Abstract
This paper examines ethnic politics
as an explanation for conflict in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. Differing views
on what causes militancy include political and social arguments examining
historical ethnic rivalries and their effect on the political landscape. The economic
and environmental narrative expounds the motivations of militant groups’ revolt
against the Nigerian government and oil companies against underdevelopment and
environmental degradation. It is argued that materialistic economic arguments focus
on the politics of oil in the ‘Greed and Grievance’ debate paying insufficient
attention to the role of ethnicity. This paper acquiesces with the
constructivist viewpoint that a combination of factors is causal and an
integrated solution to the crisis is important. It further attests that the
politics of ethnicity at the national level should not be sidelined and overplaying
the materialistic and instrumentalist perspectives is problematic. Ethnic
politics plays the role within economic explanations as a catalyst fuelling conflict.
In assessing the impact of oil politics on militancy, the extent to which the
terms ‘oil conflict’ and ‘resource curse’ are representative is questioned.
This paper illustrates how ethnic politics, though not necessarily more central
than oil, is evident within the ‘resource conflict’ view of integrated
explanations of conflict.
Introduction
The Niger Delta (ND) is an area of approximately 14,000 square miles in
South West Nigeria bordering the Gulf of Guinea. The nine states forming the
region are Abia, Akwa-Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo, Imo, Ondo and
Rivers states.[1] In 1956
oil was discovered in the Ijaw town of Oloibiri, Bayelsa State. In addition to
Bayelsa[2], two
states in the region are leading producers of crude oil and natural gas namely
Rivers[3]
and Delta. The region accounts for eight percent of global oil consumption
making Nigeria the sixth largest exporter of crude oil.[4]
Juxtapose that with the ND being in the top five of the worst areas for environmental
pollution, underdevelopment and ethnic violence it is understandable why a
large number of academic and journalistic accounts attribute conflict in the
region to greed, oil as a resource curse and grievance.
What is construed as ‘conflict’ itself is subjective to the dynamics of
form, magnitude, scope, duration, escalation and impact on competing groups. The
contextual basis for resource conflict used in this paper is at the national
level reflecting ‘violent intrastate conflicts that are caused or exacerbated
by resource abundance or environmental scarcity.’[5] It
excludes ‘resource competition’ or conflict from the pursuit of scarce
resources and ‘resource blocked aggression’, conflicts initiated by oil export
revenue rich states.[6]
These dimensions broaden the variables internationally and ethnic conflict in
this paper by its nature refers to the local intra-state. Assuming the impact
of oil as a resource curse is overplayed in explanations for militancy, the
implications for conflict resolution policy is that development, should not
always be seen as the apparent solution.[7] The
analysis of historical and existing ethnic rivalries is therefore pertinent.
The use of the term ethnicity or ethnic minority in this paper is synonymous
to Osaghae’s definition as a communal entity that shares a name, language,
origin, descent, culture, land and socio-political organization as long as
these objective factors provide the basis for subjective separatist definition
from other ethnic identities.[8] Of
these factors, language remains the primary differential of ethnicity.[9] This
explains Nigeria’s identification of major ethnic groups as Hausa-Fulani, Igbo
and Yoruba speaking and ethnic minorities in the ND as mainly Ijaw and Edo
speaking.[10] The
United Nations’ definition of ethnic minority includes non dominant groups
attempting to preserve ethnicity, religion, language or culture different from
the rest of the population of the state of which they are nationals.[11]
Ethnic conflict here focuses on insurgency by minority groups of
‘similar’ ethnicity against state institutions overwhelmingly represented by
major ethnic groups. The ethnic narrative within Nigeria’s civil war in Biafra[12]
and violence between the Yoruba/Igbo speaking Christian south and the Hausa
speaking Muslim North is crucial to understanding conflict between ethnic
majority and minority groups. The reasoning here is ethnic politics contributes
more to violence than the primordial rivalry between minority groups.[13] Therefore
meaningful attempts at resolving conflicts cannot exclusively propose
development but must include a bold attempt to answer the ‘national question’:
address the review of restructuring federalism and inherited colonial legacy
structures.
The first chapter, a literary analysis, compares views on the centrality
of oil and ethnicity as causes of conflict. It charts the historical evolution
of conflict from colonisation to the present day. This sets the context for revealing
the relationship between resource insurgency and historical ethnic rivalries.
It challenges presumptions that ethnic rivalries are caused by resource
conflict or vice versa. A more cyclical relationship exists between the two and
ascertaining what comes first is intricate. The extent to which ethnicity plays
a role in all other factors such as political and economic marginalisation,
environmental degradation, underdevelopment, colonial legacies, corruption and
criminalization is indicative of a loosely primordial element in integrated
explanations.
The second chapter substantiates the theoretical backdrop of ethnic and resource
conflict by looking at primordial, instrumentalist and constructivist
explanations of conflict. The role of ethnicity and associated national
politics within the ‘greed and grievance’ and ‘resource curse’ concepts are
examined.
The third chapter illustrates this by examining the motivations of major ethnic
movements focusing on the prominent Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger
Delta (MEND) and Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP). It
highlights ethnicity’s relevance by juxtaposing these Ijaw and Ogoni examples
respectively with prominent theoretical frameworks, showing that even in contrasting
explanations ethnicity plays a significant role. Examining greed and the
resource curse in the aims and activities of MEND and grievance in MOSOP’s
quest for political and economic autonomy, indicates politics within the ND is
a microcosm (and product) of the ethnic politics at the national level.
The final chapter concludes by summarising the key points and elucidating
the policy implications for current and future governments in Nigeria.
Methodology
This research has been conducted primarily by drawing from the extensive
literature available. The historical and empirical contexts are pivotal to
positioning the arguments herein and therefore extensive research from
newspaper and magazine articles facilitated building a timeline of events in
Nigerian political history relevant to the ND.[14] The
period that stretches from the last decade of colonisation through independence,
the Nigerian civil war and to the present time, provide the focus for identifying
events illustrating the strength and nature of the connection between ethnicity
and other causes of conflict. Email communication and telephone interviews with
authors who have written extensively on the subject, ex-officials of the
Nigerian government, academics and journalists was utilised to critically
interrogate differing views. While no contact was made with militant leaders, statements
of prominent groups were researched to provide a balance.[15]
Chapter 1: Differing views on the centrality of oil and ethnicity as explanations for conflict
Attempts at explaining the causes of militancy and conflict in the ND have
attracted a plethora of approaches. Some have moved towards an integrated
explanation identifying political and economic factors as causal, environmental
as ‘proximate’ and social as ‘trigger’ factors.[16] Others
have categorized the causes of internal conflict into two camps namely
‘redistribution’ and ‘recognition’.[17]
In the case of the Ogoni, redistribution depicts the need to secure their
environment and livelihood while recognition relates to self determination and
inclusivity. According to Agbonifo, ‘... both inadvertently portray internal
conflict in materialistic and provincial terms’.[18]
Many explanations that mention oil’s ‘resource curse’ characteristics
form the backdrop of conflict evaluation.[19] In
these accounts, where greed and grievance play prominent roles, the Gulf of
Guinea is portrayed as the new oil supplier to the insatiable western markets
triggering the evolution of greed into grievance.[20]
According to Michael Watts, militancy represents the interaction of youth politics
and corruption in the petro-state.[21] The
centrality of oil as a resource has been widely demonstrated[22]
and the impact on social conflict in Nigeria’s rentier space is ‘characterized by
violence and destabilizing tendencies’.[23] However,
the challenge ignored by many accounts, is investigating how much the ethnic
politics can be as credible as oil in explaining conflicts. The ND however remains
a classical example of ‘oilification’: the ‘process of distorting and
reconstructing an extra-oil threat or conflict to give it an oil import in
order to justify the state’s security action’.[24]
Omeje names the Odi Massacre[25] as
an example of ‘oilification’ of a conflict expressed along ethnic lines. This
securitization of oil with ethnic overtones is a political tool common in Nigerian
politics, its consequences being one reason for inaccurate interpretations of
resource conflicts. Omeje admits the constructivist flip side missing in his
argument, coined ‘ethnification’[26]
here, is an ‘enriching dimension’.[27]
One reason oil remains central to explanations of conflict is Nigeria’s
rentier state status having an economy relying heavily on rent rather than the domestic
sector. A limited proportion of the state is involved in generation of the rent
(ninety-five percent of oil revenues come from the ND) and the state
government, the largest employer, is the principal recipient of the rent.[28] This centrality of oil conveniently explains
violent conflicts in the region as ‘oil conflicts’[29] making Nigeria another unfortunate country
debilitated by the natural resource curse.[30] Even though rentier politics,
poverty and marginalization do not automatically lead to conflict, this
produces ‘characterized violence and destabilizing tendencies’.[31] In
Colgan’s inter-state resource conflict assessment, he acknowledges his multinomial
model to determine petro-states’ propensity for violence requires dependent and
control variables.[32] Recalling
Huntingdon’s perspective that religious cultural factors shape fault lines of
dispute[33],
he adds Muslim population percentages and the number of contiguous territorial
borders as control variables.[34] At
the sub-national level, these factors are synonymous with ethnic population and
their geographical boundaries.
Ake claims that ethnic conflicts are actually ‘democratic’ in that the
objectives include attempting to regain rights as free equal citizens.[35]
This view challenges many greed based theories that claim militants are linked
to syndicates whose criminal activities benefit from a chaotic security
situation and opportunities to do well out of war.[36]
For instance Collier offers the argument that oil provides the basis by which
militants can finance their activities.[37] The presence of ethnic tension provides a favourable atmosphere for
increasing competition for resources, jobs, and other benefits from the oil
industry. Additionally it creates fertile ground for ambitious activists,
criminals and corrupt politicians to exploit these tensions for their own
purposes. Consequently, present day armed militia emerge and the proliferation of
criminal activities associated with the oil industry that sustains them.[38] It is no coincidence that youth
unemployment and associated socio-economic implications determines the
membership of militancy groups.[39] In
these arguments, social grievance plays a less prominent role than economic
grievance or the states predatory tendency. Noteworthy though, regarding social
grievance and conflict, is that ethnic composition along with cultural,
religious, linguistic, racial divisions are contributing factors.[40]
The British colonial state’s ‘divide and rule’ tactic, an administrative
structure of indirect rule and regionalization, cast doubts on the view that
Nigeria’s political independence aspirations were feasible. Nigeria was split
along ethnic lines as a result of history and tradition. The ethnic
polarization that helped ethnic mobilization and manipulation is partly
attributed to the 1910 Land and Native Rights Ordinance making land in northern
Nigeria controlled by the colonial governor, limiting southern Nigerians moving
to the north. The Nigerian state inherited these legacies and learnt from their
colonial masters’ repression and political manipulation. The same way the
British colonial administration encouraged communal sentiments, successive
governments, both military and civilian, devised their own brands of divide and
rule. This generated the complex myriad of well documented ethnic politics.[41] Going further afield, African
conflicts like Liberia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda and Sudan, show evidence of being
the result of the colonial experience and post independence institutions of
governance.[42]
The historical
agglomeration of over 250 ethnic groups[43]
combined with little regard for the pre-colonial state of affairs generated
ethnic conflict and insecurity of minorities.[44]
The move from indirect rule to regionalization created a wedge between majority
and minority ethnic groups. The oil fuelled resource curse merely exacerbated
the resultant ethnic and economic nationalism that demands resource control. Post colonial Nigeria suffers a
legitimacy crisis arising from ethnic politics and artificially created
boundaries. Very rarely did Africa’s inherited boundaries reflect tribal areas.[45] The boundary between Nigeria and
Cameroon[46] for instance divides fourteen
cultural areas.[47] The
assumption that the conflict is the result of pre-colonial animosities between
diverse ethnic communities is characteristic of modernization theory. Before
independence the ND comprised of Ahoada, Degema, Opobo, Ogoni, Brass, Western
Ijaw and Warri divisions. The Willink Commission appointed in 1957 appraised
means of allaying the fears of minorities and constant demands for a distinct
political region arising from insecurity and ethnic domination fears.
