History

Luke 14:28 "For which of you intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost ,whether he has enough to finish it-lest ,after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, 'this man began to build and was not able to finish".

In their attempt to establish control over the society and economy of Kano, the British worked hand in hand with the Emirs, District and Village heads. It is strongly argued in this paper that the Emirs, District and Village heads played decisive roles in the colonial administration of Kano 1903-1960. It was the oppressive nature of their rule that explained the emergence of a radical political party in Kano, called the Northern Element Progressive Union (NEPU). Indeed it was these developments in the history of Kano that transformed the political outlook of the people. Far from that, NEPU political struggles transformed the Nigerian Independence struggle from the fight against the British to a fight against both the British and the local agents of the British (the Aristocracy).

In the anti-colonial struggle for independence in (Northern) Nigeria, certain names are not as publicised as they are supposed to be. The names so frequently notable are those of Sir Ahmadu Bello, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and some few others, mostly belonging to the conservative, pro-British Northern People’s Congress (NPC). Names, such as that of Mallam Aminu Kano and others,  most of who were despised by the British are rarely mentioned. Similar experience was also what obtains in Southern part of the country, where the likes of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe dominate’s the history. This understanding distorts the history of political leadership that led in the struggle for independence in Nigeria. Though mostly at grassroots levels, the efforts by these personalities in the anti-colonial struggle in Northern Nigeria cannot be disregarded in any event. It was these leading personalities and individuals with such a determined grassroots support that created alliances with some other individuals and groups from Southern part of the country to form a united front for an independent Nigeria. Fundamentally, it was such real pressure at grassroots levels that intrinsically forced the British into accepting to grant independence at the time it did, not because of the British magnanimity or the so called activities of the celebrated Nationalists of the types of Sir Ahmadu Bello, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe and the likes.
In this light, this chapter will examine the personality and role of Aminu Kano, one of the grassroots leaders of the Talakawa (the oppressed people) in Northern Nigeria in the anti-colonial struggle in Nigeria. Concern is going to be on his grassroots political activities bringing out how it provided leadership to the popular masses during the course of the anti-colonial struggle for the independence of Nigeria.  It is relevant to mention here that all through in his struggle for the independence of Nigeria; Mallam Aminu Kano established a solid relationship, especially with the Action Group (AG) of South Western Nigeria under Chief Obafemi Awolowo and the ZIKIST Movements against the reactionary Northern people’s Congress (NPC). The strength of Late Mallam Aminu has always been in his ability to go beyond the normal ethnic and religious bounds of the Nigerian political practice, to a clearly defined ideological leaning with the basic objective to put in place a system based on social justice for all.

With the Jihad, Scholars of Hausaland became more sensitized and began to move around in search of advance knowledge to places far and wide. It was in this context that Sheikh Yahuza and his family left Yantumaki in Katsina to Zaria. Sheikh Yahuza followed the same kind of life, as his parents, and through which he retained their legacy. Before his death Sheikh Yahuza established a culture of learning of specific type in Zaria, thus his writings were in most cases towards educating his disciples on Sufi (Tijaniyyah Ibrahimiyyah) type of knowledge. After his death, his students found it relevant to immortalize him, a development which led to the establishment of a School and Library for his manuscripts and books. This study encourages the respective scholarly houses in Zaria and other parts of Nigeria to take the challenge and keep the culture of scholarship by establishing modern type’s schools and preserving the works they inherited.

