During the latter part of the nineteenth century, European powers acquired large territorial areas in Africa. These territories ignored the boundaries of old African tribal kingdoms and the African modes of life, because the new countries were to serve as ‘common market’ areas supplying Europe with the wealth of the tropics. Nigeria is an example of the new superstructure which in operation fails to become a homogeneous entity after the assumption of political power by the Africans. There are problems of existing tribal kingdoms, of geographic distribution of ethnic groups and of traditional values. The British colonization of Nigeria also brought about regional distribution of Western ideas and differing attitudes among Nigerians. The problems, politically, sociologically and economically, are imbedded in present day Nigerian society. The British attempt to build Nigeria as an economic area has produced certain centripetal forces which are revealed in the growth of urbanization with resulting detribalization, means of communication with the concomitant social mobility, and the educational facilities with its new breed of Nigerians. The building of national consciousness and political stability are faced with centrifugal forces which are really problems of change introduced by the Europeans and accepted by the Africans. At the same time, the forces of change are challenged by traditional factors which still weigh on the Nigerian mind.

Modern Nigeria is a creation of the British who because of economic interest, ignored the existing political, racial, historical, religious and language differences. The task of developing a concept of nationalism from among such diverse elements who inhabit Nigeria and speak about 280 tribal languages was immense if not impossible. The traditionalists did their best in opposing the British who took away their privileges and traditional rights, but their policy did not countenance nationalism. The rise and growth of nationalism was only possible through educated Africans. Colonialism brought Nigeria in contact with the West and western culture, but the impact of it was felt differently in different parts of Nigeria. By debarring Christian Missions, lawyers and merchants the North, the British deliberately allowed Northern Nigeria to retain its customs and social structure. This further increased and complicated the problems of modernization, nationalism and unity, as Nigerians were influenced by two opposing outside cultures, .one Western, the other Oriental. The basic problems: social, racial and political were the result of the superstructure creation of Nigeria and they unmistakingly affect nationalism, as some of the ethnic groupings which make up Nigeria were large enough to constitute nations in themselves. Because of strong ethnocentrism existing in Nigeria, it has sometimes been argued that Nigeria bas not one nationalism but many nationalisms. The educated elite have succeeded in winning statehood for Nigeria, but they have yet to succeed in bringing about cultural and political nationalism in Nigeria.

The question of ethnicity has been one of the most topical subjects of study by social scientists. The controversies around this phenomenon seem to have been heated up by the high visibility of mobilized and politicized ethnic groups in most multi-ethnic states. Therefore, the extent to which ethnic nationalities are able to effectively manage the interplay of ethnic differences determines to what extent a multi-ethnic nation develops without crisis. Historically Nigeria has come a long way from multi-ethnic entity with political differences and background to the amalgamation of 1914 till the present structure of thirty-six states. Ethnicity, no doubt has contributed immensely to ethnic conflicts in Nigeria because of long standing revulsion or resentments towards ethnic groups different from one’s own or fear of domination which can as well lead ethnic groups to resort to violence as a means to protect and preserve the existing ethnic groups. Significantly ethnicity in Nigeria, is a product inequality among the various ethnic groups orchestrated by a long period of colonialism; a period which witnessed the ascendancy of three major ethnic groups to the socio-political domination of other ethnic groups and a period when the three major ethnic groups were used as a pedestal for the distribution of socio-political goods, resulting in the inability of other ethnic groups to access these socio-political goods. This situation has continued to impact negatively on the forces of national integration and cohesion in ethnically divided Nigeria. Considering the relationship between ethnicity and development; socio-political exclusion is not only ethically dangerous to development but also economically unproductive. It deprives groups and individuals of the opportunity for the necessary development that can be beneficial to the society. Thus, it is important to develop an integrative socio-political frame-work that explicitly recognizes the participatory role of every ethnic group in governance. Hence, there is a need for the adoption of inclusive governance to manage ethnicity in Nigeria. Notwithstanding, ethnic conflict still persists and an attempt will be made in this study to identify the reasons. Central to socio-political sustainability in Nigeria is a system that should recognize that differences are important to development and encompass notions of equality. Such a system should acknowledge the socio-political and economic power of every ethnic group and promote a system devoid of ethnocentric and exclusionary socio-political and economic policies.

Although organised Marxist organisations did not emerge in Nigeria until the mid-1940s, leftist ideology had been prevalent among nationalist and labour leaders since the late 1920s. Both official documents and oral histories indicate deep-rooted support for leftism in Nigeria and anxiety among British colonial officials that this support threatened the Colonial Office's own timetable for gradual decolonisation. This study analyses the development of leftist ideology and attempts to establish a nationwide leftist organisation in colonial and post-independent Nigeria. The role of the Zikist movement is retold in light of new evidence, while other leftist organisations are salvaged from the footnotes of Nigeria nationalist history. More importantly, the adaptability of Marxist-Leninist ideology to colonial reality by the different leftist groups in Nigeria is emphasized. The reaction of Anglo-American officials in Lagos and the metropolis towards the Communist Party of Great Britain and other leftist organisations' sponsorship of Marxist groups in Nigeria are discussed. Lastly, the continuity between the departing colonial power and the Balewa administration is addressed to juxtapose the linkage between the two governments. The study thus provides a lucid explanation for the failure of leftist ideology and organisations in Nigeria during the twentieth century. In this eight-chapter thesis I consistently argue, based on official documents from England, Nigeria, and the United States, that the role of Marxists and Soviet Cold War interests in colonial territories are relevant to nationalism and decolonisation in Nigeria; that the issue is not to determine or measure whether or not Anglo-American policies are direct response to Soviet interests; that there are political, economic, and diplomatic policies carried out as part of the transfer of power process; and that the success of these is partly a result of collaboration with local subaltern leaders and official resolve to institutionalise imperial preferences before independence on October 1, 1960. / History / D.Litt. et Phil. (History)

In July 1979, Nigeria's federal military government declared a 100% takeover of select operations belonging to the London-based oil company, British Petroleum (BP). The takeover of BP marked the takeover of Nigeria's most lucrative industry that had been controlled by foreign investors. Within the secondary literature a more elaborate version of this event is offered by scholars, declaring it nationalization with little agreement over why this "Giant of West Africa" nationalization BP. Some mention South Africa, others Southern Rhodesia (present-day Zimbabwe); some mention oil, while others solely discuss UK diplomacy. Why the discrepancy over the reason for nationalization? This project sets out to explain not only why Nigeria nationalized BP in 1979, but also how the nationalization fits into the broad theoretical discussions on nationalism, economic policy, foreign relations, and nationalization. It challenges the popular narrative of why Nigeria nationalized BP and substantially revises it. The argument is put forward that the nationalization of BP hinged almost entirely on the notion of economic nationalism and that the nationalization fit into an established trend of takeovers aimed at foreign companies. The federal military government simply used southern Africa --discussed as the sole reason for nationalization within the secondary Literature-- as a way to bolster international support. This project also project uses the nationalization as a looking-glass into Nigeria and its oil industry during the 1970s. Also, this project addresses the impact the nationalization had on Nigerian society. With regard to nationalism, Nigeria represents an excellent case for understanding the existence and application of economic nationalism, which functions not only as a subject of study much like ethnic nationalism or civic nationalism, but also as a new perspective on the relationship between the various expressions of nationalism and economic policy.

Although organised Marxist organisations did not emerge in Nigeria until the mid-1940s, leftist ideology had been prevalent among nationalist and labour leaders since the late 1920s. Both official documents and oral histories indicate deep-rooted support for leftism in Nigeria and anxiety among British colonial officials that this support threatened the Colonial Office's own timetable for gradual decolonisation. This study analyses the development of leftist ideology and attempts to establish a nationwide leftist organisation in colonial and post-independent Nigeria. The role of the Zikist movement is retold in light of new evidence, while other leftist organisations are salvaged from the footnotes of Nigeria nationalist history. More importantly, the adaptability of Marxist-Leninist ideology to colonial reality by the different leftist groups in Nigeria is emphasized. The reaction of Anglo-American officials in Lagos and the metropolis towards the Communist Party of Great Britain and other leftist organisations' sponsorship of Marxist groups in Nigeria are discussed. Lastly, the continuity between the departing colonial power and the Balewa administration is addressed to juxtapose the linkage between the two governments. The study thus provides a lucid explanation for the failure of leftist ideology and organisations in Nigeria during the twentieth century. In this eight-chapter thesis I consistently argue, based on official documents from England, Nigeria, and the United States, that the role of Marxists and Soviet Cold War interests in colonial territories are relevant to nationalism and decolonisation in Nigeria; that the issue is not to determine or measure whether or not Anglo-American policies are direct response to Soviet interests; that there are political, economic, and diplomatic policies carried out as part of the transfer of power process; and that the success of these is partly a result of collaboration with local subaltern leaders and official resolve to institutionalise imperial preferences before independence on October 1, 1960. / History / D.Litt. et Phil. (History)