AN INSIGHT INTO THE MILITARY INTERVENTION IN NIGERIA DEMOCRACY
Abdussalam Umar Abedo Ph.D
Department of History and International Studies
Nigeria Police Academy, Wudil, Kano
Abstract
The incursion of the military into Nigeria political democracy altered the military status of solely defending the country from external aggression to that of military rule. Hence, from the first military coup led by Ibo extracts and the subsequent Nigeria civil war, the Nigeria state has witnessed military intervention of one form or the other. Their peculiar slogans were to accuse the politician of corruption, nepotism, and favoritism. They invented obnoxious decree to rule the country in an autocratic manner without adherence to Nigeria constitution. Unfortunately, military administration failed to deliver their promises to make life better for average citizens. The very reasons for overthrowing corrupt politicians were also glaring during the military administration. Nigeria state has witness series of military incursion to undue the corrupt element of the political players but failed woefully due to internal contradiction within the military personnel eager to overthrow democratic set up. The foreign interest to control the economy of African state, the ambition of the political elites and the desire of the young military officers trained in the developed countries to initiate radical revolutionary changes in their home countries contributed immensely to the persistent military incursion in the affairs of the democratic process.
Keywords: Democracy, Military Coup, Constitution, Authoritarian, Civil War
Introduction
This is a bird eyes view explanation of the general causes of military intervention in Nigeria politics. It is plausible to look at the rationale of military intervention in African and third world countries. Some writers had generalized and concluded that, the military intervene so as to promote equity in resources distribution and to act as agent of modernization. That is military intervene only because of flaws in the political and institutional structures of the society (H.B. Okibe, 2000:143-147).But Major General David M. Jemibewon, asserted that “it is difficult to resort to generalizations in political matters of this nature,… as human affairs do not lend themselves to the precision of mathematical calculations, and that circumstances differ from country to country” (H.B. Okibe, 2000: 143-147).There are certain combinations of circumstances which prepare a favorable climate for the intervention of the military in politics.
The inability of most of the African governments to govern effectively has been one of the main sources of military intervention in Africa. If the civilian government fails to maintain law and order, and is incapable of coping with social and economic problems of the society, then the military will find it easy to step in to remove the government and tackle the urgent problems facing the society. This was the case of many African countries, including Nigeria during the January 1955 (G. Arnold, 1977: xiii). Furthermore, absence of any peaceful means of changing governments in many African countries invites the military into politics. In Africa, many civilian regimes were turning their countries into authoritarian one party state, and many ruling elites were becoming a corrupt clique determined to cling to power at all cost. This is a situation which if could not be changed by peaceful and constitutional means, invites the use of force and violence means. This was exactly what led to the overthrow of the government of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana in 1966, and the subsequent situation in Nigeria in 1960s (E.E. Osagie, 2002:4).Another cause of military intervention in African politics is the tendency among some African army officers to emulate others who staged coups elsewhere, especially those who seemed to be former course mates or contemporaries in military training institutions. This is the view of Jemibewon that term them as ‘imitative coups’ (S. Huntington, 1980: 7).
Another reason is the personal and political ambition of some army officers. This undoubtedly led to many coups in Africa. For example, the series of coups in Dahomey, Congo Brazzaville and in the abortive coup spearheaded by Lt. Col. Dimka in February 1976 and Major Gideon Orkar in April 1990 in Nigeria (D.M Jemibewon, 1978: 3-4).There is the tendency that the military assumed the self-appointed custodian role. That the politicians could only rule if the military judge them to be doing well (Z.M. Umar, 2000: 94).It has been suggested for example, that the young army officers who spearheaded the January 1966 coup was motivated by tribal sentiments, where the intention was to enthrone Igbo domination over the country.It is also suggested that, they had been instigated by a number of political leaders to destroy the existing regime (D.M Jemibewon, 1978: 5). Still, there may be some truth in these suggestions if one look at the outcome of the coup. Obviously, the outcome was that, northern and southern leaders were assassinated and it was the Igbo who formed the new ruling class (S.L. Joseph, 60).In addition, some selfish politicians use the military officers unwittingly to disrupt and gain their desire needs.It appeared more superficial when posited that the young military officers were motivated by the principles of patriotism, fired by the love of their country. This can be seen from a speech of Major Nzeogwu when he was informing the nation the aim of the coup, which was to establish a strong united and prosperous nation free from corruption and internal strife (D.M Jemibewon, 1978:9).
