ATTENTION:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n INFORMATION:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n WHATSAPP US ON 08137701720<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n NIGERIA\u2019S FOREIGN POLICY UNDER MILITARY RULE AS A STUDY OF MURTALA\/OBASANJO ADMINISTRATION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n CHAPTER ONE<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.0 INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study intend to assess perspectives on Muritala foreign policy from the year 1993 till 1998. Our curiosity and historical inquisitiveness at this inquiry is predicated on four major strands. First, the beginning of the period of our study (1960) marks the beginning of Nigeria as an independent nation and in essence her peculiar foreign policy. The year 2007, as our terminal date, is an offshoot of the end of a century. Politically, Nigeria moved to a democratic government after a long period of military rule which made Nigeria to be in pariah status. Also, the period between our chosen landmarks year’s period of study witnessed significant changes in Global affairs with attendant effects on Nigeria. Outside Africa, the wider world is shrinking into one (Globalization).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Secondly, the period spanning forty seven years affords enough time for the era of pioneering foreign policy to pass and also allow Nigeria’s national institutions responsible for its international relations to evolve and mature in their own right irrespective of the trend of events within the country. Thirdly, the institutions and instruments, assumptions, sentiments, ideologies, goals, objectives, methods and a range of other factors behind the national mindset must have passed through many trials and gauged against practical experience. Finally, the fourth strand to be kept in mind is that historically, the time frame affords the opportunity to determine changes and continuities in Nigeria’s foreign policy. In essence, we can determine the factors that are transient and those that are enduring on the basis of lessons learnt and conclusions drawn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY<\/p>\n\n\n\n Foreign policy is the course of action pursued by a nation in its dealings with other nations, usually in pursuance of its national objectives. That’s why, in diplomatic circles, “national interest” is often regarded as the basis upon which a nation’s foreign policy should be constructed. In this view, engagements with other nations should be based on the calculation of real or symbolic profit. For national leaders and diplomats, the underlying questions for any foreign engagement should be: What can our nation gain from this engagement? What does it contribute to our national interest? We live in an interdependent world where no nation is an island. Nations must interact with each other if they must survive. The essence of this interaction is to be able to derive from other nations those things that they need but which they cannot produce and to also dispose of those things they have in abundance in order to derive resources they will use in paying for their needs. Also by interactions, nations are able to maintain friendly relations with others, so as to make the world friendlier, safer and more conducive for human habitation and development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Due to these over-riding reasons for nations to relate with others, most states now have in place a dynamic process of interaction between the changing domestic demands and supply faced with the changing external circumstance. This is what is referred to as foreign policy. According to Chandra (1982:16) foreign policy is an important key to the rational explanations of international behaviors. It is not possible to understand interstate relations without understanding of foreign polices of states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consequently, turning our search light on Nigeria, various regimes have tried to pursue the country’s foreign policy under almost the same objectives. While the style tends to differ, thereby reflecting the idiosyncrasies of the president or Head of state and his foreign minister, the substance has remained basically the same. Available literature have focused mainly on how dynamic, Nigeria’s foreign policy has been under various regimes. Though useful, we believe, it has not helped to assess the concrete gains of Nigeria’s foreign policy. An elegant book by Adebajo, Adekeye & Mustapha, Abdul Raufu (eds) (2008), covers an expansive thematic mosaic. Its sixteen chapters provide incisive analytical coverage, conceptual insights and empirical richness, pointing to the factors and imperatives which have shaped Nigeria’s foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. That it succeeds so admirably is a tribute to the editors and well-chosen authors. Each chapter helps to impose order on this complex mosaic. Nigeria is no ordinary country: it is Africa’s most populous and its third largest economy. Its polity experiences ongoing fragility and its democratic base is rather tenuous, yet it exercises tremendous power and influence in its sub-region, in Africa and on the global stage. It is the sixth largest oil exporter in the world, yet the scourge of poverty and underdevelopment afflicts the majority of its 130 million people and this has been exacerbated by perennial bad governance and debilitating corruption. In its 48 years of independence, the country has had a chequered political history, punctuated by seven military regimes and failed attempts at forging a calculus of democracy. The country’s citizens have acquired a dubious reputation for ingenuity in creating niches in the global criminal underworld. Thus it is hardly surprising if, in the words of its former foreign minister Ibrahim Gambari, the country ‘…has teetered between confidence and conflict, and between exuberance and exhaustion’.