CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

There is an intricate relationship between internal conflict and political violence. This is anchored on the fact that both have social elements and group interest. Internal conflict involves the confrontation of powers. Power takes several forms, which may be identive and assertive, altruistic and manipulative, coercive and physical among others. On the other hand, politics involves the struggle for power and this makes conflict a basic ingredient of politics. This is usually action oriented, which is intentionally meant to carry out the actor’s own will against the resistance of other people, group or parties. Conflict according to Morrison and Stevenson (1971) is a “social relationship in which the actors hold logically incompatible values”. So, political conflict usually involves a struggle over values, power and scarce resources. This struggle for values, power and scarce resources could result into the use of coercion or physical force, and when this method is employed, the result will be political violence. Political violence is a product of social conflict. This is because by definition, social is intentionally taking into account other selves, power involves the capability to produce effects, and social power is an intentionally directed capability to produce effects through another person. So, internal conflict is then the confrontation of social powers. But what does this view really imply? There are three ways to look at this. First, internal conflict is exclusively an aspect of social power. To understand such conflict therefore, we have to deal at the level of social powers and their dialectics. Again, internal conflict is not limited to hostile or antagonistic opposition, which is to say that it is not wholly a clash or coercive powers as usually implied, but of any opposing powers. Another is the existence of violence that does not presume an underlying social conflict. Violence here connotes an intense manifestation of strength that often involves some severe physical effects. Indeed, social conflicts involve interests, and a person’s interest is a vector of power; it includes his attitude and strength towards the production of effects. So, social power is a social interest that is, one oriented towards other selves. With this understanding, we can relate more specifically to our concepts of internal conflict and political violence in Nigeria. Within the psychological sphere, an interest consists of situation, actor, goal and object so, in Nigeria how is our ethnic, religious, social, economic and political interests a factor in our response to national interest? How do these affect our decisions and responses to our national needs and integration? It is within this context that we will locate an interest as a part of the dynamic motivational calculus. Its strength is generated by our needs, and its content and direction are partially learned from experience and culture and partially rational. In Nigeria, internal conflict vary as to whether they emphasis antagonizing tests of power, competition, incompatibility of interests or mutual awareness of incompatibility based on ethnicity, economic conditions, politics affiliation, resources sharing among others. This clearly indicates or establishes the fact that social conflicts are generated based on prevalent conditions of the Micro and Macro levels of the country. These conditions that manifest social conflicts are projected within the political sphere and are aggressively and antagonistically pursued with all political mights. The result of this political aggression is what usually leads to political violence in Nigeria

