the British involved their investment philosophy which was based on Adam Smith‟s theory of laissez-faire. The British investment philosophy was that the colonial power both at home and in colonies should not invest on their colonies, but they rather put developmental programs for colonies‟ resources through securing suitable circumstances for private entrepreneurs so as to be able to conduct their business. Furthermore, the British initiated various social changes that aimed to make Nigeria financially self-sufficient. The process of transforming indigenous economies and societies had to be completed through reorganizing the monetary system, imposing the British currency in transactions and establishing markets for selling their products, which actually had been manufactured by raw materials exported from African lands. The British tapped various sources of revenue including taxation and custom duties in order to both finance colonial administrations and disrupt indigenous social and economic systems. Customs duties were paid by European traders on exported and imported goods, who would compensate for their losses through rising prices of imported items, which persuaded indigenous people to get involved in the foreign economic system. Introducing a monetary system to Nigeria was also a part of the process of impeding the natural trend of indigenous agricultural system. Imposing taxes persuaded autochthonous farmers to produce agricultural products responding to British traders‟ demands so that they could gain cash money for paying their taxes. Furthermore, agricultural items which were tended for exportation started increasing as the European traders paid attractive prices to the indigenous people for their products. Falola relates: “According to Helleiner, by 1929 the value of exports had increased sevenfold, export volume by fivefold, and export production accounted for 5 to 7 percent of gross domestic product.” (“Development Planning” 5). The advancement of international trade, especially in the Southern Protectorate, was also due to sustaining traditional methods of production that continued as enthusiastic driver for local people so as to enhance the rate of production (Martin 29). The processes of pre- colonial economic production involved transactions that showed Nigerians ability to manage their economies and to adopt their regions. Martin states that Ngwa –a community located in Igbo land- farmers considered the years that had preceded the establishment of the colonial power as prosperous years because they had witnessed successful agricultural diversification which had been more prosperous via other economic activities such as hunting and trading overseas (47). Moreover, the wage labour system and European lifestyle and culture brought about mass of immigration to urban cities. Youth migrated increasingly to urban cities to seek jobs and to learn Western culture and “civilization”. Besides urbanization, the British brought other social changes to the Colony of Nigeria. The social transformation involved the classification of society into different classes; the lower-class comprised artisans and low-incomes, and it was the hotbed of poverty and criminality, whereas the upper category consisted of lawyers, politicians, doctors and those who had power and qualification to be integrated in the colonial machinery and to enjoy political leadership and „facilities of city”. Moreover, the British introduced a category of educated and Christianized elements. Some of these elements were freed slaves who had been brought back home from England and America, and were used by Christian missionaries to spread Christianity. Furthermore, the colonial power regarded the educated elements as a backbone by which they could carry the heavy administrative works. The colonial government employed a number of educated elements in high positions in the colonial machinery. A growing number of Yoruba former slaves returned home in Yoruba land to hold senior positions in political hierarchy (Eluwa 206). Eluwa also notes that the governors who supported the integration of the African educated elements in the political government provided the educated category with highly significant responsibilities (206). For example, by the second half of the nineteenth century Governor MacGrevor appointed a Nigerian school inspector named Henry Carr as a Colonial Secretary, while nominating Dr. O. Johnson, C. Sapara William and C. J. George to the posts of a medical practitioner, a lawyer and a member of Legislative Council respectively. Furthermore, the educated class was used sometimes to absorb indigenous resentments against the colonial power. However, this political integration did not last for much of the period of the British colonization to Nigeria. As early as the twentieth century the British attitudes towards the employment of African educated elements in the political machinery changed so that a number of African officers had been excluded from the political machinery. This discrimination played a major role in the emergence of the various national movements that gradually took steps towards independence.

2.3. The Rise of Nationalism in Nigeria

Nationalism is primarily a political principle, which holds that the political and the

national unit should be congruent. Nationalism as a sentiment, or as a movement, can

aroused by the violation of the principle, or the feeling of satisfaction aroused by its

fulfilment. A nationalist movement is one actuated by sentiment of this kind. (qtd. in

Eriksen 119).

Analysing the above quotation, Eriksen argues that “national unit” refers to an ethnic group and thus nationalism is a peculiar link between ethnicity and nationalism. Other scholars, such as Ernest Gellner argue that nationalism is chiefly a “political interest” which unifies the political and the national interests (Eriksen 119). In other words, nationalism involves unifying political interests so as to fulfil the integrity of a nation

In Nigeria this unification of political interests came to life by the 1950s, when the British government initiated the exclusion of a mass of native educated elites from the political machinery. Moreover, the rise of nationalism as a political awareness in Nigeria and in all West Africa had been introduced by the Westernized Africans intellectuals who had gained their education abroad in Britain and America.

Upon their return home with cultural and political ideologies on national unity and nation-state, and by virtue of holding strategic political positions, the educated elements initiated various writings that provided other Christianized elements, whose education was limited to reading, writing and counting, with awareness of the imperial role and the necessity of national unity. Thus, the intellectual groups shared a political consciousness to lead their nation towards independence. Moreover, at analysing nationalism in Nigeria on the standard of the above conception, the following sections focus on the political side of colonial Nigeria.

In his Nigeria: Background to Nationalism, James S. Coleman divides the notion of nationalism into two forms, including within the frame of nationalism the various “sentiment” reactions, actions and ideas that had emerged as responses to the colonial rule. Coleman classifies the Nigerian national movements into two kinds -traditional nationalism” and modern nationalism. The former comprises the early resistances and protests against the British colonialism and imposed policies; the policies that generated “psychological” and emotional reactions (Coleman 169). In other terms, traditional nationalism reflected indigenous resentments and frustrations over the advent of colonial power to their land. One example of “traditional nationalism” was The People‟s Union of 1908; a political movement that emerged as an early awareness towards the imposition of taxes to finance a new water scheme. Another example was a nationalist movement emerged in 1911, namely the Lagos Auxiliary of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society (LAAAPS) that protested against transferring lands to the Crown. The LAAAPS emerged to spread an awakening of a threat to indigenous natural rights.

The second form –modern nationalism- refers to the ideas and the thoughts of western- educated intellectuals that poured within a unique political frame, regardless the differentiation among these thoughts. For example, the two leading figures of Nigerian and West African nationalism, Edward Wilmot Blyden and John Payne Jackson, had different ideologies on nationalism so that their ideas on self-government differentiated from each other. While in his early writings Jackson argued that Nigerians were not yet ready to govern themselves and that the British should initiate preparation processes for indigenous people to be capable of running their affairs, Blyden‟s thoughts reflected his interest in the cultural aspect of nationalism.

1.3.2. Early Thoughts on Nationalism Nigerian nationalism owed much of its emergence to two previously mentioned African intellectuals, Blyden and Jackson. The former spent much of the late of 1890s in Lagos as Secretary for Native Affairs. Blyden‟s thoughts and writings gave birth to the whole West African nationalism. Coleman states that Casely Hayford of the Gold Coast described him as “the father of African nationalism” (183). Blyden stressed that Africans should seek the history of their land and its “contribution to humanity.” His major work Islam, Christianity and the Negro Race appeared to vindicate Africans‟ capability to manage their societies and to appeal for Africans in the whole continent to be worthy of the continent that had been considered the birthplace of humanity (Eluwa 212). During the period of his work in Lagos Blyden maintained a close friendship with the owner and the editor of Lagos Weekly Record John Payn Jackson.

Jackson focused on the political aspect of nationalism. He criticised the British political system describing the British government as a racial power. Jackson states “one cannot refrain from speculating the bankruptcy of the New Imperial …, as long as Great Britain continues to transcend the limits of the political righteousness; to harbour the colour prejudice …” (qtd. in Coleman 184). Jackson also appealed to indigenous to protest against the racial government, stressing meanwhile that it was the elite‟s duty to propose constitutional conventions to the government so as to reform the social and the economic system of Nigeria. Jackson writes: “… every constitutional effort directed against the nullification of Nigerian System is a concentrated duty, a moral duty and a national duty … Resistance to oppression is not justifiable but also necessary”. (qtd. in Coleman 184). Moreover, Jackson criticised Great Britain‟s efforts as a trustee for West Africa, claiming that little efforts had been devoted to educate indigenous people and prepare them for self- government.

Such ideas and words were adequate to revive the national spirit among Nigerian educated elements, who had formerly, in few occasions, collaborated with their traditional chiefs to protest against the British colonization. Jackson stated: “The West African discovered what West Indians discovered 35 years ago, that, placed as they were under the controlling influence of a foreign power, it was essential for their well-being that they should make a common cause and develop a national unity …” (qtd. in Coleman 185). Furthermore, both Jackson and Blyden were men of thoughts rather than men of actions whose ideas reflected their awareness of their political duty as intelligentsia.

