WOULD THERE BE NIGERIA IF THERE WERE NO COLONIZATION?

WOULD THERE BE NIGERIA IF THERE WERE NO COLONIZATION?

            Yes! With or without colonization, Nigeria would have emerged but probably, with some modifications in its form and size. Yes, a form of country not bearing the name Nigeria would be, even though it may not have taken the name, geographical structure and probably, the aggregates of persons and tribes of the current day Nigeria.

This fact is consolidated by the very fact that the name ‘Nigeria’ is a fruit of the colonialist amalgamation of the southern and northern protectorates by Lord Lugard in 1914. But then, there were repulsive tensions in the both regions which should have rather called for the move for careful social work rather than a coerced amalgamation. According to A. Smith, human conditions do not change overnight, nor do new allegiances suddenly develop without long and complicated processes of social adjustment. And it is on this basis that from A. Smith’s further avowal, it can be deduced that Nigeria is like a state that was theoretically created overnight by the sudden passing of constitutional laws, or the signing of constitutional agreements, as well as the absence of mutual agreement and the presence of a coerced amalgam ethnic nationalities at gun point. 

On this basis also, Usman and Abba toeing the footsteps of Smith, aver that “the concept of Nigeria is false, because the amalgamation of 1914 did not amalgamate two distinct entities, standing apart from one another and having some cohesion on their own…” Usman and Abba are apparently correct because there were no evidences to show that the people of the Northern and Southern protectorates were ever consulted to discuss and consent to live together as one country and under one constitution when the 1914 amalgamation ordinance was proclaimed. The amalgamation exercise far from being altruistic, has been historically shown to be fraudulent, because, while the colonial government was embarking on the amalgamation venture, the same administration was busy sowing seeds of discord among the parts through the creation of imposed caste-system.

The fraudulence and pragmatic impracticability of the amalgamation exercise is evidenced by the widespread antagonism and the secessionist moves that have subsisted right from the 1914 amalgamation exercise. To quote two northern leaders:

Sir Ahmadu Bello in 1956 said:  “…what kind of trouble have we let ourselves in for, by associating with these southern people? Lord Lugard and his amalgamation is not for us…”

Again, Sir Tafewa Balewa in 1952 also said: “…we in the north take it that Nigerian unity is only a British intention for the country they created. It is not for us.”

Secessionist moves are also evidenced in the Movement for the actualisation of the sovereign state of Biafra (MASSOB) formed in late 1999 in the south-eastern part of Nigeria.

            The famous statement of Chef Obafemi Awolowo is pertinent at this point. He says: “Nigeria is only a geographical expression to which life was given by the diabolical amalgamation of 1914, that amalgamation will ever remain the most painful injury a British government inflicted in Southern Nigeria.”

From Awolowos’s statement, without colonization there would have been no amalgamation but then, without amalgamation there would have been no unified entity called Nigeria. Rather, there would most probably have been three (3) geographical regions but probably not as a unified entity called Nigeria, which is the name given by Flora Shaw as any name can be given to any location. Thus, there would most probably have been regions with different people (perhaps interacting), different ideologies and political structures.