The evolution of the
tripartite link between colonialism, ethnicity and the civil war in Biafra war
and their roles in ethnic violence forms the source of ethnic politics. This reflects
the grievances and demands of minority groups and the political economy of oil.
British colonial policies forcibly amalgamated ethnic groups with incompatible
economic systems, traditions, education and religion. The entire period in
Nigeria’s political history since independence is littered with coups between the
dominant ethnic groups.[48] The last coup before the onset of
civil war where the Igbo leader, General Ironsi was killed witnessed the
massacre of thousands of Igbos. Of the three majority groups, communities in the
ND are closest to the Igbo in terms of location, traditions and ethnic
identity. The continuous concern of Igbos for their very existence in this
period evidently influenced the decision of the Eastern Region Consultative
Assembly voting to secede from Nigeria declaring the region to be the Republic
of Biafra.[49] Civil war broke out in July 1967.
British policy during the civil war, though initially neutral, quickly changed
in support of the Nigerian government. Since much of the discovered oil was in
Biafra, Britain wanted to protect British Petroleum’s concession to develop it.[50] For many, the civil war in Biafra
is not a distant historical memory. The images of starvation used as a weapon
of war during that period mirror the images of environmental degradation and
economic underdevelopment plaguing the ND today.[51] The ethnic motivation of the
leaders of militancy groups such as MEND is comparable to that of their Igbo
counterparts. Ken Saro-Wiwa claims ten percent of the Ogoni population died in
the Biafran war.[52]
One limitation found in academic scholarship, due to the focus on crude
oil as central to conflict, is engagement of only the period since 1956 when
oil was discovered in commercial quantities. Ako and Okonma avoid this pitfall by
comparing the ‘palm-oil’ and ‘crude-oil’ eras.[53]
They argue that both periods demonstrate conflict triggered by the exclusion of
local communities from resource benefits. In the first of these ‘resource
wars’, distribution and recognition that resolved the crisis remains elusive today.
This alternative history of the oil century explains colonial legacies and
previous historical resource conflicts as comparable to the current circumstances.
The Akassa rebellion against the British Royal Niger Company over palm oil in 1895
attests towards long standing colonial divide and rule legacies which are now
being re-enacted on a different stage.[54]
Uprisings synonymous with the conflict in the ND linked to resources and
underdevelopment are not new. Many examples predate the discovery of oil. In
the 1960’s the Agbekoya uprisings[55],
Tiv Riots[56], Adaka
Boro[57] secessionist
attempts and the Nigerian Civil War in Biafra all occurred before oil. This
does not directly raise a challenge to the instrumentalist environmentalist
view[58]
but throws doubt on suggestions it applies primarily to oil. Numerous parallels
can be drawn on the issue of ethnic minority rights. From the British imperialist
exclusion of indigenous population of Bonny, Brass or Opobo to a Nigerian elite
dominated by an ethnic majority quelling the ambitions of the Ogoni, the roles
of ethnicity are similar. Ako and Okonmah highlight the role of cultural
identity and mention the similarities of parties as one of four parallels
between the two eras.[59]
There is also ethnic identity politics revealed in the history of revenue
allocation for which the struggle of minorities is attributed.[60]
Before oil, the allocation of minerals like coal and tin was based on the
derivation principle that fifty percent of revenues go back to the state or
region that was the source of the resource.[61]
This favoured the Hausa-Fulani, Igbo and Yoruba majority ethnic groups. Following
the discovery of oil this changed[62] continuing
to benefit the big three.[63]
According to Robinsons
‘The progressive whittling down of the derivation fund was seen by the
oil minorities as marginalisation and social injustice especially as they were
not consulted, and the rules changed with the decline of agriculture based
derivation which had favoured the big three.’[64]
The injustice in
the derivation principle kindles revolt tendencies from the peaceful protest of
MOSOP to the more violent militancy of MEND. However before examining these
groups a theoretical framework for understanding ethnic identity and conflict
is important.
Chapter 2: Theoretical Perspectives
2.1. Ethnic Identity and Conflict
Primordial explanations of ethnic identity evolving into conflict as
inevitable, suggest that ancient hatreds going back many years are responsible,
exacerbated by the characteristics of the individuals and groups involved.
However this does not explain how communities in the ND lived peacefully for
almost half a millennium. In Huntingdon’s Clash of Civilization thesis, adjacent
groups struggle violently often over territories, resources and each other.[65] In
Nigeria, this primordial fault line is drawn between the Muslim North of Hausa-Fulani
ethnicity and the Christian South of Igbo/Yoruba ancestry.[66] Kaplan
discusses differences of biology, ethnicity and race suggesting that this compromises
the trust between individuals and groups who don’t identify with each other.[67] To
explain conflicts it is important to go back in history to events that shaped
their hatreds.[68] The
weakness here is the lack of clarity as to how far back in history is required
to identify the source of these ancient hatreds. In the ND it is not ‘ancient’
and suggesting these hatreds always existed (or appeared out of nowhere) is incredulous.
For instrumentalism, the ethnic identities created from colonial legacies
changed progressively, apparently as the effects of colonial ‘divide and rule’
strategies became diluted. Conflict is not inevitable and depends on resource
scarcity resulting from material, economic and social inequality. Elites take
advantage of material deprivations and politicize ethnicity to mobilise power.
Instrumentalists see elites as fundamentally capable of manipulation but fail
to address how elites formulate hatreds from nothing. ‘Ethnification’[69]
of conflicts by a repressive Nigerian government is effective by using existing
beliefs in society or inter-subjective tensions and understandings about self
and other. Power and material interests are important but elite power has limitations.
The social constructivist views the most fundamental feature of society as
the organization of material forces such as natural resources, geography and
state power. This means to understand how the world works requires taking these
fundamentals into account. For an integrated explanation of the reasons for ethnic
violence, examining the role of ethnicity in these fundamentals forms a basis
for constructivists’ explanations of how rhetoric that generates ethnic
conflict is persuasive especially where it fits with history and beliefs. Constructivism
argues that ethnic identities are socially constructed both intentionally and
by accident. The constructivist viewpoint in this
paper does not ignore the origins of ethnic groups, determines how colonial
legacies created identities (and the effects) and highlights identity’s
changing nature.[70] This addresses the
weaknesses of the primordial argument (vagueness of ethnicity’s origin), a
purely materialistic account (focus solely on oil) and an instrumentalist
perspective (no ethnicity changeability). The encompassing constructivist
framework used here combines the strengths of primordial, materialistic and
instrumentalist perspectives to examine ethnicity’s role in oil conflict as
discussed next.
2.2. The role of ethnicity in oil conflicts
2.2.1. Resource curse perspective
The economists’ term ‘Dutch Disease’ refers to the effects of North Sea
gas on the Dutch economy where the currency’s rise in value resulted in other
exports becoming uncompetitive.[71] This
‘resource curse’ has the impact of oil exports in Nigeria as one of its best
illustrations. Nigeria is one of the world’s most oil dependent countries based
on fuel exports as a percentage of total exports.[72] As
oil revenues became significant to Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings in the
1970s, other exports like peanuts and cocoa became unprofitable. This led to
the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP)
of economic reform. According to Obi, ‘Structural Adjustment did not merely
deepen existing contradictions in Nigeria’s political economy in ways that
worsened scarcities, its impact widened inequalities and disparities between
individuals, groups and even regions.’[73]
The ensuing competition by ethnic minority groups for a share of
shrinking oil resources makes ethnic identity critical for survival.[74] A
lot can be deciphered from research samples of conflicts in Africa, especially
conflicts over territorial resources, which show very few cases of ethnic
homogeneity. However, resource competition between ethnically diverse
communities and the state is not merely an indication of a grassroots
insurgency or social unrest by marginalised groups against an oppressive state.
The prevalent discourse focusing on the tense relationship between the state
and ethnic groups must not ignore the ‘ethnicity of the state’. The ethnic
composition of most Nigerian elite since independence remains dominated by the
three majority groups[75] and
therefore the control of oil revenue. The economic incentive for militancy is hence
correlated with ethnic politics.
One persistent area of contention constructed as ethnically biased has
been the allocation of oil revenues (derivation principle).[76] Ethnicity’s
role in the derivation principle pre-dates independence and the discovery of oil.
An unfair derivation principle and failing federalism from ethnic diversity
have together in tandem fuelled conflict. What is revealing is the cataclysmic
effect a multi-ethnic environment has on oil’s resource curse where a zero sum
game is at play. Since oil revenue remains fixed (more oil revenue for the
north means less for the south and vice versa), this becomes evident in the
north-south divide and associated political wrangling on the derivation
principle. This dynamic is replayed again at the sub-national level as ethnic
minority groups vie for their fair share of the national cake. This has been
the factor for creation of states from three regions in the first republic
after independence to thirty-six states today. In Shaxson’s view, this just creates
more microcosms of this dynamic. This concept can be outlined as one reason why
the resource curse can be less permeating in a country like Norway which is
essentially ethnically homogenous compared to Nigeria. In this respect the
former suffers from the first two economic aspects of the resource curse,
currency and export fluctuations, but less from the third, the ethnic and
political consequences.
Obi notes correctly that simply relying on economic statistics that link
oil dependency to poverty and conflict is inconclusive on its own.[77] The
oil curse discourse is about oil abundance being the incentive for corruption,
bad governance and the motive for militant groups to engage in conflict. What
is absent from this line of analysis is the role of ethnicity, class relations
and how Africa’s resources are subject to transnational processes. In this more
recent work Obi has also noted a rise in challenge of the resource curse
theorists.[78] He
contends that ‘... the resource curse thesis feeds certain perspectives on the
nature of the African oil-rich states built upon an internal resource conflict
nexus that is subversive of development, democratic governance, national,
regional and global security.’[79]
His view accentuates the need for the connection between the ‘paradox of
plenty’ and conflict to be interrogated. Even
before oil was discovered in Nigeria, numerous other examples exist in Africa
supporting the ‘resource curse’ paradigm: oil in Sudan, diamonds in Sierra
Leone and cocoa in Cote d’Ivoire. While the role of resources in conflict
cannot be ignored, Obi outlines a number of factors, other than ethnicity, that
are often ignored.[80] Merely
measuring resource wealth and not taking into consideration the population to
obtain ‘resource wealth per capita’ is inadequate.[81] Extrapolating
this argument, it is suggested that ethnic diversity in a population is an even
more valuable measure of the potential for conflict from grievances about resource
distribution. The contrasting ‘resource wealth per ethnic capita’ for Nigeria
compared to Saudi Arabia or Norway for instance could explain Nigeria’s more
violent experience.
