Nigeria's Neo-Colonial Status, a Step In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NIGERIA'S NEO-COLONIAL STATUS, A STEP IN THE DIRECTION OF TRUE INDEPENDENCE A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF ATLANTA UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS BY OKON PETER UDO DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE ATLANTA, GEORGIA MAY 1980 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER I 11 Nigeria, A Neo-Colonial State CHAPTER II 65 Neo-Colonialism, A Prelude to True Independence CONCLUSION 86 APPENDIX 91 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 INTRODUCTION The aim of this study is twofold: (1) to determine whether Nigeria is infact a neo-colonial state; and (2) to show why and how current circumstances in Nigeria can lead to true independence for that country. By true independence is meant actual or real freedom as opposed to nominal free dom. That is neo-colonialism means "the existence of consi derable foreign direction over a nominally independent na tion" governed by reactionary elements. Although much has been written about neo-colonialism in Africa the search that preceeded the commencement of this study revealed no previous investigation aimed at: (1) deter mining the status of Nigeria in terms of neo-colonialism, and (2) establishing any relationship between neo-colonialism in Nigeria and the possibility of true independence for the coun try. The significance of the study therefore derives from the fact that it represents an attempt to fill a research gap. Neo-colonialism, the subject of this research, relates to the theoretical framework of dependency. Dependency here refers to the inability or unwillingness of most countries of the Third World to free themselves completely from imperialists domination and exploitation. Interest in this phenomenon has generated an enormous body of literature. Although much of ^Harry Magdoff, Imperialism: From the Colonial Age to the Present (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978), p. 73. 2 the literature has been consulted with profit in connection with this study, the works of Harry Magdoff, Kwame Nkrumah, and Rene Dumont have been particularly helpful. The speci fic help gained from these authors will be indicated in the course of discussing their books. Harry Magdoff explains in his Imperialism: From the Colonial Age to the Present that contemporary dependency has its origin in Western capitalism's change of approach to appropriating wealth. In the early days of capitalism, according to the author, wealth appropriated from a domi nated territory and transferred to the capitalist centers consisted of that territory's surplus. The methods by which this was accomplished included "the exaction of tri bute," "plunder" and "direct robbery."1 The important point about these methods, the author points out, is that they "left the economic basis of conquered . territor ies intact."2 It can be concluded on the basis of this observation that in those days a dominated territory could overcome subjugation. Military superiority was the primary instru ment of domination; and military power stemmed from econo mic strength. Therefore, so long as a subject nation's economic basis was not disrupted there was a chance that that nation could become strong enough to free itself from oppression, or even to rise to a position of dominance. The seeds of contemporary dependency, as the author llbid., p. 3. 2Ibid. 3 shows were sown when the capitalist mode of creating wealth shifted from "direct robbery" to manufacture. As "factory production spread" and technology advanced, more goods than home markets could buy were produced. "At this point the securing of markets" for the surplus goods "became a major concern."^ As a result, the international economic, political, and military activity of ... captalist nations became in creasingly involved in transforming foreign economies to create a new supply of customers.3 Imperialism; From the Colonial Age to the Present is a collection of essays "written at different times . for special occasions." They are all written by Magdoff "under three headings: "History," "Theory and the Third World," and "Reply to Critics." Each section contributes to a clarifica tion of the connection between dependency and capitalism as a world wide economic system. The specific and most important benefits derived from Magdoff's book in connection with this research are: (1) the definition of the term neo-colonialism, and (2) an enlight ening explanation of the link between colonial structural arrangements and dependency in the Third World. Neo-colonialism, one of the most important terms in this investigation, is used in the sense that Magdoff uses it. He defines neo-colonialism as "the existence of consi derable foreign direction over a nominally independent na- llbid., p. 4. 