|
|
| |
| Ethno-Religious Conflict and Security Implication in Nigeria: The Myths and Realities |
Dr Eugene Anowai, & Joy Okebuinor
|
Abstract:
Nigeria is made up of over 250 ethnic groups of which three are majority groups (Ibo, Hausa, and Yoruba), These groups because of their privilege position have consistently dominated the political and economic scene before and after independence in 1960. This is a clear case of marginalization of minorities by the majority ethnic groups and this serves as fertile grounds for conflicts involving individual or groups to achieve their goals. The political class in collaboration with their religious counterparts has explored and exploit religion as a mobilizing instrument for sharing national resources. Most conflicts in Nigeria had assumed ethnic and religious character and this has caused destruction of citizen lives and property worth millions of naira. All these ethno religious conflicts appear to have serious implications to national security in Nigeria. Almost all the ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria witness since independence owe their origin to the expression of socio-economic and political deprivation of the affected ethnic and religious groups. This undermined peaceful co-existence among Nigerians, thus scuttling the integration efforts of the country. In view of this, the paper examines the causes of ethno-religious conflicts and implications to national security in Nigeria. It is both interrogative and analytical; it is interrogative because the incessant pace of ethno religious conflicts has done more harm than good in Nigeria, and it is analytical because it explains the frog’s eye the variables responsible for these conflicts. The failure of political elites to establish good governance, forge national unity and promote socio-economic development engineered ethno-religious conflicts. Nigeria will continue to suffer disintegration if this trend persist especially the recent insurgency and perennial settler-indigene conflicts in all sections of the country. The only option is to face this challenge collectively with sense of patriotism. It recommends commonalities amidst our differences and recognizes the truth in our diversity in unity, while exhorting unity in diversity
|
|
|
| | |