Dialogue as Conflict Engagement and Peacebuilding Panacea In National Reconstruction and Social Cohesion within a conflict-affected context: A retrospect of Nigeria.

Charles Obiorah Kwuelum – Dialogue as Conflict Engagement and Peacebuilding Panacea In National Reconstruction and Social Cohesion within a conflict-affected context: A retrospect of Nigeria.

October 31, 2014

1

Abstract As social and politically constructed entities enjoy the traits of unity, progress and state – status, institutions, personalities, structure, and governance mechanisms operate to either displace or accommodate the very core reason for such construct, the common good. Non inclusive citizen participation in governance and political process with the lack of democratic dividends arising from lack of individual agency sometimes lead to violence, fragility, discontent and under development. Amidst conflict dynamism, controversies and matrix of scenarios in the Nigerian state, national conferences are designed and implemented. Whether such implies actual mutual and realizable dialogue-process is the position of this work; as it opines that a proactive integration of all forms of conflict mitigating interventions by all stakeholders and the openness of Nigerians to a seeming transformation as both process and product for understanding differences, be awakened. Possibly it will lead to not only reduction of violence, but unity and reconciliation. Also, it unfolds the intrinsic place of dialogue in nation building, a common ground for a just peace, new approaches, and innovations that ignites change and a sustainable peace irrespective of what appears to be an irreconcilable reality. Dialogue is an inevitable tool in conflict mitigation, prevention and post conflict reconstruction.

Keywords: Dialogue, Conflict, Peacebuilding, Stakeholder engagement, National reconstruction

Introduction

As a political entity/nation state, Nigeria is faced with the contest of perspectives regarding its

birth of national journey to democratic governance; and the goal of democracy is embraced with

conflicting notions and worsened by the lingering violent conflicts (the northern Nigeria violence

epitomized in the Boko Haram insurgency, Regional vigilantism and ethno-religious violence).

The question of whether there is an ownership of the national unity process, and citizen-driven

participation by the people unfolds in terms of efficiency/responsibility in relation to governance.

As a reality therefore, it prompts numerous questions on the possibility of dialogue in our world

of differences; should dialogue be regarded as an outcome, a product or process of engagement.

Are there ethics guiding the process, and is it right to say that Dialogue is a delusion for the fact

of irreconcilability. Also, is Dialogue devoid of Justice and Responsibility of actions by actors as

their positions, needs and interests inevitably make them as either satisfied with the process or

not.

Dialogue is deeply human and practical (passive and active) as a bridge that connects humans and

the outcomes of their actions, thereby being a panacea for nation-building stakeholder

engagement. These outcomes are the results of divisions, tensions and differences (reconcilable or


October 31, 2014

2

irreconcilable) culminating in violence. Permit me to point out clearly that violence creates

bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the survivors as affirmed by Martin Luther King, Jnr

(January 15, 1929 – April 4, 1968) thus:

“Violence never brings permanent peace…. creates new and more complicated ones. … It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue…. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers”i

Division, like Violence openly contradicts the essence of human existence and the purpose for the

for formation of ‘homo sapiens’, evident in the work/reflection of the French philosopher

Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) thus “Life is moving towards a unification, our hope can only

be operative if it is expressed in greater human cohesion and solidarity”ii. Teilhard was

influenced by the work of Henri Bergson (another French philosopher) –Creative Evolution. One

basic fact is that we know fully well that everything we experience directly or indirectly is

affected by the relationships of people in groups and relationships among groups (Kareem and

Guga, 2005: 1). According to Joseph Omoregbe, the goal of history towards which mankind is

collectively marching is the Omega Pointiii. The Omega Point has two functions – bringing the

universe together into unity, and of closing and crowning world history. He tells us that the

Omega Point is a transcendent super-person, with four major attributes – autonomy, actuality,

irreversibility, and finally transcendence. This Jesuit catholic priest brings in religious elements

into his evolution theory, envisaging the Omega Point like the Logos of the Stoics. We may not

totally accept the views of Teilhard but he attempts to give a philosophico-religious interpretation

to the data of science (Omoregbe, 1997: 28).

Conflict/disputes seem to be unavoidably present in all human relationships and all societies.

Such an attribute breeds de-humanization and in-dignity of humans and the universe. It is about

human relationship and the fact that the human species is bonded. Dialogue plays a vital role in

state or international relations as much as it does in inter-personal affairs. It is the catalyst that


October 31, 2014

3

breaks down differences of all kinds and the energy to sustainable development and wellbeing.

Dialogue enhances Dignity and its essential elementsiv, and dignity according to Donna Hicks “is

an internal state of peace that comes with the recognition and acceptance of the value and

vulnerability of all living things”v it’s usefulness can not be over-emphasized as it can be a tool

for information gathering, analysis, relationship-building, and decision-making. It is a method of

social change (Schirch and Campt, 2007: 65). Also, it creates the safe space for mutual treatment

of each other like the wise inspiration of Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe thus “treat people as they

want to be and you help them become what they are capable of being”vi. Dialogue empowers the

engagement of differences and boundaries through the efforts of individuals, groups and global

movements toward mediated cultural difference. It involves the kind of understanding that binds

problem solvers in a continual and dynamic negotiation of the relationships between subjects, the

artifacts that they create, and the environment they share.

