Abstract
Africa, the least developed of continents, has in recent times become a hub of increasing geostrategic schemes by some of the ?big guns? in contemporary global politics –notably the United
States of America and its allies, who seemingly are regarded as the conventional overlords of the
region, the BRIC states- Brazil, Russia, India, China, and some other emerging countries from
Asia. This neo-relationship which is characterized by socio-economic and politico-military
interests, though regarded in certain quarters and existing literature as a symbiotic one, is
gradually, as events unfold, assuming a predatory and highly asymmetrical relation. It is
important to note that the neo-scramble is riddled with interests that are beyond Africa, which as
events occur, might hurt and/or limit the continent‘s aspirations, development and impair its
security. Bringing it home, the activities of the major powers and the multinational corporations
would have serious implications for the co
1.1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
Extra-African presence and interests in Africa, and the Gulf of Guinea in particular, have
presently assumed a more pronounced dimension in the 21st century. Really, the scramble for
Africa, and indeed the Gulf of Guinea by extra-territorial powers is deeply rooted in earlier
centuries starting from the 16thcentury, but the 21stcentury in particular holds the record for the
largest ?rush? for Africa and her resources by the big-guns in international politics (Adesanya,
2004). Indeed the 20th century ushered in globalization, which obviously is serving the purposes
of spreading development and deepening the linkages between or amongst peoples within the
international system. Thus, the phenomenon has assisted in whittling barriers to communication
between and among states. This development marked a watershed in state relations as
international relations which was largely euro-centric (focused on Europe) in political,
technological, cultural, and politico-diplomatic, as well as military gamuts to mention a few,
began to adopt a more encompassing global structure to include other continents of the world.
More than this is the fact that democracy proliferates within the global system, while the role of
Multinational Corporations (MNCs) as tool to actualize the aspirations of the major power,
assumed a robust dimension within the international system.
Beyond this however is the fact that the end of the cataclysmic event of the 2nd World
War brought the Cold War, which served to bifurcate the world into East-West. This situation
2
led to the second scramble for Africa, between the ideological giants of the United States and the
Soviet Union. The newly independent African states insisted on being non-aligned to either side,
this however served the purpose of enticing both sides of the divide to woo them as new brides.
As such, they –African units- were able to access some necessary funds and hardware. Given
that Africa is festooned with a cornucopia of resources, particularly at a time when some of the
major powers are in dire need, the continent has thus assumed the status of the epicentre of
global scramble; even as the 21stcentury scramble becomes a currency that resonates in literature.
Flowing from the foregoing therefore is the notion that the neo-scramble for the continent
is underpinned by desires for resources, and as such, the Gulf of Guinea that boasts of countries
that are treasure trove, especially serious reserves of desired energy and mineral resources have
assumed the status of the ?mecca‘ of worship for the extra-territorial powers of the US, China,
UK and France that consider themselves as the conventional overlords of the zone, India, Brazil,
Japan, Russia, and Malaysia to mention a few. In view of this, existing literature has claimed that
the countries of the region are going to enjoy serious in-flow of revenue that would assist them in
not merely leaving the rank of poor states, but emerging as well to do ones. This claim, as events
are presently showing, was made without giving serious considerations to the attendants that
would come with the scramble.
To this end, the core of this study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter is an
introduction to the study. It argues that more than the increased influx of funds into the countries
of Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, the energy and mineral producing ones in particular, there are
developmental and security challenges that might assume grave dimensions, particularly to
Nigeria, which is the perceived regional power. These developmental and security concerns are
the attendants of the 21st century scramble for the region by extra-territorial powers, which are
3
deepening both their presence and interests in the region in order to guarantee their oil and
mineral supply, and equally seek markets for their manufactured goods. Chapter two is
concerned with the framework of study, while chapter three presents the methodology explored
in achieving the aims of the study. Chapter four serves the purpose of analysing the data
gathered; and equally nuances the development and security challenges that Nigeria might
contend with given the ongoing scramble for oil and mineral resources in the region by major
global oil importers, especially those identified above. The last chapter draws out the major
conclusion, summary of the study and recommendation.