1.1.1 The Emergence of the All Progressive Congress

For 16 years, the gigantic behemoth, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) controlled the political system of Nigeria almost unopposed due to highly monetized politics, individualistic tendencies of politicians, incoherent party ideologies, and party defection among several other factors. On February 6, 2013, the All Progressive Congress (APC) was born when Nigeria’s three biggest opposition parties; the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), the Congress for Progressive (CPC), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), merged to form the APC (The Nation, May 29, 2015). The rise of APC was very significant because several attempts in the past to form a mega party in the country had been unsuccessful (Egwemi, 2009). APC became more strengthened after five serving PDP governors defected to the newly formed party. Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, Abdulfatah Ahmed of Kwara State, Rabiu Kwankwanso of Kano State, Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State and Aliyu Wamakko of Sokoto State (The Nation, May 29, 2015). Similarly, 49 legislators defected to join the original 137 legislators in the APC. This new twist gave APC the cutting edge in the House of Representatives long before the election (Ibid). On January 29, 2014, 11 senators led by former Kwara State Governor, Bukola Saraki decamped to APC (Ibid). Other political heavyweights such as ex- Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal (now Sokoto State Governor) and former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar joined APC. On March 28, 2015, the presidential candidate of APC, Gen. Muhammudu Buhari (retd) defeated the incumbent president, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP with almost 2.6 million votes (`The Nation, May 29, 2015). Currently, APC boasts of 22 executive governors, 64 senators and 225 members of the House of Representatives (including both the Senate President and the Speaker, House of Representatives). APC is clearly the most dominant party in Nigeria since the conclusion of the 2015 general polls. Using the elite theory, APC won the polls because both the political elite in the north and southwestern Nigeria worked assiduously to iron out their perceived religious and cultural differences in order to build a formidable opposition party. The political elite in the north believed that the region was edged out of enjoying political power after the demise of late President Yaradua and the emergence of Dr. Goodluck Jonathan in 2011 as the elected President. Jonathan’s re-election bid was perceived by northern political elites to be an attempt by a section of the country to cripple the Hausa/Fulani hegemony on Nigerian politics. Similarly, the Bolaji Ahmed Tinubu led Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) perceived President Jonathan’s body language, political appointments and policies to be anti-Yoruba. Besides, the party stalwarts in ACN believed it was high time the Yoruba nation joined mainstream political climate of Nigeria. The vice presidential slot given to Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, an accomplished lawyer and scholar from Ogun state was a clear indication that southwest meant real business. The propaganda used by the northern and southwestern elite was well received by the people from those regions who boast of the largest percentage of population spread. The emergence of Buhari as APC’s presidential flag bearer, who commands a cult like followership in the north and his track records as an anti-corruption crusader and military tactician helped in polishing his image both locally and internationally. The APC campaign strategists capitalized on the failures of Jonathan’s administration in addressing the Boko Haram Insurgency; fighting corruption and salvaging the dwindling economy to sell the “CHANGE” bandwagon to the public. The defection of some notable influential party leaders from PDP to APC validates the postulations made by elite theorists. The much publicized political feud between Dr. Jonathan as sitting President and former military ruler and civilian President, Olusegun Obasanjo gave the PDP a bad image. Obasanjo’s expulsion from PDP, his withdrawal from partisan politics and the adoption of his junior in the military, Gen. Buhari (retd) was seen as a paradigm shift by the majority of Nigerian elite to effect a change in the running of the country.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Internal conflict is one of the major issues in Nigeria political parties; be it the people’s Democratic Party (PDP) or the all progressive congress (APC). The internal conflict in the All Progressive Congress (APC) is the issue of zoning and decampment. A lot of political elites decamping from one political party to the other; most of them that moved into the APC wishes to be given the same position they occupy in their former political party. This brought serious issues in the All Progressive Congress (APC). Secondly, there have been series of studies on conflicts but not even a single study has been carried out on internal conflict in the Nigeria political system. It is to this regard that the study is based on Muhammed buhari and the management of internal conflicts in the “all progressive congress (APC)

1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The main aim of the research work is to examine Muhammed buhari and the management of internal conflicts in the “all progressive congress (APC). The specific objectives of the study are:

1. to determine the causes of internal conflicts among the members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria
2. to determine the methods used by Muhammed buhari in the resolution of internal conflict among members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria
3. to ascertain the challenges faced by Muhammed Buhari in the management of internal conflict among members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria
4. to recommend ways to resolve issues of internal conflict among member of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The study came up with research questions so as to ascertain the above stated objectives of the study. The following research questions guide the objectives of the study:

1. What are the causes of internal conflicts among the members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria?
2. What are the methods used by Muhammed buhari in the resolution of internal conflict among members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria?
3. What are the challenges faced by Muhammed Buhari in the management of internal conflict among members of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria?
4. What are the ways to resolve issues of internal conflict among member of all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria?

1.5 STATEMENT OF THE HYPOTHESIS

H0: Muhammed Buhari method of management of internal conflicts in the all progressive congress is not effective

H1: Muhammed Buhari method of management of internal conflicts in the all progressive congress is effective

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study on Muhammed buhari and the management of internal conflicts in the “all progressive congress (APC) will be of immense benefit to all the political parties in Nigeria. The study will explore the causes and kind of internal conflicts in the Nigeria political party system. The findings of the study will proffer a lasting solution and recommend ways to stop the issue of internal conflict in the all progressive congress (APC) in Nigeria. The study will serve as a repository of information to other researchers that desire to carry out similar research on the above topic. Finally the study will contribute to the body of existing literature on internal conflicts.

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study will cover on Muhammed buhari and the management of internal conflicts in the “all progressive congress (APC)

1.8 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

Financial constraint- Insufficient fund tends to impede the efficiency of the researcher in sourcing for the relevant materials, literature or information and in the process of data collection (internet, questionnaire and interview).

Time constraint- The researcher will simultaneously engage in this study with other academic work. This consequently will cut down on the time devoted for the research work

1.9 DEFINITION OF TERMS

INTERNAL CONFLICTS: Internal conflict is a struggle within a person's mind over a problem or question