ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR
CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK
YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE
PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL
INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS
PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
NIGERIA FOREIGN POLICY AND NATIONAL SECURITY,A CASE STUDY OF NIGERIA AND
CAMEROON,2000-2014
CHAPTER ONE
1.1
Background of the study
Fundamentally, the first goal of virtually every Independent State
is to provide a reasonable amount of Security for its citizens. With some
notable exceptions, such as tyrannies that deliberately implant suspicion and
fear among their citizens, governments tend to view individual and group
security as important in their own right and as prerequisites for the
achievement of all other worthwhile ends (Magstadt, 2006: 380-389). Aristotle
and Thomas Hobbes are among the influential political philosophers who argued
most strenuously that safety from harm constituted the chief justification for
a government existence. Aristotle posits that once a State has arisen, the
inhabitants of that State arrange for a constitution or government. A
constitution, politeia, for
Aristotle, is the arrangement of powers in a State, especially of the supreme
power and the constitution makes the government whose cardinal aim is to
protect life and property, or provide security for its citizens. Jeremy Bentham
had identified four “subordinate ends” of legislation namely: the ends to
provide subsistence, to produce abundance, to favour equality, and to maintain
security, which produced “the greatest happiness of the greatest number.”
However, security was juxtaposed to the top of the hierarchy of government,
since it is “the foundation of life” on which everything depends (Bentham,
1950:96-7; Dean, 1991:187-8). Barker (1962:5) observes that though Aristotle
may have stressed other, higher, aims of politics, he also understood clearly
that the first goal of political life was the protection of life itself. In the
same vein, Thomas Hobbes contends that once a State had been established
through the covenant, there emerges political society and government
simultaneously by one consent, and that government is a solution to man’s
natural State, where man’s life, in the popular Hobbessian conception, was
“solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”, and in which sovereigns have “their
eyes fixed on one another, that is their forts, garrisons and guns upon the
frontiers of their kingdoms, and continual spies upon their neighbours, which
is a posture of war.” In the view of Rousseau (cited in Asirvatham and Misra,
2005:55), “government is “a living tool”. It is the practical organization of
the State through which the will of the State is formulated, expressed and
realized. Thus, and as Eminue (2001:178) remarked, “every State must have a
government – that is, public institutions or machinery for accomplishing State
purposes- one of which is the protection of life and property”.
At independence, national security became a commonplace expression
in the vocabulary of Nigerian government and politics. Protecting Nigerians
from foreign and domestic enemies was the highest national priority. Put
differently, safeguarding the sovereignty, independence and territorial
integrity of the State was the central pillar of Nigeria’s national security
policy. Thus, section 14(2) (b) of the 1999
Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria states,
inter alia that “the security and
welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of the government.”
Recently, there have been several instances of violence occasioned by a spate
of suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism or insurgency leading to the
loss of hundreds of innocent lives and property in many parts of Nigeria, in
particular, security threats posed by the activities of the Boko Haram (BH)
sect domiciled in parts of Nigeria’s Northern States just as militant groups in
the Southern States of the Federation (the Movement for the Survival of the
Ogoni People (MOSOP), the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta
(MEND) in the Niger Delta region, the O’odua People’s Congress (OPC) in the
South-West and the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of
Biafra (MASSOB) in the South East) have been a source of concern not only to
Nigerian citizens but also to the Federal Government and its security agents.
This article examines the world-view and terrorists activities of
BH sect and their implications for Nigeria’s national security, within the context of the
projected Islamization of Nigeria and BH’s portrayal of Islam as “a fighting
creed.”
Conceptualizing Security
The Constructivist approach or a Three-level Security framework
propounded by Barry Buzan is relevant to the study. In this thought-provoking
work, People, States and Fear: An
Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era
(1991), Buzan examines security from the three perspectives of the
international system, the State, and the individual, and argues that the most
important and effective provider of security should remain the sovereign State.
According to Buzan, where the State is assumed to be the main referent in the
study of security, one has to first ask these pertinent questions: what
constitute a State?, what is the nature of a State? Eminue (2001) has defined a
State as “a politically organized body of the people occupying a definite
territory, living under a government and incorporating sovereignty”.
Corroborating the above assertion, Naidoo (2001) posits that “using the
conventional interpretation, a State is made up of a government, people,
territory and sovereignty”. These definitions accord perfectly with the
definition and constitution of statehood as have been enshrined in the 1933
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Naidoo (2001)
explains further thus:
the whole (that is the State), comprising all its constituent
parts has a reciprocal relationship with the individual parts. The State cannot
be secure if its constituent parts are insecure or unstable. At the same time,
if the State as the institution representing its constituent parts is weak or
insecure in relation to other States, its elements will also be affected by
such weakness or insecurity
Buzan, therefore, considers the nature of the State in order to be
able to understand the security of “larger and more complicated entities” that
are “more amorphous in character”. Buzan takes this consideration of the
essence of the State all the way to a figure provided in his work, which
represents the idea of the State, the physical base of the State and the
institutional expression of the State on the three points of a triangle. This
makes it clear that the components of the State cannot be discussed as security
issues alone, but that they are interlinked and that the examination of the
linkages among them is a fruitful source of insight into the national security
problem.