Worthy of note is that in mitigating conflicts and post violence reconstruction and recovery,

dialogue as a tool requires a willingness to learn from those who believe differently; working best

when conflict parties bring curiosity and a sense of wonder about others, and a desire to learn

more about people and their experiences.vii

Explication of Terms

Dialogue is of Greek origin, from the word ‘δ iαλoγoς /iα’ meaning dia – through/inter; and

logos/logia, which means speech, oration and discourse. It is a conversation (noun) between two

or more people; an exchange of ideas or opinion on a particular issue, especially a political or

religious issue, with a view at reaching an amicable agreement or settlement; a literary work in

the form of a conversation (‘a dialogue of Plato’).viii

Dialogue therefore is a process for talking about tension-filled topics, which remains

indispensable for groups, business communities, families, organizations, national and


October 31, 2014

4

international conflicts. It ushers opportunities for exploration of solutions to violence as an

important part of peacemaking and peacebuilding in transforming the relationship of adversaries,

and enhancing the dignity of persons (Hicks, 2011: 25). Dialogue is seemingly distinguished and

not limited to debate, discussion, conversation and training. Seemingly, dialogue encompasses

various conflict handling mechanisms (negotiation, mediation and reconciliation) that tend to

measure high, the level of mutual participation in search for solutions. It helps to discover a

common ground for needs, interests and positions of warring parties.

Peacebuilding refers to a wide range of efforts by diverse actors in government and civil society

to address the root causes of violence before, during, and after violent conflict (Schirch, 2013:

xiii). Peacebuilding has two broad meanings – the direct work that internationally focuses on

addressing the factors driving and mitigating conflict; And the efforts to coordinate a

comprehensive, multi-leveled, multi-sectoral strategy, including development, humanitarian

assistance, governance, security, justice, and other sectors that may not use the term

‘peacebuilding’ to describe themselves. Worthy of note is the fact that peacebuilding was

originally conceived in the context of post conflict recovery efforts to promote reconciliation and

reconstruction. Currently, it includes conflict prevention in the sense of preventing recurrence of

violence, as well as conflict management and post conflict recovery as indicated earlier. In a

larger sense, peacebuildling involves a transformation towards a more manageable, peaceful

relationships and governance structures in both short and long terms (Snodderly, 2011: 40).

Panacea herein refers to the fact that Dialogue is remedy to violence and conflict, either in the

manner of prevention or problem solving.

Social cohesion has to do with the strengthening of new or existing relationships among levels of

social classification/stratification within the society, present in ethnically or religiously divided

contexts. It is about social interaction rather than diversity of any sort or social division, reducing

tensions and enhancing/improving unity, belongingix, engagements, understanding, societal


October 31, 2014

5

cooperation and integration. It promotes inter-personal, group or community mediation to ease

tension and reduce violence; keying into dialogue for reconciliation, mutual partnerships, social

inclusion and just peace.

National reconstruction is synonymous with post conflict recovery, referring to the process of

rebuilding degraded, damaged, or destroyed political, socio-economic, and physical infrastructure

of a country or territory, disarming and reintegration of combatants, resettling internally displaced

persons, reforming governmental institutions, promoting trauma work and reconciliation,

delivering justice, and restarting the economy in order to create the foundation for long-term

development (Snodderly, 2011: 44).

Conflict-affected context can be described as an institution, community, state or region impacted

negatively by conflict or violence or both. In a conflict-affected context, people lack human

security. According to Schirch (2013:xi), they may feel fearful, unable to meet their basic needs,

or a sense of humiliation. They need safety and development to meet their basic needs or a sense

of dignity and human rights.

Retrospect suggests ‘looking back on past events or upon reflection regarding Nigeria’s history’;

contemplation or a survey of the past time, events etc. It can mean to look back in thought or refer

back; or contemplate retrospectively.

A Recap of Nigeria’s Historical Journey and contextual analysis

Nigeria, the largest country in West Africa with a population of about 167 Million peoplex, is

multi ethnic, cultural and lingual, with its vast population distributed among over 300 ethnic

groups and equally between two major religions – Islam and Christianity (Institute for Peace and

Conflict Resolution, 2008)xi; along geographical demarcation of North and South (in a way

recalling the pre-colonial Nigeria (Eluwa, 1988), which was uncompromisingly heterogeneous

both in culture, tribe/language and organization/governance). It faces the challenges that come


October 31, 2014

6

with diversity. When there is inadequate representation; and interests with positions seen as

insignificant and irrelevant, then the struggle/quest for socio-political identity recognition is

visible as an exercise of ‘agency’. This phenomenon results to Militia group formations and

ethno-religious tensions.

Why the violent struggles? It is the result of not having our needs met as components of this

great entity called Nigeria by the structure of governancexii. It is further explained by the various

human needs theories and their places in the occurrence/construct of conflictsxiii. 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 as portrayed by Dr. Havva KOKxiv. Therefore, collections of Human Needs Theorists

postulate, “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)”xv. These Ontological needs are in constant wrestle with

the needs of governance/political structures.

The historical journey of Nigeria evolves around the 3 stages Nigeria’s life cycle – Pre-colonial,

Colonial and Post-colonial.

Socio-political history - The Democratic life of Nigeria is today at the 4th Republic, having

begun at the pre independence era in 1923 as provided by the Clifford Constitution (since 1999,

based on the fact that the governance was hinged on the 4th Republic constitution).

First Republic (October 1st, 1960- January 16th, 1966): This was the first republic that witnessed

the governance structure of Nigerian regional governors and Premiers. There were three regions


October 31, 2014

7

during the first republic – Western, Northern and Eastern Regions with the Mid- Western region

created in the later part of 1963. This Republic was disrupted with the military coup that brought

Major General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi into power. During this era, the president was a nominal

head of state because he/she was appointed, while the premier was elected and also led the

government.