Thanks to Blyden‟s and Jackson‟s thoughts various categories of Nigerian society came to understand that British imperial duty was to prepare Nigerian political leaders to govern their nation. Crowder notes that the diverse traders‟ unions were linked with each other with no bound but the national awareness (176). However, Blyden‟s and Jackson‟s works were not the first call for a self-governing West Africa. In a work published in London in 1868 by James A.B. Horton4 it was suggested that it was time for indigenous people to run their affairs (Coleman 186). In fact, even before Horton‟s work, a local newspaper authorized that colonial power would not stay on African land forever, and that it would come time when Nigerians themselves would be urgent to govern. Nonetheless, it was Western-educated intellectuals‟ thoughts that laid the foundation of various national movements then political parties that led Nigeria towards independence. Coleman argues that the Nigerian educated elite were the source of political agitations in the country, although until the 1950s the educated category consisted no more than 6 percent of the total population of Nigeria (114). The national activities they initiated such as organizational meetings and publishing nationalist articles brought about a racial and political awareness among various Nigerian social categories.

1.3.1. Early Nigerian Nationalist Movements One effective native educated on Nigerian nationalism was Herbert Macaulay, to whom scholars often refer as “the father of Nigerian nationalism” (Shillington 3: 1104). In the late 1980s Macaulay left the luxury Western life, he had been leading due to his political position as Surveyor of Crown Land, to become the foremost critic to and protester against the colonial government. In 1908, Macaulay led various activities to thwart the imposed taxes for the water scheme. In order to achieve this Macaulay provoked protests against the banning of alcoholic importation on the ground that the result of such banning would be the imposition of more taxation on the indigenous people. Macaulay also led LAAAPS to protest against the Sedition Law of 1909 which limited indigenous freedom of expression (Sklar 42). Furthermore, Macaulay‟s deportation in 1925 influenced Nigerian national awareness. That is, it resulted in uniting traditional authorities with the educated elements. Before his deportation, Macaulay formed Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP) among which main aims was attaining self-government for Nigeria. The party also aimed at Africanising the civil administrations, and also approved for a Nigerian constitution to boost political activities in Lagos. The party gained the support of cultural organizations, trade unions and traditional institutions, such as the jam’at, market women and Chief Oluwa, respectively. Shillington notes: “The party translated modern political activity into traditional political language” (3: 1104).

4 Horton published his first book in 1866, Political Economy of British West Africa; with of the Several Colonies and Settlements. British Parliament had recommended in 1865 that Britain should withdraw from her settlements in West Africa. Yet the British instead launched their expansion in the territory on the ground that the policy of withdrawal was not applicable to the Niger territories. Horton used the Parliamentary Report to launch another book entitled West African Countries and People, British and Native, published in London 1868. The NNDP gained the support of traditional groups on account of the radicalism and traditionalism that characterized its political body. It was on this ground that the party was dominated by chiefs, Imams and market women leaders (Sklar 47); non-literate members who indeed brought about its decline. Sklar states that policymaking within the NNDP was grounded only on consulting the Imams and chiefs (48).

Though the party‟s activities were confined to the region of Lagos, the nationalist aspect of the party was obvious so that it was successful in restoring Eleko Eshugayi5 to Lagos who had been deported in 1925. Despite his traditional and radical tendency, Macaulay was a liberal leader whose political interests did not differ from those of Blyden‟s and Jakson‟s. Moreover, by the late 1920s the party declined on account of the internal disagreements among its leaders, which left ground for another nationalist movement to emerge.

On the occasion of the British scheme to provide educated elites with vocational education so as to be employed in technical and medical administrations, Yaha Higher College was established. The college enrolled only eighteen students when it was first instituted (Shillington 3: 1105). Propagating their ideas and voicing their opposition to the quality of education being provided by this college, students formed Lagos Youth Movement that was later named Nigerian Youth Movement (NYM).

The NYM became more powerful when, in 1937, an intellect named Nnamdi Azikiwe returned to Nigeria from the United States, where he had gained his education. Azikiwe initiated various activities that would ignite the spirit of nationalism among nationalist leaders. For example, he resorted to The West African Pilot magazine introducing a column named “Inside Stuff” in which he proposed twenty-five principles that the Pilot would regularly publish (Sklar 51). These principles included governmental control of railways, mines, and financial institutions. In other terms, Azikiwe in a way or another demanded for a governmental intervention in economic issues of Nigeria. His claims reflected his political ideologies and campaigns for a self-governing Nigeria. In his colomn, Azikiwe also demanded the Africanization of the civil service as well as a radical constitutional reform.

5 Oba Eshugbayi Eleko was appointed by the colonial government as Oba of Lagos in 1901. On Macaulay‟s visit to London, he embarrassed the colonial government in Lagos by issuing a statement that Eleko Eshugbayi was the head of 17 million Nigerian and that Eleko received less pay than the lowest paid European gardener. The colonial government was embarrassed and took this to mean that Eleko was King of all Nigeria. As a result, the government asked Eleko to publicly rebut Macaulay‟s statement. But Eleko refused to deny and dissociate himself from Herbert Macaulay‟s statement. By virtue Oba‟s refusal to cooperat, the colonial government enacted ordinance to deport Eleko to Oyo on August 6, 1925. Moreover, not too long the party gained the support of various categories of Westernized elites who, in 1938, voted for its members to hold seats in in the Legislative Councils. Sklar states that this support reflected nothing but the common political interest of the upper class of Westernized elites (52).

The elective committee the party chose to execute legislative decisions related to the elective process to Legislative Councils‟ seats was dominated by educated Yoruba members, including businessmen, doctors and journalists (Sklar 52). However, the party‟s ethnic character did not refrain from establishing branches of the Movement in other non-Yoruba territories. In fact, the party emphasised the necessity of inter-tribal amity for establishing a national unity, as it was stated in Youth Charter and Constitution of 1938.

The NYM, nonetheless, witnessed internal disputes mainly on account of its members‟ conflicting ethnic and economic interests. The colomn of “Inside Stuff”, Azikiwe had used to write for in West African Pilot, fostered competitively the vice President of the NYM Ernest Ikoli to establish his own journal Daily Service. This competitive gesture resented the nationalist leader Azikiwe who thought of it as an impediment to achieving the party‟s goals related to self-government. In 1941 Azikiwe “dramatically” left the NYM, which brought about a crisis within the party (Sklar 53).

The conflicts within the movement attained its peak when Ikoli was selected to the presidency of the party. The selection of Ikoli on one hand and the rejection of Samuel Akinsanya -another vice-President of the NYM- on the other hand resented Azikiwe and Akinsanya, who came to agree that the latter‟s selection to the presidency of the party had been rejected only because the majority group of Lagos Yoruba would not support the leadership of an Ijibo Yoruba. Moreover, although the NYM demanded self-government as early as its formation, its programmes were directed to reform social and political systems, rather than planning schedules for self-government. Further, until the eve of the Second World War, Nigerian, and probably the whole West African, political interests were still much more relevant to social reforms and political integrations despite the few demands for self-government. Crowder states “The political activity in British West Africa on the eve of the War was still concerned with the ideals of early „Victorian Radicalism‟” (333).

1.3.3. The Impact of the Second World War

Crowder notes that no African nationalist leader has mentioned the impact of World War II on his political views (333). Reviewing West African nationalist leaders‟ works Crowder observes the mere mention of the Second World War in their personal and nationalist writings. Both Knwame Nkuruma and Obafemi Owolowo, who passed the wartime period in the United States and Britain respectively, hardly gave a mention to Second World War in their then writings. In fact, even writers who spent wartime in their homelands gave little attention to the impact of WW II on their political visions. However, though the passing mention to WW II in their political writings, the Second World War stimulated the political leaders‟ nationalist fervours. For instance, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwi‟s nationalist views remained unchanged after the War, yet they were stimulated by the employment of Africans in a war that was not theirs. Crowder notes “Nnamdi Azikiwe deplored Britain‟s lack of gratitude to her colonial subjects who helped her win the War” (333). World War II had an obvious influence on both nationalist awareness among Nigerians and the colonial policy in British colonies colonies. As far as nationalism is concerned the Second World War brought into light the question of political independence so that the political parties and organizations had their common interest in a self-governing Nigeria, although they disagreed over the processes whereby Nigeria would gain its freedom and the form of the post-independence government –Some requested for regional self- government, some demanded a Nigerian Federation. The impact of WW II on all British West Africa was obvious as it brought about various political and economic metamorphoses that would lead Nigeria to the political independence.

Politically, the impact of the Second World War cannot be denied. On the eve of the war the northern region population had no representation in Nigerian Legislative Councils. This was partly due to the difficulties of transportation between the Northern Provinces and the Southern Protectorate of Nigeria as the Council meetings were held in South-Eastern Nigeria, particularly in Lagos (Tamunu 118). On account of the absence of transport facilities it was difficult for northerners to attend the council meetings. Yet, the question of the northern representation in Legislative Councils was brought in constitutional consultations only after forming the so called Richards Constitution in 1946. In addition, Before WW II no executive seat was available for autochthonous Nigerians in the Executive Council. In 1943 two Nigerians were nominated in Executive Councils.