2Ibid. 3Ibid., p. 5. tion." Some of the questions discussed in this paper will be raised with this definition in mind. This will apply espe cially to chapter one which will seek to determine whether Nigeria is a neo-colonial state or not. Explaining dependency in terms of colonization, Mag- doff states that: . direct application of military and political force, was essential to reshape the social and economic insti tutions of many of the dependent countries to the needs of the metropolitan centers. Once this reshaping had been accomplished economic forces--the international price, marketing, and financial systems were by them selves sufficient to perpetuate and indeed intensify the relationship of dominance and exploitation between mo ther country and colony. In these circumstances, the colony could be granted formal political independence without changing anything essential, and without inter fering too seriously with the interests which had ori ginally led to the conquest of the colony.1 The above quotation is another valuable instruction regarding the kind of questions for which answers should be sought in attempting to establish the basis for accepting or rejecting the supposition that Nigeria is a neo-colonial na tion. The aim of Kwame Nkrumah's Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism is "to examine neo-colonialism ... in its African context and its relation to African unity," as well as "in world perspective."^ As in the case of Magdoff, some of the ideas and in formation gathered from Nkrumah will apply mainly to the first chapter of this paper. His revealing definitions of llbid., p. 139. ^Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Im perialism (New York: International Publishers, 1965)7 P- xvii, 5 neo-colonialism and his manifestations of neo-colonialism in the Third World will be used as pegs for some of the arguments to be advanced in chapter one. One of Nkrumah's definitions of neo-colonialism is that: The essence of neo-colonialism is that the state which is subject to it is, in theory, independent and has all the outward trappings of international sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside.1 Is this definition applicable to Nigeria? If it is, can it be shown how it is? These are the fundamental ques tions to be answered in using Nkrumah's definitions of neo colonialism. His manifestations of neo-colonialism will be used to support arguments in favor of the assumption that Nigeria is a neo-colonial country. One of these manifesta tions is rulers' indifference to the needs of workers. He takes the position that such indifference exists because "the rulers of neo-colonial states derive their authority to govern, not from the will of the people, but from the sup port which they obtain from their colonial masters."2 Nkrumah argues that neo-colonialism was conceived as a measure for remedying a potentially dangerous situation that confronted the rich in capitalist western Europe after World War II. Before the war, the "great gulf between the few rich and the many poor" in the capitalist countries of Europe had forced some alliance between colonial subjects and workers in the capitalist centers.-* llbid. 2Ibid., p. xv. , p. xii. 6 At the end of the war the majority of the people in the capi talist states were unwilling to accept "a return to the mass unemployment and . the low level of living of the pre-war years."^ At the same time, the workers were strengthening ties with the colonial subjects whose demand for independence was assuming a discordant note.^ To resolve the threat a decision was made by the im perialists to improve the living standard of their workers by making more of the wealth transferred from the colonies avail able to them. The colonies were at the same time promised what turned out to be nominal independence in every case. Al though unemployment remains a serious problem in the capital ist countries, neo-colonialism has blunted the friction that existed between the capitalists and workers; but this peace, the author explains, can only be a temporary one as the old conflict is bound to be renewed when the rest of the world unites against exploitation. It is Nkrumah's opinion that neo-colonialism represents an act of aggression because it has divided the world into "the rich and poor" creating a situation that can develop into "an international class war."3 The author goes on to explain that neo-colonialism owes its success chiefly to the practice of breaking up large territories into small non-viable states. Referring to this practice in West Africa, he remarks that ^Ibid., pp. xii, xiii. 2lbid. 3Ibid., p. 258. 7 "the constitution imposed on Nigeria at independence divided the country into three regions . loosely joined on a Fed eral basis but with sufficient powers left to the regions to cripple overall economic planning."1 "Ghana escaped a simi lar fate by the resistance put up by the Convention Peoples Party."2 Nkrumah sees unity as the most effective weapon against imperialism. He uses long lists of bankers, miners, manufacturers and elaborate charts to show how Western Europe and North America have descended upon Africa, plundering its wealth and interfering with growth and development in that region of the world.