Introduction

It was close to passing the teenage stage in my life, full of euphoria and exuberance for what the Future holds that my worldview was twisted by the violence, which broke out and resulted to the death of thousands, with the destruction of infrastructures thereby causing a ‘pulse’ to social and economic activities. As Displaced students, we had to take refuge in an Army Barracks within the vicinity. Pondering on the violence, which regarded by many as ‘ethno-religious’, I realized during a conversation with some University students around where my institution was situated, that persons or personalities are always regarded as embodiments of religious affiliations or beliefs.

A country, which is multi ethnic and religious, would always face the challenges that come with diversity. When some groups are not properly represented or neglected and their interests and positions seen as insignificant and irrelevant, then the struggle/quest for identity is visible as an exercise of agency. This phenomenon results to Militia group formations (as we have in the Regions of Nigeria currently). I am not in any way exploring the hierarchy of human needs only, according to Maslow as it is proffered in Psychology, which has largely been supplanted by the attachment theory in graduate and clinical psychology and psychiatry but rather tailor the various definitions and the place of human needs in the occurrence/construct of conflicts (The Human Needs Theories of Abraham Maslow (1973), John Burton (1979), Marshall Rosenberg (2003) and Manfred Max-Neef (1987). I should think that this reflection informs us of the necessitated ethnic and religious divide as a result not having our needs met as components of this great entity called Nigeria by the structure of governance[i].

The Seville Statement on Violence written by twenty leading scientists from around the world, in Seville, Spain, on 16 May 1986, concluded clearly that ‘violence was not human nature.’ It convincingly argued that violence was not genetic, and was simply a social construct, and an invention (Dr. Havva KOK, 2013). Therefore, collections of Human Needs Theorists postulate the fact that  “Human needs are a powerful source of explanation of human behavior and social interaction. All individuals have needs that they strive to satisfy, either by using the system, ‘acting on the fringes,’ or acting as a reformist or revolutionary. Given this condition, social systems must be responsive to individual needs, or be subject to instability and forced change (possibly through violence or conflict)” (Roger A.Coate and Jerel A. Rosati, 1988).

The Conflict Story

The phenomenal increase of ethno-religious conflicts in Nigeria has been referred to some writers as a rising incidence that is going out of proportion, a badge of national unity and an eruption, which is being traced to the return to civil rule (Ukiwo. 2003). Thus Ikelegbe  (2005) affirms, “Since the 1990s, ethnic and ethno-religious contestation and conflicts have escalated in Nigeria. In particular, communal, ethnic, and ethno-religious politicization and mobilization have increased since democratization opened up a political space in May 1999…the very bloody and highly destructive ethnic clashes between the Itsekiris and Ijaws in Delta; the Yoruba and Hausa/Fulani in Lagos, Ogun, Kwara, Kano, Oyo, and Kaduna States; the Yoruba and Igbo in Lagos; the Hausa/Fulani and Igbo in Kano, Kaduna, Abia, and Imo States; the Tivs and the Jukuns and Kutebs in Benue States and Taraba states; and the indigenous ethnic groups in Plateau and the Hausa/Fulani settlers/herdsmen have all included some participation of ethnic militias”.

The present Day northern Nigeria was formerly Northern Protectorate during the colonial era under the British. It is commonly referred to as ‘the Hausa States’[ii] due to its language that is Hausa and culturally rooted in Islam. Islam came into the northern part of Nigeria around the 9^th century.[iii] It became more populated as a result of the cease-fire of the civil war which broke out around 1967 -1970 as a result of a unification that was not consented to by both parties (Kelechi.K. 1996). Worthy of note is that the twelve northern states are part of the thirty-six states that makeup Nigeria, including the Federal capital Territory Abuja.[iv]

Such a movement implied that the indigenes of the north would unavoidably come into contact with other religions, cultures, languages and worldviews. One would not at this point negate the fact of incompatibility between the non-Islamic principles and Islamic ones. Such a migration into the northern region of Nigeria caused an economic tension which could be described as manifesting in the form of a growing economic disparity that has led to not only ethno-religious violence, but also escalated Gun violence in the said part of Nigeria (Ime.J et al. 2007). Amidst the fact of coexistence and adaptation, the national life, which is expressed through politics and governance, had its own complexities. The point I want to make here is that even though Religion plays supposedly like Ethnicity a unifying factor, but in the case of Nigeria its adherence is more divisive than unifying. Ibrahim (1991) discloses the 1987 report of the Political Bureau that prepared the mode for return to civilian rule in 1992, which states that ‘The two organized religions have the tendency to delay national integration’ because of their ‘negative tendency’ to ‘create competing social orders’, and to define ‘the most basic community’ thereby challenging ‘ the national community of Nigeria’. Cited from Federal Government of Nigeria, Report of the Political Bureau (Lagos, 1987).[v]

The first group of political parties that were formed at the formation of our nationhood was ethnic rooted and so resulted to biased policies (authoritative and undemocratic), power manipulation and elite dominance. Also, unequal representation, religious bigotry and supremacy as it became difficult to separate religion from politics (i.e. institutionalization of religious principles). Visible too, are victimization, nepotism, marginalization and lack of nationalistic interest and patriotism. Muslims or Christians who become Nigerian leaders tend to display their religious and ethnic identities at the fields of national assignments. Some have tried making Nigeria join the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) and others too, have tried associating with either the Roman Catholic Pontiff as an ally or put religious support at fore fronts. This struggle has resulted to religious intolerance, neglect and oppression of the minority. It will be good to note that Nigeria is multi lingual (about 400 languages) and cultural and yet three are said to be the major.

Apart from the fusion of religious and political interests by politicians, some biased religious leaders like some media outfits, have also become dividers instead of connectors to Nigerians. During the Danish anti Mohammedean cartoon of September/October 2005, some Islamic clerics in the northern part of Nigeria had in solidarity with some intolerable Muslim adherents of the Islamic world, called for the extinction of Christianity through the killing of Christians. Being in Kano during this incident and also as the editor of the diocesan monthly paper, I was a witness to the press report, which confirmed about forty (40) % of Christian places of worship destroyed in Kano Municipal. There were so many deaths, and economic means of livelihood destroyed. This caused bitter and hatred on the part of Christians, as there was no reprisal attack from the Christians. Also, the international influence of the Twin Tower Terrorist attack (September 2001) and the fierce reaction of the United States on Afghanistan Taliban Government (October 2001) have a local transfer of aggression in northern Nigeria. It resulted to Christians being attacked, thereby yielding to human and structural destructions made.

At each display of intolerable vicious confrontation or retaliation from either Muslims or Christians, the Federal Government has only intervened by sending military and imposing curfew and also establishing judicial commissions. Apart from international insinuated or carry over ethno-religious actions, there is also the intra Islamic conflict that affected the Christians like the Maitasine violent religious conflict of Kano and Borno (1980 – 1982).[vi] Since these violent conflicts take place without being resolved by the Government either at the Federal or State level amidst the traumatic results/consequences including Gender Based Violence/Crimes, that constantly reoccur. They become recycled in different forms. There have been ethnic insinuated conflicts that became ethno-religious, like the 1999 and 2000 (Shagamu and Lagos respectively) spill over or reprisal attacks of Muslims on non-Muslims and non-Hausas in northern Nigeria. At such occurrences they unfortunately kill Muslims who are not Hausas.  The struggle for territorial control on the part of both northern Christians and Muslims has also caused several ethno-religious violent conflicts, in which ‘settlers’ tend to impose their cultural and religious heritage on the ‘indigenous’ (Harnischfeger.J. 2006). The decade ethno-religious conflict in plateau state Nigeria that is a middle belt state having borders with three Hausa states, is a product of such even though there is a political undertone to such violent conflicts. There is also an unending tabulation of ethnic originated and Religiously identified violent conflicts which give rise to the wastage of human lives are constantly and development, either human and structural – (Salawu, 2010) ranging from 2001 through 2008/2009/2010 – respectively.[vii]

Recently, there has been resurgence of an extremist Islamic sect called Boko Haram. One fact, which I tend to dwell with, is that it is a group that has its identity embedded in its needs, position and interests like any other militia group from other geographical zones within Nigeria. These Militias have in their formation stages undergone process transformations that can be evaluated by different Approaches of this construct. But one still contests the fact that a group actually represents in entirety, the claims of total and collective representation when it comes to the issues of ethnic, social, religious, economic and political/cultural motifs and interests. This group proposes to Islamize non-Muslims in the north and also to implement Shari’a, which is the Islamic legal system. I think that the group takes its position by implication, but I am of the view that the government and well meaning Nigerians should initiate an in-depth exploration and analysis of their interests in order to discover the underplayed causes of their grievances. As their principled methodology, they propose Jihad.