In the late 1940s, constitutional negotiators dominated by the three
majority ethnic groups rejected the creation of a political federation based on
ethnic groups. Eventually the creation of Northern, Eastern and Western regions
with semi-sovereign status was agreed.[82] According
to the 100% derivation principle by the Louis Chick Commission[83]
of 1954, mineral royalties were returned fully to the source, at this time the
Northern region.[84] Subsequently,
‘The grant of semi-sovereign status to these regions triggered separatist
claims by minorities who felt that they would be excluded from the benefits of
membership.’[85]
According to George Soros[86]
the ‘Dutch Disease’ represents only one aspect of the trio that encompasses the
resource curse. The other two are the disruptive fluctuation of prices of other
exports and the effect on political stability. This paper does not focus on the
first two economic perspectives as numerous works have attempted demonstrating
the inversely proportional relationship between resource dependency and
economic growth.[87] In her
seminal work on the pitfalls of commodity led growth, Karl also rightly
refrains from the simplicity of this unitary economic view of the ‘Dutch
Disease’.[88] She
appropriately incorporates inevitable changes in institutional structure,
political life, government preferences and choices in the allocation of
resources.[89] In the
ND this structure and the choices made are almost entirely driven by ethnicity.
It is this political aspect of the resource curse, and its ethnic dimension,
though it has the most impact, that is least understood.
Shaxson’s perspective of
Sub-Saharan Africa reflects the gradual shift from the view that the resource
curse explanation is either imperialistic (oil companies and their western
hosts exploiting Africa)[90] to
one that blames bad governance within the oil state. In Nigeria both these
themes are strong. MOSOP’s confrontation with Royal Dutch Shell and the oil industry
is a rejection of imperialistic western interests. The insurgency against the
state by MEND and Ijaw youth movements could be construed as a protest against
bad governance and corruption. Either way, the complicit collaboration of the
tripartite combination of the ethnic majority elite, oil companies and minority
groups are the obstacle to realistic governance.[91] The
ethnicity of Nigerian President, Goodluck Jonathan, has played a helpful role
in resolving conflict.[92] The oil
producing states that have attracted the most violence are Bayelsa, Delta and
Rivers. In 2008 when he was Vice-President, Jonathan’s two pronged policy of
engagement with insurgents and development showed mixed signals of success.[93]
In Bayelsa, his home state, diplomatic negotiation with the militants resulted
in reduction in hostage taking and attacks on oil installations.[94]
The resource curse twin challenges, bad governance and corruption, are
linked to ethnic fragmentation. Shaxson cautions against corruption being
simply explained by the behaviour of actors at the domestic level.[95] He
contends that the systemic factors and global perspectives such as international
money flows that form part of the complex components of ‘corruption’. The
ethnic dimension present in this aspect of the resource curse is that
corruption, to a certain degree, breeds a culture of collaboration within
ethnicities in line with the primordial perception that lack of trust is rife
with others you cannot identify with. Ethnic strands are also evident in greed
and grievance as elaborated next.
2.2.2. The Greed and Grievance Perspective
Greed (elite competing over oil
rents) and grievance (relative deprivation that fuels conflict) have been used
extensively to explain civil unrest and militancy.[96] Both concepts are intrinsically intertwined
and independently insufficient as explanations of conflict. The simple
straightforward greed or grievance explanation for resource conflict is weak
since many other factors like capacity of militant groups, location and
resources available matter.[97] What started as an ethnic grievance has
metamorphosed into greed manifested by opportunistic criminal activity taking
advantage of security deficiencies.[98]
Ethnicity however, is central to
both schools of thought. Intra-state conflict often results from grievances about
political ethnic dominance, inter-ethnic horizontal inequality and ethnic
identity formation. Even multinomial accounts use ethnic hatred and political
and economic exclusion to measure grievance.[99] These accounts concur regarding the extent to
which ethnic diversity can be used as a measuring variable. Collier and
Hoeffler indicate that
‘Ethnic and religious hatreds
are widely perceived as a cause of civil conflict. Although such hatreds cannot
be quantified, they can evidently only occur in societies that are multi-ethnic
or multi-religious and so our proxies measure various dimensions of diversity.’[100]
Elbadawi and Bodea also built multinomial
specifications of domestic conflict supporting the hypothesis that ethnic diversity
accentuates distributional conflict.[101]
Interest based
rational choice arguments contend that the motivation for conflict is
competition for scarce resources in a zero sum game.[102]
Such interest perspectives like the greed and grievance model do not accept
identity as a sole cause for conflicts.[103]
Looking at Nigeria’s ethnic diversity with no single dominant group, Collier
and Hoeffler’s contention that in nations with no group having more than
forty-five percent of the population, ethnic diversity lowers risk of conflict
is weak.[104] This
at least calls for a closer examination of their multinomial evidence to
support greed theory in countries with abundant resources.[105]
Similar other arguments cite political and economic state failure as more
causal of conflict than ethnic diversity.[106]
However ethnic diversity is instrumental in violent conflicts because evidence
suggests identity differences have increased the chance of civil wars.[107] The
evolution of the ND conflict requires an interest based approach to
understanding it. However it must be noted that identity conflicts are longer lasting
based on memories of past ‘chosen traumas’[108] between
opposing ethnic groups that have no basis on interests but rather on some conflict
between these groups that keep being carried over through generations.
In explaining factors that
incite militants some questionably downplay ethnic, political and social
variables contending that economic variables such as financial state weakness
have more explanatory power.[109] According to Obi ‘... the unequal
power relations and (ethnic minority) grievances in the ND were well
established before oil became a significant factor in Nigeria’s political
economy.’[110] Collier
and Hoeffler say
‘Rebellion needs both motive and
opportunity. Political Science literature tends to explain the motive aspect of
circumstances that people want to rebel. If the grievances are sufficiently
acute then people feel the need to engage in violent protest. Economic accounts
explain rebellion in the context of opportunities that enable rebellion to
occur.’[111]
Ethnicity is however also
central to the greed school of thought. Any attempt to isolate greed, one of
two intertwined concepts, as causal to conflict is problematic since the relationship
between greed and grievance in resource conflict is cyclical. Oil politics plays
an equally evident role in furthering grievance objectives by providing both
motive and opportunity for the initiation and sustaining of insurgencies. What
is worthwhile is assessing factors like ethnicity which is evident in both explanations.
Ethnicity remains a central aspect of economic grievance because differences
lead to the discrimination evident in unfair distribution of oil revenue. Such
discrimination is the basis of social conflict and there is a connection
between discrimination based on ethnicity and the beginnings of hostilities.
Where conflict results from a combination of ‘greed’ and ‘grievance’, ethnicity
plays the role of being the basis along which militant groups mobilize to
resolve ‘non-ethnic’ political or economic grievances. Carment et al correctly suggest
that the expression of a conflict as ethnic arises when ethnicity is the basis
of exclusion and confrontation.[112]
Their contention however, that this dilutes the primordial element in conflict,
is misleading since it is primarily the expression itself that classifies a
conflict. Identifying grievances such as human rights, justice or self
determination as evolving from ’non-ethnic’ to ‘ethnic’ lacks comprehensiveness
especially where the mobilization lines are ethnic. This is illustrated next
with brief studies of the Ijaw and Ogoni people.
Chapter 3: Illustrating Ethnicity Within Greed and Grievance
3.2. MEND and the Ijaws
The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), an armed
youth militia, emerged in early 2006 in the Ijaw areas in the western ND. Local
resistance and the cycle of government attacks and reprisals by Ijaw militia
marked its fiery birth. A prominent insurgent movement, MEND is chosen as an
illustration of ethnic militancy due to its ethnic representation, mainly by
and for the Ijaws.[113] MEND
is an umbrella organization (or ‘idea’[114])
for a lot of the other militancy fringe groups.[115] As
a group it evolved from the defunct Niger Delta Peoples Volunteer Force (NDPVF)
under new leadership. If the words of Asari, the leader of the NDPVF, are
anything to go by, ethnic nationalism is not enough motivation for youth
militancy. His open statements declaring ‘I hate Nigeria’ demonstrate the
extent of ethnic marginalization felt by Ijaw militants in MEND.[116]
It’s important to highlight that the emergence of armed groups combines long
standing ethnic rivalries with resource competition, a deadly mix of the primordial
and materialistic. Prior to the proliferation of armed groups[117],
Urhobos, Itsekiris and Ijaws were already involved in materialistic conflicts
over contracts, rent and employment from the oil industry.[118]
MEND has achieved creditability as the most successful militant group
partly due to effective use of violent attacks on the state and oil companies’
installations and its media savvy operation in the way it issues threats,
demands and statements. Whilst they are able to derive some legitimacy with the
ethnic Ijaws and other groups with aims and objectives resonating with community
needs, there is still danger of this eroding with time. Pressures for funding
its operations have fuelled oil bunkering and kidnapping for ransoms. This
evolution from grievance to greed means the lines are increasingly blurred between
the activities of a grassroots insurgency with political aims and organized
criminal activity. The proceeds of illegal bunkering finance procurement of
arms fuelling conflict whilst financially benefiting Western institutions. There is
increasing interest of the US, the Western world and China in Nigeria owing to
the increasing importance of the oil rich Gulf of Guinea to strategic supplies.[119] This strategic
importance is not lost to the insurgent groups and re-enforces their resolve
and belief they can hold the state to ransom until their demands are met. This
is a key premise of MEND’s strategy in a drive to stop production and paralyse
the activities of the main oil companies working in the region.[120]
In response many oil companies are taking an inclusive approach by recruiting
from within the local communities in an attempt to win loyalties of local
people with stakes in the industry.
In addition to loss of legitimacy, another implication of the ‘curse of
resource greed’ is the ethnic tension it generates. For this to escalate into
violence amongst minority groups, a degree of ethnic diversity is assumed. In a
multi-ethnic insurgency there is the tendency for groups to compete with each
other. Such a relationship has existed between MEND and Coalition
for Militant Action (COMA) for instance. The threat of separatism is
reduced where the groups are competing both for limited resources and for
political relevance. Even though governments can take advantage of such situations
criminalizing the militant groups, there is still the risk of a new ethnic identity
created as a result of economic hardship with a nationalist agenda. This is
shown in the tension between ethnic minorities and government elite of ethnic
majority.
Within the greed and grievance debate, Collier challenges the
conventional wisdom that militancy, rebellion and insurgency are the result of
long standing deprivation and social injustice.[121] What
he fails to point out is that if greed represents a trigger to conflict, most ethnic
groups would have rebelled.[122] A
purely materialistic account of the roots of MEND ideology might use the
illustration of the instance Ijaw youths returned from a rally after a first
visit to the glittering Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, built completely from
oil revenues. The resultant heightened sense of economic marginalisation
spurred the Kaiama Declaration[123]
(communiqué issued by Ijaw youths at a conference in 1998) and formation of the
Ijaw Youth Council (IYC).[124] According
to Barrett
‘Ever since it (Kaiama Declaration) was formulated, it has served to
energise the leadership of both the Ijaw youths and their communities
throughout the ND and has become the justification for the constant resistance
mounted by the other ethnic groups who co-exist with the Ijaws in the
territory.’[125]
Since the discovery of oil, what now constitutes the ND’s geographical
boundaries is politicised.[126]
This occurred as a result of the connotation that being classified within this
region precedes rights to oil wealth. The colonial narration, evident in the
Kaiama Declaration, shows the Ijaw nation forced to be part of Nigeria and colonial
economic interests preventing Ijaw ethnic nationality from evolving as a
separate nation with complete political, social and cultural autonomy. This
forms the core of Ijaw grievances today. Being the most populous, homogenous and
distributed group makes the propensity for violence pervasive.
How much does ethnicity play a part in oil conflicts? At the intra-ethnic
level, Omeje notes that ‘Besides the lure of development provisioning and oil
security vigilantism, competition for land, forests, creeks and swamps
containing oil resources has often provoked thorny conflicts between different
ND Communities and groups because of potential rents and ‘gifts’ or dashes.’[127]
The ethnic groups that have been most active in the growing advocacy for
economic autonomy, resource control and self determination[128]
are the Ijaw and Ogoni. The analysis of ethnic composition of militant groups[129] shows
the Ijaw having the largest membership in several states.[130] In
the Warri Crisis[131]
in the 1990s with contentions over ownership of Warri[132],
the most populous ethnic groups[133] were
the warring parties. The Ijaw, frustrated by an unfavourable geographic
location and envious of Itsekiri prosperity began agitations for separation
stemmed from social and political marginalization. Even before the emergence of
oil, marginalization and protests existed in post-colonial Warri with conflicts
between Ijaw and Itsekiri being around land ownership which became more exacerbated
with the arrival of oil. Ukiwo argues that insurgency is the consequence of
longstanding experiences of political and social-cultural marginalization
stating that ‘The Ijaw are aggrieved that successive post-colonial regimes have
retained the pre-eminence of the Itsekiri monarch.’[134]
However, viewing local ethnic rivalries in isolation of broader politics
of ethnicity in Nigeria would be too simplistic. The ethnic nationalism and quest
for Ijaw self determination as a campaign targeted at the ethnic dominant elite
at Federal level is more pervasive than with local ethnic neighbours. Conflicts
caused by ethnic politics at the sub-national level are usually trumped by
contention at the national level. This rejects the sovereign argument that all
Nigeria’s resources belongs to all Nigerians but attests that due to the many
different ethnicities within the country the political community constitutes a
national and sub-national.[135]
Ejobowah expounds that conflict between ethnic communities and the state
reflects competing dominant liberal view that citizenship represents legal
membership of the state with the pluralist account where in a multinational
state, sub-national membership is the basis for political membership.[136]
The recent spate of ethnicity
linked violence from MEND is not new. More than four decades before the emergence
of MEND, the Ijaw were involved with conflict against the state for political
rights. Major Isaac Adaka Boro founded the Niger Delta Volunteer Service
(NDVS), also an Ijaw speaking militia demanding an independent ‘Niger Delta
Republic’. Their rejection of the oil distribution status quo, attack on oil
industry practices and propensity for violent reprisals is reminiscent of the
insurgency today. This ‘twelve day revolt’[137] was eventually crushed by state forces but
woke Nigeria to travails of ethnic communities, re-opening debates about demands
to be separated in independent states.[138] The role of ethnicity in this fight for
self determination goes beyond the Ijaw ethnicity of members of the NDVS. At
the time the Eastern Region was dominated by the more populous Igbo ethnic
group, obliging the Ijaw, Ibibio, Ogoni and other smaller groups to band
together and ask for a new ‘Rivers State’ once again illustrating the clash
between ethnic majority and minorities. Ukiwo agrees both intra-ethnic and inter-ethnic
conflicts are important themes in the study of Nigerian political economy.[139] Relations between Ijaw, Itsekiri,
Ogoni and Urhobo represent a microcosm of the majority ethnic groups Hausa,
Igbo and Yoruba and their relationships with each other.[140] MEND’s violent attempt to gain control of the state is
a logical reaction to ethnic marginalisation and represents the Ijaw
continuation of the Ogoni struggle by more violent means. Similarly, their
vision of the prerequisites for the cessation of militant attacks mirrors the
Ogoni Bill of Rights demanding fifty percent of oil revenues, economic and
environmental accountability of the oil companies. A political ethnic element
seeks greater autonomy for the Ijaws through the state political system similar to the
Ogoni secessionist aspirations outlined next.
3.2. MOSOP and the Ogoni
The Ogoni case illustrates state
repression as a catalyst for growing ethnic identity, grievances and conflict.
Ken Saro-Wiwa, transformed into a mythical figure by his execution in 1995 by a
discredited military regime, was the rallying point for Ogoni youth and became
the face of struggles for self determination. The Ogoni called for
‘political autonomy to
participate in the affairs of the Republic as a distinct and separate unit, provided
that this autonomy guarantees political control of Ogoni affairs by Ogoni
people; the right to control and use a fair proportion of Ogoni economic resources
for Ogoni development; adequate representations, as of right, in all Nigerian
national institutions, and the right to protect the Ogoni environment and
ecology from further degradation.’[141]
Whilst this indicates that the
ensuing conflict and militancy in the region is a response to the Federal
Government’s unwillingness to acquiesce to demands, the prevalence of ethnic
tension exacerbated the situation. When MOSOP was established in 1990, its goal
was creation of an Ogoni State or Federal Territory and a letter from Ken
Saro-Wiwa to Garrick Leton[142] made comparisons with the Yoruba
nation (comprising many states) implying that an Ogoni state does not reduce
the sense of belonging to ethnicity in the region.[143] MOSOP proposed the idea of
revenue allocation whereby each ethnic group would have control over its
resources. A needed response to a repressive regime and exploitation by the oil
industry superseded intra-ethnic conflict between Ogoni and its neighbours.[144]
MOSOP’s success in drawing national
and international attention to injustice fettered upon minorities has triggered
the emergence of similar organizations with a propensity for provoking ethnic
violence to show political relevance. Okonta argues that
‘... control of the state has
historically been the main foundation for class formation in Nigeria, and the
astute political and ideological entrepreneurs had constructed and
reconstructed new political communities based on region, ethnicity, religion
and other identities as the occasion demanded, in order to seize control of the
state and its strategic resources ...’[145]
The predominant discourse regarding MOSOP and Ken Saro-Wiwa is around human
rights violations by an elitist regime and military dictatorship and
environmental degradation and abuses by western oil companies. What is often
inadequately addressed is the view that Saro-Wiwa canvassed local support,
tapping into environmental rhetoric and grievances as a political tool to the
governors’ office[146].
The predominant view, rightly dismissed by some as simplistic[147],
accentuates a focus on the oil industry while the less addressed view central to
this paper touches on ethnic politics in Nigeria.
The Ogoni case highlights the wide range of views on the reasons for oil
as a catalyst for conflict. For Osaghae, it is the states inability or
unwillingness to meet political, economic and social demands that leads to the
radical orientation of the leadership within groups such as MOSOP.[148]
Correspondingly, Ikelegbe attests that despite their contributions, the Ogoni
continue to face marginalization, impoverishment and neglect which has created
hostility for both the state and the oil industry.[149]
Ibeanu likewise cites ‘contradiction of security between local communities, the
state and the oil industry’.[150]
However, preceding the environmental politics that dominates literature
about the Ogoni are ethnic narratives. In her account of the analysis of the
impact of the life, career and eventual execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa by then
Nigerian dictatorship, Campbell expounds on his Ogoni ethnicity as an issue in
an Igbo dominated region.[151]
Whilst vast numbers of Ogoni lost their lives in the civil war in Biafra, most
were forced to enlist and Ken Saro-Wiwa did not support the Igbo secessionists.
Ogoni identity predated colonial Nigeria and has been a challenge to the
ethnically biased patronage system that has favoured the Federal Government and
the three main ethnic groups further marginalising the Ogoni.[152]
The economic exploitation did not create but fuelled conflict while ethnicity further
compounded the acceleration of violence. According to Campbell ‘... it was the
politics of ethnic division and exploitation operated against the Ogoni by
their governments and by Shell Oil that necessitated their unification and
activism.’
A politically insecure environment would
benefit from decentralizing power both from majority ethnic groups like the
Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba. The secessionist tendencies demonstrated by the Ogoni is
the inevitable consequence of this perceived threat. As Steadman highlights:
‘Political insecurity will be most extreme
when a particular ethnic group captures the state, or an ethnic group is denied
access to state, or when the state is not yet captured but can be seen as
susceptible to domination by one group. When a single ethnic group controls all
the state apparatus, all other ethnic groups will be threatened, as they can no
longer rely on an impartial adjudicator of disputes or an unbiased protector.
Instead the resources of the state may be used against ethnic groups out of
power in favour of those in power. Again, two responses are likely – attempts
to gain control over the state or to opt out of it.’[153]
So whilst MEND is attempting to gain control of the state by resource
control, MOSOP tried to opt out by seeking political autonomy and secession.
Conclusion: Implications for Policy
Ethnic diversity in Nigeria which existed before the discovery of oil and
the resultant contemporary ethnic politics both play significant roles in accelerating
the ability of the ‘resource curse’ to fan the flames of conflict. While oil
remains central to explanations of conflict, the inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic
elements at play within the resource curse argument has shown that it would be
too simplistic to cite greed or the ‘Dutch Disease’ as primary causal factors
and other factors as peripheral.
The role of ethnicity in
colonial legacies of divide and rule has exacerbated ethnic divisions in
Nigeria and the ND is a microcosm of this reality. The civil war in Biafra is another
prominent example of the result of ethnic tension at the national level which
has now filtered down sub-nationally. The type of ethnic conflict of most
impact is that between majority ethnic groups (to which the largest proportion
of Nigerian elite belong) and minorities.
For MOSOP (Ogonis), the
‘grievance’ is associated with the quest for political recognition, self
determination aspirations and fairer distribution of resources. It has been
shown this is essentially a product of ethnic marginalisation both historical
and contemporary.[154]
For MEND (Ijaws), the ‘greed’ is a result of the politics of ethnicity which
has evolved into unfair constitutional resource sharing derivation principles,
economic and environmental neglect producing a perception of ethnic
marginalisation. The recurrent theme of ethnic narratives seen in the Ogoni
Bill of Rights, Kaiama declaration and statements released by MEND militant
leaders exemplify the prominent role of ethnicity in conflict.
Because, ethnicity issues do not stand in
isolation, the challenge for policy makers is to understand how the politics of
ethnicity is accentuated by the oil resource curse and vice versa. Okonta
contends that ‘The contentious politics of ethno-regionalism are exacerbated by
the political economy of oil and stunted growth, all of which have combined to
undermine the possibilities for a dynamic social and political system.’[155]
Conflicts based more on identity politics and ethnicity rather than
interests tend to be harder to resolve as identity conflicts usually seem
irrational. The proliferation of policy recommendations of recognition[156]
to resolve the crisis is an acknowledgement of the role of ethnic marginalisation.
Ethnic beliefs, doctrines and ideologies legitimize the principles and purposes
of policy. Therefore recognizing that a policy of development is only one facet
of any effective solution, solitary explanations of underdevelopment should be
avoided.