Another thing that seemed to invite the Military in Nigerian politics is the politicization of the military institution. There were two major sources of this politicization. First was concerned with the representativeness of the institution, which was becoming a tribal warrior. For example, by 1966, 60 percent of the soldiers were from the Middle-Belt minorities of the North and 40 percent from the rest of the country.There was no civil leader or military officer from the East that was killed. This lend credence to the suspicious that the coup was caused by tribal consideration (K.C. Osudibia, 2001: 8-9).
To this end, there was the introduction of a quota system in the recruitment and promotion of army officers. The effect of which was the military involvement in the acute political conflicts.Another source of the politicization of the institution was the political use of the military in times of peace. This gave the military a measure of political effectiveness and over and above, suggested an important political role for the military (D.M Jemibewon, 1978:9). If not the July coup which clearly portray tribal bearings in it outlook, the subsequent coups that happened in Nigeria had to do with failure of the various regimes to put things in good order as would be discussed.
Military Regimes in Nigeria: Aguiyi Ironsi Regime: January – July 15, 1966
Major General J.T.U AguiyiIronsi assumed power as a result of the coup (struck) planned and executed by five majors on 15th January, 1966. The five majors were Majors Kaduna Nzeogwu, E. Ifeajuna, D. Okafor, C.I Anufiro and A. Ademoyega (A.M. Mainasara, 1977:14).Ironsi became the leader of the federal military government after persuading what was left of the then federal cabinet to hand over the reins of power to him. This transfer was regarded by the army as voluntary transfer of power, including Ironsi in his inaugural speech on 16thJanuary, 1966 (A. Adekanye, 1989:189).The new regime emphasized on the political disturbances and crisis as what necessitated the takeover and therefore, it committed itself to a corrective agenda. The corrective agenda included preservation of the unity of the country, eradication of corruption, tribalism, regionalism and dishonesty in public life and accelerating economic development (A. Adekanye, 1989:189).
Initially the military takeover was welcomed, but the enthusiasm that most Nigerians had of the new regime very soon began to dwindle. As the foundation upon which the coup rested was badly structured and any superstructure placed on it was bound to collapse. First the coup swept the lives of most if not only northerners and westerners. There was no serious casualty from the side of the Igbo. Secondly, the government was typically a government dominated by Igbo. Thirdly, the reforms embarked by the regime appeared to be more of muddle and blunders. These issues accounted for the collapse of the regime. The problems started when Ironsi announced to the nation that the coup plotters who attempted to seize power were rebels and mutineers but were not put on trial as demanded by the section of the military (E.E. Osagie, 2002:55).
There were rumors that these military officers had continued to enjoy their salaries and other military allowances still from prison (E.E. Osagie, 2002:56).At the same time, Ironsi was promoting the military officers of Igbo origin in ranks and placing them in charge of strategic command positions.These factors branded him naïve and inexperienced in administration. The last factor to have portrayed him very blunderer and inexperienced was the passage of the Decree No.34, which abrogated the Federal system. A unitary system was introduced and the country was divided into groups of provinces to that effect (E.E. Osagie,2002 :57). It was not deliberate attempt to destabilize the country but he was suffering from poverty of thought. These had caused many people to become disillusioned with Ironsi’s performance, with the heightening of tension in the country, finally the regime collapsed in July 1966. During Ironsi visit at Ibadan to open a conference of traditional rulers, some groups of soldiers from north abducted him and his host and were killed. This marked the second coup in Nigeria history.The major outcome of Ironsi regime was the ethnic disturbances in the north against the Igbo in the north and against the Igbo hegemony in the country. There was also mutiny in the units of the army, which resulted in the mass killings of officers of Igbo origin in the army. These affairs had further caused suspicion and division in the country, which apparently became part of the remote causes of the Nigerian Civil War (E.E. Osagie, 2002:57).
The Regime of Yakubu Gowon, 1966-1975
General Yakubu Gowon assumed office as a result of the coup that swept Ironsi and his regime. The coup is believed to have been in the offing since the January coup and was planned and executed by the northern army officers in revenge to the death of northern politicians and army officers in that January coup (A.M. Mainasara,1982: 34).In addition, the coup was not aimed at clinging to power, but the revenge killings and the secession of the Northern Region from the Federation. Yakubu Gowon came to power when the terrain was very unfavorable; there was mass killing of the Igbo in the north and there was no discipline among the army itself. The first action taken by Gowon was to unite the country based on an acceptable political arrangement. His major progress was turning the country into one political entity with a federal system as unanimously agreed by all regional delegates excluding the eastern delegates. With this, he divided the country into twelve states and released all political detained from prison, who were arrested during the reign of First Republic. However, the genocide of the Igbo people in the north and the conflict between Federal Government/Gowon and Ojukwuhad further deteriorated. Consequently, the easterners under Ojukwu declared the Republic of Biafra.The drift continued to a stage of war. This resulted to Nigerian Civil War (D.M, Jemibewon,1978:30).