Nnamdi Azikiwe (NCNC)xvi was the ceremonial President while Abubakar Tafawa Balewa was

Prime Minister (NPC)xvii. It was a multi-party system (15-17 political parties) along the divide of

ethnicity and sectarianism. The 1965 national election after Nigeria was certified a Republic,

produced a major realignment of politics and a disputed result that set the country on the path to

civil war. The dominant northern NPC went into a conservative alliance with the new Yoruba –

Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP), leaving the Igbo NCNC to coalesce with the

remnants of the Action Group (AG) in a progressive alliance. In the vote, widespread electoral

fraud was alleged and riots erupted in the Yoruba West where heartlands of the AG discovered

they had apparently elected pro-government NNDP representativesxviii. This was as a result of

intra party conflict in the Western Region.

The electoral process outcome was disrupted by protests and agitation of the people for the fact

that they needed a credible process that guaranteed equitable representation at governing

machineries; economic resource distribution and control together with socio-structural regional

development.

The Civil War - The post-colonial stage is incomplete without recalling the Civil war (1967-

1970), and its socio-ethnic and structural root causes in which ethnic groups felt not represented

in government and lack of development. Also, there were manifestations of bad leadership, lack

of security, corruption, inadequate social system, lack of education, unemployment, and poverty.

Ethno-cultural factors like ethnic domination and subjugation, struggle for territorial control,

cultural autonomy, stereotype, militia formation existed alongside institutional causes in the


October 31, 2014

8

manner of an uncivil culture of politicking, weak judicial system, instrumentalization and

politicization of religious principles by politicians and leaders, lack of mutual coordination

among government functionaries/machineries, and irresponsible mass media. Finally, there are

socio-economic traits in the forms of prolonged conflict via prejudice, mutual suspicion, elite

manipulation, intolerance, exploitation and inadequate distribution of natural resources and

disfranchisement of masses. These factors gave rise to militias/vigilantism.

Second Republic (1979-1983): The take-over of governance by the military led to the embargo

on political activities in Nigeria. The drafting of a new constitution with the advent of General

Olusegun Obasanjo as a successor of the assassinated General Murtala Mohammed ushered the

second republic that was hinged on the Westminster system of government. The lift of the ban on

political party activities, led to the formation of another multi-party system (5 parties). There was

a relative smooth display of politicking and election process in 1979 that Shehu Shagari (NPN)xix

won, till the re-election of the same party in 1983. Elections were marred by violence and

allegations of widespread vote rigging and electoral malpractice led to legal battles over the

resultsxx.

This republic was also cut short by the military, led by Major General Mohammadu Buhari in

1983 and marring the democratic dispensation. He became the Head of the Supreme Military

Council and in 1985, the third ranking member of the council, General Ibrahim Babangida,

overthrew Buhari.

Third Republic (1989 -1999): In 1989, Babangida had the constitution of this Republic drafted

and also lifted the ban on political activities (1989). He established a two party system Republic

(NRC-National Republican Convention & SDP- Social Democratic Party). Though there were

gubernatorial and state legislative elections in 1991, the Presidential was in 1993. Political unrest

and spillover of such electoral violence led to the postponement of the presidential election till

1993. General Sani Abacha arrested Moshood K. Abiola (SDP) who won the Presidential


October 31, 2014

9

election, after he had declared himself winner amidst the fact that Babangida had annulled the

election in 1993. This led to an uncontrolled post-election violence, which resulted to reprisal

attacks within the geographical regions with the highest ripple effects in the north of Nigeria

(Kano, Kaduna, Plateau and Bauchi respectively).

Babangida resigned in 1993 and Earnest Shonekan, the head of his transition team, became the

interim head of National Government and was subsequently dethroned by General Sani Abacha.

Fourth Republic (1999 till date): The constitution of this Republic was adopted on May 29th

1999. Following the death of military dictator and de facto ruler of Nigeria, General Sani Abacha

in 1998, his successor General Abdusalami Abubakar initiated the transition, which heralded

Nigeria's return to democratic rule in 1999. The ban on political activities was lifted, and political

prisoners were released from detention facilitiesxxi.

This political era enjoyed a multi party system (about 54 registered parties and currently reduced

to 26)xxii. Former military leader Olusegun Obasanjo – Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) won the

internationally widely monitored elections in April 1999, followed by Shehu Musa Yar’dua -

PDP (2007) and GoodLuck Ebele Jonathan –PDP (2011). Though it was acclaimed as most

transparent and credible of elections, it experienced the worst post election violence. Currently,

there are dynamics of withdrawal of certificates from non-performing political parties or more

acceptances of new strong ones as registered parties into the political lifexxiii. There has also been

massive migration and immigration of party members from and to both opposing and ruling

parties, characterized by inter and intra party intimidation, electoral corruption and malpractices,

together with the attitude of non-civility by politicians.

Ethno-religious conflicts’ history - Some writers have described the increase of ethno-religious

conflicts in Nigeria as a rising incidence that is going out of proportion, a badge of national unity


October 31, 2014

10

and an eruption, which is being traced to the return to civil rule (Ukiwo, 2003). Thus Ikelegbe

(2005:490-491) affirms,

“Since the 1990s, ethnic and ethno-religious contestation and conflicts have escalated in Nigeria…and ethno-religious politicization and mobilization have increased since democratization opened up a political space in May 1999…”xxiv

Cross-border movement of people, religion, culture and values from the rest geographical to the

North caused tension and friction in social integration and national unity. Its economic tension

emanated from a growing economic disparity that led to not only ethno-religious violence, but

also escalated Gun violence in the said part of Nigeria (Ime et al., 2007). Amidst the fact of

coexistence and adaptation, the national life, which is expressed through politics and governance,

had its own complexities. Even though Religion like ethnicity is a unifying factor, in the case of

Nigeria its adherence is more divisive than unifying. Ibrahim (1991) affirms this aforementioned

perspective in the 1987 report of the Political Bureau that prepared the mode for return to civilian

rule in 1992xxv.