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This backdrop frames the historical and contemporary issues that have informed and animated Nigeria’s conduct in African and global affairs. There is an excellent introduction by Adekeye Adebajo. His teasing polemic sets the normative mood for the book: ‘Over its nearly 50 years of independence, Nigeria has been reduced to a giant with clay feet’. How the giant has performed is defined by three concentric circles which also provide the book’s explanatory and organisational framework: the domestic, regional, and external. In the domestic context, five chapters present different dimensions of Nigerian politics that have been consequential for its foreign policy conduct. Abdul Raufu Mustapha’s chapter examines how the country’s ‘fractured’ nationhood, its social cleavages and troubled identity have negatively shaped and influenced its foreign relations. This is nicely complemented by Ibrahim Gambari’s reflective chapter on major historical turning points in Nigeria’s domestic politics and the evolution of theory and practice in its foreign policy. The other chapters are equally instructive in chronicling the politics of the foreign service and the making of the Nigerian diplomat in a country with over 250 ethnic groups; the interface between security prerogatives and foreign policy, especially the prominent role of the military and the emergence of ethnic militias; and the way in which oil wealth has created pathologies of inequality, exploitation and repression that bring Shell and political elites into direct confrontation with restive minorities of the Niger Delta. The study, therefore, beams search light on Nigeria’s foreign policy. The major plank for this tends towards a procedural evaluation of perspectives on Nigeria’s foreign policy, most especially anchored on regimes in Nigeria with a view to ascertain levels of changes and continuities. In the final analysis, discern the concrete gains of evolving Nigeria’s foreign policy, if any at all. General Abacha became Nigeria’s Head of State on Nov. 17, 1993 after sacking the Chief Earnest Shonekan led interim National Government 82 days after it was installed. Unlike others His maiden address had warning for the international community. According to him: For the international community, we ask that you suspend judgment while we grapple with serious task of nation building, reconciliation and repairs. This government is a child of necessity with a strong determination to restore peace and stability to our country and on those foundations, enthroned a lasting and timed democracy. Give us the chance to solve our problems in our own way<\/p>\n\n\n\n X-raying the last sentence of that speech clearly shows the mindset of the Head of the Junta and why, it perceived any reaction of the international community as meddling into internal Affairs of the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n General Abacha, needed to be left alone to run Nigeria according to his whims, but the inter-dependent world of his time, made that impossible so most of his actions which clearly was Nigeria’s internal market, drew reactions from the international community. His foreign policy was based in favour of Africa. He was Nigeria’s Defense minister when ECOMOG was set up; hence he sustained it, until elections were conducted in Liberia in 1997, which saw the same Charles Taylor that started the crises emerging as the president. With Taylor as Liberia president and his not been disposed to the forced continued stay in Liberia as initially agreed, the ECOMOG adventure in the country ended. Abacha, used ECOMOG to restore the Siera Leonian, democratically elected government of Ahmed Tejan Kabba who was overthrown by Major Johnny Koroma.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nigeria has been a player in international politics since 1960 and various governments have always tried to outline what they consider to be the objectives of Nigeria’s foreign policy. However, literature reveals that, there has not been agreement as to what constitutes Nigeria drive in foreign policy. Hence, this work rather tends to raise the fundamental question, what have been the drive and the concrete gains of Nigeria’s foreign policy between 1960 and 2007<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is a belief that a nation’s foreign policy is not an illogical business; it is systematic and organized process. Chandra (1982) observes that just like domestic policies, it operates through some laid down rules and procedures and is also expected to rely on a feedback mechanism in order to assess its impact and acceptability. This study, essentially, therefore, is aimed at elucidating the perspectives on the entire Nigeria’s foreign policy making and implementation machinery and processes. This is with a view to discern changes and continuities on the basis of lessons learnt and conclusions drawn. This study therefore, will be useful to academics and possibly public policy makers. To scholars, it will add to their knowledge and welt their intellectual curiosity and inquisitiveness. To public policy makers, the enduring continuities on the basis of lessons learnt and conclusions drawn could form the basis of a better formulation and implementation of Nigeria’s foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. This study, essentially, therefore, is aimed at elucidating the perspectives on the entire Nigeria’s foreign policy making and implementation machinery and processes especially in the regime of General Sanni Abacher in Nigeria .<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. To know the historical evolution of Nigeria foreign policy using General Sanni Abacher in perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. To evaluate the fall out of General Sanni Abacher foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. To compare Sanni Abacher forign policy objective with other political leaders foreign policy in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n a. Promotion and protection of the national interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n b. Promotion of African integration and support for African unity<\/p>\n\n\n\n c. Promotion of international co-operation for consolidation of universal peace and mutual respect among nations and elimination of discrimination in all ramifications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n d. Respect for international law and treaty organization as well as the seeking of settlement of international dispute; negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication and promotion of just world order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Is this study, essentially aimed at elucidating the perspectives on the entire Nigeria’s foreign policy making and implementation machinery and processes especially in the regime of General Sanni Abacher in Nigeria?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. How one know the historical evolution of Nigeria foreign policy using General Sanni Abach in perspective?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Is it possible to evaluate the fall out of General Sanni Abacher foreign policy?