The civil war was to the Federal Government, an attempt to maintain the unity of the country, while on the Biafran side, was at procurement of a republic for the Igbo free from the influence of the Muslim North and the Federal Government dominated by the Northern(A.M. Mainasara,1982: 34).The war was thought to be a short-lived struggle; however, it turned out to be a protracted war and lasted for thirty months due to the foreign involvement and support for the Biafrans. The civil war had important implications and consequences upon Nigerian politics and her foreign policy. It led to improved relations with foreign countries for example, Soviet Union and review of relations with Britain, USA, France and many African countries (Osudibia, 2004:40). The war had affected the inter-group relations in the country. The war had also affected the economy of the county in terms of spending during the war, oil revenue and many infrastructures were destroyed (Osudibia, 2004:40-41).
In writing about Gowon regime, it is good to separate its history into two parts. The time of assumption to power to the end of the civil war portrayed the story of glorious and successful leader who won the popularity of the people. From the time of the end and the civil war to the collapse of the regime portrayed his weaknesses and failure, whose failures earned him abuses and curses(D.M.Jemibewon,1978:43).The glorious days of Gowon started with his creation of states to correct the political imbalances which for long threatened the solidarity of the country. He reunited the country from the secession in the east. He decisively embarked on gigantic projects of rehabilitation, reconstruction and reconciliation, to correct the damages and devastation brought about by the civil war (E.E. Osagie, 2002:44).
The promulgation of the national development plan is another achievement of the regime, though not all successful. Gowon had tried in restructuring the national revenue allocation formula, which had far-reaching implications. It strengthened the role of the Federal Government as the sole allocate and distributive authority and gave it a domineering fiscal position. The regime introduced the indigenization policy of foreign business to enable the citizens partake in the economic production in their country (E.E. Osagie, 2002:45). He introduced some national policies to enhance cohesion among Nigerian ethnic groups. Under this, Federal Government College and Unity Schools were established with students from all states. National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) was introduced in 1973 to further national integration. National Sport Festival was also introduced in the year(E.E. Osagie, 2002:45-46).
The regime as a result of the oil boom, reviewed the salaries and welfare of the civil servants particularly the teachers (The Udoji Awards). In addition, various infrastructural facilities were established throughout the country. Universities, Colleges of Education, Polytechnics, roads, hospitals and other medical care facilities were provided (E.E. Osagie, 2002:79).Another achievement of Gowon administration was in foreign policies. It was during his time that Nigeria took the lead in African approach to negotiations in the issues of African independence and the establishment of ECOWAS in 1975 (G. Arnold, 1977:24).
However, the factors that led to the collapsed of the regime, which formed the second part can be summarized upon a massive accusation of corruption and especially among top officials and failure to manage the enormous wealth accrued from the oil boom. There were also decline in the economic sectors other than the oil, congestion in the port, indiscipline in public life and indecision in the administration. Furthermore, there were poor distribution of petroleum in the country and the repudiation of the plan to make handover to the civilians during the promised time (S.L. Joseph, 1995:80).
The Regime of Murtala Muhammed, 1975-1976
On 29 July, 1976, while in Kampala attending O.A.U summit, a group of Colonels and Lieutenants Colonels planned and executed a palace but bloodless coup against him, and new government came in under Brigadier Murtala Muhammed and Olusegun Obasanjo. The government was entirely aggrieved by maladministration and lack of direction by Gowon’s regime. Therefore, became very committed to fulfilling what seemed to be the failure of Gowon. Every decision and policy taken was always ordered to be implemented with immediate effect (S.L. Joseph, 1995:81). The new regimes started by removing the remains of the former regime and appointed new ones. Then the regime embarked on tremendous reforms, which remain a watershed in the country’s history.He created new states. He implements indigenization and privatization policies (K.C. Osudibia, 2004:13). He planned the transfer of the federal capital to Abuja. The regime cancelled the controversial population census of 1973. The regime did a lot to redistribute responsibilities between the Federal Government and state governments. For example, the federal government took control of the universities and primary education. (E.E Osagie, 2002: 18).