1.1.2 WHAT IS THE NEO-SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICA ALL ABOUT?
The neo-scramble for Africa refers to the ?mild‘ scuffle for African states by the
industrialized world with the aim of establishing influence on the region as well as securing
foreign policy interests of socio-economic and politico-military pedigree. It could also be viewed
as all subsisting relations and interrelations regarding economy, politics, military, technology and
socio-cultural aspects between the Global North and Africa arising in the 21st century in which
the latter benefits on a lesser scale to the former.
The neo-scramble for Africa differs from the earlier epochs with new players on board,
new geo-political relations, variegated strategies and inter-connected implications which all have
impacts on Africa and the extra-African powers themselves. It is imperative to observe the role
of globalization in shaping the structure of states relations today without totally deleting the ever
present underlying factor of state security of national interest – a trait that has been present in
4
these relations from time immemorial. An event largely seen in existing literature as the closest
origin of the current neo-scramble for Africa is the Cold War (1945 – 89) – forty five years of
overall high- level tension and competition between the superpowers, but with no direct military
conflict (Mingst, 1999).
For African states during and after the phase of de-colonization, the 20th century was
largely defined by the activities of the two super powers of that era – the United States of
America and the Defunct Soviet Union (cold war). These two belligerents, which individually
held and still hold opposing ideologies on the politico-economic structure of the global system
(capitalism for the U.S.A. and socialism for the Defunct Soviet Union), consciously and
otherwise had states all over the world surrendering allegiances to either one of them for the
strengthening their individual causes. These arrangements saw for the establishment of military
international organizations armed with the objective of securing and protecting member states of
either the capitalist or socialist blocs. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was
created by the U.S. and its allies while the WARSAW Pact was initiated by the Defunct Soviet
Union. This bi-polarity was however punctured by the establishment of a third wheel to the duo;
the Non-Aligned Movement (1955) – a movement of 115 members representing the interests and
priorities of developing states of which some African states like Nigeria, Ghana, are members
(the non-aligned movement: Description and history, n.d.). At this juncture the rational question
that comes to mind is, of what significance is the event of the cold war to Africa as well as
Nigeria‘s development and security? One factor that stands out as regards this question is seen in
the violent dimension of the cold war.
Going by the afore stated definition of the cold war which includes the absence of direct
military confrontation by the belligerents, one who isn‘t abreast of the details might conclude
5
that the period which is defined in some literature like Mingst (1999) as a period of ?long peace
sustained by mutual deterrence? was actually free from violence, but this couldn‘t be farther
from the truth. Proxy wars (surrogate wars being fought on behalf of the United States on one
hand and the Defunct Soviet Union on the other) claimed the lives of thousand on African soil
and this is not to talk of the wars in Asia, Latin America and the rest of the world; a notable
example of such in Africa is the Angola civil war of the 1980s. Though there was no proxy war
fought on Nigerian soil, Nigeria‘s foreign policy of non-alignment to any of the super powers
and their allies was largely as a result of the cold war. This resulted in Nigeria receiving aids
from both sides in a bid to win her over and as such Nigeria‘s claim of non-alignment has been
criticized. Another factor to consider in answering the question is the evil that was apartheid rule
– the enforcement of racial hierarchy privileging whites in South Africa to the detriment of the
native blacks (BBC archive Apartheid in South-Africa: Living under racial segregation and
discrimination n.d.). Nigeria spent millions of naira in aids to support the movement for the
eradication of apartheid.
Coming home, the British colonial economic policies in Nigeria during the hey-days of
colonialism which discouraged indigenous industrialization impacted on the latter‘s ability to
become more independent as Nigeria became a source of raw materials for the metropolis cites
and factories in Britain (Adeyeri and Adejuwon 2012). Some 50 years later after gaining flag
independence, Nigeria‘s dependence on Britain is still a reality and neo-colonialism as argued by
the great Kwame Nkrumah has come to replace colonialism with a more refined approach.
