Tony Okerafor
1 November 2009
So many people, for so much of the time, have hardly bothered to consider some of the more important similarities between the United States of America, the richest and most powerful country in the world, and Africa's most populous nation, Nigeria.
The comparisons between the two democratic countries, when we have examined them, should go some way in explaining why, for the first part, Nigeria has been of strategic interest to the U.S, and for the other part, America has been such a big player in both the economic and political development of the oil-rich African country.
It is worthy of note, first and foremost, that the kind of political system in operation in Nigeria is modeled after America's presidential system of government. With a federal constitution that bear resemblance to one another in many respects, both countries operate a presidential democracy, in effect a federally arranged structure that not only allows for a powerful, elected executive president, but, also a vibrant two-chamber legislature, as well as a judiciary that is fairly independent, in keeping with the famous doctrine of separation of powers, between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
Also, the constitutions of the two countries have been designed to accommodate a multi-party structure, and that is because they are both heterogenous societies. The U.S. ranks as the most populous country in The America's, while Nigeria occupies the same position on the African continent.
Similarly, it is common to hear or read Americans describing themselves as the world's oldest democracy. They may well be. What is not as disputedable, however, is this fact that the world's only surviving super-power ranks as the largest democracy in the Western hemisphere and the second largest, worldwide, behind India.
In relation to the United States, Nigeria democracy is a very, very young phenomenon. For a variety of reasons, many of which its much richer and more powerful Western friend had never had to endure, Nigeria's democratic experience has severally staggered and chequered. Yet, the country still operates Africa's largest democracy and presides over one of its largest economies.
On a more practical note, both countries are heavily endowed, either country having commodities and/or services that the other needs. Over the years, it has been very hard, if not down right impossible, for successive administrations in the U.S. to formulate a foreign policy agenda that have not given Africa pride of place. During the Cold War, Eastern Europe, led by the defunct Soviet Union, and the West, led by the U.S., frantically fought to have political, economic and military influences in Africa. Nigeria due to its size and geography had to be highly-prized. But, it was, and remains, a major oil exporter, with almost an evenly-split Christian and Moslem populations.
Those factors combined, enabled Nigeria to become not just a regional player, but, an important actor in world politics. It also enabled successive governments, whether military or civilian, to stand aloof, choosing instead to join the Non-Aligned Movement, while America and the former Soviet Union were able to use the political and economic muscle to cajole or "persuade" other smaller or less resolute states on the continent to join their ranks.
So, the question, the all-important "puzzle", which we can now answer, or summarize, in just a few words, is this: why is Nigeria of strategic interest to the United States? One: economically, Nigeria not only ranks among Africa's three largest economies, but, it is also a very large market for U.S. goods and services. It is no small deal, for instance, that the U.S. may already have overtaken the United Kingdom as the biggest investor in the country. Besides, U.S.-based multi-nationals, especially oil firms, have a major presence in Nigeria, added to this all-important point, that America remains a major importer of Nigerian oil. Amounting to about 11 per cent of all U.S. oil imports, every year. Trade between the two countries runs into the region of a few billion U.S. dollars each year, with the balance of trade favouring the richer country.
While Nigeria has played a ready market, and an expanding one, for American computers and micro-chips, the politics of the relationship between the two countries is not lost on them both. Her military and economic might aside, the U.S. remains the most influential country. It has political interest, as well as responsibilities, that stretch from The Americas to Europe, to Asia, and to Africa.
For reasons which the specificity of this discussion may not allow, Cold War era ties between Nigeria and the U.S. could not assume the prominence or the infectious closeness that had characterized, say, U.S.-Egypt relations or U.S.S.R.-Libya ties. But, as the Cold War and the arms race between East and West tailed off, beginning from the early 1990s relations between Africa's biggest democracy and the world's only surviving super-power took on a much more constructive shape.
A succession of military dictatorships in the country found out that they needed a stronger voice in world affairs, and one way to achieve that had to be through the United Nations Security Council, whose most important members, including the U.S., had begun toying with the idea of reforming it, and crucially, increasing its ranks to reflect modern-day realities. Stiff competition with other key African players, such as, South Africa and Egypt, meant that Nigeria had to endear itself to countries, like the U.S., Britain, France and others, whose veto-wielding powers on the U.N Security Council would ultimately determine who got what.
If the military regimes couldn't win the Americans over by restoring multi-party democracy to their embattled fatherland, they could at least try, by giving the Western world and others reason to see Nigeria as, not just a well-behaved and civilized member of the world community, but also a factor of stability in the the region. Tragedy for American and U.N. peace-keepers in Somalia, in 1992, forced Bill Clinton to pull his troops out of there in 1993, never to return to the continent for real combat duties, under the auspices of the U.N., that is.
Even though unconstitutional rule, often the most brutal form of it, had characterized the business of governance in Nigeria from the mid-1980s, when the Second Republic was overthrown, to the late 1990s when the Third Republic was born, Washington and its allies in London, Paris and Berlin resolved to put up with it. They did not want their economic interests, the oil and other concerns, to be compromised. That is one point. Another point: a brutal dictatorship that could guarantee a relatively high degree of internal stability and order was a preferable option than to allow such a massive entity to unravel and plunge into anarchy, with the inevitable consequence of destabilizing the entire region.
There was a third factor behind the quiet resolve of the U.S. to turn a blind eye to the oppressive methods of the khaki boys power at the time. General Babangida and later on General Abacha, had managed to coax the rest of West Africa into taking up this idea of a peace-enforcement military force for the ECOWAS sub-region, called ECOMOG. In Liberia, a former U.S. colony, and in Sierra Leone, a former possession of Britain, ECOMOG had registered big successes.
Later, in the Ivory Coast, France's ex-colony, they achieved the same feat that had characterized the Liberia and Sierra Leone conflicts: namely, restoring relative order to the conflict zone, in order to create a tranquil enough environment for the United Nations to send in their peace-keeping troops.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2009 Daily Champion. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