The British considered this political development for Nigerians as a reward to their military joining to Allies forces to assist them win the War. Crowder states that the British expressed constantly in The West African Pilot that the indigenous people expected such political rewards for their participation in the war. However, as a matter of fact, these political developments took place basically by virtue of protests against the socio-economic changes the British brought about since their advent to Nigeria. Therefore, the political progress brought about considerable economic changes in Nigerian economy. Moreover, this political advance was also due to the change of the British conception of colonialism so that their aim became preparing indigenous people for self-rule.

2.3.4. The External Influences on the British Policies The nationalist leaders‟ pressure for political independence was not the only cause for decolonizing Nigeria. The British policies that were directed to prepare Nigerians for self- government had something to do with other external influences. Due to the instability in British colonies overseas, particularly in West Indies, the Colonial Office at home formed a commission to review the colonial system in British West Africa. The commission‟s review gave birth to various developmental programmes on West African societies and economies. One significant programme was the Colonial Development and Welfare (CDW) of 1940. The CDW pledged the government intervention in the economic programmes that would foster the exploitation of local resources and improve the welfare of the autochthonous people. The CDW reflected British new idealism on imperialism and influenced the local government in all four British West African territories, among which was Nigeria. Coleman argues: “The new law reflected in part the idea which had begun to affect the local politics, that government should be a positive agency for the promotion of social welfare and economic well-being” (231). Another external factor that influenced British policies in her colonies was the Atlantic Charter which states that after the War the imperial powers should make new deals, forming new developmental schemes for their dependencies. Further, the Charter influenced to some extent Nigerian nationalism.

The Charter states that it is the right of all people to choose the government under which they will live. This statement was welcomed by The West African Pilot which used it to criticise the British government and to attack Churchill‟s exclusion of the colonial subjects from colonial authority. Further, the Atlantic Charter statement for self-government was more advocated by the Labour Party leaders who stressed inside and outside Parliament on endeavouring the contents of the Atlantic Charter, particularly the part related to self- government (Coleman 236).

1.3.5. Political and Nationalist Development The Second World War had its effects not only on the nationalist spirit of Nigerian political leaders but also on the Nigerian politics. As it has been stated earlier in this chapter, Azikiwe broke with the NYM mainly by virtue of the commercial competition between its members. However, Azikiwe‟s resignation was also due to the political turbulence, which Nigeria had witnessed before the Second World War. Crowder claims that Nigerian politics before 1948 had been more disorded than those of Ghana (346). Thus, Nigerian nationalism before WW II was still an awareness of the necessity of the participation in policymaking, despite the early thoughts of self-government advocated by Blyden, Jackson and others. In other terms, the early national parties were more regional in manner than nationalist.

In 1946 a Constitution was inaugurated to the country of Nigeria, named after Sir Arthur Richards, the then Governor General. Richards‟ Constitution proposed a political representation on a regional ground, dividing the country into three main regions i.e. Northern Provinces, Eastern Region and Western Region.

The division of the country, which took place until 1953, gave birth to three political parties whose members sought the affairs of their regions separately. The Northern Provinces, that until 1946 had no seats in Legislative Councils, came under the political lights when the Northern People‟s Congress (NPC) was established in 1950. Crowder argues that the NPC allowed for its leading members to discuss their preoccupations in Constitution consultations which in return allowed them to protect their interests against the influence of the Southern intelligentsia (348). The NPC spokesmen stressed heavily that the elective process to the Legislative Council‟s seats must be initiated by people (Crowder 348). The NCP, therefore, sought the domination over the majority of the elective seats. Further, NPC was preceded by two other ethnic-based movements i.e. National Council for Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in Igbo land and Action Group (AG). The latter was established by a British- educated Yoruba previously mentioned, Obafemi Owolowo.

Under Richards Constitution, Nigeria came to possess three regional houses of assembly and one central House of Representatives as well as a federal government. However, it was quite apparent that both the federal government and the central council were with no significance in the period between 1953-1961 as the movement‟s demands were issued over dividing the country into three regions or, as movements‟ leaders called them, “states” (Crowder 349). Coleman notes that the Action Group leaders drafted a detailed proposal on the form the post-independence regional governments would take (374). The proposal was to be inaugurated in the Constitution consultation that had been scheduled for September 19, 1956. The proposal was an indirect request for self-government for South- Western region. Gradually, the question of regional self-government became also the issue of both the NCNC and the NPC. These requests had been disclosed through parties‟ meeting reports, public statements and press articles. The result was the emergence of ethnic nationalism, ethnic hostility and ethnic loyalty among individuals of ethnic groups. The political development, which occurred in post-war period and provided nationalist movements with power over their regions fostered ethnic nationalism of post-war Nigeria, which made the AG a Yoruba-dominated party and the NCNC an Igbo-dominated one, whereas the domination of the Hausa-Fulani on the NPC was crystal clear.

Though these political parties were ethnic-based ones, they shared some sort of common interest. Coleman argues that both the Action Group and the NCNC sought to be nationalist parties (389). In fact, their political operations within their regions reflected some sort of nationalism. Their attempts to reflect nationalist ideologies could be proved by the fact that each party gained some support outside the core of its area. According to Coleman, in the 1956 elections to the Northern House of Assembly the Action Group won seats in that assembly so it was the case for the NCNC in some non-Igbo areas (389). In addition, in 1948 the NCNC drew up a charter known as Freedom Charter which states: “Commonwealth of Nigeria and the Cameroons … shall be organized into states on national and linguistic basis”. Moreover, the leaders of both the Action Group party and the NCNC movement declared as early as their foundation that Nigeria should be a self-independent country, regardless of the requests being made for regional independence. In its 1945 Constitution the NCNC stated that among its aims would be attaining “self-government for Nigeria so that Nigerians will exercise legislative, executive and judicial powers” (Coleman 398).

The NCNC also cited article III of the Atlantic Charter that concerns the right of choosing government by people. Even though, since the establishment of regional Houses of Assembly in 1951, the nationalist leaders have become busy with elective campaigns to Houses of Assembly and the House of Representatives. The interparty rivalry for seats in Legislative Councils was intense so that the nationalist leaders put most of their political efforts to win the elective seats in Houses of Assembly and the House of Representatives. Coleman notes “it would have been a political suicide for political parties to slacken its drive towards the year of destiny” (398). However, the various elective campaigns sanctioned a strong affirmation that Nigeria would gain its freedom in 1956, i.e. after the end of the five- year term of regional Houses of Assembly. This affirmation brought about the Action Group and the NCNC into alliance to achieve the goal of self-government in 1956. The alliance took place because the spokesmen of the NDP stressed on March 1953 in House of Representatives that Nigeria would gain self- government only when she became ready for it. The NDP, therefore, opposed the demand of self-government in 1956 as a date to political independence, which bitterly resented the Action Group and the NCNC who left the House of Representatives in 1953.

1.3.5. Regional Conflicts and Self-Government Nigerian independence owed much of its achievement to the political processes that had put nationalist ideas into action since the post-war period. Self-government was a cardinal principle in colonial policy for the British dependencies, and also was an implicit concept in the British “trusteeship” on overseas territories. However, it was also implicit in the colonial policy that the British dependencies would gain self-government only when they become ready to rule themselves. Coleman argues that this should be the role of nationalist leaders so that they should display the power and national unity that show their capacity to govern their nations (396). As early as the twentieth century, Nigerian nationalist leaders had shown the political competence and will to govern their nation. However, during the 1950s various regional disagreements over self-government occurred and delayed the political independence of Nigeria as the colonial government saw that their dependency was not yet ready for self- rule.

The argument the NDP spokesmen launched in the conference of March 1953, and which states that Nigeria should gain her political independence “only when it is applicable”, escalated the long-term regional resentments between the northern and the southern territories, as it escalated regionalism in the country. Coleman notes:

After the adjournment of the House of Representatives the northern members were

subjected to insults and abuse by Lagos crowds, and during the ensuring weeks they were

ridiculed and strongly criticised by the southern press. Upon their return to the north they

determined never to be subjected to such indignities again (399).

The northern politicians even scheduled an eight point programme for establishing a secessionist Hausa-Fulani ethnicity. This act provoked further criticism to northern representatives who had been already described by the intelligentsia of the Southern region as lacking representativeness. The southern politicians also had their opinions towards the northern political leaders. Coleman noted that the leaders of both the Action Group and the NCNC were forced to accept holding the northern political leaders to 50 per cent the House of Representatives seats as the northern people consisted the bulk of the population of Nigeria (401). They were more than convinced that the radical and traditional society of Hausa-Fulani would “vote as a monolithic bloc” for the northern representatives in the electoral process to the House of Representatives seats. Moreover, the tension attained its peak when the intelligentsia of the south sent delegations to the northerners to rethink the question of political independence in 1956. The result was regional riots in Kano (see map 2) which brought about the death and the wounding of 277 people from both regions (Coleman 399).