There exist similarities as well as differences between the scramble for Africa prior to the
21st century and the neo-scramble for Africa. Some of the similarities are seen in the following;
6
1. The scrambles, in both eras‘ have extra-African players engaging the region on the
platform of separate identities. For example in the 21st century the United Nations
Security Council (UNSC) has virtually all its members vying for influence in the Gulf of
Guinea thereby dividing the council into the U.S.A, Britain, France and its allies on one
hand and on the other Moscow, Beijing and its allies (the two groups practice capitalism
and communism respectively which is characteristic of the cold war);
2. In both eras, the underlying factor of securing individual national interests remains an
independent variable. Irrespective of the facade displayed for public view and the new
strategies in play in the 21st century, the common deducible trait in state relations
between Africa and extra-African players in both periods mentioned is that of securing
national interest;
3. The more significant expanse of the African continent remains glued to the status of
third-world. This is a fact that was in existence prior to the neo-scramble and still has not
changed in very recent times even with the continued economic relations between the two
classes;
4. The industrialized countries had and still have the upper hand over Africa in these
relations as regards calling the shots and laying down the rules. The International
Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the Paris Club and other financial institutions of
the west continue are just some of the instruments used by the west to exploit the
weaknesses of Africa. Attached to grants and aids offered by these institutions are
stringent pay back clauses which have been discovered to further put Africa in a position
of subservience;
7
5. Africa‘s role, in terms of economic relations has not changed and neither has that of the
west. In the two eras being considered, the role of extracting raw materials has remained
the same for Africa while the west has maintained the duty of refining such materials into
finished products and re-selling such back to Africa at exaggerated prices, the list is
almost endless.
As regards the differences in scramble for Africa before the 21st century and afterwards we have;
1. The21st century has witnesses the emergence of new players notably the BRIC statesBrazil, Russia, India, China, and some other Asian countries. These new players were
also accompanied by new strategies, schemes, substance of interest, and so on. It is
important to note that prior to the 21st century, most of these new players didn‘t have the
wherewithal to expand their influence overseas to Africa;
2. Energy resources, especially oil and other associated products have been put on a
pedestal in the 21st century following the discovery of its importance during the heydays
of both world wars and the cold war. These resources were discovered to be in abundant
supply in Africa, as such in an attempt to avoid the crises-ridden middle east as well as
the dictates of industrialized states that also harbour crude oil, these super powers have
turned to Africa for a relatively cheaper and easier access to oil in the 21st century which
was not exactly so in the preceding era;
3. Africa in the period preceding the 21st century had most of its states under colonial
subjugation up until the later part of the 20th century. The transition of former colonies in
Africa to status of independent states has significantly changed the structure of relations
as regards Africa‘s participation in international politics, bearing in mind that political
8
sovereignty is a pre-requisite requirement for state induction into the international
system;
4. Following the end of the cold war in the early years of the 21st century, there has been an
undeniable acceptance of capitalism in Africa as the preferred mode of production. This
is a very significant difference in the sense that in the second half of the 20thcentury
capitalism and communism were both being promulgated almost equally by the U.S. and
the Defunct Soviet Union (ideological antagonism of the cold war).
The afore-mentioned are just some of the obvious differences in the scramble for Africa in
the two eras. Suffice to say that the neo-scramble for Africa does not have these foreign states as
well as multi-nationals and investors cordoning-off the acquisition of non-energy related
resources, it has been discovered that the security of energy resources has been placed at the fore
front of foreign policy objectives of the majority of these extra-African states.
1.2.0 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The global economy is witnessing serious fluctuations with attendant spill-over, which is
assuming a grave dimension in Africa, particularly the Gulf of Guinea. This is partly because of
the widespread crises in/with which the Middle-East, which previously was the major supplier of
crude oil to the global market, is embroiled. This is coupled with both the significance of the oil
and gas resources and the impending scarcity of these resources; in addition to these were the Al
Qaeda terror attacks September 11, 2001 on the U.S.; as well as the intensified search for natural
resources necessary for furthering development.
9
Given the above, key global players, especially China and the United States – at a
reduced rate presently, perhaps because of America‘s possession of large deposit of Shale oilare increasingly casting their gazes on the oil-rich countries of Africa, especially those of the
Gulf of Guinea; some other zones of the continent where they – extra-regional powers – could
access the desired resources. Their interest, as earlier explained, is partly because of the need to
securitize their energy and mineral resources supply; that is, to diversify their sources of energy
supply away from the Middle East, which has continuously been a boiling cauldron of imbroglio,
and to ensure that their companies do not witness the dearth of necessary resources. In this
regard, Henry Ryan, the former Deputy under Secretary of Defence insisted that Africa … is
emerging on the world scene as a strategic player…. (Mc Fate, 2008).
