The Question of African Leadership: Nigeria in Focus

Adu Yao Nikez ORCID: 0000-0001-8696-0181 PhD in Law Associate professor of the Department of Human and Social Sciences, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia 117198, Russia, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 6 adu_ya@pfur.ru Other publications by this author

Nwalie George Avele ORCID: 0000-0002-5383-9315 PhD in History Post-graduate student, Department of Theory and History of International Relations, Russian People’s Friendship University 117198, Russia, Moscow, Miklukho-Maklaya str., 6 nwalie.george@gmail.com Other publications by this author

INTRODUCTION

The concept of leadership in Africa as a deciding factor in the unification of the African continent is associated with the Pan-Africanism ideology. Nigeria since independence in 1960, took upon itself the role of uniting Africa against western recolonization ^[1]. The African continent became the centerpiece of its foreign policy. Meanwhile, Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy and its national interest made it possible for the country to pursue African-oriented policy, which in turn led to the creation of The Organisation of African Unity (now African Union) in 1963 and The Economic Community of West African States in 1975.Moreover, Nigeria seeks and possesses the criteria that qualify its candidacy as one of the two African states to take over the slots melted for Security Council permanent seats in conformity with the proposal and recommendations of the UN High-Level Panel.

Nigeria assumed a leading role in these events as it forged a foreign policy with a strong Afrocentric posture. Nigeria’s leadership role on the continent was a product of Pan-Africanism vision, dreams, and sometimes, whims of the founding fathers. Nigeria’s since its foreign policy formation has centered its foreign policy on Africa, using its Afrocentric foreign policy concept to improve its relations with African countries. Although, it was believed that the leadership style laid down by the founding fathers necessitated the Afrocentric foreign policy concept. As a country that aspires to be first among equals on the continent, Nigeria has consistently flexed its diplomatic muscle to advance the interests of fellow African countries ^[2].

Moreover, the issue of African solidarity which was first internationalized by the Abubakar Tafawa Balewa administration was in conformity with the well-established principles of traditional law, the Charter of the OAU ^[3], as well as the UN Charter ^[4]. However, both charters have the same principles as reflected in the document of its establishment, which are: The Sovereign equality of all member states; Non-interference in the internal affairs of states; respect for the sovereignty and of each state and for its inalienable right to independent of existence, etc.

In addition, Nigeria has used its influence on good effects and to good ends. For instance, it worked with other countries in the West African subregion to establish the Economic Community of West African States in 1975. It went on to push for the prevention and resolution of devastating conflicts that engulfed Liberia in 1992. The conflict spilled over into Sierra Leone and other countries in the region. Nigeria spearheaded the cessation of hostilities and created the ceasefire monitoring group (ECOMOG) to bring a total end to the civil strife and restore democracy in the affected countries.

Nigeria has not limited its peacekeeping role to West Africa. It has also been engaged in Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, and Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict resolution and has played a key role in fighting apartheid in Southern Africa and supporting liberation movements on the continent.

Nigeria’s Afrocentric Concept towards Africa Affairs

It is essential for Nigeria to build and strengthen cooperation with African countries in order to develop the continent. Nigeria’s first Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, in his submission at the United Nations General Assembly in 1961, announced that Nigeria’s desires to work with other African countries for the progress of Africa and to help in bringing all African territories to a state of responsible independence ^[5]. To this end, the Nigerian government articulated plans focusing purely on African affairs.

It is imperative to note that, Nigeria has taken a position as a mouthpiece and reliable defender of Africa’s interest in the global arena, as the United Nations, especially concerning the issues of decolonization of Africa and the struggle against apartheid. Nigeria’s effort and role to end racism and other crime against humanity in South Africa was unspeakable, on the issue of African decolonization, it has been a fundamental aspect of Nigeria’s foreign policy to assist and influence within the limit of its resources, in the decolonization process in Africa ^[6]. It was believed that the leadership style laid down by the founding fathers necessitated the Afrocentric foreign policy concept. As a country that aspires to be first among equals on the continent, Nigeria has consistently flexed its diplomatic muscle to advance the interests of fellow African countries ^[7].

More importantly, Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy has helped in the consolidation and promotion of a good neighborliness policy. The policy is associated and developed with numerous ideas and strategic considerations that include demographic, political, and economic reasons, which most people believed ball to security matters, especially within the context of what happens or does not happen around the state of Nigeria.