The new military Junta attempted to uncover the ill-gotten wealth stolen during the regime of Gowon. The regime took the great steps to return the country to civilian rule. This greatly influenced the popularity of the regime. A timetable was drawn where by 1979, the leadership will be given to a civilian government and the timetable was strictly adhered to (E.E Osagie, 2002:83-84). In foreign affairs, the regime has a profound impact on her foreign relation. It aided in the decolonization of Angola and the nationalization of foreign firms. For example, the British Petroleum Firm was declared African Petroleum. Nigeria was made a center peace of African foreign policy (E.E Osagie, 2002:89).The regime had proved very popular, dynamic and purposeful, but very short-lived. On 13 February 1976, General Murtala was killed in an unsuccessful coup led by a group of officers call ‘the Young Revolutionaries’ (Osudibia, 2004:14).
The Obasanjo Regime 1976-1979
With the killing of Murtala Muhammed, Obasanjo took over the administration of the country and began to compliment the plans designed by his predecessor. The incidence that swept the life of Murtala is thought to have been caused by a number of reasons. First, it was thought to have resulted from intra-military institutional problems and grudges of certain officers in the Army over promotion. Second, it was thought to be a conspiracy of the officers from Middle Belt to restore Gowon. Last, it was thought to have resulted from Western conspiracy to deal with Murtala who was becoming a radical or communist by inclination (E.E Osagie, 2002:88-89).But in all, the regime of Murtala was hailed as the best in the history of Nigeria. The coup was led by Lt. Colonel, B.S. Dimka and some junior officers. When Obasanjo took power, he successfully drafted a new Constitution (the 1979 constitution), set up political parties and established the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) (E.E Osagie, 2002:88-89).
His administration reformed the Local Government System in the country and successfully implemented it with the conduct of elections throughout the country. He also introduced an agricultural program designed to provide adequate food and strengthen the basis of national economy. He also introduced an educational scheme ‘the Universal Primary Education’ (UPE) designed to free the nation from illiteracy and ignorance (E.E Osagie, 2002:44). After conducting elections, Obasanjo handed over the leadership to the newly elected civilian government. Hence, a compliment of the promise did by General Murtala (Z.M. Umar, 2000:102).
The Second Republic and the Buhari Regime 1979-1985
It is called ‘the Second Republic’ because it was the second civilian regime in the country; the military had successfully transferred power on October 1979 to Alhaji Shehu Shagari who led the second republic. It was thought by then, the military had said goodbye to politics. And the military had made adequate provisions for the civilians to continue handling the Nigeria politics, yet the new regime proved very incapable, as the problems that led to the collapsed of the First Republic manifested during the second republic and finally led to its collapse on 31 December, 1983 (Habibu, 2000). Let us look at the factors that led to the collapse of the republic and see if the military intervention was the solution. It was claimed that there was massive corruption, economic mismanagement, political instability, injustice, economic recession in the country and authoritarian tendencies. There were also indiscipline in all public life, election rigging and violence and public discontent with regime (K.C. Osudibia, 16-17).On 31 December, 1983, the second republic was led to unnatural and woeful end and the military regime took control. It happened as a result of a bloodless coup but which claimed the life of only Brigadier Ibrahim Bako (S.L. Joseph, 1995:88).
Generals Muhammad Buhari and Tunde Idiagbon led the regime. The regime was short-lived but very action packed regime (K.C. Osudibia, 2004:18).Like the previous military regimes, the Buhari regime came with programmes aimed at improving the state of the economy, which was in deep recession, and to purge indiscipline and corruption. The first attempt by the regime was to arrest all those who partook in money laundering during the second republic so as to recover the stolen public fund. Several decrees were passed.The regime believed in addition, that the problems with Nigeria had to do with lack of indiscipline in the Nigerian society. From then, the government became very preoccupied with task of instilling sense of discipline, not only among the public officials but into the general population. The programme War against Indiscipline was launched in different phases. The first phase of WAI was launched by Tunde Idiagbon on 20 March 1984 and was tagged ‘queue culture’ The second phase was launched by Solomon Omojokun and was tagged ‘work ethics’ on 1 May 1984. The last phase was tagged ‘nationalism and patriotism’ and was launched on 22nd August, 1984 (M Omolewa, 1986,:212).This step was quit great and was welcomed nationwide. There was a deep sense of sanity in the country. Through the passage of decrees, smuggling, drug and money trafficking, tempering with oil pipeline and bunkering were declared unlawful and great economic sabotage (K.C Osudibia,2004: 25).