As part of the 50th anniversary celebration of Nigeria’s independence, President Good luck Jonathan gave award to some Nigerian’s across the country. Amongst the people he recognized includes some past leaders, statesmen and so on. On his on however he excluded a select group of the past Heads of States and some important personalities, who no doubt were honoured by history. For example why not Michael Imoudu, Tai Solarin, M. D. Yusufu, Dr. Yusufu Bala Usman and their likes? I am here more concern with the exclusion of General Murtala Ramat Muhammed, who served as Head of State for only six month and lost his life, but earned Nigeria the proud position, it is claiming as leader of Africa today.
President Good Luck needs to be taken a little into the history of the political situation in Africa since independence. Whatever his discipline of study, I guess Mr. President must know that Africa was conquered by the Imperialist and a system of colonization by force was imposed on the economy and society of the African People. He needs to be reminded that the specific type of colonization administered in Southern Africa and some part of East and North Africa was more violent and dehumanizing, than the experience in any part of the world. It was in this respect that the effort by all the independent African countries, championed by Ghana (Gold Coast) under President Kwame Nkhruma was to liberate these countries and establish a United State of Africa.  This started with a meeting of the All African Peoples Conference organised in 1958 with the intension of freeing Africa from colonial rule and to initiate the process towards establishing a United Africa under a unified political state. Efforts toward achieving such a dream led to the establishment of “Freedom Fund” in which Ghana contributed immensely and supported a number of political organizations secretly.

The greatest challenge before democratic governance in Nigeria is in the deliberate refusal to built democratic structures based on a clear understanding of the meaning of democracy. Democracy must be understood to mean, as noted above, not just about election; and in the process electing representatives, but about the right of the electors over and above the elected, after election. Thus in as much as the 2011 election is important, what is indeed paramount to us is to begin to ask ourselves about the future of our country within the context of the democratic processes, specifically from 1998 to date. We need to begin to ask and to attempt to answer and in the process convince ourselves over the way and manner in which governance is executed across all sectors of the Nigerian society. The bottom line of it all is the fact that No one can eat his cake and have it untouched. If Nigerians are really serious about democracy and good governance, it is right time now to begin to see and accept the reality of our history for the purposes of the development of our nation and shun the politics of deceit and self enrichment. Democracy is no longer a theoretical thing; it has been put into practice for centuries; so Nigerians have a lot of to learn from. But more specifically, there is no one variant democracy; meaning that there are as many democracies as we have societies world over. To facilitate this discussion, this paper begins with an attempt to trace the history of the evolution of the Nigerian State and governance within the Nigerian area since the very earliest times of the Nigerian history. This is with a view to establishing the relevance of history to the survival of our nation. It is also to, once again, caution Nigerians to search and know; to respect their past, and the past of others for the purposes of the establishment of a durable democratic culture and environment.

Introduction:
Islam is a religion of Allah sent to mankind by Allah through his chosen messenger, Muhammad (PBUH). In Hausaland, the religion first made its appearance in about the 11th century, mostly practiced by merchants and members of the royalty. By about the 15th century its influence permeated and became the practice of the community. Towards the end of the 18th century the practice of the religion was polluted and resulted in the 1804 Jihad. Towards the 20th century, the Caliphate derailed, weakened and was conquered by the Europeans. This did not only mark the end of the Caliphate but also the beginning of the establishment of Christianity, a development that also led to the upsurge of religious movements with the claim of reforming Islam. 

Statement of the Problem

The Muslim community of northern Nigeria witnessed a sudden drift in their perception of Islam from the mid 1970s when a particular religious understanding was introduced. Under the name of Jama’atul Izalatul Bid’a Wa’ikhamatul Sunnah, this understanding laid claim of salvaging Islam from innovation. The methodology and approach used (Wahabi/Salafi Islam) condemned the established tradition of the 19th century reformers (Jihadist). The result was the emergence of a non-armed violent culture in the religious lives of the people that produced so many tendencies and groups professing varying conceptions and misconceptions of Islam. Parents, traditional leaders, religious leaders and the general socio–cultural ethos and institutions were challenged and disregarded. Dominated by the rising class of northern elites comprising of very senior government officials in the Civil Service, Bureaucrats, the Military, Traditional rulers and other Private Individuals including Merchants; this new belief system spread like wildfire into most part of northern Nigeria and beyond. Supported both morally and financially by the military regime of General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (1985-1993), this form of Islam was registered as an association to undertake its activities including sourcing for fund from abroad.

This study seeks to show that there is a strong link, both in theory and practice, between the movement that call itself Jama’atul Izalatul Bid’a wa Ikhamatus Sunnah (JIBWIS) and Jama’atul Ahlis Sunnah Lidda’awati wal Jihad (Boko Haram). It strongly argues that no meaningful solution of the menace of Boko Haram adherents can be achieved outside this conceptualization. It also exposes the dangers of neglecting this conceptualization to the peaceful existence of Nigeria as a political entity, and established that Islam is never violent. It is indeed not all about Jihad; and that Jihad is but the purification of the heart Muslims, not massacre. 