The first group of political parties was ethnic rooted and so resulted to biased policies

(authoritative and undemocratic), power manipulation, and elite dominance; 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. Political leaders (some), tried to

display their religious and ethnic sentiments at the fields of national assignments (e.g.

Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), Vatican/Roman Catholic Pontiff, Shari’a, and religious

pilgrimages; thereby creating religious intolerance, neglect and oppression of the minority.

Like biased politicians and civic leaders, some religious leaders and media outfits, have also

become dividers instead of connectors to Nigerians (e.g. the Danish anti Mohammedean cartoon

of September/October 2005, in which some Islamic clerics had in solidarity with some intolerable

Muslim adherents of the Islamic world, called for the extinction of Christians; the international


October 31, 2014

11

influence of the Twin Tower Terrorist attack (September 2001) and the fierce reaction of the

United States on Afghanistan Taliban Government (October 2001) had a contextualized

aggression on northern Nigeria). These events caused bitterness, hatred, and transfer aggression,

together with human and structural destructions.

The Federal Government constantly militarized locations of violence and imposed curfews;

establish judicial commissions of inquiry and sometimes compensations. Asides external extreme

religious influence, there is also the intra Islamic conflict/violence that affected the Christians like

the Maitasine violent religious conflict in Kano and Borno (1980 – 1982). Remaining unresolved

by the government amidst their numerous traumatic results/consequences, reprisals and cycle of

violence become imminent. Unfortunately, ethnic conflicts become ethno-religious, like the 1999

and 2000 (Shagamu and Lagos respectively) reprisal attacks of Muslims on non-Muslims and

non-Hausas in northern Nigeria. 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,

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 chronicle of ethnic-oriented and

religiously identified violent conflicts which give rise to devastation of human lives and

development, either human and structural (Salawu, 2010: 346-347) ranging from 2001 through

2008/2009/2010 respectively.xxvi

Recently, there has been resurgence of an extremist Islamic sect called Boko Haram. This

terrorist group proposes to Islamize non-Muslims in the north and also the implementation of

Shari’a, which is the Islamic legal system through the means of Jihad, alongside the establishment

of an independent Islamic State. The sect pointed out the fact of corruption on the part of

politicians for the inequality of distribution of economic resources/poverty,


October 31, 2014

12

joblessness/unemployment, lack of infrastructures, biased governance or protection of ethnic

interests as some reasons for such a religious intervention termed ‘Purification’ as inspirational of

their actionsxxvii; alongside their socio-political quest (for the Independent Islamic State referring

to the 12 northern states)xxviii. These, motivate their activities (bombings, gun violence, gender

based violence, looting and kidnappings)xxix, resulting to economic paralysis, internal

displacement and discouraged local and foreign investments.

There has been series of Boko Haram attacks in northern Nigeria as follows: 2010 – Bauchi; 2010

– Abuja; 2011 – Abuja; 2011 – Yobe and Borno; 2011 – Niger; 2012/13/14 (till date) – Kano,

Bauchi, Gombe, Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Jigawa, Abuja and Kaduna. These attacks have

prompted Vigilatism/militia, abuse of human rights, extra judicial killings and militarization,

which the Federal Government initiated as a counter violence extremism strategy.

Historical Indicators of dialogue capacities/capacities for dialogue

In today’s Nigeria, politics, governance and religion are intertwined and twisted by political

players makes inter and intra ethnic relationships more complicated than imagined. Political

parties have become glorified or secularized religious and ethnic groups. The pattern of Nigerian

political economy is characterized by instability, conflicting social, religious, regional and ethnic

interests; and a preoccupation with unequal distribution of resources, rather than creation of

wealth. These factors tend to portray irreconcilable differences in Nigeria’s federalism and it is on

such that a common platform for dialogue is regarded as a fashionable political theory –

sovereign national conference.

Some dialogical experiences

Independence/Constitutional conference- London & Lagos – the journey towards independence

and subsequent democratic life, necessitated the constitutional conference of 1957-1958

(September 27th to October 29th) at London in order to design the national blueprint of Nigeria’s


October 31, 2014

13

socio-political, economic life. The Conference reached agreement on arrangements for the

attainment by the North of Regional Self-Government on 15th March 1959; on fiscal matters;

police; the handling of many aspects of the problem of minorities and many other subjects

together with the Bill of Parliament for Independence (1960)xxx. The dialogue strengthened

Nigeria’s diversities at the embryonic stage of nationhood. Worthy of note is the fact that

Nigeria’s constitution has undergone several reviews via national conferences such as 1978,

2005; and 1994/95 conferencexxxi. There was also a Truth Commission (1999-2001)xxxii and the

most recent national conference (2014)xxxiii. This national dialogue was saddled with the aim of

realistically examining and genuinely resolving, long-standing impediments to our cohesion and

harmonious development as a truly Federal State. According to President Jonathan GoodLuck

“Our sole motivation … is the patriotic desire for a better and greater nation; … and manner

that will positively advance that objective.”xxxiv The conference had these Recommendations-

Creation of 18 New States, Resource Control/Derivation Principle/Fiscal Federalism, Public

Finance/Revenue Allocation, Forms of Government, Legislature, Power Sharing/Rotation, Local

Government, Immunity Clause, Independent Candidacy, Governance, Anti-corruption, Land

Tenure Act, National Anthem, and Religionxxxv.