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. Is there any comparism between Sanni Abacher forign policy objective and other political leaders foreign policy in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.5 REASEARCH HYPOTHESIS<\/p>\n\n\n\n H0: This study, is not essentially aimed at elucidating the perspectives on the entire Nigeria’s foreign policy making and implementation machinery and processes especially in the regime of General Sanni Abacher in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H1: This study, is essentially aimed at elucidating the perspectives on the entire Nigeria’s foreign policy making and implementation machinery and processes especially in the regime of General Sanni Abacher in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H0: One cannot know the historical evolution of Nigeria foreign policy using General Sanni Abacher in perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H1: One can know the historical evolution of Nigeria foreign policy using General Sanni Abacher in perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H0: It is impossible to evaluate the fall out of General Sanni Abacher foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H1: It is possible to evaluate the fall out of General Sanni Abacher foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H0: There is a small comparism between Sanni Abacher forign policy objective and other political leaders foreign policy in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n H1: There is a big comparism between Sanni Abacher forign policy objective and other political leaders foreign policy in Nigeria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY<\/p>\n\n\n\n This study therefore, will be useful to academics and possibly public policy makers. To scholars, it will add to their knowledge and welt their intellectual curiosity and inquisitiveness. To public policy makers, the enduring continuities on the basis of lessons learnt and conclusions drawn could form the basis of a better formulation and implementation of Nigeria’s foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.7 FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Foreign policy analysis has a lot of competing frameworks with each seeming to be superior to others. Though attempts have been made to group them into broad categories like idealism, realism, classical, traditional and scientific among others, not only do differences exist among the categories but even within them. The problem which this poses for foreign policy analysis is that the framework adopted affects the focus of the study, the questions to be asked and conclusions that would be reached. Hence, for the purpose of this study, there is no generally acceptable framework that can be said to be flawless or that will escape criticism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.8 RESEARCH METHODS<\/p>\n\n\n\n This study is going to adopt a historical descriptive and systematic method of analysis. As it has been, we will x-ray perspectives on Nigeria’s foreign policy between 1993-1998. This study will therefore, focus on the foreign policy of Nigeria under different regimes with a view to ascertain how she has advanced her foreign policy objectives. In order words, what the drive and concrete gains of Nigeria foreign policy were? Hence, based on the aforementioned, the materials for this research will be acquired through the secondary data collection method making use of newspapers, magazines, journals and published works of relevant agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Equally important sources of data include International electronic media (Internet) as well as personal observations and experiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.9 SCOPE \/LIMITATION OF THE STUDY<\/p>\n\n\n\n This research work is on the history evoluation of Nigeria foreign policy under General Sanni Abacha 1993-1998. As enunciated by Hosti (1995:45,210,223), foreign policy covers not just a state’s relations with others but also the domestic environment from which the policy emanates at first instance. This creates a boundary problem for this study on perspectives on Nigeria’s foreign policy in the sense that, there are no clear distinctions between what is considered domestic and what is considered international, as the domestic policies or actions of a state could have far reaching implications internationally. Take for instance, the Babangida annulment of June 12 elections in 1992 in Nigeria became such an international issue that one may wonder whether there is any dividing line between domestic and international issues. Also, the terrain to be covered in this study and the character of the subject, foreign policy is such that different states and government attach importance to it. Also, the type of governmental system and level of development also colour its foreign policy. And to be able to adequately understand and evaluate the foreign policy of Nigeria, we also need full and detailed account of all the foreign policies of other states with whom Nigeria interacts. This, we know, is clearly impossible, in a work of this nature. Hence, the problem of scope of the subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.10 DEFINITION OF TERMS<\/p>\n\n\n\n Foreign policy: Foreign policy is the course of action pursued by a nation in its dealings with other nations, usually in pursuance of its national objectives. That’s why, in diplomatic circles, “national interest” is often regarded as the basis upon which a nation’s foreign policy should be constructed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 08068231953 or 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n (1) Your project topics<\/p>\n\n\n\n (2) Email Address<\/p>\n\n\n\n (3) Payment Name<\/p>\n\n\n\n (4) Teller Number<\/p>\n\n\n\n We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert<\/p>\n\n\n\n BANK ACCOUNTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Number: 0046579864<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bank: GTBank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n OR<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI<\/p>\n\n\n\n Account Number: 3139283609<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bank: FIRST BANK<\/p>\n\n\n\n FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 08068231953 or 08168759420<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n AFFILIATE LINKS:<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n myeasyproject.com.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterials.com<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterials.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectsmaterials.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectsmaterial.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n easyprojectmaterial.net.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n projectmaterials.com.ng<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n