The two levels of sub-national and national ethnic identity politics that
have been discussed here play a dual role and understanding their combined
impact is pivotal for policy formulation. At both levels policies seeking to
promote inclusivity for minority ethnic groups must first address the issue of
common Nigerian citizenship or the ‘National Question’. This has been illustrated as manifesting in
several ways: Nigeria versus imperialism; tensions between majority groups with
each other and with minorities; the North-South divide; inter-state rivalry;
inter-ethnic rivalries within states and inter-sectional rivalries within ethnic
groups. Since ethnicity plays multiple roles, it renews the emphasis in
resolving the national question. Federalism is now subject to a new
paradigm shift ‘exacerbated by the post modern legitimisation of ethnic
identity.’[157] The
proliferation of state and local governments during fifty years of independence
restricts the sovereignty of the state-nation and causes policy being forced
further into various combinations of self rule.[158]
This shift increases the possibility of more groups seeking political autonomy
and gaining legitimacy.[159] In
reality, though federalism may be touted as a means to solve ethnic conflicts,
it is the ethnic consciousness that makes it necessary that also makes it difficult.[160] Mustapha attests
that, ‘Conflicts over the distribution of political and economic goods among
its ethno-religious groupings have made it difficult for a coherent national
ethos to emerge and a clear definition of its national interests.’[161] Identity politics
at the national level, demonstrated in the North-South divide, shown for
example in the results of the 2011 presidential elections[162], is further reflected
in ethnic rivalry at the regional and local levels. This must be addressed by creating
democratic institutions reflecting a more representative ethnic balance and restoring
legitimacy. Okonta re-iterates this theme in underscoring the notion that for a
constitutional amendment to be accepted it must be truly federalist.[163]
The marginalization of minority ethnic groups makes
it mandatory that policy seeks ways for creating new channels of engagement. Decades
of state repression, corruption and bad governance has created mistrust and
lack of faith in institutions. Power has been manipulated for the benefit of
self and the ethnic groups to which the elite are a part of and has led to a
loss in legitimacy. Ethnic minorities almost feel they are fighting for their
very survival. This perpetuates a high level of insecurity from both the ethnic
communities and the state. A constitutional and democratic structure and policy
that limits the power of the government could create an environment where the
government is less likely to take risks in a clampdown. This has potential to
dissolve this security dilemma by building more trust between the state and the
citizenry. The combination of ethnic diversity with constraints on state action
help overcome security concerns.[164]
Since the propensity to
escalate rapidly is an important characteristic in defining conflict, the role
of ethnicity as a catalyst for other causal factors has rightly been examined. By showing
ethnicity’s role in resource conflict, this paper has highlighted the need for
policy to do three things: avoid the misleading approach of overplaying
materialistic economic factors by examining the role of oil in isolation;
scrutinize ethnic politics at the national level without the distraction of
concentrating on intra-ethnic rivalry and lastly present integrated solutions
where all factors are given more evenly balanced roles as causes of conflict.
Bibliography
Books and Articles
Agbonifo, John. 2009. “Oil,
Insecurity, and Subversive Patriots in the Niger Delta: The Ogoni as agent of
revolutionary change.” Journal of Third World Studies: 71-106.
Ake, Claude. 2000. The
Feasibility of Democracy in Africa. Dakar: CODESRIA.
Ako, Rhuks, and Patrick Okonmah.
2009. “Minority Rights Issues in Nigeria: A Theoretical Analysis of Historical
and Contemporary Conflicts in the Oil-Rich Niger Delta Region.” International
Journal on Minority and Group Rights 16 (1) (February 1): 53-65.
Alao, Abiodun, and Funmi
Olonisakin. 2000. “Economic Fragility and Political Fluidity: Explaining
Natural Resources and Conflicts.” International Peacekeeping: 23-36.
Amusan, Lere. 2001.
“Ethno-Religious And Environmental Conflicts: Challenges To Human Security and
Development in Nigeria.” Perspectives: Central European Review of
International Affairs: 57-68.
Amuwo, Adekunle. 2009. “Towards
a New Political Economy of the Niger Delta Question in Nigeria.” Politikon:
South African Journal of Political Studies 36 (2): 237-257. doi:Article.
Arowosegbe, Jeremiah O. 2009.
“Violence and national development in Nigeria: the political economy of youth
restiveness in the Niger Delta.” Review of African Political Economy:
575-594.
Badru, Pade. 2010. “Ethnic
Conflict and State Formation in Post-Colonial Africa: A comparative study of
Ethnic Genocide in the Congo, Liberia, Nigeria, and Rwanda-Burundi.” Journal
of Third World Studies: 149-169.
Basedau, Matthias, and Jann Lay.
2009. “Resource Curse or Rentier Peace? The Ambiguous Effects of Oil Wealth and
Oil Dependence on Violent Conflict.” Journal of Peace Research 46 (6)
(November 1): 757 -776. doi:10.1177/0022343309340500.
Bassey, Celestine O, T A
Imobighe, and Judith Burdin Asuni. 2002. Conflict and Instability in the
Niger Delta: The Warri Case. Spectrum Books.
Beblawi, Hazem, and Giacomo
Luciani. 1987. The Rentier State. London: Croom Helm.
Berdal, Mats. 2003. “How ‘New’
are ‘New Wars’? Global Economic Change and the Study of Civil War.” Global
Governance.
Brock, Lisa. 1999. “Oil, the
Ogoni and Nigeria: A Conversation with Barine Yorbe TeeKate.” Radical
History Review: 25-30.
Brown, Michael E. 2001. Nationalism
and ethnic conflict. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Campbell, Marion. 2002.
“Witnessing death: Ken Saro-Wiwa and the Ogoni crisis.” Postcolonial Studies:
39-49.
Carment, David, Patrick James,
and Zeynep Taydas. 2009. “The Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict: State,
Society, and Synthesis.” International Studies Review 11 (1) (March 1):
63-86.
Carter, Johnson. 2008.
“Partitioning to Peace: Sovereignty, Demography, and Ethnic Civil Wars.” International
Security 32 (4): 140-170.
Clapham, Christopher. 1998. African
guerrillas. Oxford: James Currey.
Colgan, Jeff. 2010. “Oil and
Revolutionary Governments: Fuel for International Conflict.” International
Organization 64: 661-694.
Collier, Paul. 2007. The
Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can be Done
About It. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Collier, Paul, and Anke Hoeffler.
2004. “Greed and grievance in civil war.” Oxford Economic Papers 56 (4)
(October 1): 563 -595. doi:10.1093/oep/gpf064.
Cookman, Claude. 2011. “Gilles
Caron’s Coverage of the Crisis in Biafra.” Visual Communication Quarterly
15 (4) (September 3): 226-242. doi:doi: 10.1080/15551390802415063.
Cramer, Christopher. 2006. Civil
War Is Not a Stupid Thing: Accounting for Violence in Developing Countries.
London: Hurst.
Diamond, Stanley. 2007. “Who
Killed Biafra?” Dialectical Anthropology 37 (1-3): 339-362.
Dibua, J. I. 2005. “Citizenship
and Resource Control in Nigeria: The Case of Minority Communities in the Niger
Delta.” Africa Spectrum 40 (1) (January 1): 5-28.
Ding, Ning, and Barry C. Field.
2005. “Natural Resource Abundance and Economic Growth.” Land Economics
81 (4) (November 1): 496-502.
Duffield, Mark. 2001. Global
Governance and the New Wars: The Merging of Development and Security. Zed
Books.
———. 2005. “Getting savages to
fight barbarians: development, security and the colonial present.” Conflict,
Security & Development: 141-159.
Dunning, Thad. 2005. “Resource
Dependence, Economic Performance, and Political Stability.” The Journal of
Conflict Resolution 49 (4): 451-482.
Duquet, Nils. 2009. “Arms
Acquisition Patterns and the Dynamics of Armed Conflict: Lessons from the Niger
Delta.” International Studies Perspectives: 169-185.
Ebeku, Kaniye S A. 2006. Oil
and the Niger Delta people in international law: resource rights, environmental
and equity issues. Köppe.
Eberlein, Ruben. 2006. “On the road
to the State’s perdition?: authority and sovereignty in the Niger Delta,
Nigeria.” Journal of Modern African Studies: 573-596.
Ejobowah, John Boye. 2000. “Who
owns the oil? The politics of ethnicity in the Niger Delta of Nigeria.” Africa
Today 47 (1): 29-47.
Ekeh, Peter P. 2005. Warri
City and British colonial rule in Western Niger Delta. Buffalo: Urhobo
Historical Society.
Elazar, Daniel J. 1996. “From
Statism to Federalism: A Paradigm Shift.” International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science
politique 17 (4) (October
1): 417-429.
Elbadawi E., and Sambanis N.
2000. “Why are there so many civil wars in Africa? Understanding and preventing
violent conflict.” Journal of African Economies 9 (3): 244-269.
Eze, Malachy Chukwuemeka. 2011.
“The political economy of conflict resolution in a natural resource economy:
The case of Nigeria’s Niger Delta.” African Journal of Political Science and
International Relations 5 (3) (March): 152-158.
Fanon, Frantz. 2001. The
Wretched of the Earth. London: Penguin Books.
Fearon, James D., and David D.
Laitin. 2003. “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War.” The American Political
Science Review 97 (1) (February 1): 75-90.
Forsyth, F. 2007. The Biafra
Story: The Making of an African Legend. Pen & Sword.
http://books.google.com.ng/books?id=fp1xAAAAMAAJ.
Frynas, Jedrzej George. 2000. Oil
in Nigeria : conflict and litigation between oil companies and village
communities. London: Lit Verlag.
———. 2001. “Corporate and State
responses to anti-oil protests in the Niger Delta.” African Affairs 100
(398): 27-54.
Gartzke, Erik, and Kristian
Skrede Gleditsch. 2006. “Identity and Conflict: Ties that bind and Differences
that Divide.” European Journal of International Relations 12 (1): 53-87.
Griffiths, Ieuan. 1986. “The
Scramble for Africa: Inherited Political Boundaries.” The Geographical
Journal 152 (2) (January 1): 204-216.
Grossman, Herschell I. 1991. “A
General Equilibrium Model of Insurrections.” The American Economic Review
81 (4): 912-921.
Grossman, HI. 1999. “Kleptocracy
and revolutions.” Oxford Economic Papers 51 (2) (April 1): 267 -283.
doi:10.1093/oep/51.2.267.
Gurr, Ted Robert. 1994. “Peoples
Against States: Ethnopolitical Conflict and the Changing World System: 1994
Presidential Address.” International Studies Quarterly 38 (3): 347-377.
Hartzell, Caroline A, Matthew
Hoddie, and Molly Bauer. 2010. “Economic Liberalization via IMF Structural
Adjustment: Sowing the Seeds of Civil War?” International Organization
64: 339-356.
Hills, Alice. 1997. “Warlords,
Militia, and Conflict in Contemporary Africa: A Re-examination of Terms.” Small
Wars and Insurgencies 8 (1): 35-51.
Horowitz, Donald L. 1985. Ethnic
groups in conflict. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, Ltd.
Howe, Herbert M. 2001. Ambiguous
Order: Military Forces in African States. Lynne Rienner.
Human Rights Watch. 2003. “The
Warri Crisis: Fueling Violence.” Human Rights Watch 15 (18 A)
(November). http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/nigeria1103.pdf.
Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. “The
Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72 (3): 22-49.
———. 1996. The Clash of
Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Touchstone.
Ibaba, Ibaba S. 2009. “Violent
conflicts and sustainable development in Bayelsa State.” Review of African
Political Economy 36 (122): 555-573.
Ibeanu, Okechukwu. 1997. “Oil,
Conflict and Security in Rural Nigeria: Issues in Ogoni Crisis.” African
Association of Political Science 1 (2). Occasional Papers Series: 4.
Idemudia, Uwafiokun, and Uwem
Ite. 2006. “Demystifying the Niger Delta conflict: towards an integrated
explanation” 33 (109): 391-406.
