A STUDY OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN BOUNDARY DISPUTES: CASE STUDY OF NIGERIA AND CAMEROON CONFLICT OVER THE BAKASSI PENINSULA
ABSTRACT
This study sketches a conceptual framework of international conflict dynamics
and resolution, examines the geopolitics of the Bakassi dispute between Nigeria
and Cameroon, and outlines socio-economic implications of its peaceful
settlement. Neglect and subsequent discovery of oil deposits subjected the
Bakassi Peninsula to claims and counter-claims for sovereignty, military
occupation and recourse to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ’s
ruling in 2002 in favour of Cameroon, although based on sound historical
evidence, faced implementation difficulties. However, following mediation by
the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, good faith by protagonists, the
Green-tree Agreement and subsequent instruments, Nigeria completed the
withdrawal of its military, police and administration from the Bakassi Peninsula by 14 August 2008. Putting aside disruptive activities by social movements, the entire process could be viewed as a model in peaceful resolution of border conflicts. Implications of the settlement anchor on expenditure-reducing and expenditure-switching effects, wealth-generating effects, and enhanced
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
- BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Territorial claims, ideology, colonialism, nationalism, religion and natural resources have typically been the main sources of conflict throughout the world. While the influence of some of these is waning, struggles for the control of valuable natural resources have remained a persistent feature of national and international affairs for decades. In addition to helping some of the most corrupt and oppressive regimes to remain in power, natural resources have been fuelling conflicts within and between African countries. Such conflict situations typically take the form of territorial disputes over the possession of oil-laden border areas, factional struggles among the leaders of oil-rich countries, and major inter-state wars over the control of vital oil and mineral zones (Klare 2004). Africa was largely controlled by indigenous people in the 1870s, but by 19141 it became almost exclusively subjugated and divided into protectorates/colonies by the European powers (Rourke 1997; Aghemelo and Ibhasebhor 2006). The colonial boundaries in these configurations were not established according to the various indigenous groupings. Grouping nations together in some cases and dividing them in others was a common feature as long as it was consistent with the security and economic interests of the colonial powers. After independence, most of Africa became and is still troubled by the legacy of trying to get originally different indigenous groupings to live peacefully in a single country or to get the same ethnic group to live peacefully in different neighbouring countries. As in most of Africa, therefore, the origins of the conflict situation between Cameroon and Nigeria over border issues can be traced to the colonial era and some post independence political activities. The border between Cameroon and Nigeria extending from Lake Chad to the Gulf of Guinea has been a bone of contention between the two territories dating back to 1913. However, the knowledge that the Bakassi Peninsula harbours important deposits of oil/gas reserves triggered mounting hostilities and military confrontations in the early 1990s between Cameroon and Nigeria. According to Klare (2004), the close connection between oil and conflict derives from three essential features of petroleum: (1) its vital importance to the economic and military power of nations; (2) its irregular geographical distribution; and (3) its imminent changing centre of gravity. In 1993 Nigerian troops occupied the Bakassi Peninsula. In 1994, after serious incidents of border incursions that provoked shooting, and after many casualties and deaths of soldiers had been recorded on both sides, Cameroon submitted its entire set of border-related disputes with Nigeria to the International Court of Justice at The Hague for adjudication. After examining the case for eight years, the World Court ruled that Cameroon is the rightful owner of the oil-rich
Peninsula, basing its argument on the 1913 Anglo-German Treaty which traced
the borders between the two colonial powers. Following intensive diplomatic activities culminating in the 12 June 2006 Greentree Agreement 2 brokered by the United Nations and witnessed/guaranteed by four world powers – Britain, France, Germany and the United States – Nigeria eventually agreed to unconditionally hand over the oil-rich Peninsula to Cameroon. On 14 August 2006 Nigeria effectively pulled out its military and the Cameroonian flag was hoisted. Two years later (14 August 2008) the remaining Nigerian administration and police left the Peninsula.
