Foreign Policy Analysis : Compare and Contrast Nigeria’s Relationship with the U.S.A. Essay

INTRODUCTIONA earths overseas insurance form _or_ system of governance is a set of goals outlining how the nation will interact with otherwise countries scotchally, insurance polity-makingly, sociablely and militarily, and to a lesser finis how the country will interact with non- put forward actors. The aforementioned interaction is evaluated and monitored in attempts to maximize benefits of multi-lateral inter internal cooperation. unlike policies argon desired to dish up project a countrys home(a) enkindle, national security ideological goals and frugal prosperity. This can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with other nations or redden through with(predicate) exploitation.Foreign form _or_ system of government epitome is the regular regard of and research into the processes and theories of orthogonal insurance policy.This newspaper seeks to evaluate the dealingship (stinting and multitude) that has existed amongst Nigeria and the linked States of the States. (U.S.A) in deuce very(prenominal) distinct epochs. (1960-1966), post indep differenceence, and surrounded by 1999- 2003, the immediate popular era aft(prenominal) a lengthy post- legionsinterregnum. The paper shall consist of an introduction and segments on conceptual clarifications, suppositious frame subject, X-ray of number under memorise, and the conclusion drawn from the study shall also be presented. abstract CLARIFICATIONInternational Relations Rossenau, (1961). Views international traffic as the study of the transactions, contacts, flows of information among and among separately organized nation state. Holsti, (1972). Defines international relations to encompass all forms of interaction amidst the members of distinct societies. Adeniran, (1983). submits that international relations is an domain of study which foc designs on the semipolitical, frugal and other interactions among international actors and the inter-state systems. scotch relations is a alliance amidst 2 or much states that revolves around the promotion, modify of finance, industry and global trading activities. legions relations A armament is an organization authorized by its nation to use suck up, usually including use of weapons, in defending its country by combating demonstrable or perceived threats. The military is made up of a force or forces with a capability to execute national defense policy. legions relations deal with the interaction between and among nation states to enhance capability development especially as it affects the strategic, operational, logistic and tactical requirements their military forces. soldiery relations are characterized by the exchange of combat arms and mount services. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKThe theoretical framework at bottom which this study shall be conducted, is the last making betterment. The theory focuses attention on the processes of public finale making. A political action has the character of a decis ion interpreted by nigh actors in a specific situation through a particular process. Political actions can be understood by referring to the person who took the decision and the inter-active processes by which the decision was reached. firearm following the decision making approach, the political scientist has to encounter a complex set of social psychological and institutional processes. Hence, this approach has to draw on several concepts true in sociology, social psychology and psychology. Mahajan, (200039).The decision making approach has 2 fundamental purposes one is the identification of crucial structures in the political demesne w here(predicate) changes take place, where decisions are made, where actions are initiated and carried out. While, the other is a systematic abstract of the decision making behaviour which leads to action. In other words, the decision approach focuses inquiry on actors called decision makers and on the state defined as the decision unit. Hence , the actions of the state are seen through the actions of the decision makers. The crux here is that if a sufficient knowledge of the behaviour and activities of the known actors is established, it can adjust the foundation for the explanation of a decision. Okere, (2000115) NIGERIAS FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVESForeign policy objectives are built upon some general principles or national occupys which is embodied in the nations constitution. Foreign policy objectives of both nation can be classified into a trinity of military strategic, political/diplomatic and economic/cultural imperatives. In the first republic, (1960-1966) which constitutes a part of this studys focal point the leash objectives that channelise Nigerias foreign policy, were enunciated by sir, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa the first prime minister of Nigeria, to embr oil colour among others -Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states. - no-interference in the internal affairs of other states .-The promotion of functional cooperation among African states. Chapter II, sub section 19 of the 1999 constitution outlines the foreign policy objectives of Nigeria between 1999-2003. Which constitutes the second leg of the studys time frame. What is however certain is that under the devil variant epochs that Nigerias foreign policy is to be subjected to scrutiny by this study, the principal objective of the foreign policy has been to promote and protect the countrys national interest in its interactions and kinds with specific countries in the international system. (Abdullahi 2004). NIGERIA-AMERICA relations Motives for CollaborationPresident Kennedy once note thatEvery nation determines its policies in term of its own interestThe traditional American foreign policy encompasses both moral idealism and raw self-interests. The linked States primary interest in relation to Nigeria is oil. As a voracious consumer of the countrys sweet (i.e., low-sulfur) petroleum, America recogni zes Nigerias worth as the largest oil maker in Africa and the fifth largest in the OPEC. Nigeria has been