Ideas that hold the State together and on which political institutions
are build are nationalism and political ideology. Anything that threatens these
ideas ultimately threatens the stability of political order. Such threats might
be targeted at the existing structure of government or at the territorial
integrity of the State or at the existence of the State itself.
As Buzan et al
(1998:150) succinctly observe,
Existential threats to a State are those that ultimately involve
sovereignty, because sovereignty is what defines a State as a State. Threats to
State survival are therefore threats to sovereignty.
The territory of the State constitutes the physical base of the State, and most threats
targeted at the physical base of the State must be military, economic and
environmental in character. The basic institutions
of the State comprise the Legislature, the Executive, the
Judiciary, the Civil Service and the military.
According to Buzan (1991:118 ff):
1.2
Statement of the problem
Nigeria can be guided by the Anti-terrorism policy as spelt out by
Wilkinson (1993) which entails the following (albeit, with some modifications):
no surrender to terrorists; an absolute determination to defeat terrorists; no
deals with and no concessions to terrorists; intensified effort to bring
terrorists to justice; tough measures to punish State sponsors. We can borrow
from the United States President W. H. Bush the "Anti-Terrorism
Strategy" called "the 4D Strategy": "Defeat, Deny, Diminish
and Defend" of 29 January 2002.. This Strategy which could be modified for
use in the Nigerian context entails firstly,
“calls for defeating terrorist organizations” of global reach through the
direct or indirect use of diplomatic, economic, information, law enforcement,
military, financial, intelligence and other instruments of power;
Secondly, it entails denying terrorists the sponsorship, support,
and sanctuary that enable them to exist, gain strength, train, plan, and
execute their attacks. Nigeria must join in the International campaign against
terrorist financing - Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Finance of Terrorism
- which is summarized by the acronym “AML/CFT”. Since money is the lifeblood of
all terrorist operations, stopping or blocking payment is a sure way of
disorganizing and defeating BH. Nigeria already criminalizes money laundering,
but given the wave of BH bombings, efforts to organizationally strangulate,
financially amputate and socially isolate the BH sect need to be intensified
along the lines of acquisition of necessary anti-money laundering skills and
data processing capacity by financial intelligence units and other financial
institutions; freezing of all assets and bank accounts of known BH terrorists
and sponsors; monitoring of possible cash couriers and alternative remittance
systems outside the formal banking system; strict compliance with cash
reporting requirements in consonance with modern electronic banking system;
blocking of suspicious fund-raising activities by individuals and groups with
fictitious/doubtful identity; following all monies transferred from and to
charities to authenticate their sources, destination and the propriety of their
use and apprehension and prosecution of all patrons, sponsors and operatives of
the BH sect, no matter how highly placed they may be (Sharman in Bellamy et.al 2008:77-189);
Thirdly, there is a need for diminishing the underlying conditions
(such as poverty, unemployment, educational backwardness, deprivation, social
disenfranchisement, etc) that tend to make under-privileged Nigerians
vulnerable exploitation. Fourthly, defending Nigeria’s sovereignty, territorial
integrity and its national interests at home and abroad; including the
protection of the secular status of Nigeria, its populace and the protection of
its democratic principles.
Fifthly, there should be no dialogue with BH terrorists. One of
the fundamental principles in the war on terror is that there must be no
compromise with terrorists. Even though the Goodluck Jonathan administration
has been severally criticized for using exclusively military means to tackle
the BH menace, Government should remain focused in its resolve to stamp out
religious bigotry from the society. In any case, BH does not even make itself
amenable, even if Government was willing to dialogue with it. It takes two to
tangle. Apart from the elusiveness of BH’s leadership, its self-confessed
unwillingness to negotiate would be another serious obstacle, for as BH’s
spokesman, Abu Qaqa, has unequivocally stated:
We will consider negotiation only when we have brought the
Government to their knees (sic).
Once we have seen that things are being done according to the dictates of
Allah, and our members are released (from prison), we will only put aside our
arms – but we will not lay them down. You don’t put down your arms in Islam,
you only put them aside (Mark, 2012).
1.3
Objectives of the study
1.
To understand Nigeria’s foreign policy in relation to its
national security
2.
To understand the impact of Nigeria’s foreign policy on its
national security
1.4
Research Questions
1.
What is the relationship between Nigeria’s foreign policy and
its national security
2.
What is the impact of Nigeria’s foreign policy on its
national security
1.5
Research Hypothesis
H0: Nigeria’s foreign policy does not have a significant
impact on national security
H1: Nigeria’s foreign policy have a significant impact on
national security
1.6
Limitations of the study
There was limited time and finance during the research
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT
WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT
MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate
amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1)
Your project topics
(2)
Email Address
(3)
Payment Name
(4)
Teller Number
We
will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account
Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account
Number: 0046579864
Bank:
GTBank.
OR
Account
Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account
Number: 2023350498
Bank:
UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
https://projectmaterialsng.blogspot.com.ng/
https://foreasyprojectmaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://mypostumes.blogspot.com.ng/
https://myeasymaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://eazyprojectsmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/
https://easzprojectmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/
Comments
Post a Comment