Again, Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy and good neighborliness were justified in a statement made by Nigerian first Prime Minister, Tafawa Balewa on 7 October 1960, at the United Nations General Assembly, when he said that Nigeria’s would be paying more attention to the problems of Africa in comparison to the rest of the world. According to him any human being would first secure and protect its immediate neighbors before attending to the outside world ^[8].

The concept of Afrocentric and good neighborliness was given more credible and emphatic attention when Jaja Anucha Wachuku, the Nigeria first Minister of Foreign Affairs stated categorically that any Nigeria’s foreign policy that does not connote the interest of the common man in the continent of Africa is unrealistic. According to him, charity begins at home, thus, the dividend of Nigeria’s foreign policy should be seen in the affairs of the people ^[9].

The Nigeria Role in the Formation of OAU/AU

Nigeria’s played a significant role in determining the final shape of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), which was established in 1963 and its subsequent transmutation into the African Union (AU) in 2002 ^[10]. The Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, was among the key players who participated in the formation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 1963. Despite, Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah contributions, Nigeria’s also played a decisive role in the negotiation processes between the Monrovia Group and Casablanca Group members, which in turn saw the establishment of the organization.

Accordingly, the issue of African solidarity which was first internationalized by the Abubakar Tafawa Balewa administration was in conformity with the well-established principles of traditional law as well as the Charter of the UN and OAU as reflected in the document of its establishment, which are: the sovereign equality of all member states; non-interference in the internal affairs of states; respect for the sovereignty and of each state and for its inalienable right to independent of existence; peaceful settlement of disputes by negotiation; unresolved condemnation, in all its forms, of political assassination as well as of subversive activities on the part of neighboring states or any other states; absolute commitment to the total emancipation of the African territories which are still dependent; and affirmation of a policy of non-alignment with regard to all groups. All of these are the bases for its engagement.

Apparently, the outline principles have guided Nigeria’s active role in the activities of the defunct OAU and have a cogent understanding of the leadership formation of Nigeria in African affairs. Although, the formation of the Organization of African Unity in 1963, and the issue of regional integration and African unity has been a prioritized agenda in Nigerian foreign policy. For instance, Yakubu Gowon Nigerian former President, declared at the United Nations General Assembly in 1973, that Nigeria is moving steadily toward occupying a leadership role on the African continent. He further submitted that Nigeria would use its natural resources, such as natural gas, iron ore, coal, just to mention a few to support the struggle for African unity and the liberation of Africans living under colonial or white‐minority rule ^[11].

Thus, the leadership role played by Nigeria in the formation of the Organization of African Unity has given it a perception of a hegemony status in all affairs ranging from politics, social, cultural, and economic. More so, Nigeria’s role in West Africa can be envisaged to be a stabilizer in the context of African unity. It is imperative to note that, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) was born out of necessity for African unity and development which became inevitable during the year of Africa in the 1960s. Hence, the issues of Pan-Africanism, anti-colonialism, and imperialism were top on the agenda of both leaders and Africans in the diaspora. The birth of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) was not without intense politics among young independent African countries, who all wanted to influence decisions and to make a remarkable impact in the development of their continent ^[12].

In spite of that, division manifested among different countries and groups who view the roadmap of African development from different perspectives. Thus, in the effort to establish the OAU, two factors became predominant, and their interplay greatly affects the growth and development of this intergovernmental organization. These events include A movement for the formation and consolidation of independent states within existing boundaries; and A Pan-African movement aspiring to unite all the states of Africa to join forces for general and unified objectives.

Although, the latter was proffered by the group later known as a radical group (Casablanca group) led by Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana in 1961. The Casablanca group was composed of seven states who are radical, left-wing leaders: Algeria, Egypt, Ghana, Guinea, Libya, Mali, and Morocco met in Casablanca, adopted a charter which later became known as the Casablanca charter ^[13].

However, the charter provided for joint military command and African common market. The group also advocated for a socialist development of all of Africa around a strong central authority. While the former group (Monrovia group) was more favored by the conservative group which included Nigeria, Tunisia, Somalia, Congo, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Liberia, Togo, and the twelve Brazzaville groups. The Monrovia group approach was more moderate and less radical than that of the Casablanca group. They promoted nationalism, as well as adopted gradual institutionalization of the Pan-Africanism ideas into the continental body politic.

It is a measure of the success of Nigeria’s vision of Pan-Africanism that makes its group succeed in influencing the other groups in adopting the objectives of the Monrovia group as the OAU ideology. Nigeria exerted considerable influence in the process leading to the formation of the OAU ^[14]. However, the preparatory conference which determine the final shape and structure of the organization was held in January 1962 in Lagos, due to Nigeria’s influence. According to the Casablanca group ideology, there should first be unity of aspirations and socioeconomic cooperation before total political integration. Meanwhile, Nigeria felt that there was a need to reconcile the contending positions with a view to attaining continental cooperation. To this end, the Prime Minister of Nigeria, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, took the initiative to organize the conference of African and Malagasy States in Lagos in 1962, which was aimed to elevate and consolidate peace and cooperation among the young independence states ^[15]. Nigeria initiated the Lagos Charter draft in order to advance its ideas about African unity.

Finally, the Monrovia group ideas ultimately prevailed, due to Nigeria’s influence and consistent push. The Monrovia group met with the Casablanca group and through a lot of consultative activities, both groups were able to unite all African states to create the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 1963. Moreover, the groups realized that solidarity is of great importance in order to mitigate and to check the spread of divisive extra African influences all over the continent and thus the October 1961 event which conceived the 16th Session of the United Nations Organization (UN), were Ethiopia called upon African states to join in the creation of the organization, which is in conformity with Article 52 of the UN charter ^[16] of a regional organization of African states, which allow every region to tackle its own problem without the influence and pressure of the outside world.

The Nigeria Role in the Formation of ECOWAS

It is a fact of history that Nigeria played a prominent role in the formation of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in 1975 ^[17]. However, the original intention of the community emanates from Article 2 of the Treaty of Lagos, which was aimed to promote, regulate, and develop all fields of economic activities in order to improve the living standard, maintain economic stability, and promote close relations between ECOWAS member states.

Prior to the establishment of the Economic Community of West African States in 1975, the political, economic, and security problems in the West African region were handled individually by the state. Although, collective efforts towards economic challenges gained traction in West Africa after the Nigeria – Biafra civil war in 1970. Out of enlightened self-interest, Nigeria's former Head-of-State, General Yakubu Gowon (Retired), liaised with the late Togolese President, GnassingbeEyadema, to establish a regional economic Organisation, ECOWAS in order to concertedly managed the economic and political challenges in the West African region.

The ECOWAS at the initial stage posits as an economic organization, that was bestowed with a task of ending economic instabilities in the region. But the organization steadily adapts to prevailing security problems within the subregion on the ground that the economy can only excel in a well conducive atmosphere of nonviolence. To this end, ECOWAS was obliged to evolve into an organization bearing the onerous burden of resolving an accumulated security problem in the subregion. Nevertheless, ECOWAS has since committed itself, through the Protocols on peaceful intervention in conflict areas, to providing security to states in distress and crises ^[18].

Another emphasis in creating the Economic Community of West African States was the liberalization of inter-community trade and related forms of cooperation, such as regional economic communities which was fully supported by ECOWAS member states ^[19]. Nigeria’s role towards ECOWAS integration processes is another effort to institutionalize the concept of Pan-Africanism ^[20]. Nigeria’s interest is divided into two variables, first variables explain Nigeria’s role in the initiation and maintenance of ECOWAS, giving insight into the future behavior of the organization, and the second variables expatiate on Nigeria’s interest into African diplomacy as relates to the concept of Pam-Africanism.

The Nigeria Involvement in the Formation of ECOMOG

During the formation of the Economic Community of West African States Ceasefire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), President Ibrahim Babangida was seen to have spearheaded the formation of the group, essentially because of Nigeria’s political will to determine and influence its subregion. The Nigerian leadership status in West Africa and Africa at large are gotten out of its endowment of human and natural resources, which had geared Nigeria’s manifest destiny to remains more about influence than power.

Moreover, the ECOMOG was initiated as a result of the Liberian conflict which became a school of thought for ECOWAS and its member states. In spite of that, the international community stood aloof while Liberians were left to their fate at the commencement of the conflict. To this end, President Ibrahim Babangida who posed as the most influential leader in the subregion, spearheaded the move for the formation of ECOMOG to intervene in the Liberian conflict ^[21]. Nevertheless, the Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) troops, that were sent to Liberia as a regional peace interventionist force, was largely made up of Nigerian troops and mainly funded by the Nigerian Government ^[22].

Subsequently, during General Sani Abacha reigned in 1993, ECOWAS remained his area of focus, and ECOMOG was the most important regional cooperative unit intervening in every conflicting area in the West African region and beyond. While the disorderliness of the Liberian civil war led Ghana and other major participants in the peacekeeping mission to threaten of pulling out, General Sani Abacha remained resolute. Perhaps, the ECOMOG successes were attainable because of Nigeria’s involvement and leadership role in the regional intervention force which was seen as a good counterbalance to its pariah status in the international community at that time ^[23].