As such, the American government dispatched naval task force, comprising an aircraft
carrier, a guided missile cruiser, two guided missile destroyers, an attack submarine and a supply
ship to the Gulf of Guinea (The Punch, 2004, 6) to conduct military exercises in that
?ungoverned‘ part of Africa. Since then, key government officials in Washington restated the
importance of the GoG (and the rest of Africa) to U.S. energy and security calculations; for
instance, Walter Kansteiner III erstwhile U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Africa opined that:
African oil is critical to the U.S., and it will increase and become more important as we go
forward (Obi, 2008, 38; Traub-Merz & Yates, 2004, 7). Also, the Chinese government and some
other Asian governments, India for instance, have deepened their investments in the region
through a wide range of commercial deals such as the Chinese $2 billion loan [in 2003] to
Angola for secured supply of 10,000 [barrels] of Angolan crude per day. Presently, China‘s
state-owned national oil companies and those from India are active in prospecting for oil with a
mandate to meet some portions of their countries crude oil requirements. Aside from the U.S.
10
and China and other Asian countries, other countries such as France and Britain are already
deeply involved in the continent, portions of which they regard as their traditional zone of
influence. In several respects examined in the study, the growing activities of major extraAfrican powers in Africa portend several challenges for Nigeria and other countries of the
continent. Granted this, extant literature has claimed that the 21st century scramble for Africa
portends serious advantages to its units, particularly Nigeria, which presently is the largest
economy on the continent. This claim, as realized, was made without proper regard for the
serious disadvantageous appurtenances that evolve and/or are deepened by the neo-scramble for
the continent.
In view of the above, the study makes a radical departure from existing literature by
examining the background to and the broad dimensions of the 21st century scramble for the
Africa. This is done through the examination of the existing interface between the historical
experiences of oil-rich and mineral resources laden African countries and the factors that led to
the neo-scramble for the continent. As such, the study seeks to explain the varying security
threats that the domestic regional and international politics involved in the neo-scramble for the
continent poses to Nigeria.
1.3.0 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The specific objectives of the study are to:
1. probe the growing importance of Africa to regional and global security;
2. examine the myriad developmental and security issues relating to the international
politics of natural resources in Africa; and to
3. analyze the implications of the complex developmental and security issues that are
engendered by the convergence of extra-continental interests in the Africa for Nigeria.
11
1.4.0 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Granted the fact of the region‘s importance as the proverbial bride in or to international
politico-economy, particularly as a treasure trove, one realizes that a probe meant to demonstrate
the objectives of this study is necessary. As such, the following questions form the necessary
tools with which one would elicit apposite responses from interviewees that would be
purposively chosen.
1. In your opinion, how and/or why has so much relevance been attached to the African
continent from the start of the present century?
2. What complex security issues are being engendered by the presence and interests of
extra-continental powers in the continent?
3. What implications, in your view, do the deepening of both the presence and interests of
extra-territorial powers in Africa pose for Nigeria‘s national security; and how adequate
are the measures that the Nigerian federal government has adopted in combating such
negative effects on her national security and development?
1.5.0 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
Certain conjectural statements intended to explain facts as well as observations in the
study were adopted and they are referred to as hypotheses. These statements though not verified
proved to be a pre-requisite for the completion of the study – they are divided into two (Null
hypothesis and Alternative hypothesis).The following are both the Null (Ho) and Alternative
(H1) hypothesis of the afore-mentioned research questions of the study:
Research Question1
H0 There is no significant relevance attached to Africa beginning from the 21st century.
H1 There is significant relevance attached to Africa beginning from the 21st century.
Research Question 2
H0 There are no complex security issues engendered by the international politics on-going in
the continent of Africa.
12
H1 There are complex security issues engendered by the international politics on-going in the
continent of Africa.
Research Question 3
H0 The extra-regional scramble for the continent has no implications on Nigeria‘s security.
H1 The extra-regional scramble for Africa has grave implications for Nigeria‘s security.
1.6.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
This study is of immense relevance, both to the academic and the practitioners. For the
academics because it adds a new dimension to the understanding of the 21st century scramble for
Africa, which has presently become the epicentre for global interests and/or investment. And for
the practitioners because they would be able to take into cognizance the fact that the neoscramblers are rational actors that would first pursue the different aspirations of their varying
countries before taking Africa, their host, into consideration. In this light, the major thrust of the
study is the presentation of the realistic dimensions of the hidden transcripts of the neoscramblers for the continent.