The Impact Of Xenophobic Attacks On Nigeria-south Africa Bilateral Relations

1.3 Aims and Objectives of the Study

The main aims and objectives of the study is to investigate he Impact Of Xenophobic Attacks On Nigeria-South Africa Bilateral Relations

The specific objectives are:

1. To examine xenophobic attacks in South Sfrica and Nigeria’s afrocentric foreign policy

2. To analyze the historical background to Nigeria-South Africa relations

3. To investigate the impact of xenophobic attacks on Nigeria-South Africa relations

1.4 Research Questions

1. What are the nature of xenophobic attacks in south africa and Nigeria’s afrocentric foreign policy

2. What are the historical background to Nigeria-South Africa relations?

3. what are the impact of xenophobic attacks on Nigeria-South Africa relations?

1.5 Scope of the Study

This study takes a critical review of xenophobic attacks in  South Africa, and the current bilateral relationship between Nigeria and South Africa government.

1.6  Research Methodology

This study is qualitative in nature and makes use of secondary sources of data which include: books, academic journals, magazines, newspapers and online sources. The research does not employ quantitative analysis. The study makes use of a theory of international relations specifically political realism as revised from available literatures to analyse the relationships between the independent and dependent variables. The independent variable in this study is the xenophobic attacks in South Africa while the dependent variable in this work is Nigeria’s foreign policy

1.7 Literature Review

The Concept of Xenophobia Xenophobia is a social phenomenon with political significance. This is as a result of the fact that it embodies hatred and fear of foreigners and indirectly influences the policies of government. As a concept however, the term xenophobia is bereft of a singular definition. This is no fault of the concept but due to the various submissions of scholars. In defining the term, Fayomi, Chidozie and Ayo (2015) attempt a dichotomization. The term xenophobia is of Greek origins made up of two terms, xenos translated to mean “stranger” or “foreigner” and phobos translated to mean “fear”. Hence xenophobia to Fayomi et al (2015) suggests a fear or dislike of foreigners. Harris (2002) explains xenophobia as a negative attitude stemming from dislike, hatred or fear. Solomon and Haigh (2009) explain xenophobia as the fear or hatred of foreigners leading to discriminatory behaviours including violence. The term xenophobia can also be explained as “the deep dislike of non-nationals by nationals of a recipient state” (Bekker 2010:127) (cited in Hågensen, 2014:1). Saleh (2015) explains the term xenophobia as hate and violence premised on prejudiced discourses, leading to the stigmatization of people based on nationality. Hence xenophobia can be explained as the exhibition of hatred or dislike for people of other nationalities, through violence, sabotage, looting, etc. Xenophobia is however not limited to violence against immigrants and non-nationals. It could also be portrayed in other forms including exploitation, looting, property destruction and verbal abuse. In highlighting its characteristics, the phenomenon of xenophobia can be linked to the philosophies of nationalism and ethnocentrism which highlight the belief in the superiority of one’s country or ethnicity over another (licata & Klein, 2002; Schirmer, 1998) (cited in Yakushko, 2009). In support of this argument, Watts (1996) (cited in Yakushko, 2009) suggests that the chances of xenophobia is hightened when ethnocentrism connects with a sense of threat as a result of the presence of a non-national resulting in prejudice. An example of such is holding foreigners or non-nationals responsible for the prevalent levels of unemployment.

The quest of a nation to pronounce and actualise its interests and objectives within the purview of the international system makes necessary the phenomenon of foreign policy. Foreign policy also aids a state in choosing its allies and maintaining international political and economic relations that are advantageous to its development. However, within the field of social science, concepts such as foreign policy do not have a singular or universal definition. This is due to definitions offered by scholars from different viewpoints. Foreign policy can be explained as the category of policy that deals with a nations defence, economy, international political and economic relations in the international system. According to Frankel (1978:26-27) (cited in Ezirim, 2011) foreign policy referes to “a range of actions, as well as a set of principles influencing these actions, taken with reference to external situations and factors”. To Adeniji (1968:15) the term foreign policy denotes a “projection of the country’s national interest into the trans-national arena, and the consequent interaction of one with the other”. Foreign policy serves as a bridge between the domestic politics of a State and the arena of world politics (Evans and Newnham, 1999) (cited in Rolenc, 2013). To Iganga (2013), foreign policy beyond crafted objectives interests and principles, is the process which a state applies elements of national power for the projection of national interest on the stage of international politics.

Nigeria’s Foreign Policy

Nigeria’s foreign policy can be explained as the set of principles guiding her actions taken during her interactions with foreign powers. Origins of Nigeria’s foreign policy can be traced to the colonial epoch in her history. During this period, the formation of Nigeria’s foreign policy was the perogative of Her Majesty’s government in Great Britain. Invariably, the decision of the British government concerning Nigeria’s interactions with the international system formed Nigeria’s foreign policy. An indeginous foreign policy for Nigeria was formed after independence in October 1960. Nigeria’s foreign policy during the early days of her independence was crafted with specific focus on Africa and still retains this focus even in current times. In his speech at the United Nations, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, Tafawa Balewa highlighted reasons for specific focus on Africa: So far, I have concentrated on the problems of Africa. Please do not think that we are not interested in the problems of the rest of the world: We are intensely interested in them and hope to be allowed to assist in finding solutions to them through this organization, but being human we are naturally concerned first with what affects our immediate neighbourhood (Afinotan, 2015:167).

From the preceding, it can be explained that the Afrocentric nature of Nigeria’s foreign policy is attributed to finding solutions to Africa’s problems which were prevailent at the time. A significant issue confronting Africa was colonialism as some African countries had not attained independence. As a result, Nigeria’s foreign policy was crafted inculcating the following principles: non alignment, legal equality of all States, non interference, mulitaleral diplomacy, afrocentricism (Olusanya & Akindele, 1986:3-5) (cited in Ezirim, 2011). Hence, the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Section 20 asserts that: “the state shall promote African unity, as well as total political, economic, social and cultural liberation of Africa and all other forms of international cooperation conducive of the consolidation of universal peace and mutual respect and friendship among all peoples and States, and shall combat racial discrimination in all its manifestations”. Nigeria’s foreign policy is guided by certain objectives which revolve around the sovereignty, integrity and development of the Nigerian state, liberation and unity of Africa, engendering corporation and regional integration, promotion of world peace and promotion of the principles of freedom, mutual respect and equality in the international system (Akindele & Ate, 2000) (cited in Ezirim, 2011). From the preceding, it can be firmley asserted that Nigeria’s foreign policy can be analysed through concetric circles, with the first and innermost circle being her national interests. The second circle represents West Africa and Nigeria’s contributions to the integration of the sub-region. The third circle centres on Africa and the fourth and outermost circle deals with Nigeria’s relations with the different countries of the world. The afore- mentioned have guided Nigeria’s actions in the continent and on the stage of world politics. Different States in Africa have been beneficiaries of Nigeria’s afro-centric polity through peace keeping efforts, etc. Sule (2013) asserts that Nigeria has contributed enormous amount of troops as well as advisors to more than 40 United Nations (UN), African Union (AU) and Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) missions. Amongst the peacekeeping efforts conducted by Nigeria as a result of her african centered foreign policy include: Congo from 1960-1966, Chad in 1979, Lebanon from 1978-1983, Liberia in 2003, etc. Nigeria, as a result of her afro-centric foreign policy has also supported integration efforts in West Africa, leading to the creation of ECOWAS in 1975.

Nigeria’s foreign policy possesses certain fundamental components which form a major part of its formation as well as its implementation. According to Njoku and Nwafor (2005), these  fundamental components include: