Article

Morality and realism in Nigerian foreign policy

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

Inquires into the components of morality and realism in contemporary international relations theory, examining a major dilemma of the foreign policy process: policymakers and executors must cope with the complexities of competing values. Investigating this problem has implications not only for the comprehension of Nigerian foreign affairs and, perhaps, those of other African and Third World states, but also for contemporary international relations. -after Author

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... 217 under Balewa was " perhaps, more realistic in fashioning its relations with other states than is imagined " (Okolo, 1975:535), for which political realism was suggested as " the proper theory on which to base the explanation of Nigeria " s foreign policy orientation " (Okolo and Langley, 1973:309), he was to completely contradict with the argument that " moral considerations " underpinned Nigeria " s relations with extra-African states, and with Britain in particular (Okolo, 1988:73). ...
... That Balewa was not moralistic or idealistic but realistic appeared to be a challenge to the emerging tradition of analysis, a significant element of which has been a condemnatory stance toward Balewa and the administration. But when he had the opportunity to demonstrate his thesis in a paper devoted to the study of morality and realism in Nigeria " s foreign policy, Okolo (1988:73-74 ...
... Under such a circumstance, Nigeria " s non-alignment " showed obvious Western leaning " . In the end, not only was " Nigeria pro-West foreign policy … justified on moral grounds " , but " the cold attitude towards the Soviet Union was also justified on moral grounds " (Okolo, 1988:74). Balewa was therefore a thoroughgoing moralist and not a realist at all! ...
Article
Full-text available
There is hardly any study of Nigeria's attitude towards the Cold War between 1960 and 1965 that does not arrive at the conclusion that Nigeria was 'aligned'. In fact, this verdict has been elevated to the status of an axiom with the declaration that it is the consensus among Nigerian scholars. If not completely ending debate, this posture forecloses the possibility of any contrary verdict, and predetermines the outcome of future investigations since even before the commencement of research, the outcome is already known or presumed. To investigate the problem is to repeat the verdict. It is not just to dogmatism that this leads, but also discursive closure. What is the source of this postwar tradition of analysis, and how valid are its epistemological pretensions? Deploying historical revisionism as a tool for the examination of the fit between judgments and their premises, the paper argues that the tradition is built on the conceptual, methodological, and evidential components of the contemporary political criticisms of the Balewa administration, and therefore rests on very shaky epistemic foundation. By origin, it is an ideological response to the perceived failure of the Balewa administration to fulfil the expectations of Nigerians consequent upon independence. Living in the truth, man attaches to the standards he derives from what is present, and thus he does not discover any more but merely arranges. In the truth the mystery remains concealed. Man closes himself in the truth. He does not question the truth. Living in truth, man uncovers because he does not attach to 'standards' derived from what is presenting for him. What is present he takes as an artifact, and questions it in regard to its opening (Korab-Karpowicz, 1991:155-156).
... Idang's Nigeria: Internal Politics and Foreign Policy, the earliest of these works, argues that while "the term non-alignment was often used" by the Balewa administration to describe "its approach to extra-African relations, few of its actions were consonant with and predicated upon this official policy", 3 non-alignment being merely "a smokescreen for adherence to pro-Western positions". 4 Even though Nigeria officially adopted nonalignment in 1960, for Ajibola, "in practice, the Nigerian policy of non-alignment was decidedly pro-West", 5 or "in reality pro-West", 6 then for Okolo, "subsequent actions of the Nigerian government under Sir Abubakar showed obvious western learning", 7 and then for Aluko, "Nigeria's policy of non-alignment exhibited a great deal of partiality in favour of the United States (and the rest of the Western powers) but against the USSR". 8 But the verdict that Nigeria was 'aligned' did not have to be explicitly announced to make the point. ...
Article
Full-text available
Two traditions of analysis exist with regard to the nature and expression of non-alignment in Nigeria’s foreign policy between 1960 and 1965. The tradition that dates from the early 1960s concludes that Nigeria’s foreign policy towards the Cold War was independent and non-aligned, and the post-war tradition is that Nigeria was ‘aligned’. Both traditions adduce as evidence for their opposing verdicts Nigeria’s voting pattern in the United Nations General Assembly between 1960 and 1965. Yet no thoroughgoing quantitative analysis of Nigeria’s pattern of voting in the General Assembly,both in individual and relative terms, has been undertaken. But can the same piece of evidence at the same time support such opposing conclusions? This paper responds to this problematic by first reviewing Nigeria’s policy toward the United Nations, and analysing the pattern of Nigeria’s voting on Cold War issues in the General Assembly. It employed the Lijphart method of computing Indices of Agreement of roll-call votes, taking account of abstentions, and arranged these indices in matrices anchored on groups of possibly caucusing states. The result is that the coincidence of Nigeria’s pattern of voting was minimal with those of the superpowers, but highly related to the voting patterns of the ‘radical’ African states and putative non-aligned states. This strengthens the conclusion that Nigeria acted as the administration said it would: independent and not routinely identifying with either of the superpowers.
Article
Full-text available
There is no doubt that Nigeria’s foreign policy is indeed outdated. This is evidenced in the fact that we now live in different times. Though Nigeria’s role in Africa still remains significant, however, the time “Africa” was made the centre piece of Nigeria’s foreign policy, was a time when many countries in the continent were struggling to throw off the yolk of colonialism. And the adoption of such a policy was to stand in solidarity with those nations that were struggling to achieve or gain independence. And today, no single country in the continent is under foreign rule or direct control, and the times now call for a review of Nigeria’s foreign policy to reflect the nations current circumstances and realities among the committee of states across the globe. And there is no time than under the present administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. The Buhari administration must look critically and make an assessment of how and which way to direct Nigeria’s foreign policy. The responsibility appears to be binding on President Buhari’s administration having been neglected or not given the required attention by many previous regimes and administrations. The confidence of Nigerians in President Buhari’s vision, promises and commitment to change and general progress/ greatness of Nigeria seems to justify such expectations in the area of foreign relations and policy. There is need for Nigeria to be more involved in world affairs and to seek observer status in certain supranational institutions including the E.U, NATO and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) in this era of globalisation, and the accompanying system of interdependence. This paper tries to provide a guide with regards to the review of the foreign policy of Nigeria by President Buhari to reflect the realities and challenges of the times in which we are living. The paper argues that Nigeria must be a global player despite being a regional power in consideration of its pottentials and position in the scheme of things, drawing lessons based on Realist theories in international affairs and conduct as well as the experiences of certain states like Japan as models for foreign policy development.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.