The northern representatives opposed the request of self-government for fear that the southern politicians would dominate the self-governing Nigeria. This fear had several reasons including the domination of southern intelligentsia on strategic social and political posts in the colonial administration as well as their controlling of various public and private sectors in the northern society. These fears were also based on the influence of the southern political and social attitudes on the socio-political system of northern people (Coleman 400). Furthermore, the self-government Constitution that had been written in the House of Representatives council strengthened the northern opposition to self-government. The Constitution stated that Nigeria would take a federal system with regional governments and one central government. For northern people, such government system meant simply the domination of southern on higher positions in administrative and military services.

Despite the political disagreements inside and outside the House of Representatives and the regional conflicts, the year of 1953 witnessed significant changes that assisted in the attainment of Nigerian political independence. The disagreements between the NDP on one hand and the NCNC and the Action Group on the other hand not only led to unifying the Action Group and the NCNC to seek Nigerian independence, but also fostered both parties to leave the council, therefore, transforming their political interests to Nigerian political independence. Besides, it was in the same year that a constitution was written for a self- governing Nigeria; the constitution under which a Legislative Council namely the Eastern House was formed. The Eastern House brought back Azikiwe and other nationalist leaders to the political scene after they had been excluded from senior positions in the colonial machinery. These nationalist leaders won the elections to Eastern House with majority, and collaborated with each other in their negotiation with the Nigerian Governor on self- government.

Azikiwe and Owolowo revived the nationalist spirit so that they unified their efforts towards what they considered the final conference of independence, stressing that this would be the last conference for self-government as it had been stated in their invitation letter to the Nigerian Governor; the letter that displayed their persistence on a self-governing Nigeria in 1956:

This … is the last constitution conferring dependent status which we are willing to

operate. The Constitution will come to an end … in 1956 or by earlier breakdown or

abrogation. If any of these … events occur we demand that Britain, in all friendly spirit

should accord us Dominion status within the British Commonwealth of Nations. If she

refuses to do so we would unhesitatingly declare our independence and proceed to assert

it whatever the consequences might be (qtd. in Coleman 402).

However, the conference of 1956 was not the last; Nigeria did not gain her independence in that year; partly because the delegates of the northern territory who represented the bulk population of Nigeria had already rejected the idea, and partly because the leaders of the Northern Provinces demanded a regional self-government for the northern region in 1959.

Azikiwe and his fellows continued their nationalist activities that aimed to both unifying Nigeria and securing its self-government. In 1957 they called the three regional parties for unifying their objective and state a memorandum requesting the British to grant a political independence for Nigeria in 1959. The northern politicians seemed willing to agree upon it as they had already requested regional independence in that year. The memorandum was issued in the conference of 1957, but the result was not satisfactory for the nationalist leaders who did not stop there and whose objectives finally became common. A northern political leader in NDP states:

We have given further consideration to the secretary of state‟s statement on the

independence of the Federation of Nigeria … The year of 1959 has been unanimously

proposed by the people of Nigeria … Having gone thus for on the path of reason and realism, we had thought that the Secretary of State would accede to our united

wishes”(qtd. in Coleman 405).

The nationalist leaders continued their nationalist speeches and articles as well as negotiations with the Secretary of State of Nigeria on self-government. Azikwe‟s nationalist comments could be encountered in The West African Pilot, or other nationalist press such as Nigerian Tribune. Moreover, the nationalist leaders, through experience, came to be more careful about their negotiations for self-government. It was obvious for them through the Secretary of State response to their 1957 memorandum that the British were not keen in decolonizing Nigeria in 1959, as they requested. Therefore, they appointed the year of 1960 as the last year of the colonization of Nigeria.

On October 1, 1960, Nigeria was granted self-government thanks to persistence of nationalist leaders, such as Nnamdi Azikiwe, who became the president of Senate of the new independent Nigerian Federation, and later the president of Nigerian Republic in 1963. Nonetheless, Nigerian elites sustained the British regional division to the country as well as the political apparatus the British had established to rule the colony. That is, Nigeria continued to be divided into three regions –the Northern, the Eastern and the Western regions (see map 3).

Conclusion The advent of the British to Nigeria brought about various social and economic changes that sometimes angered Nigerian intelligentsia who endeavoured attempts at protesting against the various British colonial; the attempts which could be included within the scope of nationalism. Therefore, nationalism emerged as a political awareness that reflected the political interest among the various strata of Westernized educated elites. Despite the regional and ethnic disagreements, the nationalist leaders could unify their goal and gain political independence for their nation in 1960.

Chapter Three: Challenges of Nation-Building 1960-1970

Introduction

On the eve of independence, Nigerian socio-political structure had been fragmented by virtue of the regional division of 1953. The demands over regional self-governments had shattered the unity of political parties, which affected the post-independent Federal government. Therefore, in post-colonial era Nigeria came to inherit a number of obstacles that doubtless affected Nigerian politics and escalated ethnic and regional conflicts in the country. Post-colonial ethnic groups inherited suspicious and mistrustful relations that brought about bitter disagreements among political leaders and led to damaged interethnic relations. In addition, national culture had been subverted by virtue of the socio-political and the socio- economic systems the British introduced since their advent as early as the second half of the nineteenth century. Moreover, socio-political and cultural fragmentation resulted in a sequence of crises and riots, ranging from the Action Group crisis of 1963 and the Federal elections crisis of 1964 to Nigerian Civil War, in 1967-1970. This chapter handles the first decade of independent Nigeria and the challenges that confronted nation building in this period. The chapter agrees that these challenges had much to do with what is often conceptualized as politicizing ethnicity.

3.1. Nation-Building A growing number of indicators suggested a prosperous politics and economy for Nigeria. At independence, this country came to compromise the heaviest population among most of the then decolonized African countries. In addition, the country had witnessed a gradual economic growth since the establishment of British colonial rule, introducing new processes of production and a new economic structure, though, as it has been seen previously in the second chapter, these processes deteriorated people‟s interrelations and societies, as the discovery of petroleum in the Niger Delta region in 1958 led to more prosperous economy. Furthermore, as soon as Nigerian politicians regained power and control over their land, and due to the 1950s regional and constitutional disagreements, the necessity of a common culture and historical past that would bring Nigerians together and put an end to the regional conflicts became crystal clear. Hence a variety of educated elites including artists, writers, scholars and even politicians sought to develop Blyden‟s thoughts on cultural nationalism so as to forge a national identity among Nigerians by appealing to maintain common culture and reconstruct a common historical past. Christian schools in Nigeria had produced a variety of writers who used their pens and imagination to illustrate Nigerian pre-colonial culture and history and to make pride of pre- colonial communities‟ patterns of life and interdependency. One eminent writer whose works contributed effectively in illustrating pre-colonial Nigerian patterns of life was Chinua Achebe. His piece of art Things Fall Apart (1958) made him one of the leading voices for cultural nationalism in post-colonial Nigeria. Things Fall Apart was written in English language but with an Igbo voice. Achebe used Igbo proverbs, metaphors and speech rhythms to narrate pre-colonial Nigerian life. Yet, Achebe’s use of English was not without a purpose. He emphasises himself in his book Morning Yet on Creation Day that he has used English because he does not speak of Igbo people, neither he speaks of Nigeria, but of all African continent (“Critical Essays”). Achebe’s works displays his desire to demonstrate the aesthetic aspects of pre-colonial cultural patterns and socio-political systems as well as his awareness of duty as an intellectual. In a commentary in his Morning Yet on Creation Day Achebe states that Africans had been deprived of all fundamentals of nation building during colonial times, and that they should regain their culture, their philosophy and, more importantly, their dignity so as to build a common orientation and national integration (“Critical Essays”).

Along with Achebe there was also Wole Soyinka; another writer who emerged in the early 1960s with a dramatic playwright entitled The Swamp Dwellers, throughout which he displays his desire to forge a national unity through employing characters from diverse ethnicities in his play, as the play was performed by multi-ethnic cast. Furthermore, along artists there were also academics and scholars who initiated processes of rewriting and reinterpreting Nigerian history to make pride of and commitment to Nigerian traditions. Thus, nation-building was the focus of various Nigerians.

Individual attempts were also initiated so as to restore pre-colonial patterns of relations between ethnicities. According to Okepeh, as soon as Nigeria attained its independence, traders from each of the Hausa-Fulani, the Igbo and the Yoruba from Idomaland attempted to reconstruct their pre-colonial relations by migrating in droves to inhabit other regions of Nigeria (133). Morever, such attempts inspired politicians to initiate the process of creating regional states in the country as a part of political efforts of building a nation state.

3.1.1. State Creation At independence, Nigerian politicians inherited not only the British government systems but also their thoughts on which political structure was more appropriate for Nigeria, given its ethnic composition. Prior to the amalgamation of 1914, the Governor of Northern Nigeria Charles L. Temple and some British administrators advocated the idea that the existence of multi-states structure would minimize the political and financial problems of the country due to the ethnic and cultural heterogeneity of Nigerian Protectorates. Opposed to Governor Temple was Fredrick Ludgard whose idea of the amalgamation was inspired by the history of the Fulani Jihad, as the Fulani could establish a united Empire that lay upon the Hausa-Fulani and the Yoruba states, notwithstanding cultural and ethnic heterogeneity. Later on, Governor Richards advocated the idea of dividing Nigeria on the ground that the country was “naturally” divided into three Provinces –the northern, the eastern and the western regions- according to ethnic and socio-political differentiations (Okpu 185). The regional division under the Richards‟ Constitution engendered awareness among minorities who had stressed on creating their own states since 1951 for fear of ethnic majority domination.