Civil War/Aburi – Ghana conference/accord – out of the civil war violence emerged the Aburi

accord and sovereignty national conference (January 1967), which was initiated by a Ghanaian

head of state Lt. Gen. Joe Ankrah; attended by Lt-Colonel Yakubu Gowon Head of the Supreme

Military Councilxxxvi, Commodore Joseph Akinwale Wey Head of the Nigerian navy, Colonel

Robert Adeyinka Adebayo Military Governor of the western region, Lt-Colonel Hassan Usman

Katsina Military Governor of the northern region, Lt-Colonel David Akpode Ejoor Governor of

mid-west region, Major Mobolaji Johnson Military Governor of Lagos, Alhaji Kam Selem

Inspector-General of Police Timothy Omo-Bare Police and Col Emeka Ojukwu Governor of

South East as the eastern delegatexxxvii. It is commonly held that virtually everything discussed at


October 31, 2014

14

the Aburi conference is relevant till todayxxxviii. So much so that a reader would be tempted to

believe that the discussion was on Nigeria's current problems, rather than over 40 years earlier, in

1967. It is probably the best-recorded constitutional debate in historyxxxix. It focused on balance of

power between central and federating regional governments, military professional worldviews

and national responsibility, together with constitutional matters. This dialogue relatively

facilitated the unity of Nigeria.

Civil Society Organizations’ Initiativesxl – These are developmental, humanitarian, human rights

and peacebuilding projects and programsxli, either religious or secular (both local and

international NGOs); those have been initiated to enhance social integration, bridge differences

and create a common safety space for understanding (e.g. NIREC, CAN, NEEDCSI, IMC, SFCG

etc). They have facilitated programs and projects with blended perspectives that leverage

communal and religious divisions in some locations in Nigeria thereby enhancing federal unity.

Conclusion and Remarks

Worthy of note is the fact that Conflict and Dialogue are inevitably contextual and dynamic. The

causes of these conflicts that sometimes result to violence and its adverse effects, have different

dimensions ranging from systemic, structural, personal and interpersonal. They are categorized

much as political, social, economic, ethnic/sectarian, religious, and physical (Macnair, 2003). An

environment of insecurity and fear inevitably points to non-development. In spite of the absence

of violence and conflict, peace still remains unrealized because conflict is not limited to fragile

states but hinged on fulfillment of human rights, dignity, social justice and wellbeing of all. Good

to note that violence and conflict emerge from struggle for resource control, unemployment,

failed structures, corruption and corporate interests. To therefore attain an absence of violence

and conflict, there is a need for not only structural transformation, but also of the system whether

human or societal. The realization of such moment of ‘just peace and wellbeing’ points to a

sustained dialogue.


October 31, 2014

15

In retrospect, heterogeneity of the Nigerian state remains inevitable in its multi-ethnicity. It is a

secular state (at least in theory), and has been a source of socio-political violent conflicts.

Nigeria’s scenario is built around a cycle of repeated factors/causes, and militarization of national

life. Conflict does not end with an accord; hence there is a need for a sustained engagement and a

constantly renewed strategy (Lederach, 2012). This will naturally lead to violence prevention,

despite the fact that it is extremely difficult to turn the imagination from the effects of massacre to

the imaginal tasks of rebuilding (Pouligny et al., 2007). Such a dialogue/engagement would

enable people treat each other with dignity, become more connected and able to create more

meaningful relationships thereby leading to a sustainable development and wellbeing. It is

imperative to have a dialogical exchange between insider and outsider knowledge and practice,

thereby enhancing the elements of human dignity. This is because when dignity is violated, the

reaction is possibly an aroused aggression, even violence, hatred, and vengeance; alongside

psychological effects of violence such as on victims, perpetrators, non-participants and effects as

causes and effects of means on ends.

Effective dialogue is not only of representation, but also of inclusion, participation and

ownership. It should be accessible at the micro, meso and macro levels in the attempt to

responding to the Needs, Positions and Interests of stakeholders. It begins with the individual to

the other/community and so entails trust building, transparency and transformation. The impact of

grassroots and local agencies/capacities for peace should stir the motivation for such

national/people-to-people dialogue. It involves education, because it is about changing

worldviews/perspectives. The inevitability of both inter and intra natures of conflict is sequential

to the intra and inter personal dimension of dialogue. Though the mechanics of national dialogue

or conference in Nigeria has always created a vacuum and disconnect between the grassroots and

the rest strata of the society, it still portrays a degree of cohesion and to a certain extent diluted

religious fundamentalism, ethnic sectarianism, and regionalism.


October 31, 2014

16

Good leadership/governance is synonymous to good followership/citizenry. Motivation towards

transparent and acceptable dialogue is drawn from all forms of leadership (political, communal,

family, religious, secular, non governmental, traditional, etc) within a context. A national

unity/interest oriented leadership strives to formulate and execute policies that not only interpret

the recommendations of such conferences but also enhance them. Worthy of note is the fact that

such nationalistic enshrined leadership/governance is depended on its political culture and

democratic dynamics. The recommendations and implementations of such dialogues must be for

the Common Good of the society that is enshrined in the national life. It is inevitably a stimulant

to citizenry mutual co-existence.