The Shagari regime was very notable for electoral malpractices and democratic instability, but the restoration of democracy was not the preoccupation of Buhari regime. This was the reason why there were no clear signs of any transition programme to return the country to the civilians. The regime was more obsessed with economic recovery and discipline (E.E Osagie, 2002:169). The bulk of the populace became burden with poverty and hunger, prompting another military coup led by General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida.
The Ibrahim Babangida Regime, 1985-1993
On 27thAugust 1985, the Buhari regime ended as a result of a bloodless palace coup led by Brigadier Dogonyaro. It brought General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida to power. The end of Buhari regime did not surprise many people, for it failed in many respect. First, it failed to win the confidence of many Nigerians as a result of harsh laws, absence of fundamental human rights and liberties, severe punishments and detention of people without trial. These made the regime very unpopular to the citizens (M.Omolewa, 212-214). The regime failed to overcome the economic crisis it inherited, nor manage it adequately. This was largely due to inefficient administrative measures to tackle the economic crisis (E.E Osagie,2002:185). Another reason why the regime was toppled had to do with the fact that, there was preponderance of Northerners among the top officials of the government(E.E Osagie,2002:186).Moreover, the repressive and authoritarian nature of the regime and its inability to initiate any positive change in the economy and a plan transition to civil rule led to her collapse.
Severe discontentment from within the country and outside contributed in the failure of the regime. The regime in addition, in its attempt to recover the stolen public fund changed the Naira notes. This did not only anger the citizens but hampered the economy.The new regime under Babangida very soon embarked on great policies and programs to alleviate the country’s social, economic and political problems. The first step it took was the release of many political detainees and announcement of respect for human rights and liberties. Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) was launched aimed at reviving and transforming the economy. It introduced privatization policies to open the economy to private investors. Transition program was proclaimed to be fulfilled by 1993 (S.L. Joseph,1995:92-93).These dreams seemed to appear unrealizable and the situation was further one of more drifts.
The regime had recorded some successes like creation of more states and local governments. It managed to conduct census in 1991. It gave autonomy to local governments. The regime had established Federal Road Safety Commission and various agencies to address unemployment, rural neglect and infrastructural development (E.E Osagie,2002 :188).The regime had failed in many respects. The popular SAP failed, not only to give new life to the economy but made things more badly, as the general living standards failed considerably. Political assassinations and human right abuses were the means through which the government checks any opposition. Misappropriation of funds was more rampant. Corruption had assumed a new dimension that resulted in the emergence and growth of coin money laundering tag as 419 in the country. The economy was also hanged on foreign debts.The regime failed in its long-term transition program, which consumed enormous wealth. It was the period when Nigeria witnessed massive strikes, riots and demonstrations by workers and unions. This led to collapse in many areas of public life. The period was the most turbulent era in Nigeria’s post-colonial history. In short, the regime was more authoritarian than its predecessor. (E.E Osagie, 2002:241-248).
There were in addition, inter-ethnic and religious conflicts in the country during the period. The country was put in a stand-still situation. The transition was aborted by the annulment of June 12 presidential elections. Consequently, the Military Junta was under pressures from within the country and outside to hand-over to civilians. The pressures even came from the military itself, Gen. Babangida has to step aside and formed an interim National Government headed by Earnest Shonekon (Z.M Umar, 2000:118).
The Interim National Government (ING), 27th August – 17th November 1993
On 27thAugust 1993, after years in power Babangida handed over the leadership to the ING led by Earnest Shonekan. The aim was to make the situation more conducive and conduct election and make hand-over. But the ING faced many problems and opposition because of its legitimacy. Orders from the ING were not respected and carried out. In this wake, General Sani Abacha took control and formed another military regime (Z.M Umar, 2000: 119).
The Sani Abacha Regime, 1993-1998
With his ascension to power in November 1993, General Sani Abacha dissolved all political parties and continued to bulldoze any democratic principles in the country. The regime was the most harassed in Nigerian history. This had to do with the intense hostilities and opposition towards the regime at its very beginning. This gave the regime no room for any serious reflection on the complex problems facing the country (E.E. Osagie,2002 :273). The regime’s response to these oppositions and hostilities made it more authoritarian, repressive and more murderous. There were massive trials and convictions of not only civilians but also even the army officials. The regime killed many politicians notably the Ogoni leader Chief Saro Wiwa. The regime had shown to be more nationalistic and the economic crisis of the country was given a nationalistic approach. The regime soon abrogated the liberalization policies and turned from relations with the western countries towards the Asian countries and China (E.E. Osagie, 2002:273).