Ifeka, Caroline. 2001. “Oil,
NGOs & youths: struggles for resource control in the Niger Delta.” Review
of African Political Economy: 99-105.
Ikelegbe, Augustine. 2005.
“Encounters of Insurgent Youth Associations with the State in the Oil Rich
Niger Delta Region of Nigeria.” Journal of Third World Studies 22 (1):
151-181.
Ikime, Obaro. 1969. Niger
Delta rivalry: Itsẹkiri-Urhobo relations and the European presence, 1884-1936.
Longman.
Jackson, Paul. 2003. “Warlords
as Alternative Forms of Governance.” Small Wars and Insurgencies 14 (2):
131-150.
Jha, Saumitra. 2007.
“Maintaining peace across ethnic lines: new lessons from the past.” The
Economics of Peace and Security Journal 2 (2).
Juhasz, Antonia. 2008. The
Tyranny Of Oil. New York: Harper.
Kaldor, Mary. 1999. New and
Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Stanford: Polity Press.
Kalyvas, Stathis N. 2001.
“"New” and ‘Old’ Civil Wars: A Valid Distinction?” World Politics
54 (1): 99-118.
———. 2006. The logic of
violence in civil war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaplan, Robert D. 1993. Balkan
ghosts: a journey through history. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Karl, Terry Lynn. 1997. The
Paradox of Plenty : Oil Booms and Petro-States. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Kashi, Ed, and Michael Watts.
2010. Curse of the Black Gold: 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta.
PowerHouse Books.
Keddie, Nikki R. 1998. “The New
Religious Politics: Where, When, and Why Do ‘Fundamentalisms’ Appear.” Comparative
Studies in Society and History 40 (4): 696-723.
Keen, David. 1998. “The Economic
Function of Violence in Civil Wars.” Adelphi Paper 320.
Klare, Michael T. 2002. Resource
Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict. Holt Paperbacks.
Klare, Michael, and Daniel
Volman. 2006. “America, China and the Scramble for Africa’s Oil.” Review of
African Political Economy 33 (108): 297-309.
Krishna, Sankaran. 2001. “Race,
Amnesia, and the Education of International Relations.” Alternatives 26
(4): 401-423.
Laqueur, Walter. 1998. Guerrilla
warfare : a historical & critical study. London: Transaction
Publishers.
Lyall, Jason. 2010. “Do
Democracies Make Inferior Counterinsurgents? Reassessing Democracy’s Impact on
War Outcomes and Duration.” International Organization 64 (1): 167-192.
Lynch, Marc. 2005.
“Transnational Dialogue in an Age of Terror.” Global Society 19 (1):
5-28.
Mannheim, Karl. 1991. Ideology
and utopia : an introduction to the sociology of knowledge. London:
Routledge.
Mansfield, Edward D, and Jack
Snyder. 1995. “Democratisation and the Danger of War.” International
Security 20 (1): 5-38.
McCormick, Gordon H, and Frank
Giordano. 2007. “Things Come Together: Symbolic Violence and Guerrilla
Mobilisation.” Third World Quarterly 28 (2): 295-320.
Melander, Erik. 2009. “The
Geography of Fear: Regional Ethnic Diversity, the Security Dilemma and Ethnic
War.” European Journal of International Relations 15 (1): 95-124.
Melander, Erik, Magnus Öberg,
and Jonathan Hall. 2009. “Are ‘New Wars’ More Atrocious? Battle Severity,
Civilians Killed and Forced Migration Before and After the End of the Cold
War.” European Journal of International Relations 15 (3): 505-536.
Min, Brian, Lars-Erik Cederman,
and Andreas Wimmer. 2010. “Why Do Ethnic Groups Rebel? New Data and Analysis.” World
Politics: 87-119.
Monroe, Kristen Renwick, James
Hankin, and Renee Bukovchik Van Vechten. 2000. “The Psychological Foundations of
Identity Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 3 (1) (June):
419. doi:Article.
Münkler, Herfried. 2005. The
New Wars. Malden, Massachusetts: Polity Press.
Naanen, Ben. 1995.
“Oil-producing minorities and the restructuring of Nigerian federalism: The
case of the Ogoni people.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 33
(1): 46-78.
———. 2011. “Oil‐producing
minorities and the restructuring of Nigerian federalism: The case of the Ogoni
people.” The Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 33 (1)
(September 11): 46-78. doi:doi: 10.1080/14662049508447695.
Nigeria Constitutional Rights
Project. 1999. Land, oil and human rights in Nigeria’s Delta region.
Constitutional Rights Project.
Nnoli, Okwudiba. 1978. Ethnic
Politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishers.
———. 1989. Ethnic Conflict in
Africa. Vol. 1. Indiana University: Publication Unit, CODESRIA.
Nwajiaku, Kathryn. 2005.
“Between Discourse and Reality: The Politics of Oil and Ijaw Ethnic Nationalism
in the Niger Delta (Entre discours et réalité. Politique pétrolière et nationalisme ethnique ijaw dans le delta du
Niger).” Cahiers d’Études Africaines 45 (178) (January 1):
457-496.
Nzewunwa, Nwanna. 1980. The
Niger Delta : aspects of its prehistoric economy and culture. Oxford: B.A.R.
Obi, Cyril. 1999. “The Crisis of
Environmental Governance in the Niger Delta 1985-1996.” African Association
of Political Science 3 (3). Occasional Paper Series: 3-33.
———. 2004. “The oil paradox :
reflections on the violent dynamics of petro-politics and (mis)governance in
Nigeria’s Niger Delta.” Africa Institute Occasional Paper 73.
———. 2008. “Enter the Dragon?
Chinese Oil Companies and Resistance in the Niger Delta.” Review of African
Political Economy 35 (117) (September): 417-434.
———. 2010. “Oil as the ‘Curse’
of Conflict in Africa: Peering through the Smoke and Mirrors.” Review of
African Political Economy 37 (126) (December): 483-495.
Okonta, Ike. 2008. When
citizens revolt: Nigerian elites, big oil, and the Ogoni struggle for
self-determination. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Okonta, Ike, and Oronto Douglas.
2003. Where vultures feast: shell, human rights, and oil in the Niger Delta.
London and New York: Verso.
Omeje, Kenneth. 2004. “The
State, Conflict and Evolving Politics in the Niger Delta, Nigeria.” Review
of African Political Economy 31 (101) (September): 425-440.
———. 2005. “Oil Conflict in
Nigeria: Contending Issues and Perspectives of the Local Niger Delta People.” New
Political Economy 10 (3) (September): 321-334.
———. 2006. High stakes and
stakeholders: oil conflict and security in Nigeria. Aldershot: Aldershot.
Osaghae, Eghosa. 1995. “The
Ogoni Uprising: Oil Politics, Minority Agitation and the Future of the Nigerian
State.” African Affairs 94 (376) (July): 325-344.
———. 2002. “Regulating Conflicts
in Nigeria.” Peace Review 14 (2) (June): 217-224.
Osaghae, Eghosa E. 1991. “Ethnic
Minorities and Federalism in Nigeria.” African Affairs 90 (359) (April
1): 237-258.
———. 1996. “Human Rights and
Ethnic Conflict Management: The Case of Nigeria.” Journal of Peace Research
33 (2) (May 1): 171-188.
Oyefusi, Aderoju. 2009. “Trust
and the Breakdown of Civil Order in Nigeria’s Delta Region: Evidence from
Historical Conflict Episodes.” Round Table 98 (403) (August): 483-492.
Peel, Michael. 2009. A Swamp
Full of Dollars: Pipelines and Paramilitaries at Nigeria’s Oil Frontier.
London and New York: I.B. Tauris.
Ratcliffe, Peter. 1996. “Race”,
ethnicity and nation: international perspectives on social conflict. UCL
Press.
Reno, William. 1998. Warlord
Politics and African States. London: Lynne Rienner.
Richmond, Oliver P. 2006. “The
problem of peace: understanding the “liberal peace".” Conflict,
Security & Development 6 (3): 291-314.
RodrÃguez, Francisco, and
Jeffrey D. Sachs. 1999. “Why Do Resource-Abundant Economies Grow More Slowly?” Journal
of Economic Growth 4 (3): 277-303.
Ross, M. H. 2007. Cultural
contestation in ethnic conflict. Cambridge University Press.
Saha, Santosh C. 2010.
“Sub-Saharan ethnic attachment and civil conflict : a methodological approach
to state-building and ethnicity.” Journal of Third World Studies (1):
235-251.
Sambanis, Nicholas. 2002. “A
Review of Recent Advances and Future Directions in the Literature on Civil
War.” Defence and Peace Economics 13: 215-243.
Sampson, Anthony. 2009. The
Seven Sisters - The Great Oil Companies and the World They Shaped. London:
PFD.
Sen, Amartya. 2007. Identity
and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny. W W Norton & Co Inc.
http://books.google.com/books?id=qhyVGwAACAAJ.
Shaw, Martin. 2000. “The
contemporary mode of warfare? Mary Kaldor’s theory of new wars.” Review of
International Political Economy 7 (1): 171-180.
Shaxson, Nicholas. 2007. “Oil,
corruption and the resource curse.” International Affairs 83 (6)
(November): 1123-1140.
Smith, Anthony D. 1981. “War and
Ethnicity: The role of Warfare in the Formation, Self Images, and Cohesion of
Ethnic Communities.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 4: 375-397.
———. 1993. “The Ethnic Sources
of Nationalism.” Survival 35 (1): 48-62.
Steinberg, David A, and Stephen
M Saideman. 2008. “Laissez Fear: Assessing the Impact of Government Involvement
in the Economy on Ethnic Violence.” International Studies Quarterly 52
(2): 235-259.
Stewart, Frances. 2004.
“Development and security.” Conflict, Security & Development 4 (3):
261-288.
Stokes, Doug. 2007. “Blood for
oil? Global capital, counter-insurgency and the dual logic of American energy
security.” Review of International Studies 33: 245-264.
Suberu, Rotimi. 2001. Federalism
and ethnic conflict in Nigeria. Washington: United States Institute of
Peace.
Sunstein, Cass R. 2002. “Why
They Hate Us: The Role of Social Dynamics.” Harvard Journal of Law &
Public Policy 25 (2): 429-440.
Taber, Robert. 2002. War of
the flea: the classic study of guerrilla warfare. Brassey’s.
http://books.google.com/books?id=w4v2Jf2auW8C.
Tamuno, Tekena N. 1970.
“Separatist Agitations in Nigeria since 1914.” The Journal of Modern African
Studies 8 (4) (December 1): 563-584.
Tebekaemi, Tony, ed. 1982. The
Twelve Day Revolution. Benin City: Ethiope Publishing Company.
Tschirgi, Necla. 2004.
“Political economy of armed conflicts and peace building.” Conflict,
Security & Development 4 (3): 377-382.
Ukiwo, Ukoha. 2005. “The Study
of Ethnicity in Nigeria.” Oxford Development Studies 33 (1) (March):
7-23.
———. 2007. “From ‘pirates’ to
‘militants’: a historical perspective on anti-State and anti-oil company
mobilization among the Ijaw of Warri, western Niger Delta.” African Affairs
106 (425): 587-610.
Volkan, Vamik. 2001.
“Transgenerational transmissions and chosen traumas: An aspect of large-group
identity.” Group Analysis (34): 79-97.