For emphasis, during the summit in Yamoussoukro, Ivory Coast in March 1998, the ECOWAS Foreign Ministers reached a consensus upon the recommendation for ECOMOG to officially take up the peacekeeping operations in West Africa. The Yamoussoukro accord recognized the dominant role that Nigeria played in the subregional intervention force which has produced a positive result ^[24]. Perhaps, what the Nigerian troops contributed to ECOMOG tells the story of Nigeria’s enormous contribution in relation to member states [see Table 1].

Table 1. The chronological list of ECOMOG troops: Liberia Technical Team

Source: UNOMIL Resolution 972 ^[25].

Table 2. The chronological list of ECOMOG humanitarian aspects: Liberia refugees.

Source: Liberia UNOMIL Background ^[25]

The above chronological lists of ECOMOG, show the deployment of military commanders, the number of dispatched soldiers, and the countries where most of the Liberia refugees seek their asylum ^[26]. However, the various chronological lists showed that Nigeria played an active role in ECOMOG peacekeeping operations in Liberia. Nigerian military commander Joshua Dogonyaro took charge of the affairs of ECOMOG belly two months after the deployment of the ECOMOG troops to Liberia, which in turn produced the expected result as required by the ECOWAS.

The ECOMOG developments began with the intervention in the Liberian civil war in 1990, which claimed the lives of almost 150,000 civilians and led to a complete breakdown of law and order. It displaced scores of people, both internally and beyond the borders, resulting in some 784,900 refugees in the neighboring countries, like Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria. In 1995, 1996, and 1997, Nigeria contributed a whopping sum of 75 percent, 85 percent, and 82 percent of troops, respectively to the ECOMOG peacekeeping force ^[27].

Furthermore, Nigeria’s diplomatic, and military contributions towards ECOMOG intervention have shaped the force processes and outcome, throughout the period of Liberia, and Sierra Leone peacekeeping missions. For clarity, the change of ECOMOG field commander from a Ghanaian to a Nigerian within months of the deployment of the troops were in accordance with Nigeria input, as well as the failure of the Ghanaian led force to prevent the murder of Samuel Kanyan Doe, in turn, encouraged Nigerian to take over the command in 1999. Moreover, after the death of Samuel Kanyan Doe successive ECOMOG field commanders were Nigerians who are directly responsible to the Nigerian Ministry of Defence ^[28].

Subsequently, the ECOWAS members in August 1997 introduced an interposition force, ECOMOG II to assist in the reinstatement of the legitimate government of President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah of Sierra Leone. Perhaps, Nigeria’s participation was outstanding, the bulk of the force was formed by Nigerian troops and all the commanders were Nigerian ^[29]. Out of the 13000 troops deployed to ECOMOG between 1998 and 1999, Nigeria contributed 12000 troops. It is believed that Nigeria decisive role in Sierra Leone is to proffer its own line of reasoning, as well as exercise its leadership role in its subregion ^[30].

Meanwhile, the ECOMOG’s role in quelling the military-political crises in Liberia, and Sierra Leone became successful, because of Nigeria’s involvement in the process ^[31]. The ECOMOG vital role in the peacekeeping mission in Liberia, was as a result of the mandate given by ECOWAS, which served as an instrument of a dual nature, on the one hand, it considered to restore peace, maintain security, strengthen governance and the rule of law, but on the other hand, has weaknesses, unclear, ambiguous or lacked peacekeeping potential ^[32].

Most of the sources that recorded the Nigeria’s expenditure to ECOMOG shown some dissimilar in its total expenditure, a source recorded Nigeria’s expenditure at a total of US$1 billion beyond the original ECOMOG budget of US$500 million while another source estimated Nigeria’s total expenditure at over US$2.8 billion. Meanwhile, Nigeria is reputed, by yet another source to have spent in excess of US$4 billion on a peacekeeping mission in Liberia and Sierra Leone, and likewise expended the sum of US$1 million daily on Sierra Leone alone ^[33]. The total cost of expenditure that Nigeria spends on the ECOMOG peacekeeping mission in the Mano River Union is estimated at US$8 billion ^[34].

Table 3. The chronological list of Nigeria’s military expenditure as a percentage and in constant US$m, of Government spending from 2000 to 2020.

Sources: ^[35,36].