On the ground of minorities‟ fears, a commission known as the Willink Commission, named after its chairman Sir Henry Willink, was formed to discuss the question of minorities in the conference of Nigerian constitution that was held in London in September, 1957. The commission was also held to resolve disagreements among the leading parties of Nigeria over state-creation within the Federation of Nigeria. Thereafter, the leaders of the political parties except for the NPC leaders, who opposed creating more states in the country, came to agree upon creating more states in the country, which would ease the fears of ethnic minorities.

State creation strategy would involve fragmenting the country into various states, creating more independent political regions and meanwhile connecting them to and administrating them by the Federal government. Hence, in 1963 the federal government initiated an experiment in the Western Region, curved out a state in the area and named it Mid-Western region. The creation of the Mid-West state was an attempt to resolve the crises that affected nation-building in Nigeria. Addressing the significance of state-creation E. A. Ayendela states in respect of the 1967 expansion, when the military regime created twelve more states:

By far the most important measure of the "New Nigerians" is the division of the country

into twelve states, the high priority status of which is clear from the fact that the states

were created simultaneously…The administrative, political and constitutional

advantages for the country of dividing the three Regions - North, West and East - into

smaller, almost equal and balanced units were beyond dispute (qtd. in Wuam 108).

Although it was debatable whether state-creation within the federation was politically a wise step, the Mid-Western region showed the possibility of the success of the initiation. Jorre observes that the Mid-West Region was a successful experiment because it proved that a number of ethnicities could live peacefully under a federal regime. The Mid-West Region survived all the on-going crises that confronted Nigeria during the first decade of post- colonial Nigeria.

It was widely agreed that state creation in Nigeria would limit the exploitation of ethnicity by political leaders by creating independent administrations for minorities. Odetola notes that the institutions that emerged under the creation of regional states were capable of ensuring the demands of and the support for the regions they operated within (184). The creation of states fulfilled self-determination for minorities within the area and undermined the possibility of the domination of the majority groups over the minorities. It also weakened ethnic domination as the states were connected directly to the federal government and were managed by the federal administrations. State creation also brought under lights the issue of ethnicity and religion in the country and brought about a variety of initiatives to limit ethnic focuses among political parties and to make their focuses more national (Wuam 108). Furthermore, state creation was advocated by a number of Nigerian politicians who through experience thought of it as the solution of limiting „regionalism‟ and ethnic loyalty in the Nigerian federation.

Odetola notes that due to the ethnic composition of Nigeria, the more political units are created, the more common political interest rises among the various ethnic groups, because creating independent administrations would minimize the needs of ethnic minorities to majority groups by instituting various administrations that would operate to fulfil their needs and demands (182). Odetola grounded his argument on Deutsh and Etzioni‟s assumption that state-creation would engender coalitions and breed strong relations based on mutual interests (Odetela 183). Thereafter, state-creation would limit the exploitation of ethnic attachments into the national affairs because as long as ethnic groups are administratively distinguished from each other and meanwhile governed by a unique federal government, ethnicity will be less accentuated in the politics of the country. More importantly, state-creation would redress the regional representativeness so that the Hausa- Fulani would represent the Hausa-Fulani in the Federal House of Representatives, rather than representing the Northern Provinces. In fact, this was the reason behind northern political leaders‟ refusal to create more states in the northern region. Hence, despite the creation of the Mid-Western Region no political party undertook the „risk‟ of creating an additional state within the region it governed. It was the military regime that launched the process again in 1967. Nonetheless, the political and the intellectual efforts for nation building were challenged by a number of crises that prevented nationalism and national culture in the country.

3.2. Challenges to Building a Nation-State Ethnicity involves cultural and socio-economic interrelations that contributed to a great deal to the establishment of societies. In post-colonial Nigeria new aspects of relations emerged between communities; aspects that can be conceptualized in the term of „ethnonationalism‟, for the term is defined by O. Nnolli as the culmination of interrelationships between different ethnic groups within a political society that encompasses distinct ethnic groups (Ikepe 150). Defining nationalism as political awareness, ethnicity could be easily politicized on account of “the conflicting interests of ethnic-based elites as they engage in power struggles and as groups compete generally for scarce state resources and largesse such as employment, education, election, representation, and most of all, the control of state power” (Ikepe 150). Ikepe further notes that the danger of ethnonationalism lies in its nature because it involves uneven contestants who struggle among each other to gain power, and also because it involves savage conflicts that never end (151). Therefore, ethnonationalism involves an on-going and unrelenting struggle over power and competition over the country‟s resources. In post-colonial Nigerian context, politicizing ethnicity became a danger involving a number of obstacles that debilitated the national awareness, which had emerged during colonial period and contributed to some extent in driving the country towards independence.

3.2.1. Ethnic Resentments On the eve of independence northern politicians expressed their uncertainty about the significance of a politically unified Nigeria. On February 8, 1950, the Nigerian newspaper Gaskiya Ta Fi Kwabo published a correspondence that was received from the northern Nigerians containing northerners‟ unwillingness to be unified with southerners. The letter read: “In truth we are not able to see any advantage in a united Nigeria, only oppression and injustice. We, on reflection, consider that a mistake was made in 1914, where north and south were joined together” (qtd. in Koreih 7). Thereafter, Nigerian politics had been driven by self- determination since the establishment of the Nigerian Federation. The Hausa-Fulani expressed in different occasions their disapproval to the existence of Igbos in northern Nigeria. The emir Mukhtar Bello, for example, requested the Minister of Northern Region to take into consideration the matter of the employment of Igbos in northern administrations. Bello addressed the following words to the minister:

I would like to say something very important…the minister should take my appeal to

the Federal Government about the Ibos in the Post Office. I wish the number of these

Ibos to be reduced…there are too many of them in the north. They are just like sardines

and I think they are just too dangerous for the region (qtd. in Koreih 7).

Koreih further suggests that Bello‟s speech tended to propagate the danger of “others” on the northern region. Therefore, Bello‟s speech suggests that northerners‟ fears of Igbo domination concerned in a great deal with the economic and political resources of the northern region. In fact, the northerners‟ sentiments towards Igbo people go back several years. Due to their settlement on the coastal areas, the Igbos were more open to European technology and modernity, which made them dynamic traders who could be found in every sector in Nigeria; they settled heavily in northern Nigeria, dominating various economic sectors. This resented the Hausa-Fulani politicians who expressed explicitly their refusal to Igbos‟ existence in the northern region. One example can be seen in the following words by Mallam Bashari Umar: “I would like you, as a Minister of Land and Survey, to revoke forthwith all certificate of occupancy from the hands of Igbos resident in the region” (Koreih 7).

Ethnic discrimination was pronounced increasingly among the northern residents as Igbo‟s presence in their land became a focus of interest in the Northern House of Assembly. In a meeting of the House members, a Fulani emir named Mallam Muhamad Mustapha demanded that Igbos should not be allowed to possess plots or market stalls. Mustapha‟s speech insisted that northerners should protect their economic resources, particularly their markets and their estates. Another assembly member whose speech reflected the preoccupation of many members in the assembly was Mallam Ibrahim Mussa of Igal (Koreih 7). Mallam Mussa‟s speech attracted the attention of the northern politicians because it suggested that northern political resources were threatened, hence he suggested the withdrawal of all Igbos from the civil service in the northern region through sending delegates to the House of Representatives to request the repatriation of all Igbos being integrated in the northern administrations. Moreover, mobilizing northerners preoccupations to a high level provoked debates concerning regionalism in the House of Representatives.

Nigerian politicians involved the matter of regional commitment in their discussions in the House of Representatives. In a formal discussion between two members of Northern House of Assembly Ahmadu Bello and his fellow Alhaji Usman Liman, the latter stressed that Igbos should go back to eastern region and that each administrator should be employed in civil services of his region. Alhaji Liman said: “…the Ibos should go back to their Region. There should be no hesitation about the matter. Mr Chairman, North for Northerners, East for Easterners, West for Westerners and the Federation is for us all”(qtd. in Koreih 7) These obvious ethnic resentments that the northern politicians harboured against Igbos were so accentuated in the political competition which brought about serious ethnic conflicts and drove the politics of Nigeria towards its worst degree.