one of the largest exporters of crude oil to the united States. American companies much(prenominal) as shell, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron have substantial investments in the lucrative Nigerian oil industry, which, along with other Western oil companies, they dominate. Nigeria led a peacekeeping mission as part of the economic Community of West Africa States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) that helped to stabilize long-time U.S. allies Liberia and sierra Leone. A third U.S. interest is the maintenance of America cultural-historical linkages to the country of Nigeria. A great number of Americans signature their roots to Africa. M any of those Americans, including entertainer-scholar Paul b. Robeson (1898-1976), trace those origins to Nigeria. Last, but certainly not least, America needs Nigerias help in its campaign against international drug trafficking.The economic hardships in Nige ria, resulted in the emergence of a significant drug-dependent culture and in the conversion of Nigerian borders into a major route for the trafficking of cocaine and heroin into the fall in States. The fall in States also looks to Nigeria to help reduce the number of Americans victimized by the domiciliate of Nigerian business opportunities that are too good to be true. harmonize to one estimate, Americans lose $2 billion annually to white collar curse syndicates based in Nigeria. Nigeria sees in the unify States a steady purchaser of its oil. Although Nigerias share of the U.S. market has fluctuated over the old age, the get together States remains a primary purchaser of Nigerian crude oil. Second, Nigeria values political ties with America. The join States is one of the most authorityful countries in the beingness, and the two countries share corresponding demographic features such as ethnic, economic, and religious complexities. Nigeria relies on these political conn ections as it experiments with a presidential style of government. Third, like many developing countries, Nigeria seeks to smash into America technological capabilities for its manpower development needs.Tens of thousands of Nigerians have flocked to the United States in search of higher education. Nigeria will maximize the benefit of its relationship with the United States by identifying and exploiting the points at which the two nations interests overlap. Nigeria and U.S. interests converge with respect to the purchase and trade of crude oil and the necessity of maintaining good-humoured political relations. (Aka, 2005) It should be noted that in the fulfilment under polish, (1960-1966), it was the prime minister that maintained a near monopoly of control over the countrys foreign policy (Aluko, 1977). For Nigeria on the other hand, there was a compelling need to alter the parsimony and modernize agriculture immediately after independence. To earn this objectives, the coun try would require foreign aid and the diversification of the countrys afield market America was one of the countries she looked up to for the injection of the required chief city to fund her development plans. NIGERIA UNITED STATES RELATIONS (1960-1966)For centuries, United States foreign policy has been outwardly characterized by its diplomatic and economic encouragement of fledging democracies around the world. In particular, the nations of Africa and particularly Nigeria are seen to benefit from Americas idealistic foreign Agenda. (Aka, 2005). It should however be noted that few foreign political actions are based entirely in good will they are much often rooted in prudence and rationality. Although promoting democracy may, as was preliminary stated, be a sufficient national interest in and of itself, such idealistic abstraction is usually augmented by more concrete or material considerations. This is certainly true for the United States interest in relations with Nigeria. ( Aka, 2005). There are a plethora of cultural, historical and political reasons why Nigeria has been important to the U.S. These range form population, oil, resource and strategic military importance. Nigerias colonial history left behind external economic relations policy that was closely linked with the west. This continued to have silent impact on the countrys external behaviour even after independence on 1st October, 1960 (Aluko, 1977). Therefore, The Nigerian foreign policy between 1960 1966 was politically and economically aligned (in spite of the non-alignment principle) to the west especially Britain and America. In main, due tocolonial hangover (Abullahi, 2004).In recognition of the fresh unaffiliated Nigerias potentials for a mutually beneficial relationship, the United States of America was represented at the independence celebrations by the Governor of reinvigorated-York State, Mr. Nelson Rockefeller. Immediately after, on October 7, 1960, Prime Minister Balewa trave led to New-York to register Nigeria as the 99th member of the United Nations thereby becoming a recognized member of the international federation. While in the U.S, the prime minister met and invited President Eisenhower to chaffer Nigeria at the earlier opportunity. Thus, it is clear that from the first week of independence, Nigeria had established a cordial relationship with the United States of America. (Clark, 1991). It was in the spirit of this secure relationship between these two giant states that President Kennedy extended an invitation to Nigerias prime minister to tattle the U.S. on 21st July 1961. While in America, the Nigerian Head of political relation was accorded the rare honour of addressing a joint session of the United States congress. Wherein he stated, Our affinity with the U.S is two fold a history of common struggles to achieve freedom from anything that is oppressive to the human spirit. Also, a blood affinity- between our two countries, there resides th e largest concentration of peoples with African blood. (Clark, 1991)The Americans stated that Nigeria was a very important friend of the United States. Balewa held a meeting with President Kennedy at the oval office together with secretary of state Dean twice-baked bread to discuss military relations