Watts, Michael. 2004. “Resource
curse? governmentality, oil and power in the Niger Delta, Nigeria.” Geopolitics
9 (1): 50-80. doi:doi:10.1080/14650040412331307832.
———. 2007. “Petro-Insurgency or
Criminal Syndicate? Conflict and Violence in the Niger Delta.” Review of
African Political Economy 34 (114) (December): 637-660.
———. 2008. “Imperial Oil: The
Anatomy of a Nigerian Oil Insurgency (Imperial Oil: Anatomie eines
nigerianischen Ól-Aufstandes).” Erdkunde 62 (1) (January 1): 27-39.
Waugh, A., and S. Cronje. 1969. Biafra:
Britain’s shame. M. Joseph. http://books.google.com.ng/books?id=GbKaZwEACAAJ.
Welsh, David. 1996. “Ethnicity
in sub-Saharan Africa.” International Affairs 72 (3) (July): 477-492.
Woodward, Susan L. 1995. Balkan
tragedy : chaos and dissolution after the Cold War. Washington, D.C.: Brookings
Institution.
Zalik, Anna. 2004. “The Niger
Delta: ‘petro violence’ and ‘partnership development’.” Review of African
Political Economy 31 (101): 401-424.
———. 2009. “Zones of Exclusion:
Offshore Extraction, the Contestation of Space and Physical Displacement in the
Nigerian Delta and the Mexican Gulf.” Antipode 41 (3) (June): 557-582.
Reports
Agbu, Osita. 2004. Ethnic
Militias and the Threat to Democracy in Post-Transition Nigeria. Research
Report no. 127. Uppsala: The Nordic Africa Institute.
Asuni, Judith. 2009. Understanding
the Armed Groups of the Niger Delta - Council on Foreign Relations. Council
on Foreign Relations, September.
http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/understanding-armed-groups-niger-delta/p20146.
Bodea, Cristina, and Ibrahim A Elbadawi.
2007. Riots, Coups and Civil War: Revisiting the Greed and Grievance Debate.
Policy Research Working Paper. The World Bank Development Research Group,
November.
Economist Intelligence Unit.
2009. Country Report - Nigeria. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.
NDES. 1997. Final Report
Phase 1: Environmental and Socio-Economic Characteristics. Niger Delta
Environmental Survey.
Obi, Cyril. 2001. The
changing forms of identity politics in Nigeria under economic adjustment : The
case of the Oil Minorities Movement of the Niger Delta. Research report no.
119. Uppsala: Nordic Africa Institute.
———. 2006. Youth and the
generational dimensions to struggles for resource control in the Niger Delta :
Prospects for the Nation-State Project in Nigeria. CODESRIA. Dakar.
Ojo, J. 2002. The Niger
Delta: Managing Resources and Conflicts. Research. Ibadan: Development
Policy Centre.
Okonta, Ike. 2006. Behind the
Mask: Explaining the Emergence of the MEND Militia in Nigeriaʼs Oil-Bearing
Niger Delta. Working Paper. Niger Delta - Economies of Violence. Berkeley:
Institute of International Studies.
http://oldweb.geog.berkeley.edu/ProjectsResources/ND%20Website/NigerDelta/WP/11-Okonta.pdf.
Osaghae, Eghosa, Augustine
Ikelegbe, Omobolaji Olarinmoye, and Stephen I Okhomina. 2011. Youth
Militias, Self Determination and Resource Control Struggles in the Niger-delta
Region of Nigeria. Dakar: CODESRIA.
Robinson, Deborah. 1996. Ogoni:
the struggle continues. Geneva: World Council of Churches.
Sachs, Jeffrey D., and Andrew M.
Warner. 1995. Natural Resource Abundance and Economic Growth. National
Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, NBER Working Papers: 5398.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,shib&db=eoh&AN=0718646&site=ehost-live.
Shehadi, Kamal S. 1993. Ethnic
Self-Determination and the Break-up of States. Adelphi Paper. International
Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS).
Ukiwo, Ukoha. 2005. On the
Study of Ethnicity in Nigeria. Working Paper. Oxford: University of Oxford
Department of International Development.
United Nations Economic and
Social Council. 1950. Report of the Third
session of the Sub-Commission on the prevention of discrimination and the
protection of minorities to the commission on Human Rights. New York: January 30.
WAC-Global-Services. 2003. Peace
and Security in the Niger Delta. Conflict Expert Group Baseline Report.
Newspapers and Magazine Articles
‘Nigeria: Blood and oil’, The Economist, 15 March 2007
‘Nigerian Oil’, National Geographic, February 2007
‘The curse of oil: The paradox
of plenty’, The Economist, 20
December 2005
‘Shell has admitted liability
but has a long way to go to make amends’, The
Guardian, 4 August 2011
Barrett, Lindsay. 2006. “Nigeria
Bonny, The Travails of an Oil Kingdom.” New African, November.
———. 2008a. “Niger Delta: The
True Story.” New African, January.
———. 2008b. “Mixed signals from
the Niger Delta.” New African, April.
Pini, Jason. 2005. “The ‘Cold
War’ at the Presidency.” New African, October.
Robinson, Simon. 2006. “Nigeria’s
Deadly Days.” Time, May 14.
Internet Sources
“Nigeria’s shadowy oil rebels,” BBC,
accessed 21 August, 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4732210.stm.
“Blood oil dripping from Nigeria,”
BBC, accessed 18 August, 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7519302.stm.
“Will amnesty bring peace to
Niger Delta?,” BBC, accessed 22 August, 2011, October 5.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8291336.stm.
“Nigeria peace talks fruitful,” BBC,
accessed 22 August, 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8361330.stm.
“Nigeria militants in oil
attack,” BBC, accessed 3 August, 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8422165.stm.
“Nigeria group ends Delta
truce,” BBC, accessed 2 September, 2011, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8488772.stm.
“Nigeria militant backs
Jonathan,” BBC, accessed 4 September, 2011,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8686224.stm.
“Oil battles on the Niger
Delta,” BBC, accessed 5 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11399155.
“Who are Nigeria’s Mend oil
militants?” BBC, accessed 5 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11467394.
“Oil workers seized in Niger
Delta,” BBC, accessed 5 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11765381.
“Nigeria militants behind
attack,” BBC, accessed 5 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11820294.
“Charges over Nigeria oil
kidnaps,” BBC, accessed 19 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11845355.
“Massive security as Nigeria
votes,” BBC, accessed 5 September, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12128421.
“Nigeria timeline,” BBC,
accessed 19 September, 2011,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/1067695.stm.
“Volunteers kidnapped in
Nigeria,” BBC, accessed 25 August, 2011,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13713100.
“Decades to clean up Nigeria
oil,” BBC, accessed 25 August, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14398659.
“ Niger Delta Working Papers at
UC Berkeley,” UC Berkeley, accessed 3 August, 2011, http://www.adakaboro.org/reports.
“The Adaka Boro Centre - The
Twelve-Day Revolution,” Adaka Boro Centre, accessed 3 August, 2011, http://www.adakaboro.org/the12dayrev.
“Asari Dokubo: Me, Henry Okah
Jomo Gbomo, Judith Asuni and the Niger Delta Insurgency,” Sahara Reporters,
accessed 3 August, 2011, http://saharareporters.com/interview/asari-dokubo-me-henry-okahjomo-gbomo-judith-asuni-and-niger-delta-insurgency.
“MEND Destroys Three Pipelines in Niger Delta; Pledges to Cripple Crude
Exports,” IHS Global Insight: Country & Industry Forecasting, accessed
4 September, 2011, http://www.ihs.com/products/Global-Insight/industry-economic-report.aspx?ID=106598115.
.
“CFR’s Campbell: Niger Delta
Insurrection Threatens Nigeria’s Stability,” Council on Foreign Relations,
accessed 4 September, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/cfrs-campbell-niger-delta-insurrection-threatens-nigerias-stability/p24743.
“Oil Pollution in the Niger
Delta: Whose Fault?,” Council on Foreign Relations, accessed 4 September, 2011,
http://www.cfr.org/africa/oil-pollution-niger-delta-whose-fault/p22809.
“Understanding the Armed Groups
of the Niger Delta,” Council on Foreign Relations, accessed 5 September, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/understanding-armed-groups-niger-delta/p20146.
“MEND: The Niger Delta’s
Umbrella Militant Group,” Council on Foreign Relations, accessed 5 September,
2011, http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/mend-niger-deltas-umbrella-militant-group/p12920.
“The Niger Delta Blues,” Council
on Foreign Relations, accessed 5 September, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/niger-delta-blues/p11775.
“Nigeria’s Volatile Delta,”
Council on Foreign Relations, accessed 5 September, 2011, http://www.cfr.org/nigeria/nigerias-volatile-delta/p12896.
“50 years of independence - Ethnic
violence : Africa’s curse ? (Part 2)”, FRANCE 24, accessed 10 September, 2011, http://www.france24.com/en/20100421-france-24-debate-african-independence-ethnic-conflicts-part2.
“Nigeria: Seizing the Moment in
the Niger Delta,” International Crisis Group, accessed 10 September, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/B060-nigeria-seizing-the-moment-in-the-niger-delta.aspx.
“Nigeria: Ogoni Land after Shell,”
International Crisis Group, accessed 9 September, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/B054-nigeria-ogoni-land-after-shell.aspx.
“Nigeria: Ending Unrest in the
Niger Delta,” International Crisis Group, accessed 9 September, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/135-nigeria-ending-unrest-in-the-niger-delta.aspx.
“Nigeria’s Faltering Federal
Experiment,” International Crisis Group, accessed 9 September, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/119-nigerias-faltering-federal-experiment.aspx.
“Fuelling the Niger Delta Crisis,”
International Crisis Group, accessed 28 August, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/118-fuelling-the-niger-delta-crisis.aspx.
“The Swamps of Insurgency:
Nigeria’s Delta Unrest,” International Crisis Group, accessed 28 August, 2011, http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/west-africa/nigeria/115-the-swamps-of-insurgency-nigerias-delta-unrest.aspx.
“Niger Delta Development
Commission,” Niger Delta Development Commission, accessed 28 August, 2011, http://www.nddc.gov.ng/.
“George Soros,” accessed 28
August, 2011, http://georgesoros.com/.
“Bayelsa State Government,” Bayelsa
State: Official Government Website, accessed 10 August, 2011, http://www.bayelsa.gov.ng/about-us.html.
“CIA: The World Factbook,”
Central Intelligence Agency (US), accessed August 25, 2011, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2176rank.html?countryName=Nigeria&countryCode=ni®ionCode=afr&rank=6#ni.
“Rivers State: Official
Government Website,” accessed August 25, 2011, http://www.riversstate.gov.ng/
“Ogoni_Bill_of_Rights_1990.pdf ,”
The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People, accessed
August 25, 2011, http://www.mosop.org/Ogoni_Bill_of_Rights_1990.pdf.
Theses
Lionberger, Brian. 2007.
Emerging Requirements for U.S. Counterinsurgency: An Examination of the
Insurgency in the Niger River Delta Region. Pomona, California: California
State Polytechnic, June 15.
Novack, Edward. 2007. Criminals
and Insurgents: The role of ethnicity in state responses to internal resource
competitors. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School, June.
Nwajiaku, Kathryn. 2005. Oil
Politics and Identity Transformation in Nigeria: The Case of the Ijaw in the
Niger Delta. Oxford: University of Oxford.