3.2.2. The Political Crises of the First Republic As it has been mentioned previously, Nigerian individuals including academics and artists attempted vigorously to forge a national unity within the Nigerian Federation. Nonetheless, conflicts among political parties over domination on both regional assemblies and Federal assembly prevented unifying ethnic interests. These conflicts were escalated by virtue of the discovery and the introduction of economic resources in the country as regional and Federal assemblies determined the way whereby these resources were distributed (Falola & Heaton 165). Therefore, the competition over resources marked the post-colonial Nigerian politics as politicians transformed national politics to ethnic politics, due to their separate and conflicting interests. These conflicts were also engendered by virtue of fear that a given ethnicity would undermine another ethnicity‟s opportunities of having access to economic resources. On the one hand, Southern political leaders feared that if the “conservative” government of Northern Region dominated the Federal government, they would divert revenues of sources, such as taxes of import-export goods, to finance developmental projects for the Northern Provinces. They also felt that they would weaken their positions as policymakers in the Federal assembly. On the other hand, northerners feared that the Action Group Party and the NCNC would ally and control civil and educational services of the north since northerners were less educated than southerners.

The mistrustful relations between political parties‟ leaders affected the sense of national identity in the country. However, this mistrust was not curved out of a vacuum, but rather it was engendered because of the ethnic loyalty that characterized political parties since their foundation in the late 1940s. The NPC dominated Federal assembly since 1953 thanks to the great number that characterized population of the north. The domination of northern politicians on the federal assembly allowed also domination over civil and military sectors by uneducated northern citizens. In 1961, for instance, 50 percent of appointed military officers were Hausa-Fulani by ethnicity, and were unqualified for this post vis-à-vis their fellow candidates from southern region (Falola & Heaton 166). In addition, the bulk of the projects of the First National Development Programme (a federal program introduced by the government to develop the country) were directed to the Northern Provinces and held by northern entrepreneurs.

Indeed, such ethnic-based policies escalated resentments among policymakers in the country. The NPC was accompanied by the NCNC in governing the federal governments; the coalition that resented the Action Group members. Moreover, the Action Group opposition to the two-party system bred disagreements within the party. Some of its members such as Chief Owolowo called for a regional independence to the South-Eastern Province through finding means to be self-sufficient. He also called for nationalizing the country‟s industries.

The Action Group opposition to the NPC-NCNC coalition brought about the party‟s exclusion from the Federal government. The two parties allied to weaken the Action Group by any means for that they undertook a systematic attack on the group (Anglin 175). In 1962, the federal government declared a state of emergency and accused the Group‟s leaders of treason and corruption and were arrested for several months without trial. Furthermore, the federal government formed a commission to inquire into corruption affairs in the country. The commission charged ten prominent members of the Action Group including Chief Owolowo with treasonable felonies. Owolowo was found guilty of diverting regional funds in the amount of over five million Naira, in order to serve ethnic affairs related to his party (Falola & Heaton 167). However, the NPC-NCNC coalition did not last long. In fact, the NPC domination over House of Representatives since 1953 had always resented the NCNC leaders who by the approach of national census sought to have the majority of seats in the House of Representatives.

The Igbo-dominated NCNC sought to win the majority of seats in the House of Representatives by any means. The NPC dominated the House since 1953, because the 1953 census revealed that the population of the northern region represented the majority of bulk population of Nigeria. Thus, the NCNC thought that the only way to win the bulk seats in the House of Representatives was through indicating that the population of southern region overcame the population of northern region. Hence, in the census of 1962 the party faked the results so that they indicated that the population of southern region were 70 percent of the population of the country (Falola & Heaton 168). Yet, the NPC leaders did not accept this result and requested the federal government for another census the next year. Indeed, when the census had been conducted again in 1963, results were in favour of the Hausa-Fulani party so that the party won the majority because the results were accepted this time by the federal government. This of course bitterly resented the NCNC leaders so that they immediately quit the House, which ensured the complete manipulation of the NPC over it. Moreover, by the approach of the federal elections, a realignment of the two parties occurred as a part of preparing them to the elections. That is, each party joined other minority parties outside their regions so as to make them national rather than regional. The NCNC along with the Action Group embraced parties in the north such as United Middle Belt Congress and the Northern Elements Progressive Union to form the electoral grouping United Progressive Grand Allien (UPGA). Similarly, the NPC included parties from the southern region, principally Chief Atinkola‟s Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP) and, in south-east, the Dynamic Party, to form Nigerian National Alliance (NNA). Yet things only went from bad to worse. The electoral campaigns being conducted by both parties –UGPA and NNA- reflected much of the character of Nigerian politics. Apart from the “political philosophies” the two parties expressed and the economic programmes they sanctioned, the campaigns were undertaken under bitter rivalry, particularly in the north and the south-west, where the NNA leaders devoted their power and time to undermine the opportunities of their competitors. UPGA candidates claimed that they were mistreated in the north, whereas their supporters were often physically prevented from expressing their support to the party‟s candidates. They were even arrested and detained for mere speaking of the UPGA party. In October 1964, 297 supporters were arrested and imprisoned for more than six months (Falola and Heaton 169). Moreover, the realignment did not serve much the position of the UPGA so that they ordered the boycott of the elections. The boycott that the UPGA called for succeeded in most of the south-eastern area where the UPGA had control and influence. According to Anglin, there were no elections throughout the Eastern Region as well as throughout the Mid-West region (127). Yet, the election process took place despite the UPGA‟s effort to prevent their occurrence; the result was in favour of the NNA. Further, the whole process, since the inauguration of campaigns, was disapproved by the Head of the State Nnamdi Azikiwe who launched several attempts to ensure the freedom and the purity of election. Few days before the voting, Azikiwe requested the Prime Minister Abubakr Tefawa Belawa to delay the election process six months to “enable the United Nations to send experts and assist them in conducting free and fair elections” (Anglin 182). Nonetheless, the Prime Minister rejected the President‟s proposal due to the pressure he had been receiving from his own party. Furthermore, when the results had been announced with the victory of the NNA, Azikiwe appealed to the Prime Minister to ignore the results of the election and schedule for another one. Yet, once again, the Prime Minister refused the proposal of Azikiwe on the ground that the elections had been constitutionally run. The President then tried his last step- a threat of resignation if his proposal was not to be taken into consideration. Azikiwe stated: “I find it awkward to exercise the power to call upon any person to form a government. True, the Constitution is clear in this issue, but my decision is that I will not exercise such a power and I would rather resign.” (qtd. in Anglin 182). According to Anglin, by „exercising power‟, Azikiwe meant exercising constitutional responsibilities. With Azikiwe‟s refusal to exercise constitutional responsibilities, an official step must take place to resolve the crisis. Two days after Azikiwe‟s resigning statement, Chief Justice of Eastern Nigeria and Chief of the Federation introduced a resolution to the constitutional deadlock; a five-point that included introducing a government headed by Prime Minister Belawa. The latter immediately called upon Azikiwe to negotiate the creation of the NNA government since it was the winner of the elections. Azikiwe agreed on condition that a “broad-based government” should be created for the federation should be governed by all parties. Azikiwe also conditioned that an election for the Western House of Representatives would be conducted on October, 1965. This was to happen, yet only to make things worse particularly in the Western Region when elector contest involved principally the Action Group and NNDP parties. The Western Region elections brought about serious internecine conflicts in the south- eastern area. The elections were merely a repeat to the scene of 1964 federal elections; both competitors devoted much of their power to win the electoral seats in the Western House of Representatives. Yet, the action that resented the people of the West was that the claiming of victory by both sides so that each party claimed the winning of the majority of seats. Thereafter, the results of the elections led to violent thuggery across the whole Western Region. People protested in streets and led violent actions against the governments of both parties, such as clashing with police, burning houses and even killing. Moreover, with the northern domination over the federal government and the Easterners resentments, the first Republic was under a threat of collapse. The problems of Nigerian society were only increasing; scramble for jobs, fraud, thuggery and the inequality of opportunities became the main characters of the Nigerian society. The 1964-1965 elections brought escalated ethnic resentments in the Federation of Nigeria particularly between the Igbo and the Hausa-Fulani peoples. These resentments were expressed more violently as early as 1966 when an army coup was launched by an Igbo- dominated army, resulting in one of the worst periods in Nigerian history.

3.2.3. Ethnic Conflicts By January 1966, Nigeria witnessed another crisis that impeded raising national awareness in first decade of post-colonial Nigeria. Five majors initiated a military coup on January 15, 1966, claiming that their aim was to finish regionalism and put an end to corruption in the country. However, the majors‟ process for achieving that led northerners to be suspicious about the military‟s claims on finishing corruption and regionalism, and considered that the majors‟ goal was Igbo domination over government. Besides that four of the five majors involved in the coup were Igbos, the army began murdering and arresting operations for northern and western politicians who had dominated the federal government during the first republic. They killed Prime Minister Bellawa as well as Premier S. L. Akintola of the Western Region, and Premier Ahmadu Bello of the Northern Region. They also killed many northerner military officers (Falola & Heaton). Furthermore, killing and arresting federal and regional leaders aimed to collapse the federal government and establishing a military regime under the leadership of Major General Aguyi Ironsi who surrounded himself with advisers from Igbo and promoted increasingly military soldiers from Igbo ethnicity to the rank of an officer. Ironsi believed that regional representativeness had been a key problem since its inauguration the 1950s (Okpu 184). Thereafter, he initiated an attempt to abolish ethnic representation through issuing a decree, namely Decree No 34, to ban creation of regions and regional representativeness and to transform Nigeria into a political unitary. The decree also abolished the formation of ethnic-based political parties. Therefore, despite the ethnic character in Ironsi‟s policies, his goal was to establish a democratic regime in the country. However, Ironsi seemed insensitive towards northerners‟ fears about Igbo domination over the country; the fact that led to a counter-coup in July, 1966.