Truth commissions and accords are not end products of dialogue. Holistic mechanics for

peacebuilding should be integrated for a just peace and sustainable human, structural

development, healing and wellbeing. Probably, National conferences/dialogues like Truth and

Reconciliation Committees are invariably limited in what they can do psychologically because

they are often shaped by political compromise; and also impose limits on victim interaction with

the process because of time and resources (Hamber, 2010: 72). A safe-space for the integration of

prudent and modest justice mechanics to ably facilitate the victim-perpetrator relationship and

possible reconciliation, should be of utmost aim of such Truth and Reconciliation Committees.

As regards constitution and citizenship debate, there are varying perceptions regarding citizenship

between states and at national level. Also, according to Dunmoye (2008: 59), controversies and

contestations over citizenship rights in the Nigerian federation have become major sources of

disagreement and political conflicts that often threaten the corporate existence of Nigeria. The

autonomy, which states/governors enjoy sometimes become opportunities for clustered ambiguity

regarding citizenship as birthright or indigene-ship being distinguished from citizenship.

Currently, there is no positioned consensus regarding this discuss. The indispensability of

dialogue constantly stands in contest and tension around the principles of diplomacy and


October 31, 2014

17

governance. The fact still remains that diplomacy would not efficiently function and its impact

not attained in the midst of violence, as it would hinder development and wellbeing. Strategic

diplomacy would appreciate a safe space for stakeholder engagement in nation building and

reconstruction.

The integrity of state diplomacy and policies should not be regarded threatened by the power of

dialogue of any form in the mitigation of political, religious, economic or ethnic conflict. A

cutting-edge diplomatic principle of counter violent extremism should be a tactical interplay of

common grounds of interaction or intersection between violence, terrorism and mitigation, in de-

escalation of violence and attainment of sustainable development, just peace and well being.

Diplomatic principles are premised on the sovereignty of nation states and the ability to sustain

nationhood and patriotic bond. It becomes a safe space or platform for the integration and

interaction of various stakeholders’ perspectives and initiatives.

Dialogue as conflict engagement and peacebuilding panacea in national reconstruction and social

cohesion within a conflict-affected context is paradigm shift from conservative/traditional

diplomacy to hybrid diplomacy in the way of improved democratic attitude and skills, issue

learning and improved relationships in the national structure. It leads to efficient management of

conflicts in order to prevent escalation, alongside individual and collective action with improved

institutional decision-making. Summarizing its goals will not be complete without the fact that

dialogue and deliberation yield increased civic capacity, together with improved community and

national problem solving arising from building communities and connections that empower via an

active civil society. This acknowledges the fact that a diverse and thriving civil society is

nevertheless one of the crucial underpinnings for strengthening the capacity of societies to

manage conflict peacefully (Tongeren et al., 2005: 10).


October 31, 2014

18

National conferences/dialogues should be for long and short-term nation/state building and

peacebuilding in Nigeria, as it has for sometime now lubricated the social friction arising from its

multi-ethnicity and diversity.

i Available at <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-lecture.html> ii Joseph Omoregbe quotes the work of Teilhard de Chardin, The Future of Man (London: Fontana Books, 1964), p. 274 in A Simplified History of Western Philosophy: Contemporary Philosophy. Lagos: Joja Press Ltd, Ikeja. 1991, p. 28 iii It refers to the final term, the terminus ad quem of cosmic evolution. It is the point of unity, the point at which the growing movement of socialization and unification will culminate in the desired unity. At the Omega Point, Cosmogenesis (the whole cosmic movement) will enter a new sphere, the theosphere- the sphere of super-consciousness. The human minds will then attain a higher level of consciousness. iv Donna Hicks mentions in her book-Dignity- 10 elements: Acceptance of dignity, inclusion, safety, acknowledgment, recognition, fairness, benefit of the doubt, understanding, independence and accountability. v Donna H: Dignity, The Essential Role It Plays in Resolving Conflict. Yale University Press: New Haven and London. 2011, p. 1 vi Available at <http://www.philharding.net/quotes-corner/quotes-corner-4people.htm> vii Lisa Schirch & David Campt. (2007). The Little Book of Dialogue for Difficult Subjects: A Practical, Hands-On-Guide. PA: Good Books, Intercourse, PA 17534. 2007, p. 10 viii Available at <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dialogue> ix A Study on social cohesion in diverse communities, available at <http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/2036-social-cohesion-communities.pdf > x Available at <http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/09/population-many-nigeria/> xi Available at <https://www.academia.edu/6274014/The_Boko_Haram_Challenge_and_Possible_Peace_Process_in_Nigeria> xii Available at <www.turkishweekly.net/article/264/reducing-violence-applying-the-human-needs-theory-to-the-conflict-in-chechnya.html> xiii Abraham Maslow (1973), John Burton (1979), Marshall Rosenberg (2003) and Manfred Max-Neef (1987). xiv Available at <www.turkishweekly.net/article/264/reducing-violence-applying-the-human-needs-theory-to-the-conflict-in-chechnya.html > xv The work of Roger A.Coate and Jerel A. Rosati, available at <https://www.academia.edu/4878348/Non_Violence_An_Antidote_to_the_Violence_of_Northern_Nigeria>, p. 1 xvi National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons/National Council of Nigerian Citizens xvii Northern Peoples Congress xviii Meredith (2005), The Fate of Africa, p. 198. xix National Party of Nigeria xx Falola, Toyin, and Julius Omozuanvbo Ihonvbere. The Rise and Fall of Nigeria's Second Republic, 1979-1983. London: Zed Books, 1985 xxi Available at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Fourth_Republic> xxii Available at <http://www.inecnigeria.org/?page_id=18> xxiii Available at <http://www.nigeriaworld.info/2013/03/registered-political-parties-in-nigeria.html> xxiv Available at <https://www.academia.edu/6274014/The_Boko_Haram_Challenge_and_Possible_Peace_Process_in_Nigeria> xxv Cited from Federal Government of Nigeria, Report of the Political Bureau (Lagos, 1987), Vol. 2, pp. 460-461. xxvi Available at <http://www.eist.eu/resources/item.asp?d=3263> xxvii The Interview was reported by one of the media houses in Nigeria – Daily Trust, as written by Abdulkadir Mukhtar, 2012, September 14th). Available at < http://www.ailytrust.com.ng/index.php/other-sections/lead-stories/176786-ghaddafis-fall-fuelled-boko-haram-obasanjo> xxviii Borno, Bauchi, Taraba, Kano, Jigawa, Kaduna, Zamfara, Sokoto, Kebbi, Niger, Gombe and Adamawa. xxix The attacks of Boko Haram can be found in some of my works, available at <https://www.academia.edu/6274014/The_Boko_Haram_Challenge_and_Possible_Peace_Process_in_Nigeria> (pp.9-