General Sani Abacha created more new states and local government councils in the country. This made the numbers of the states to 36 and Local governments to 724. The regime also embarked on a corrective and anti-corruption crusade. It was aimed at cleansing the society of indiscipline and brings probity, accountability and effective management (E.E. Osagie, 2002:278). There were absolute rigidity in administrative policy under Abacha regime, so much that, economic decline, accentuation of political crisis, unemployment, inflation, retrenchment, insecurity and eventual failed coup d’état of lieutenant General Oladipo Diya that makes Nigeria lost its image among the international community. The international community had put the country in terrible isolation.
General Abdussalam Abubakar Regime, 1998-1999
General Abdussalam Abubakar came to power as the result of the death of Gen.,Sani Abacha on 8th June 1998. With his ascension to power, he promised to answer the major cries of the citizens, that is, to hand over power to the civilians. Very soon, he designed a transition program, which will end after ten months. And this was exactly what happened after ten months. He started by releasing the political detainees who were detained by General Abacha and appealed to Nigerians abroad to come back home and build the country(Z.M Umar, 2000:126).The transition project of Abdussalam Abubakar was the shortest in the history of the country, but one that consumed the two-over-three of the country’s foreign reserves.
Nature of The Military Regimes in Nigeria
Generally, the military regimes in Nigeria occupy the political and administrative structures of government at both federal and state levels. They ruled with many civilian factors as well. In reality, the regimes were not solely military regimes, as it was not only the men in kaki that ruled (S.L. Joseph, 1995:98).The politicians influenced the military in the administration and even invited them to make intervention.For example, during Gowon’s regime, out of twelve members of his executive council, eleven were civilians including Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Mal. Aminu Kano, Chief Anthony Enahoro, and Joseph S. Tarka, etc.(S. L. Joseph 1994:77). During Murtala’s regime, the civilian that formed his executive council far exceeded that of Gowon. They included B.O.W Mafeni (Minister for Agriculture), Dr. R.A Adeleye (Housing, Urban Development and Environment), Umar Mutallab (Economic Development), Umaru Shinkafi (Internal Affairs), etc. (S. L. Joseph 1994:84). This was how it happened throughout the military carriers as Nigerian administrators.There was always the existence of the Supreme Military Council at the federal level, comprising mostly members of the Armed Forces and representatives of other Para-military agencies. This body was a decision-making body and maintenance of law and Order, among other things, and the head of states or the president was the chairman (H.B. Okibe, 2000:162).The power of the Federal Military Government to make laws was exercised by means of decree. There were also cabinet ministers and advisors, which comprised both the military and the civilians.According to global view, Nigerian military interventions were motivated by modernization reasons. It is also obvious that, some regimes can be accepted as being successful while some can be condemned as disappointing and a colossal failure (D.M. Jemibewon, 1978:53).
In addition, the military had objectives, which they set to achieve. The objectives were restoration of law and order, destroying the decadent practices like corruption and indiscipline and maintaining the country a strong and united country (D.M. Jemibewon, 1978:54 -55).
However, there some factors that contributed in the failure of the military regimes to realize their objectives. There was lack of cohesion among the army itself, which tends to lead to instability in the army and counter-coups. There was problem of going beyond the administrative role, which the military only seemed to assume. In addition, the military assumed political role. There was also the application of military rules in administration. It is a tradition in military that orders are not bargained. Moreover, there was the result of intense pressure and criticisms from within the country and outside. These problems formed part of the causes of the failure of the military regimes in Nigeria (D.M. Jemibewon, 1978:55).
From the foregoing, it is obvious that autocratic exercise of the military limited political activities, unconstitutional procedures, and human right abuses were the most important distinguishing features of the military regimes in Nigeria. The military were characterized by tyranny, personal rule, sit-tight rule, coercive rule, repression and lack of accountability, probity and transparency (O.G. Wafure, n.d.:177).