Northern officers who could no longer bear being occupied by southerner officers and administrated by southerner politicians led a counter-coup in July of the same year, capturing and killing Ironsi in Ibadan (see map 3). After three days they appointed Lieutenant Colonel Yakubu Gowon as the Head of the State. When Gowon came to power, he revoked the Decree No 34 and re-established the federal government, indicating that the federal system unified Nigeria and that regional differentiation was part of the structure of Nigeria. Yet ethnic conflicts did not stop. In September 1966, northerners led violent massacre towards Igbos and other easterners living in the north, killing between 80000 and 100000 easterners (Falola & Heaton 174). As revenge, easterners did likewise to northerners living in Igbo land, which brought about mass movement from both regions. That is, easterners living in the north went back to the eastern region and vice versa.

Both the military coup and the counter-coup reflected the mutual suspicion between northerners and easterners. Northerners were not convinced with the majors‟ claim on finishing corruption in the country and more importantly thought that the only solution to end their military regime was through killing as much Igbos as possible. After the country-coup, the eastern government appointed a judicial committee to investigate the northerners‟ thuggery against the easterners. The committee was chaired by G.C.N. Onyiuke who prepared his report on the ground of statements by 235 eyewitnesses (Koreih 7). The report considered that the northern government and their “collaborators from British residents” prepared an agenda that targeted to finish the Igbo race through carrying out genocidal massacres in the eastern region. The agenda drew up a list of targeted Igbo political and military figures to be murdered, including Major General Aguiyi Ironsi, and all army officers as revenge to the murder of Abubakr Tefawa and other northern leaders. The agenda also stated as a target the killing of all Igbo residents in northern region as well as murdering all Igbo of Yamiri land (Koreih 7). Moreover, these massacres led Lieutenant Colonel from Igbo namely Ojukwu to consider secession of the eastern region, but he was opposed by the Head of the State Gowon

The secession matter engendered disagreements between Ojunku and Gowon. The two held a series of meetings in Aburi, Ghana on January the fourth and January the fifth, 1967 to negotiate the matter, but the negotiations only led to more disagreements. Gowon believed that it had been agreed during Aburi meetings that the region should remain within the federation of Nigeria, while Ojunku claimed that the meetings of Aburi provided him with power over the government of Western Region. Consequently, in March, 1967, Ojuku announced that all federal institutions being in south-eastern region would be held by the south-eastern government for the region would be administratively independent; Ojunkwu declared the establishment of a new independent Republic in the south-eastern Nigeria named the Republic of Biafra.

3.2.3.1 Nigerian Civil War 1967-1970 After the announcement of the Republic of Biafra, the Federal Military Government (FMG) sought to prevent the secession of the region for quite obvious reasons. Gowon and his government opposed the secession of south-eastern region because they sincerely believed in the unity of Nigeria and that any secession would lead to other minorities secession. Besides, the region Ojunku claimed contained 67 percent of the known petroleum reserves in Nigeria (Falola & Heaton 175). Consequently, Gowon government sent out its military forces towards Biafra, sparking a civil war that lasted for two and a half years in the south-eastern region, and ended in Biafra‟s collapse. The Biafra war was the period when interethnic relations attained their worst degree in Nigerian history. While Gowon and his government considered the war a “police action” that would not last long, Igbo considered it a survival war that would save them. Easterners believed that the overall aim of federal government was the “genocide” for all Igbo ethnicity as Ojukwu and his government were able to forge an ethnic solidarity among the Igbo people and turning the war to a self-defence attempt.

The war produced an ethnic nationalism among Igbos, which indeed had its aftermath in their relations with other ethnic groups. Jorre observes: “these resourceful people, for the first time in their history, were turning their powers in on themselves. The result was an almost audible hum, spurred on by an intense nationalism and the ever-present threat from outside”. While politicians from both sides held strictly to their positions, things were becoming worse for citizens of Nigeria. Moreover, Gowon initiated a variety of policies that indicated that Igbo‟s interpretation of “genocide” was likely to be plausible; policies that aimed to isolate and impoverish Igbo people.

Gowon initiated a division in the formerly created regions, curving out twelve new states. Yet state-creation this time followed ethnic lines, aimed to isolate the Igbo speaking people. The division also provoked an ethnic attachment among Igbo speaking people in all Nigeria. Jorre notes that the Igbo of Mid-Western states felt strong sympathy for Biafra, because it contained the bulk of Igbo population in the south-eastern region

While the creation of states targeted to isolate Igbo people, Gowon also undertook policies that would disrupt the economy of the newly established Republic of Biafra. The Federal military surrounded the country, blockading the coast which made it difficult for Biafran traders to sail with their goods and items outside the country and meanwhile to prevent the external aids from reaching into the region. Koreih notes that the Federal government requested all countries and international organization not to intervene in Nigerian internal affairs (3). These economic policies inflicted sufferance and poverty among the inhabitants of Biafra; prices increased and diseases spread all over the south-eastern region. Folala and Heaton point out: “The price of beef rose from 3 shillings a pound to 60, dried fish from 5 shillings a pound to 60, and a chicken, which went for roughly 15 shillings before the war, cost as much as £30 by its end” (176). In the summer of 1968, the International Committee of Red Cross reported that 300, 000 children were diagnosed with kwashiorkor disease and that 3, 000.000 children were near to death (Koreih 3). Moreover, the Igbo interpretation received the attention of the International Committee on the Investigation of Crimes of Genocides which formed a commission led by the Ghanian Dr. Mensah who travelled to Biafra to inquire into the war. According to Koreih, the committee found evidence that proved the northerners intention to exterminate the whole Igbo ethnicity (3).

The Biafran war demonstrated the northerners‟ hatred towards the Igbos. Dr. Mensah‟s committee, and on the ground of interviews with Igbo refuges from various sections from Nigeria, Nigerian officials, the International Red Cross and the International Observer Team as well as on the ground of previous reports on violent assaults on Igbos in northern Nigeria, concluded that the Federal government was filled of hatred towards Igbo people so that they made, as a final solution, the war of genocide on Biafran Igbos (Koreih 3). The Northerners‟ attitudes towards their ethnic counterparts were grounded on the obvious Igbos dominance on the commercial and administrative sectors in the country. The Kano riots of 1953 were partly due to the northerners and the southerners‟ disagreements over self- government. Moreover, the report illustrated the degree to which ethnic hatred was pronounced in post-colonial Nigeria politics. The report states:

The underlying intention of Nigeria Authorities in its relations with the people of the

former Eastern Nigeria has always been to solve their political or other differences by

calculated massacre of Biafran citizens…Besides physical acts of extermination, the

Biafrans have been subjected to psychological pressure by malicious, vicious and

destructive falsehood that not was a Biafran an unwanted “stranger” in his own country,

the general object of hate and discrimination throughout the length and breadth of

Nigeria (qtd. in Koreih 3)

During the war this ethnic hatred expressed itself explicitly via different means. According to Koreih, on July 6, 1967, the Federal government launched a Hausa song that had been sung mainly to incite the military thuggery against the Igbo people. The song was to be translated “Let us go and crush them. We will pillage their property, ravish their womenfolk, murder their menfolk and complete the pogrom of 1966” (3). Such resentments took the lives of between 1 and 3 million Nigerians from both sides, however the bulk were Igbos.

The war indeed left deep marks in the Nigerian history. Ukiwo notes that it has been argued that the contemporary socio-political violence in Nigeria has much to do with Civil War, and that the war resulted in maintaining a „culture of violence‟ in the country (10). Ukiwo quotes:

War time leads to a degradation of moral values. It upgrades patriotism, heroism,

valour, but it degrades the moral code, excuses excesses of sadistic behaviour,

especially if these excesses are visited on the so-called enemy. Long after hostilities

cease, it is often difficult to re-inculcate the normal moral code in the people. Nigeria

has seen this experience which has debased public life and service (10).

However, Ukiwo argues that the contemporary socio-political violence was the culmination of the use of violence by the state as a means to quell the riots that had emerged since the political crises of 1964-1965 (11). Thereafter, Ukiwo argues that the violence being used by the state during the political crisis was the cause of the Biafra war. He believes that the driver of government‟s recourse to this process was its failure in managing the political competition that had been witnessed in the Nigerian Federation since the eve of independence. Ukiwo concludes that violence being perpetrated within a political context often compels groups that had already seen themselves as culturally distinctive to conceive social differences (28) as was the case of Igbos, who after the Biafran war held memories that were adequate to conceive ethnic nationalism and prevent the formation of national identity. Therefore, the war left its mark on ethnic relations between both groups. It was clear after the war that Igbo people were no longer keen in forging any kind of relation with the Hausa people, as a lady said to a Christian Pope after giving a lecture on forgiveness and love: “As far as what the Hausas have done to our people is concerned, we shall neither love, nor forgive, nor forget” (Jorre). Furthermore, Ukiwo added that political leaders are likely to forget the lesson learned from Biafran war, the lesson concerning forming ethnic nationalism, and thus they keep resorting to discrimination strategies that impede nation-building.