Research Methodology 
This study is going to rely on the use of Primary and Secondary sources in its effort to document and establish the relationship between the two Islamic organizations. The Primary sources of our concern come from field interviews. Indeed since a lot has been written about them the Secondary sources of this study will rely on that.

The Demise of Socialism, the Triumph of New Capitalist Social Order and Modern Slavery in Africa


By

Muhammadu Mustapha Gwadabe
Department of History
Ahmadu Bello University


Abstract

The trade in slaves around the world has a very long history, but the arrival of the Europeans on the West Coast of Africa marked a new phase in the African slave trade. First in search of the land of gold along the shores of Africa, the Portuguese before the middle of the 15th century graduated into the export of African captives back to Lisbon where they were sold into slavery. The establishment in the New World of European plantations for the large-scale production of sugar, cotton and tobacco, and the enormous profit derived from it necessitated the continued search and trade in slaves, which for year’s dawn negatively and disastrously on the economy and society of the people of Africa. Through the efforts of the religious and humanitarian groups in Western Europe and the Americas the trade in slaves was challenged as inhuman and iniquitous, which forced the British Parliament in 1807 declared the trade illegal for British subjects. Yet, it took long before the trade came to an end among the French, Americas, Spanish and the Portuguese slavers. It took the British the posting of its military Preventive Squadron (Navy) that rescued about three thousand slaves on a yearly basis, to check other European countries interested in continuing with the trade.  It was this effort also that checked the activities of the African coastal chieftains who were accustomed to the ready profit of the slave, and were reluctant to abandon the sale of their own people. It is the view in this paper that the British effort at the abolition of the slave trade was in view of the revolution they attained in the science and technology of production, which made the use of human labour in production of limited relevance. It is going to be shown also that it was the attainment of similar state of economic development by other European countries that made the abolition of the trade practicable, and marked the commencement of the colonisation of Africa and other parts of the world. Soon, a new challenge developed which produced forces against colonisation; for socialism and western democracy. Close to the end of the twentieth century the socialist world was challenged to collapse and disintegration, which marked the end of the cold war politics of bipolarity. Since then the international environment became preoccupied by forces of western democracy and capitalism, globalisation, and economic crisis especially in most Third World countries. In most parts of Africa this development was followed by varying attempts to make ends meet, including trafficking of young girls, and other forms of modern slavery. This paper is going to argue that there is a relationship between modern slavery in Africa, and the collapse of Socialism and the triumph of Capitalist new Social Order.

Researching through the history of religious activities in the north this essay argues that there is a relationship between the current state of disunity and conflict in Kaduna state and the Northern Nigeria in general, and the resurgence of the radical reformist religious movements' that developed among both the Muslim and Christian communities. These movements (Izala and Pentecostal) that resurfaced nearly at the same time created tendencies for division and militancy among their followers. Side by side with the international politics and the deteriorating state of the Nigerian economy due to merciless plunder of the national resources by the political elite across the religions and ethnic groups favourable condition for mass recruitment of insurgents becomes very easy. Thus from 1980s Kaduna state started experiencing clashes and continuing growth of enmity and hatred encouraged and financed by the respective local elites and possibly other international financiers. This essay argues that the challenge for peace in Kaduna state must address the excesses of these new religious movements, which produced not only inter religious, but intra-religious contestations and conflict.

In their attempt to establish control over the society and economy of Kano, the British worked hand in hand with the Emirs, District and Village heads. It is strongly argued in this paper that the Emirs, District and Village heads played decisive roles in the colonial administration of Kano 1903-1960. It was the oppressive nature of their rule that explained the emergence of a radical political party in Kano, called the Northern Element Progressive Union (NEPU). Indeed it was these developments in the history of Kano that transformed the political outlook of the people. Far from that, NEPU political struggles transformed the Nigerian Independence struggle from the fight against the British to a fight against both the British and the local agents of the British (the Aristocracy).