1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
In this context, two key questions arise:
1.Is the outcome of the Bakassi conflict a model of conflict resolution and economic cross-border development, or
2.Is it more a situation of conflict dynamics, crisis and economic instability?
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main objective of this study is to evaluate the implications of the Bakassi
conflict settlement between Cameroon and Nigeria for sustainable peace and
economic development. The specific objectives are:
(1) to develop a conceptual framework of international conflict dynamics and resolution;
(2) to examine the geopolitics of the Bakassi question;
(3) to discuss implications of the verdict of the International Court of Justice and subsequent instruments for international conflict resolution and socio-economic development in Cameroon; and
(4) to outline policy recommendations on the basis of the analysis.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In this section, the nature of international conflicts, their dynamics, and oil as
engine and fuel for conflict situations are discussed. The dispute settlement linkages between Cameroon and Nigeria are then established.
2.1 Nature of international conflicts
Conflict is as old as the history of mankind and therefore normal, natural and
unavoidable, yet it can generate negative and very destructive impacts, as well as
awareness, economic growth and development (Ivorgba 2005). What matters is
our response to conflict and post-conflict situations. Conflict is an indication
that somehow, there is misunderstanding that requires attention and proper
action. International conflicts might occur between governments striving to monopolise the exploitation of resources in disputed territories. It could arise when a nation-state intervenes in the domestic disputes of another state. Occasionally, a conflict may ensue where the nationals of one state are attacked, dehumanised, killed or maimed by the agents of another state. Conflicts between countries are often presented as occurring between their governments and such situations are either conducted or perceived as inter-governmental struggles, while the bone of contention is usually territory or some other economic resource (Asobie 2003).
It is seldom the welfare of the ordinary citizens of the states concerned that
provokes conflict situations in Africa. Even when such reasons are brandished,
they often turn out to be attempts at concealing other agendas. As noted by Asobie (2003), a deeper examination may reveal that, in essence, international conflicts are struggles between primary social classes, clashing across national boundaries. In this regard, the real actors in international conflicts
lications of the Bakassi conflict resolution for Cameroon are social classes (for instance, the ruling elite) which, in their struggles, mobilise
and use the various state institutions to push forward their goals. For the most
part, contests are related to the control of productive resources. Even when such resources are exploited, the proceeds are typically distributed disproportionately in favour of the ruling classes and their cronies/protégés. As the working class citizens become aware of this unequal sharing, the more vulnerable ones may be attracted into social movements conceived and sponsored by disgruntled dropouts from the ruling class. Such social movements are fashioned to operate in opposition to the ruling elite using all sorts of means, while expecting better days ahead. Hiding behind governments, in some international conflicts, are the monopolistic capitalists operating trans-nationally with multinational tentacles. Major oil and mineral exploiting companies belong to this category. These dominant expatriate capitalists are typically in simultaneous alliances with the respective ruling classes in the exploitation of resources in both countries. These unpleasant alliances often manifest in millions of hard currency diverted and stacked away in foreign banks, and open avenues for interventions in domestic affairs of host countries that serve the interest of multinationals even at the cost of inter-state conflicts. Yet victims of such conflicts remain the working people – especially the youth, women and child soldiers, as well as old people who find it difficult to escape conflict zones, emigrate or seek refugee status elsewhere.
2.2 Dynamics of international conflicts
The dynamics of most international conflicts may be shaped by three critical
factors:
(1) The nature and size of the booty that would accrue from the conflict. This
refers to the relative utility and size of the presumed productive resources that
the victor might gain after the struggle.
(2) The nature of the relationship between the social classes that constitute the
primary actors in conflict. Once monopolistic capitalists either on one side or on
Francis Menjo Baye
both sides of the state territorial boundaries have high stakes in the outcome of
the conflict, the spiral of international conflicts will be almost unending.3
(3) The nature of domestic politics in the nation-states that form the bases
for the contending parties. This includes the nature of the regime in power.
Authoritarian/dictatorial regimes have the tendency to provoke the emergence
of violent inter-state politics, so as to divert attention from burning domestic
issues and prolong their stay in power.
Generally, when violent conflicts erupt between two contending ruling classes
of two distinct countries, they are extensions of violent intra-state conflicts
promoted by the various discontented social groups who may be having
international connections. Hoffmann (1985) observed that one definitely cannot
imagine a non-violent diplomacy as long as violence has not been eliminated
from intra-state politics. In this connection, social movements within territorial
boundaries frequently seek to establish links with similar bodies in neighbouring countries and will spare no effort in taking advantage of a conflict situation to canvass for international recognition.
2.3 Oil as engine and fuel for conflict situations
It is possible that in some cases conflicts originated before the discovery of
petroleum, but became interwoven with oil issues as the importance of oil as
a factor of production increased. The drivers of such tendencies are territorial
disputes, separatist struggles and factional/dynastic struggles.
Territorial disputes occur in border zones and offshore areas that were thought
to possess no particular value, but suddenly become very valuable with the
discovery of oil. For several decades, neither the Nigerian nor Cameroonian
ruling elite showed any particular interest in the Bakassi Peninsula. Neither
showed any concern nor initiated any programme that was capable of
ameliorating the deplorable conditions of mass poverty, squalor and destitution
in which most Bakassi residents live. But struggles over the ownership of Bakassby Nigeria and Cameroon began immediately it was discovered in the eighties that the Peninsula was floating on reserves of crude oil (Sango 2002). It was only then that the elite of both countries started making serious claims and counterclaims over the territory.
Separatist struggles occur when oil is produced or presumed to exist in an
area largely inhabited by an ethnic minority and the bulk of oil revenues go
or are expected to go to government officials in the national capital. In this
context, members of the ethnic minority often perceive a strong incentive to
break away and establish their own ethnic state, with a view to getting all of the oil revenue. This sort of struggle is occurring in the southern part of Sudan, where the predominantly Christian population is struggling for independence and in Cameroon, where the Southern Cameroon National Council (SCNC) sympathises with advocates for the independence of the Bakassi Peninsula as
‘The Republic of Ambazonia’ (Gumne 2006). In some cases such as the Delta
region of Nigeria, ethnic minorities are fighting to gain greater autonomy (and a larger share of oil revenues) rather than a separate state. Factional/dynastic struggles occur because whoever controls the government of oil-producing states also controls the allocation of oil revenues. Those in control will seek to retain power for as long as possible, using heavy-handed repression and election rigging, while those excluded from power will have a powerful incentive to use any means necessary to gain control (including armed rebellion, terrorism, or coup d’état). These sorts of factional struggles have been a consistent pattern in countries like Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, as well as in most oil-rich states. In other countries, especially Venezuela, disputes over the allocation of oil revenues have taken the form of political violence between competing parties and interest groups (Klare 2004).
To get the complete project or material
Pay #3000 (10 Dollars) for Project material
Pay #5000 (30 Dollars) for complete project.
BANK TRANSFER OR DEPOSIT
PAYMENT DETAILS:
- ACCOUNT NAME : SAMUEL CHARLES
ACCOUNT NO. : 2009884029
BANK : FIRST BANK
ACCOUNT TYPE: CURRENT ACCOUNT
(2) ACCOUNT NAME : SAMUEL CHARLES
ACCOUNT NO. : 2078806476
BANK : UBA
ACCOUNT TYPE: SAVINGS ACCOUNT
AFTER PAYMENT SEND YOUR PERSONAL DETAILS AS FOLLOWS –
NAME
TOPIC
DEPARTMENT
MOBILE NUMBER
AMOUNT PAID
TO +2348077215645 , +2348176196229 AS SMS OR WHATSAPP MESSAGE OR
E-MAIL: distinctvaluedproject@gmail.com