Conclusion Nation-building in Nigeria was interrupted by a number of crises. Ethnic resentments and politicizing ethnicity brought about instability to the politics of Nigeria so that the country was deteriorated on account of its elites‟ conflicting interests, which led to a decade of instability. The military coup of 1966 was an attempt to embody the federal principles in the country. Nonetheless, suspicion and the mistrust led to a military counter-coup that led to violent massacres against the Igbo people. The massacres ended in 1970, yet until that time, the national integration was proved to be a failure process in the country of Nigerian Federation.

Conclusion

To conclude, this work comes to argue that the negative aspects of relations, which the major ethnic groups inherited due to the establishment of the colonial power, impeded the unification of political and national interest that Nigeria had witnessed by the late decades of colonialism. Before the advent of the British, communities developed integrative mechanisms that illustrated people‟s abilities to socio-economic integration and cultural assimilation with each other and to develop common identities. The advent of the British marked a watershed in the history of the country for it interrupted the normal formation of common identities.

As the example of the Hausa-Fulani has shown, ethnicity was not only the outcome of blood relations, but also economic complementarity, social interconnection and cultural assimilation. On this ground, the work argues that the ethnic composition does not impede the acquisition of common a cultural and national identity as pre-colonial Nigerians could possess common national identities notwithstanding ethnic diversity. However, politicizing ethnicity in post-colonial Nigeria impeded the unification of political interests.

As it has been developed, various attempts had been inaugurated by Nigerians to handle the question of the accentuation of ethnicity in the national politics and more importantly to normalize relations between the different ethnic groups in the country. These attempts had begun since the adoption of the federal system into Nigeria, to reflect the common national awareness that characterized Nigerian political leaders during the colonial epoch. The request for creating more independent states aimed at limiting the phenomenon of ethnic representativeness or what is labelled politicizing ethnicity. When the attempt of state- creation had been inaugurated in 1963 in the Western Region, it showed a success for it proved that a number of ethnic groups could live under a federal system. In addition, the military regime of 1966 launched another attempt to finish ethnic politics via prohibiting the establishment of ethnic political parties.

In each attempt, the northerners appeared as major players to thwart nation-building in the country. The NCNC leaders opposed openly the creation of independent states in the region they had been in charge of. Furthermore, soon after the establishment of the military regime in 1966 and the prohibition of ethnic political parties, the Hausa-Fulani showed mistrustful and suspicious attitudes towards the Igbos. In fact, the Hausa-Fulani‟s hostile attitudes towards the Igbos had roots in the early establishment of the Nigerian Federation on account of Igbos presence in northern economic and administrative sectors. Moreover, after the ethnic conflict of 1967-1970, the Igbos came to inherit similar attitudes towards their ethnic counterparts due to the violence the Hausa-Fulani perpetrated upon them.

These mutual attitudes reflected the negative aspects of relations among the different ethnic groups in Nigeria, particularly between the Hausa-Fulani and the Igbo ethnic groups. Such relations resulted from political competitions over the country‟s resources of power and economy. Thereafter, the severe competition among the political parties over winning the majority in the House of Representatives occurred mainly because the House of Representatives determined the way whereby the economic resources were distributed. The competitive relations over power positions engendered mistrustful and suspicious relations among the various ethnic political parties and organizations, which implies that until 1970 Nigerian politicians could not unify their political interests to build a nation-state.

Works Cited

Books

Campbell, John. Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 2011. BookZZ.org. Web. 08 November 2015.

Cohen, Abner. Custom and Politics in Urban Africa: a Study of Hausa Migrants in Yoruba Towns. Berkeley: University of California press, 1969. BookZZ.org. Web. 23 January 2016.

Coleman, James S. Nigeria: Background to Nationalism. Berkeley: University of California press, 1971. Print.

Crowder, Michael. ed. The Cambridge History of Africa: from c. 1940 to c. 1975. Vol 8. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. BookZZ.org. Web. 16 March 2016.

Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. Ethnicity and Nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives. 3rd ed. London: Pluto Press. 2010. BookZZ.org. Web. 24 October 2015.

Falola, Toyin. Development Planning and Decolonization in Nigeria. Florida: University Press of Florida, 1996. BookZZ.org. Web. 16 March 2016.

---, Key Events in African History. London: Greenwood Press, 2002. BookZZ.org. Web. 16 March 2016

---, The Power of African Culture. Rochester: The University of Rochester Press, 2003. BookZZ.org. Web. 19 December 2015

Falola, Toyin and Mattew M. Heatton. A History of Nigeria. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. BookZZ.org. Web. 22 October 2015

Jorre, John. The Brothers' War: Biafra and Nigeria. Faber and Faber. 1972. Google Book Search. Web. 24 March 2016.

Koreih, Chima J. ed. The Nigeria-Biafra War: Genocide and the Politics of Memory. Amherst: Cambria Press. 2012. Google Book Search. Web. 24 March 2016.

Martin, Susan M. Palm Oil Protest: An Economic History of Ngwa Region, South-Eastern Nigeria 1800-1980. New York: Cambrigde University Press. 2006. African Studies Series 59. BookFi. Web. 16 March 2016 Metz, Helen Chapin. ed. Nigeria: a Country Study.5th ed. Washington: Library of Congress Washington DC Federal Research DIV. 1991. Area Handbook Series. www.dtic.mil. Web. 07 January 2016.

Nwachimereze, John Oriji. Political Organization in Nigeria since the Late Stone Age: A History of Igbo People. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. BookZZ.org. 08 November 2015. Sklar, Richard L. Nigerian Political Parties: Power in an Emergent African Nation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963. Print.

Articles

Akinyile, R. T. “States Creation in Nigeria: The Willink Report in Retrospect”. African Studies Review. 39.2 (1996): 71-49. SNDL. Web. 21 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/525436.

Anikpo, Mark. “Ethnic Identity in Historical Perspective: The Case of Igbo Migrants in Jos, Nigeria”. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology. 5.2 (1979): 17-32. SNDL. Web. 12 April 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23816353.

Apter, Andrew. “Yoruba Ethnogenesis from Within”. Comparative Studies in Society and History. 55.2 (2013): 356–387. Journals. Cambridge. Org.Web. 04 January 2016.

Anglin, Douglas G. “Brinkmanship in Nigeria: The Federal Elections of 1964-65”. International Journal. 20.2 (1965): 173-188. SNDL. Web. 26 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40199517

Eluwa, G. I. C.. “Background to the Emergence of the National Congress of British West Africa”. African Studies Review 14.2 (1971): 205–218. SNDL. Web. 06 January 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/523823. 21-03-2016.

Ikpe, Ukana B. “Patrimonialism and Military Regimes in Nigeria”. Journal of Political Science / Revue Africaine de Science Politique. 1.5 (200): 146-162. SNDL. Web. 22 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23489908

Odetola, T. O.. “National Integration and the Creation of States in Nigeria”. Journal of Black Studies 9.2 (1978): 181–193. SNDL Web. 21 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2783834. Okene, Adam Ahmed. “Colonial Conquest and Resistance: The Case of Ebiraland 1886-1917 A.D” Kano Studies: A Journal of Savanna & Sudanic Research. 1.1 (2000). www.accademia.edu. Web. 24 February 2016.

Okpeh, Ochayi Okpeh. “Patterns and Dynamics of Inter-group Relations in Nigeria, 1800 – 1900 AD”. Journals of Historical Society of Nigeria. 17(2007/2008): 123-137. SNDL. Web. 19 December 2015. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41852774.

Okpu, Ugbana. “Nigeria‟s Dielema: Developmen or New States”. Africa: Rivista trimestrale di studi e documentazione dell'Istituto italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente. 2. 38 (1983): 183-203. SNDL. Web. 21 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41852774.

Tamuno, Tekena N. “Governor Clifford and Representative Government”. Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria 4.1 (1967): 117–124. SNDL. Web. 09 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41971203

Ukiwo, Ukoha. “Violence, Identity Mobilization and the Reimagining of Biafra”. Africa Development / Afrique et Développement. 1.34 (2009): 9-30. SNDL. Web. 23 March 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24484644.

Encyclopaedias

“Nigeria.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2015.

Shillington, Kevin. ed. Encyclopaedia of African History: An Encyclopaedia. Vo l. 3. New York: Routledge, 2013. Google Book Search. Web. 3 March 2016.

Websites

“Critical Essays Use of Language in Things Fall Apart”. cliffsnotes.com. Houghton Mifflin Harcour. Web. 29 March 2016.

Appendix

Map 1 Nigeria Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.

Map 2 Major Cities and Ethnic Groups in Present-Day Nigeria (Falola and Heaton)

Map 3 Nigeria Administrative Boundaries in 1960 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.