Impact of The Military Rule in Nigeria
This is an evaluation of the military regimes against the backdrop of being as corrective in meeting the aspirations and expectations of the people. To do justice to this, one can determine the degree of their effectiveness largely by assessing the goals the military set to achieve. It is very fundamental to mention the important but permanent and beneficial policies and programmes of the military in Nigeria. As discussed in this paper when the military first took over, Nigeria was on the brink of disintegration. The military had tried to maintain the country as one and indissoluble country, especially during the civil war. The military had provided solution to the Nigerian political problem by changing the regional structure of the country in to states and local governments.
The attempt of the Igbo to break away from Nigerian Federation was severely resisted, and at the end, they were subduing in what Gowon tag as no victor no vanquish. For now Nigeria is still a united country. To further strengthen the national unity and integration in the country, National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) was introduced. From 1966, all Nigerian constitutions were created by the military. The military in addition, had implemented huge projects, aimed at accelerating the growth, expansion and transformation of the country. They introduced the policy of indigenization known as the Enterprise Promotion Decree in 1972. They established industrial, banking, insurance and other financial organizations (Habibu, 2000). Agriculture was encouraged. The programed ‘Operation Feed the Nation’ aimed, not only boosting food production in the country, but to make the people more self-reliant in respect of food.Vehicles assembling plants during Gowon, iron and steel complexes were established. They also revolutionized through initiation of educational policies like Universal Primary Education (UPE), creation of Universities, Colleges of Education and Polytechnics. The introduction and implementation of the second and third National Development Plan, not only gave life to the economy of the country but recorded in the sector (O.G. Wafure, n.d.:177).
The military had expanded the medical services. Hospitals and clinics were built. Communication system was also transformed through construction of roads, ports, airports and bridges. The creation of Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) is another thing, which still now echoed in the ears of Nigerian peasants. The military had tried to eradicate corruption in the country. The Buhari project on discipline had tried on instill principles of discipline, justice, honesty, transparency, accountability, nationalism and patriotism in Nigerians (O.G. Wafure, n.d.:177-178).The Better Life Program and Family Support Program were good contributions of the military regimes in Nigeria under these projects, people especially women became enlightened on many issues. Military had contributed a great deal in the formulation of Nigeria’s foreign policies, notably, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), ECOMOG, the liberation of other countries, like Angola and South Africa (O.G. Wafure, n.d.:152-153).
Among other things, their first intervention in Nigerian politics in 1966 marked the beginning of Nigeria’s democratic poverty for thirty years in the political history of Nigeria after independence. The military should have used other means like creation of awareness among the politicians on how to maintain the country and protest.The military at the same time had recorded failures in running their regimes. The military regimes had formed a great part in the stealing of public funds in billions. In addition, the amounts of money used in executing projects were not worth half of the values of the projects (Habibu, 2000). Another failure of the ministry is in the prolongation of program of transition to civil rule. It was only twice since independence that the military successfully organized transition to civilian rule.Another failure of the military regimes in Nigeria is despite the gains from the oil boom; the country was placed on humiliating dependency on multilateral loans tagged aid (R. Umoren, 2001:16).
The aids and loans were meant for socio-economic reforms. The origin of Nigeria’s debt crisis started when in 1978-1979, Nigeria borrowed in order to boost investment on manufacturing industries. At the end, the projects were partly completed (R. Umoren, 2001: 27).
The projects were construction of steel complexes, petrochemical, National Fertilizer Company (NAFCON). The eruption of debt crisis in Nigeria marked the exhaustion of the development efforts, which prevailed since 1970s, led the country in to an economic impasse, and jeopardized the capacity of the governments to meet long-term aspirations of her citizens (R. Umoren,2001: 20-21).
Militarization of Nigerian Politics
The obvious legacy left by the military intervention in Nigeria politics was the syndrome of militarization in the democratic set up of the country. It means to make people do without will and to instill phobia in the people’s mind. Consequently, Nigeria became a militarized society. It manifested when everybody who wears kaki wants to give order and wants to be obeyed, an attribute of the military. During the days of the military, soldiers can punish and detain civilian without any repercussion (K.C. Osudibia, 2004:35-41).
This has become the habit of our present politicians. It also means that everybody wants to coerce others in order to get recognition. Consequently, the use of kaki has become a means of power and influence even among religious and voluntary organizations.The military regimes were known for lack of softness, due process. This had become almost a permanent feature of Nigerian society. One of the aspects of this militarization is absence of responsiveness in administration, in which one will rules without any question. The militarization has led the concepts of rule of law and due process in abeyance (T. Akpata, 2000:217).