Interviews
Akpovwa, Dan. (Editor of The Abuja Inquirer. Former Director,
Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC)). Telephone Interview, September 1,
2011.
Anyanya, Lancelot Major (Rtd.). (Board
of Directors, International Maritime School. Executive Secretary, Presidential
Implementation Committee on Maritime Safety and Security (PICOMSS)). Telephone
Interview, August 28, 2011.
Dappa, Joel. (Editor and
Publisher, Nigeria Today.) Telephone Interview, September 5, 2011.
Isumonah, Victor Dr. (Senior
Lecturer, Department of Political Science, University of Ibadan, Nigeria and
Research Fellow at the Centre for Advanced Social Science, Port Harcourt,
Nigeria.) Telephone Interview, August 28, 2011.
Film, Videos and Documentaries
Attwood, David. 2010. Blood
and Oil. Drama. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
Cioffi, Sandy. 2009. Sweet
Crude. Documentary. Virasana Productions.
Johansson, Lars. 2008. Poison
Fire. Documentary. Maweni Farm Media.
[1] These also
form the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC).
[2] Bayelsa
contributes over 30% of Nigeria’s oil production (Bayelsa State
Government)
[3] Rivers
is the heart of the industry, responsible for significant foreign exchange
earnings, accountable for over 48% of oil produced in the country and 100% of
liquefied natural gas. (Rivers State
Nigeria 2011)
[4] 2007
estimates - (CIA - The World
Factbook)
[5] (Colgan 2010, 663)
[6] ibid.
[7] (Osaghae et al.
2011)
[8] (Osaghae
1986 quoted in Ebeku 2006)
[9] (NDES 1997). A view also shared by Dr.
Victor Isumonah from comments expressed in a telephone interview on 28 August
2011.
[10] (Ebeku 2006)
[11] UN Doc. E/CN 4/358
[12] For a
detailed account see (Forsyth 2007)
[13] Ijaw,
Ogoni, Itsekiri and Urhobo
[14] See
Appendix 5 – Nigeria’s political and ND timeline
[15] See
Appendix 2 – MEND statements
[16] (Idemudia and Ite
2006)
[17] (Agbonifo 2009)
[18] (Watts 1999)
[19] (Colgan 2010;
Watts 2004; E. Osaghae 1995; Omeje 2005; E. E. Osaghae et al. 2011; Okonta
2008a; Okonta 2008b; Karl 1997; Obi 2004; M. Ross 2003)
[20] (Collier 2007)
[21] (Watts 1999)
[22] (Karl 1997; Watts
1999; Frynas 2000)
[23] (Omeje 2006)
[24] (Omeje 2004)
[25]
Excessive state response to Ijaw gangs where troops killed over 2000 civilians.
[26] Oil
conflicts between groups constructed as ethnic by the state
[27] E-mail
communication with the author.
[28] For
characteristics of a rentier state see (Beblawi and
Luciani 1987)
[29] (Omeje 2006)
[30] (Ross 2003)
[31] (Omeje 2006)
[32] (Colgan 2010)
[33] (Huntington 1996)
[34] (Colgan 2010)
[35] (Ake 2000)
[36] This
body of work is dubbed the ‘rebellion as organised crime’ theory of oil.
[37] (Collier 2007)
[38] (Asuni 2009)
[39] The
‘Ijaw youth factor’ and student activism has led to movements like Ijaw Youth
Council (IYC) and Egbesu Boys of Africa (EBA) amongst others.
[40] (Gurr 1994)
[41] See (Nnoli 1978; Ukiwo
2005a; Ukiwo 2005b; Suberu 2001; Osaghae 1996; Ejobowah 2000) regarding ethnic politics in
Nigeria.
[42] See (Clapham 1998) for an examination of the
relationship between African insurgencies and their societies that provides
context to the analysis of militancy in the ND.
[43] (CIA: The World
Factbook 2007)
[44] (Ebeku 2006;
Tamuno 1970)
[45] (Griffiths 1986)
[46] Nigeria and Cameroon had disputes
over the oil rich Bakassi peninsula.
[47] (Griffiths 1986)
[48] Nigeria’s first republic with Nnamdi
Azikwe, an Igbo as President and Tafewa Balewa, a Hausa as Prime Minister was
prematurely interrupted by a coup of mid level Army Officers. A counter coup
six months later toppled the Igbo leader General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi.
[49] The name comes from the Bight of
Biafra
[50] See (Waugh and Cronje
1969; Diamond 2007)
for Britain’s role in Biafra
[51] See (Cookman 2011) for a photographic account of
Biafra’s horrors
[52] Quoted
in (Campbell 2002)
[53] (Ako and Okonmah
2009)
[54] See (Peel 2009) for a comprehensive
journalist’s account
[55] Cocoa
farmers revolted against government increases in taxation.
[56] The Tiv
demonstrated against unfair ethnic distribution and political dominance by
majority groups.
[57] See (Tebekaemi 1982)
[58] (Reno 2000)
[59] (Ako and Okonmah
2009);
The other parallels are high demand and low supply of resources, the repressive
nature of the ruling elite and recognition with participation.
[60] (Ejobowah 2000; Omeje 2006; Omeje 2005;
Naanen 1995; Suberu 2001)
[61] (Robinson 1996 quoted in Obi 1999)
[62] Reduced
from fifty to three percent between 1960 and 1992
[63] (Obi 1999)
[64] (Robinson 1996 quoted in Obi 1999)
[65] (Huntington 1993)
[66] See
Figure 4 for a map illustrating this divide demonstrated by presidential
election results in 2011
[67] (Kaplan 1993)
[68] ibid
[69] Oil or
resource conflicts constructed as primordial conflict between ethnic groups.
[70] (Ukiwo 2005a)
[71] (Collier 2007)
[72] (Economist
Intelligence Unit 2009)
[73] (Obi 2001)
[74] ibid
[75]
Hausa-Fulani, Yoruba and Igbo
[76] (Pini 2005) examines the ‘cold war’
between southern Nigerian President and his northern deputy on the issue of
revenue allocation and resource control.
[77] (Obi 2010)
[78] ibid
[79] (Obi 2010, 484)
[80] (Obi 2010, 488)
[81] (Basedau and Lay
2009)
[82] (Ejobowah 2000)
[83] Chaired by the British commissioner Louis Chick recommended
how best revenue should be distributed considering the need to provide the
centre and regions, an adequate measure of fiscal autonomy and the importance
of applying the principle of derivation to a degree compatible with meeting all
needs.
[84] (Ejobowah 2000)
[85] (Ejobowah 2000,
32)
[86] The
prominent Hungarian-American financier
[87] (Dunning 2005; RodrÃguez and Sachs 1999;
Sachs and Warner 1995; Ding and Field 2005) An IMF study of Nigeria from
1970 to 2000, showed earnings of $350 billion. In the same period the income
per capita fell significantly and the percentage of poor rose from 36% to 70%.
[88] (Karl 1997)
[89] ibid.
[90] (Okonta and
Douglas 2003; Okonta 2008b; Shaxson 2007)
[91] (Okonta 2008b)
[92] View
shared by Joel Dappa (Editor of Nigeria
Today) in a telephone interview on 6 September, 2011.
[93] (Barrett 2008b)
[94] ibid.
[95] (Shaxson 2007)
[96] (Omeje 2006;
Okonta 2008b; Collier and Hoeffler 2004; Bodea and Elbadawi 2007; Ballentine
2003)
[97] (Ikelegbe 2005;
Collier 2007)
[98] See (H. I. Grossman
1991; H. Grossman 1999):
The criminalization of militancy and
widespread illegal oil bunkering in the ND seem to substantiate this economic
model of insurrections and Kleptocracy’s role in revolutions.
[99] (Collier and
Hoeffler 2004; Bodea and Elbadawi 2007)
[100] (Collier and
Hoeffler 2004, 571)
[101] (Bodea and
Elbadawi 2007)
[102] (Monroe, Hankin,
and Vechten 2000)
[103] (M. H. Ross 2007)
[104] (Collier and
Hoeffler 2004)
[105]
ibid.
[106] (Elbadawi E. and
Sambanis N. 2000)
[107] (Bodea and
Elbadawi 2007)
[108] (Volkan 2001)
[109] (Fearon and Laitin
2003; Collier and Hoeffler 2004)
[110] (Obi 2010)
[111] (Collier and
Hoeffler 2004, 563)
[112] (Carment, James,
and Taydas 2009)
[113]
With over 10 million people, the Ijaw are the most populous and distributed
minority group in the ND. See Figure 1.
[114] (Okonta 2006); In 2007, Dokubo-Asari, in an
interview with Sahara Reporters said MEND was created not as an organisation
but as a name for the purpose of issuing unified statements.
[115]
See Appendix 1 for a list
[116] The News, Vol. 25, No.3 25 July 2005
[117]
According to research by Academic Associates Research Works in 2007, in Delta
State there were 48 recognizable groups with 25,000 members and more than
60,000 in the region.
[118] (Asuni 2009)
[119]
See (Peel 2009) for an account of his visit to the US Warship
Dallas, patrolling West Africa’s Gulf of Guinea. He refers to Nigeria as the
‘fulcrum of a great game’ between the USA and emerging economic powers, the
result of which will define the future of big oil and the world.
[120]
See Appendix 2 for MEND statements
[121] (Ukiwo 2007)
[122]
Ibid.
[123]
See Appendix 4
[124] (Barrett 2008a,
18)
[125] (Barrett 2008a)
[126]
See Figure 2 for map showing the states in the ND.
[127] (Omeje 2004)
[128]
See Appendix 3 for MEND statements that demonstrate aims and objectives
[129]
See Appendix 1
[130]
See Figure 1
[131]
See (Human Rights Watch
2003)
for a study on the Warri region detailing the lack of governance, corruption
and organized crime stemming from oil’s curse.
[132]
Warri is the ‘economic capital’ of the oil rich Delta State of Nigeria with
significant commercial value to the region.
[133]
Ijaws, Itsekiris and Urhobos
[134] (Ukiwo 2007)
[135] (Ejobowah 2000)
[136]
Ibid.
[137] (Tebekaemi 1982); See (Nwajiaku
2005) for the political context of Isaac Boro’s revolt in 1966
[138]
The last time was during Willinks hearing 1958
[139] (Ukiwo 2005b)
[140]
See (Ebeku 2006) for a historical account of ethnicity
and its composition in the ND
[141]
See Appendix 2: Ogoni Bill of Rights
[142] First
MOSOP President
[143] (Okonta 2008a)
[144]
The Andoni for example.
[145] (Okonta 2008a)
[146]
This view was also substantiated in an interview given by Ben Naanen, then the General
Secretary of MOSOP as quoted in (Okonta 2008a)
[147] (Agbonifo 2009)
[148] (Osaghae 1995)
[149] (Ikelegbe 2005)
[150] (Ibeanu 1997)
[151] (Campbell 2002)
[152] (Campbell 2002)
[153] (Saidemen 1998)
[154] (Ojo 2002)
[155] (Mustapha 2008,
371)
[156] (Ako and Okonmah
2009; Okonta 2008b)
[157] (Elazar 1996, 419)
[158] (Elazar 1996)
[159]
ibid.
[160]
ibid.
[161] (Mustapha 2008,
370)
[162]
See Figure 4
[163] (Okonta 2008b)
[164] (Carment, James,
and Taydas 2009)