October 31, 2014

19

14); <http://www.insightonconflict.org/2014/07/nigeria-beyond-silence-guns-bombs/>; And <http://www.peacevoice.info/2014/07/18/support-for-the-victims-of-boko-haram-must-tackle-roots-of-violence/> xxx Available at <http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1958/nov/04/constitutional-conference> And <http://www.waado.org/nigerdelta/ConstitutionalMatters/willink_commission/background_lennox_boyd.pdf> xxxi Recommendations of the 1994 constitutional conference are - Setting up the Federal Character Commission, the creation of new states and local governments, recommendations on revenue allocation, decentralization of federal ministries of education, and agriculture and sharing of their assets; decentralization of federal universities and sharing of their assets; and total lifting of the ban on politics; Referencing Alex Gboyega’s work - Current options for a stabilized democracy, pp. 289-318 in which the 1994 constitutional conference report was cited in Federal Republic of Nigeria, Report of the Constitutional Conference containing the Resolutions and Recommendations, Volume I. (Abuja: National Assembly Press, 1995): xvii. Available at <http://books.openedition.org/ifra/649#ftn32> xxxii The Oputa Panel, The Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission which was later called The Judicial Commission for the Investigation of Human Rights Violations, was created to establish the causes, nature, and extent of human rights violations - in particular the assassinations and attempted killings - between January 15, 1966 and May 28, 1999, to identify perpetrators (individuals or institutions), determine the role of the state in the violations, and to recommend means to pursue justice and prevent future abuses. The commission was initially asked to investigate the period from 1984 to May 1999, covering four military governments, but this period was later extended back to 1966, the year of Nigeria's first military coup following independence. Available at <http://www.usip.org/publications/truth-commission-nigeria> xxxiii It is the largest conference of delegates and the most difficult in the words of its chairman Justice Idris Kutigi. Available at <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/167134-2014-national-conference-most-difficult-since-independence-kutigi.html#sthash.MWziwNIE.dpuf> xxxiv Available at <http://www.nigerianationalconference2014.org/aim#.U_vGmrywIaA> xxxv More information and comparison of the 3 national conferences’ recommendations is available at <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/national-conference/key-national-conference-recommendations-need-know/> xxxvi The supreme military council is the highest ruling military body in Nigeria. xxxvii Available at <http://www.nairaland.com/334770/famous-aburi-conference-full-minute> xxxviii Some of these recycled issues are revenue allocation, minority issues and creation of state, Inter-ethnic Rivalry, and the Issue of secession xxxix ibid xl Available at <http://www.unglobalcompact.org/participantsandstakeholders/civil_society.html> xli Available at <http://3phumansecurity.org/site/component/content/article/34-projects/117-services>


October 31, 2014

20

Bibliography Albert, I. O. (2001). Building Peace, Advancing Democracy: Experience with Third – Party Interventions in Nigeria’s Conflicts. Ibadan: John Archers Ltd. Albert, I. O. (1999). Community Conflict in Nigeria: Management, Resolution and Transformation. Ibadan: Spectrum. Arnold, J. C. (2000). Why Forgive? USA: Orbis Books. Assefa, H. (2008). Peace and Reconciliation as a Paradigm: A philosophy of peace and its implications on conflict, governance, and economic growth in Africa. Nairobi: ACIS Basta, R. L & Ibrahim, J. (Eds.) (1999). Federalism and Decentralization in Africa: The Multicultural Challenge. Fribourg: Institute of Federalism Fribourg. Collier, P & Vicente. P. (Eds.). (2008). “Votes And Violence: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Nigeria”. Available at <http://www.pedrovicente.org/violence.pdf> CRS. (2013). Nigeria: Current Issues and US Policy. Washington: Congressional Report Services. Retrieved from https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33964.pdf (www.crs.gov) EC/UNDP- Joint Task Force on Electoral Assistance (2011). Thematic Workshop: Elections, Violence, and Conflict Prevention – Summary Report. Spain: Barcelona. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/#q=electoral+violence+drivers+and+triggers Fisher, D. I. (2011). Working With Conflict: Skills and Strategies for Action (7th ed.). New York, New York, USA: Zed Books Ltd. Folger, M. S. (2009). Working Through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships, Groups, and Organizations (6th ed.). Boston, USA: Pearson Education, Inc. Golwa, J.H.P & Ojiji, O.O. (Eds.). (2008). Dialogue on Citizenship in Nigeria. Abuja, Nigeria: Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution. Group, I. C. (2010). Northern Nigeria: Background to Conflict. Dakar/Brussels: African Report. Harnischfeger, J. (2006). “Islamisation and Ethnic Conversion in Nigeria”. Anthropos: Anthropos Institute. Vol. 101. Hamber, B. (2010). Transforming Societies after Political Violence: Truth, Reconciliation, and Mental Health. New York: Springer. Hart, B. (2008). Ed. Peacebuilding in Traumatized Societies. Lanham. Boulder. New York. Toronto. Plymouth. UK: University Press of America, Inc. Hicks, D. (2011). Dignity: The Essential role it plays in resolving conflict. New Haven & London: University Press.


