What distinguishes Nigeria and South Africa

Half a century separated the formal independence of South Africa in 1910 and the formal independence of Nigeria in 1960. These two countries have since become the giants of Africa.  Nigeria excels in human resources; South Africa excels in mineral and material resources. What other factors distinguish the African giants? In the 20th century, Africa had two types of European colonies: those with large numbers of white settlers and a racial hierarchy, and those that were overwhelmingly indigenous. Their white populations consisted mainly of colonial chiefs and temporary residents. The most important white-settler model was South Africa. On the eve of World War II, South Africa had become the largest concentration of whites in Africa.  Extensive white settlement in an African country was good news for the economic infrastructure, but bad political news for race relations.  South Africa evolved into the most industrialised nation in Africa. But it also became the worst in racism and apartheid. The most important African country without a large European population was Nigeria. The absence of European enterprise and developmental skills deprived Nigeria of a more modern economic infrastructure. However, it spared Nigeria the agony of subsequent racial conflict. The political formulation that most shaped Nigeria was Lord Lugard’s policy of Indirect Rule, seeking to decentralise power to local chiefs and ‘native authorities.’ The political policy that molded South Africa most fundamentally was apartheid, seeking to segregate the races socially and territorially. What did Indirect Rule have in common with apartheid? Theoretically, both policies were based on a belief that Africans could best be ruled through their indigenous institutions. In Nigeria, Indirect Rule resulted in preserving the ‘native’ political institutions of Northern Nigeria.  In South Africa, the policy resulted in creating Bantustans with separate and distinctive ‘native’ authorities. Both Indirect Rule and apartheid were based on a profound distrust of the potential Westernisation of Africa. The doctrines aspired to protect the cultural authenticity of Africa. But on this issue, Lord Lugard was more sincere than South Africa’s Hendrick Verwoerd.   Lugard’s Indirect Rule was genuinely based on the British cultural tradition of political gradualism. The apartheid ideology also valued cultural continuity and regarded Westernisation as a potentially disruptive force. Lugard never used the term ‘separate development’ in relation to Nigeria, but his policies did de facto result in Northern Nigeria’s development in a different way from Southern. On the other hand, Verwoerd and his successors never used the term Indirect Rule relative to their white control, or the relationship between the Central Government in Pretoria and the Bantustans. But in reality that relationship was indeed a form of Indirect Rule. In the final analysis, Lugard’s motives differed from those of the architects of apartheid.  The designers of apartheid started off from a point of disrespect for Black people while Lord Lugard respected the kings and princes of Nigeria within the confines of an imperial order.   Apartheid started with segregation at the micro-level, micro-apartheid, and ventured into macro-apartheid by attempting territorial creation of racial homelands. In contrast, Lugard believed in amalgamation instead of territorial fragmentation. It was he who united Southern Nigeria with Northern in 1914, thereby creating the most populous country in Africa. Lugard believed in relative cultural autonomy for the different ethnic groups of Nigeria rather than territorial compartmentalisation. South Africa has had two stages of independence: independence for whites in 1910 and independence for all South Africans in 1994. Some of the worst conflicts in South Africa occurred before the attainment of full independence. Such conflicts ranged from the Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902 to the anti-apartheid struggle from the 1960s. Nigeria’s worst conflicts were after the end of colonial rule. This has included the bitter Nigerian Civil War of 1967-1970, the anti-Igbo pogrom of 1966 that triggered the civil war, and the communal and religious conflicts that have plagued independent Nigeria ever since. Another contrast between Nigeria and South Africa concerns the role of the military in politics. Apartheid South Africa entered wars to defend apartheid, but never experienced a military coup domestically. Even today, it is arguable that South Africa is conflict-prone, but not coup-prone.  Nigeria, however, has experienced more post-colonial years under military rule than under civilian. Prof. Mazrui teaches  political science and African studies at State University New York