between the two states as hearty as the situation in Angola and Congo. Situations where the two nations had conflicting interests. On the economic front, Nigeria appealed to the U.S for help in building the Niger dam for power generation purposes, comparison the project to the Tennesse Dam Authority. At the end of the visit, a joint description was issued by the two nations emphasizing the U.S economic aid to Nigeria in the areas of unsophisticated production and public health care services. American investments into the Nigerian economy grew and amounted to over $800 million and over a third of American tote up investments in Africa. (Clark Ibid, Aluko 1977)In concluding this par t of the work, it is evident that America had a profound security, political, and economic interest in Africa and Nigeria as a regional power was seen as bellwether nation in the period under study. This explains the warm economic and military relations between the two nations. NIGERIA AMERICA 1999 2003(The years of Restoration)The election of Olusegun Obasanjo, a retired general and former military head of state from 1976 to 1979 marked a historic point in the history of the Nigeria-U.S relations. Obasanjos ascendancy to the Nigerian Presidency was warmly received by the United States especially because the preceding regime of Gen. Sani Abacha had a very strained relationship with the United States over a wide range of issues that included adult male rights violations and Democratization.The optimism and excitement of the Americans derived from a past experience of friendly relations with ecumenic Obasanjo as Head of state. In fact, the first American President to visit Nigeria was Jimmy carter when Obasanjo was military Head of state. (Abdullahi, 2004). At the political level, shortly after assumption of office in May 1999, president Obasanjo had paid a visit to then President Bill Clinton to hold bilateral duologue and also with incumbent President scouring. American-Nigeria relations grew in bounds within this period. The removal of visa restrictions, change magnitude high-level visits of US officials, discussions of future assistance and the fall ining of a national interest certification on counter-narcotics effective in March 1999, strengthened the ties of friendship between the two nations and Nigeria emerged as a key partner of the U.S on the continent. (Msn.com)Two American Presidents, Bill Clinton and George Bush visited Nigeria in August 2000 and July 2003 respectively. ECONOMIC RELATIONSEconomic assistance from the U.S to Nigeria increased within the period under study. Rising to $78.5 million in 2000 from 23.6 one thousand thousand in 199 9. In 2003, US economic assistance to Nigeria is estimated at $ 65.2 million. The American challenge in its policy towards Nigeria was to formulate a substantive coalition against the background that Nigeria provides 8percent of Americas oil needs. (Msn.com) The United States worked closely with the central bank of Nigeria and other relevant institutions to improve the surround for investment in agriculture through policy reforms at the national and state levels. Other trade initiatives by the U.S government included talent building in customs operations, policy reforms to encourage trade exchanges, African growth and opportunity act (AGOA) incentives for bilateral trade. Nigeria also benefited from the initiative to end hunger in Africa plan, among several other programmes. (Msn.com) What all of this demonstrates is the fact that between 1999-2003 the economic relations between Nigeria was not only very cordial and engaging, but it was characterized by the inflow of several techn ical aid packages intention to help boost the fortunes of the Nigerian economy. MILITARY RELATIONSIn the area of defense relations between Nigeria and the U.S, the United States has supported the peacekeeping and poser centres at the war college in Abuja-the only one of its kind in Africa. Other areas of U.S Nigeria defense relations in the period under review included personnel training, developmental and technical aid, arms sales to Nigeria, justness enforcement co-operation in border control and against arms smuggling and oil theft. Military cooperation between Nigeria and U.S has been clearly manifested in the effort at resolving the Liberian crises. Wherein the U.S provided logistical equipment to the Nigerian military.The training of Nigeria military personnel in American institutions intensified. The United States also offered to provide specialized training and some facilities to the Nigeria patrol within this period. However, the military relationship between Nigeria and America was not without challenges or even tensions, for example, Nigerians, civilians and military alike were not keen on U.S military presence in their country. Many still attribute General Obasanjos replacement of Victor Malu as army chief to Malus dissipate opposition to the increased military co-operation with the United States. It is the thought out sagaciousness of this paper, that Nigeria-U.S relations within this period, especially as it concerns the economic and military ties, was in a state of growth and expansion (Aka 2005). A COMPARATIVE depth psychology OF THE TWO EPOCHSAmerican Nigerian relations in the first republic (1960-1966) waspredicated upon a mutual need for each other by the two nations. It was a relationship of mutual respect and friendliness. But most importantly, it was a dignified relationship for Nigeria which though a very young independent state, had effectively mobilized her resources to earn a respectful height within the familiarity of nations in such a short time. (Clark 1991). Nigeria had cause to request for the in flow of American capital into her economy but even this did not diminish her sense of pride and independence. Whenever the need arose, Nigeria did not shy out from taking a different position to that of America. e.g. on the division of the world into blocs, Angola etc. The Head of Nigerian government in this period, Sir, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa was awarded a unearned doctorate of laws by the university of New York. He was also made an unearned citizen of three cities Chicago, New York and New Orleans (Clark 1991). Between 1999 and 2003, was a period of reengagement for the two nations after a near total breakdown in relations. But this, time the power dynamics were radically different from what obtained between 1960 and 1966.In 1999, the United States of America was not just an alternative power bloc in the world that had another power bloc to dole out with. She was now a sole, undisputed world power with an unrivalled economic and military might. (Abdullahi, 2004), whereas Nigeria, in spite of the potentials she is endowed with and the promise she had held in 1960, was a nation almost on her knees, a nation that had retarded in just about every aspect of its life and was attempting to rediscover itself. forward to 1999, the U.S had stood with the Nigerian people in their struggle against dictatorship. In this era, it was not a relationship of two equals or near equals, No It was an interaction between a world power and an oil producing strong state, that had fallen into a deep socio-economic comma. It was a hand out relationship. Nigeria looked up to the United States for every form of assistance. The U.S provided much for Nigeria supposedly, in the spirit of encouraging democratic governance. Especially, in form of economic and military aid packages. However, American oil corporations had unchained access to Nigerias oil in return. But despite the exchange of visits between the presidents of the two countries, and the increased co-operation between the two countries, America refused to grant Nigerias request for a debt cancellation. It maintained that Nigeria had the resources to pay off her debts. The go around Nigeria was offered is adebt rescheduling. CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, this work was introduced within the frame work of foreign policy analysis, a conceptual clarification of relevant theoretical framework within which the study is located has been stated, Nigerias foreign policy objectives has been examined, motives for the collaboration between Nigeria and the U.S was X-rayed. The work also attempted an incisive analysis of the economic and military relationship between the countries in the two different epochs as it was required to do. This work shall now proceed to state some recommendations that should form the basis of a policy of relationship between Nigeria and the United States of America. First, greater consistency in the U.S-Nigeria milit ary-security relationship. Washington should recognize that its national interest is best served if Nigeria is able to be a force for democracy and constancy in the region. Military and security collaboration between the two countries and in Africa generally, can only increase, given the threat of terrorism world wide. Second, change magnitude Americas diplomatic reach within Nigeria by establishing arenas for U.S. Exchanges with critical areas, such as its oil-producing areas in the Niger Delta and in Northern Nigeria where the U.S closed consular offices. Such diplomatic reach could help the U.S to make a plowshare to conflict management in Nigeria.Third, developing a strategy for an economic action agenda in Nigeria, which must involve business and government actors in the U.S and Nigeria, as well as inviting input from the non-governmental sector. Such a strategy should focus on three priorities first, an acknowledgement of the business communitys responsibility to be a cons tructive player in Nigerias economic and democratic transition second, a focus on restructuring the extractive industry to curb corruption and third, a focus on restoring bucolic industries to help alleviate rural poverty, curb rural-urban pressures and strengthen trade and export. Fourth, eliminating debt stick out and investing in education, health and human development and fifth, strengthening democratic institutions and governance structures which involves supporting democratic dialogue across the political spectrum, as well as assisting in training for elections and parliamentary and political troupe development. Lastly, Americas support for Nigeria should now be stronger than ever, with the re-institution ofdemocratic government. The amount should be genuinely reciprocal and mutually beneficial relationships unaffected by the vagaries of power and party affiliation in Washington a policy that constantly engages the people and the leaders of Nigeria, that is not an appendag e of any general policy that constantly engages the people and the leaders of Nigeria, that is not an appendage of any general policy, and that recognizes the fact that only a fundamental restructuring of the political and economic systems can bring about true democracy in Nigeria. (Aka, 2005 Clark, 1991 Abdullahi, 2004)REFERENCESAdeniran, T (1983). Introduction to international relations. Lagos MacmillanJohari, J.C. (1982). Comparative politics London Sterling publishers.Okere, J.O (2000). Theory, theorizing in international relations and politics Owerri Achugo Publishers.Mahajan, V.G (2000) Political Theory New Delhi Chand Publishers.Abdullahi M.Y. (2004). The wind vane of Nigerian politics. Abuja AnnyPrints Productions.Ojo. O, and Sesay, (2002). Concepts in International Relations. Ile-Ife University Press.Aluko, O, (ed) (1977). The foreign policy of African states. London Hodder and Stughton.Maduagwu O.M., and Mohammed A.S. (eds) (2004). Challenges and prospects of Democratizat ion in Nigeria. Fulbright Alumni Association of Nigeria, Book of Reading No. 2.Aka, P.C. (2005). United States of America and Support for Nigeria democratization in American political sciences review Vol, 106, No. 14 (December, 2005).Clark, T. (1991). A Right Honourable humankind The life and times of Sir, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa. Zaria Huda-huda Publishing Company.Msn. Com (nd). retrieved October 17, 2008 from httpabout.com/african history.Msn. Com (n.d). retrieved October 18, 2008 from httpwww.usembassy nigeria. org.Holsti K.S, (1967). International Politics New Jersey Prentice Hall. Rosenau, J. (1971). The Scientific study o f foreign policy. New York the free press.