October 31, 2014

21

Human Rights Watch: Spiraling Violence, Boko Haram Attacks and Security Forces in Nigeria. October 2012. Available at <http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/nigeria1012webwcover.pdf> Ibrahim, J & Toure Kazah, T. “Ethno-Religious Conflicts in Northern Nigeria”. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet – The Nordic Africa Institute, Research and Analysis on Africa. Available at <http://www.nai.uu.se/publications/news/archives/042ibrahimkazah/> Ibrahim, J. (1991). “Religion and Political Turbulence in Nigeria”. The Journal of Modern Africa Studies: Cambridge University Press. Vol. 29. No. 1. ICG. (2011). Policy Briefing: Lessons from Nigeria’s 2011 Elections. Africa Briefing # 81. Available at <http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/africa/west-africa/nigeria/B81%20-%20Lessons%20from%20Nigeras%202011%20Elections.pdf> Igbuzor, O. (2010). Electoral Violence in Nigeria. Asaba: Action Aid Nigeria. INEC. (2013). Report on The 2011 General Elections. Abuja: INEC. Retrieved from http://www.inecnigeria.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/REPORT-ON-THE-2011-GENERAL-ELECTIONS.pdf Ikelegbe, A. (2005). “State, Ethnic Militias, and Conflict in Nigeria”. Canadian Journal of African Studies/Revue Canadienne des Etudes Africaines: Canada Association of African Studies. Vol. 39. No. 3. Ime, A. J., Mohammed, A. Z., Pinto, A. D., & Nkanta, C. A. (2007). “Gun Violence in Nigeria: A Focus on Ethno-Religious Conflict in Kano”. Journal of Public Health Policy: Palgrave Macmillan. Vol. 28. Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution. (2008). Strategic Conflict Assessment of Nigeria: Consolidated and Zonal Reports. Abuja: Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution. Joseph, H. P. G & Ochinya, O. O. Eds. (2008). Dialogue on Citizenship in Nigeria. Abuja: Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution. Kareem, A. B & Guga, A. (2005). Fundamentals of Human Relations. Zaria: Kareem & Guga Publishers. Kazah-Toure, T. (2003). Ethno-Religious Conflicts in Kaduna State. Kaduna: Human Rights Monitor. Kelechi, A. K. (1996). “Political Economy in Nigeria: The Military, Ethnic Politics and Development”. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society: Springer. Vol. 10. No.2. Kukah, M. H. (1993). Religion, Politics and Power in Northern Nigeria. Ibadan: Spectrum.


October 31, 2014

22

Kwaja.C. 2011. “Nigeria’s Pernicious Drivers of Ethno-Religious Conflict” in Africa Security Brief. The African Center for Strategic Studies, No. 14; Available at <http://www.africacenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/AfricaBriefFinal_14.Pdf> Lederach, JP. (1997). Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. DC: United Institute of Peace Press. Lederach, JP. (2012). “The origins and evolution of Infrastructures for peace: A personal reflection” in Journal of Peacebuilding and Development. Vol. 7. No. 3. Macnair, R. M. (2003). The Psychology of Peace (An introduction). USA: Praeger Publishers. Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in Systems. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. Okpanachi, E. (2010). “Ethno-Religious Identity and Conflict in Northern Nigeria: Understanding the Dynamics of Sharia in Kaduna and Kebbi States”- Available at <http://www.ifra-nigeria.org/spip.php?article166> Pouligny, B., Chesterman, S., & Schnabel, A. Eds. (2007). After Mass Crime: Rebuilding States and Communities. Tokyo. New York. Paris: United Nations University Press. Salawu, B. (2010). “Ethno-Religious Conflicts in Nigeria: Casual Analysis and Proposals for New Management Strategies”. European Journal of Social Sciences: EuroJournals, Inc. vol. 13. No.3. Saunders, H. H., Nemeroff, T., Slim, R. M., Parker, P. N., & Stewart, P. D. (2011). Sustained Dialogue in Conflicts: Transformation and Change. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Schrich, L. (2013). Conflict Assessment and Peacebuilding Planning: Toward a Participatory Approach to Human Security. Colarado: Kumarian Press. Schirch, L. & Campt, D. (2007). The Little Book of Dialogue for Difficult Subjects: A Practical, Hands-On Guide. Intercourse: Good Books. Tongeren, P. V., Brenk, M., Hellema, M., & Verhoeven, J. Eds. (2005). People Building Peace II: Successful Stories of Civil Society. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. Tutu, D. (1999). No Future without Forgiveness. USA: Doubleday. Ukiwo, U. (2003). “Politics, Ethno-Religious Conflicts and Democratic Consolidation in Nigeria”. The Juornal of Modern African Studies. Cambridge University Press. Vol. 41. No. 1. Uwazie, E. E. et al. Eds. (1999). Inter-Ethnic and Religious Conflict Resolution in Nigeria. Lanham. Boulder. New York. Oxford: Lexington Books.

Dialogue as Conflict Engagement and Peacebuilding Panacea In National Reconstruction and Social Cohesion within a conflict-affected context: A retrospect of Nigeria.

Documents