Political assassination was among other things used by the military regimes to subdue any opposition. Even though Obasanjo second regime, (1999-2007) was a civilian administration, he nevertheless utilized military strategy in suppressing opponent. This becomes evident where prominent politicians were killed and assassinated(U. Matthew,2006 :118).For example; Harry Marshal, Funsho William, Bola Ige and Hajiya Sa’adatu Abubakar Rimi to mention a few, were believed to have been killed for political reasons.Another thing is the use of threats and coercion against journalists by the military. Human right abuses and coercion of journalist were among other things that contributed in the castigation of Buhari’s administration and the National Security Organization (NSO). The NSO had been evil genius of the Buhari regime. However, the end of the regime did not end its conduct and activities (T. Akpata, 2000: 214-215). One more area, which was militarized by the military, was the closure of avenues for negotiation with civil society, either by banning civil organizations such as NLC, NBA, NUJ and NANS, or by harassing their members (K.C. Osudibia, 2014:12). This problem has remained in the country after military had left.One other thing is the nature of sit-tight rule of the military regimes. It was this method adopted by Obasanjo when he wanted to realize this goal through Third Term Agenda.
Conclusion
The role of the military in a sovereign state was to defend the country against external aggression. Hence, the military institution and activities were normally confined to the military barrack or cantonment. In Nigeria case, the military incursion into democratic dispensation of the firstRepublic uttered the role of military from that of defense to rule by decree. It was contended that the young army officers that went out for training in foreign land came home to exercise radical changes in the fresh independence states of Africa state. However, the obnoxious decree initiated by military in most cases abuse fundamental human rights of the citizens. Freedom of expression and civic awareness were tramp upon. Ironically, as the military taste the seat of governance, they always create transition programmes to favour themselves. Although, there were few laudable achievement recorded during the military rule in education, infrastructure and economic stride. By and large the international community abhor any form of military rule as it amount to dictatorship.
Works Cited
Achebe C, The Trouble with Nigeria, Enugu, Fourth Dimension Publishers, 1993
Akpata T, In Pursuit of Nationhood: Selected Writings on Nigerian Politics, Zaria, Malthouse, 2000
Arnold G, Modern Nigeria, London, Longman, 1977
Adelusi & H. Saliu, “Perspectives on Nigeria’s Leadership Crisis” in Savanna: A Journal of Environmental and Social Science, Vol 18, No1. June, 1977
Adekanye,A. “Politics in a Military Context” in P.P. Ekeh, et al. (ed.) Nigeria Since Independence: The First 25 years, Vol. V. Ibadan, Heinemann, 1989
Ball A.R. Modern Politics and Government, London, Macmillan, 1983
Calvovoressi P, Independent Africa and the World, England, Macmillan Group Ltd, 1985
Chikendu P, & Kalu V, The Military Question: Path to a Pan-Nigerian Democracy Order, Enugu, Mary Dan Publishers, 1996
Decalos S, Coups and Army Rule in Africa: Studies in Military Style, London, New Haven, 1980
Falola T, et al, History of Nigeria: Nigeria in the Twentieth Century, Nigeria, Longman, 1991
Huntington S, The Spider and the State, New York, Random House, 1964
Jemibewon, D.M, A Combatant in Government, Ibadan Heinemann, 1978.
Joseph S.L, Nigeria: Shadow of a Great Nation: Lagos, Dubeo Press Ltd, 1995
Matthew, U., “Third Term Agenda & Political Stability in Nigeria” in Agbor: Journal of Arts and Social Science, Vol 1, no.3, 2006
Mainasara A.M., The Five Majors: Why We Struck, Zaria, Huda, 1982
Osagie, E.E., Nigeria Since Independence: Cripple Giant, John Achers, 2002
Okibe H.B, Political Evolution and Constitutional Development in Nigeria (1861-1999), Enugu, New Haven, 2000
Osudibia, K.C, Revolution: A Dangerous Option for Nigeria, Umuahia, Snaap Press, 2004
Osudibia, K.C, Challenges to the Fourth Republic: Nigeria Connection, Umuahia, Snap Press. 2004
Umoren, R. Economic Reforms and Nigeria’s Political Crisis, Ibadan, Spectrum Book Ltd, 2001
Umar, Z.M. “An Examination of the interface of the State and Civil Society in Democratization in Nigeria” Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Political Science, 2000
Wafure, O.G. “Development Issues in Nigeria” In Abuja Journal of administration and Management, Abuja, Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 177
Oral Interview: Dr. Habibu Sani Angulu, GRA, 12th February, 2000