The above chronological list best explains various aspects of Nigeria’s military expenditure from the year 2000 to 2020, both at the domestic and international levels. Apparently, it is believed that Nigeria incurred more costs on conflict resolution and peacekeeping on foreign missions, as regards its domestic intervention. More so, it is a clear example that Nigeria is committed to its region and Africa at large.

It is imperative to note that Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt are the three major African contenders seeking continental hegemony and the UN Security Council permanent seat. Nevertheless, they have contributed hugely to the maintenance of international peace and security, essentially through the UN forces. Meanwhile, Nigeria’s participation in regional, continental and international peacekeeping was without discrimination and interest. Nigeria was deeply involved in the struggle for decolonization in Angola, Mozambique, Namibia, and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, as well as in the process of creating a name for itself ‘advanced nation’, even though it was geographically far from the Southern region of Africa.

Nigeria in recent times is not only the first African economic power but playing an important role in terms of consolidating the African foreign policy in the interest of its continent. Also, Nigeria had contributed the most peacekeeping troops to United Nations peacekeeping operations, especially, in 2013, Nigeria contributed the fifth largest number of peacekeepers to United Nations peacekeeping operations. Meanwhile, South Africa has yet to establish a record for global participation in peacekeeping missions, while Egypt is only participating with interest. In order words, its participation has so far been based on discriminatory and selective.

Finally, Nigeria possesses the criteria that qualify its candidacy as one of the two African states to take over the slots melted for Security Council permanent seats in conformity with the proposal and recommendations of the UN High-Level Panel. Accordingly, Nigeria remains the highest contributor from Africa to the UN peacekeeping operations, and its annual regular budget is in accordance with the UN High-Level Panel criteria for Council qualification.

To conclude this, we ascertain that Nigeria’s foreign policy concept from its concession is termed Afrocentrism. The Afrocentrism made it highly inevitable for the country to devote its foreign policy to Africa-oriented policy in the interest of continental unity, and total decolonization of the African continent. While Nigeria’s national interest has made it highly necessary for the country to channel its foreign policy to the subregion it belongs to. Moreover, Nigeria’s interest in its subregion is rooted in the issues, such as insecurity, political instability, economic imbalance, and many more that have been plaguing the region prior to the year of Africa in the 1960s.

It is imperative to note that Nigeria’s relations with its neighbors are traced to the Monrovia group ideology. Monrovia group was a short-lived informal association of African states with a shared vision of the future of Africa and Pan-Africanism in the early 1960s. The group ideology was inculcated into the vision of the Organization of African Unity (now African Union) in 1963. This was so because of the Nigerian leadership role and influence in its subregion. Also, Nigeria’s desire to cooperate with its immediate neighbors for the betterment of its region has triggered the creation of ECOWAS, AU, and several others.

It is shown that Nigeria’s contribution to a peacekeeping operation in Libera and Sierra Leone was never for its personal interest but to justify its leadership role in West Africa. Notwithstanding, the Nigerian government must strengthen its political, military, and economic capacities in order to maintain regional hegemony, which in turn will enable the country to function as a continental hegemon.

CONCLUSION

Nigeria’s foreign policy came into the limelight on October 7, 1960, after the country joined the United Nations to become the 99th member of the organization. Thus, Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy has helped in the consolidation and promotion of a good neighborliness policy. The policy is associated and developed with numerous ideas and strategic considerations that include demographic, political, and economic reasons. It is shown that Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy was geared to actualize its national interest and foreign policy objectives, which is paramount to the state of Nigeria in interacting with comity of nations for the purpose of mutual benefit.

It is revealed that Nigeria’s role in the formation of AU and ECOWAS, was in conformity with its national interest and foreign policy pursuit, which was designed to promote regional integration and cooperation within West Africa and Africa in general.

The authors posited that Nigeria’s contribution to a peacekeeping operation in Libera and Sierra Leone was never for its personal interest but to justify its leadership role in West Africa, which in turn will cement Nigeria’s hegemonic status in the continent of Africa. Notwithstanding, Nigeria’s involvement in the regional, continental and global levels, in terms of peacekeeping missions and other aspects, has qualified the country as one out of the two new required African representatives on the UN Security Council permanent seat. Suffice it to say that since Nigeria attained independence, the successive Nigerian Presidents has shown much commitment towards promoting African diplomacy as well as representing the good image of Africans within and in diaspora, which in turn would pave the way for the state of Nigeria in representing its continent in UN Security Council as a permanent member.