IOSR-JHSS   Volume-6 ~ Issue-1 ~ Nov-Dec-2012

Paper Type	:	Research Paper
Title	:	Theoretical And Doctrinal Foundations Of Nigeria's Peace Support Operations – A Critique
Country	:	Nigeria
Authors	:	Moses Eromedoghene Ukpenumenu Tedheke Ph.D, Moses E.U. Tedheke Ph.D
	:	10.9790/0837-0610111

Abstract:The theoretical and doctrinal focus of the Nigerian peace support operations is based on what has been described by one security practitioner as "fire next door." This is based on pure humanitarianism devoid of national interest. This has been the philosophy of Nigeria's peace keeping since in the 1960s, now nomenclatured as Peace Support Operation (PSO). The problem with the Nigerian and indeed African approach to PSOs is that a deeper investigation are not carried out on the dynamics of structural violence, based on the global social relations as the basis of world peace crises. In most cases, the secondary causal variables of crises such as ethnic differences, sectional and cultural differences are seen as the causes of the peace crises. Such approaches are not focused on the dynamics of economic inequalities as the structures that generate the crises, violence and wars, especially, in the periphery of capital. This research work, therefore, investigated the causes of structural violence that always lead to wars that Nigeria has always been called upon to keep peace. We have found out that the global uneven-development, a product of the political economy of capital is responsible for the wars that Nigeria is been called upon to keep peace. In this regard, Nigeria is playing a negative sub-imperial role to sacrifice and sustain the mess Euro-American capital has created. The fact is that others create the crises while Nigeria is called upon to keep peace a "fire next door" humanitarian endeavours.
Keywords: Inequality, exploitation, structural violence, peacekeeping

[1] Ake,C. A Political Economy of Africa (Nigeria: Longman Nigeria Ltd 1981).
[2] Alvares,C. Decolonising History: Technology and Culture in India,China and the West 1492 to the Present Day (Newyork :The Apex Press 1991).
[3] Asobie, H.A. " The Theoretical and Doctrinal Foundations of Nigeria‟s Defence Policy" in Nweke, G.A(ed) Nigerian Journal of International Affairs Vol.12,1988
[4] Atoyebi,O. "Vital Statistics on Nigeria‟s Military Participation in Peace Support Missions Since 1960" in Ogomudia, A.O (ed) Peace Support Operations, Command and Professionalism: Challenges for Nigerian Armed Forces in the 21st Century and Beyond (Ibadan:Gold Press Ltd 2007).
[5] Babu, A.M. Africa Socialism or Socialist Africa? (London: Zed Press 1981).
[6] Babu, A.M. "Postscripts" to Rodney W, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (London: Boggle-L‟ Overture Publications 1972).
[7] Bowen, J.R. "The Myth of Global Ethnic Conflicts" in Diamond, L.(ed) Journal of Democracy, October 1996.
[8] Cabral, A. Unity and Struggle (London: Heinemann Books Ltd. 1980).
[9] Camilleri, J.A.Civilisation in Crisis: Human Prospects in a Changing World (New York: Cambridge University Press 1978)
[10] Falola, T. and Ihonvbere, J. The Rise and Fall of Nigeria‟s Second Republic 1979-1984 (New Jersey: Zed Press Ltd 1985).

Abstract:There is an intricate relationship between social conflict and political violence. This is anchored on the fact that both have social elements and group interest. Social conflict involves the confrontation of powers. Power takes several forms, which may be identive and assertive, altruistic and manipulative, coercive and physical among others. On the other hand, politics involves the struggle for power and this makes conflict a basic ingredient of politics. This is usually action oriented, which is intentionally meant to carry out the actor's own will against the resistance of other people, group or parties. Conflict according to Morrison and Stevenson (1971) is a "social relationship in which the actors hold logically incompatible values". So, political conflict usually involves a struggle over values, power and scarce resources. This struggle for values, power and scarce resources could result into the use of coercion or physical force, and when this method is employed, the result will be political violence.

[1] Ake, C. A Political Theory Lagos: The Dorsey Press,1967

[2] Anber, P. "Modernization and Political Disintegration: Nigeria and the Ibos". Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 5, No.2, 1967. [3] Anifowose, R. Violence and Politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Nok Publisers International,1982.

[4] Chowdhury, M. M. "Political Conflict in Nigeria" in G. O. Ozumba (Ed.) Nigeria Government and Politics. Aba: A. A. U.,1997.

[5] Ewa, M. "Political Violence in Nigeria: An Appraisal" in S. A. Ekanem and J. N. Ogar (Eds) Philosophy, Education, Science and Technology Calabar: Samroi Publishers

[6] Deutsch, K. "Social Mobilization and Political Development", American Political Science Review 55, September 1961.

[7] Duverger, Introduction a'la Politique, Paris: Gallimond.

[8] Marx, K. and Engels, F. The Communist Manifesto, authorized English Translation and Annotated by Fredrick Engels. New York: Labour News,1964.

[9] Orison, D. G. and Stevenson . "Political Instability in Independent Black Africa: More Dimensions of Conflict Behaviour within Nations", Journal of Conflict Resolution, xv, September, 1971.

[10] Pye, L. W. "Introduction: Political Culture and Political Development in Pye and Verba (Eds.) Political Culture and Political Development, New York: Wiley and Sons,1971.

Abstract:This paper aims at discovering the problems faced by English Language Teachers in knowledge sharing, knowledge creation and knowledge use. The factors like large-size classes, lack of resources, prescriptive curriculum, unmotivated students and the faulty assessment system create impediments for English language teachers in knowledge use whereas the factors like centralized organizational structure, excess of work, lack of trust, lack of motivation and an absence of knowledge sharing and knowledge receiving behavior among English teachers are hurdles in knowledge sharing and knowledge creation. Data were collected through randomly selected sample of 150 in-service teachers of English. Data were simply elaborated through charts by the researchers. Finally on the basis of findings, certain generalizations are made in relation to the factors that hamper the process of knowledge sharing, knowledge creation and knowledge use. There are also given some recommendations that may be valuable for the betterment of the process of knowledge sharing, knowledge creation and knowledge use in educational organizations.
Keywords: Knowledge sharing, Knowledge creation and Knowledge use

[1] Al-Otaibi G. Language learning strategy use among Saudi EFL students and its relationship to language proficiency lever, gender and motivation [PhD Dissertation]. Indiana (PA): Indiana University of Pennsylvania 2004
[2] Abrams, L.C., Cross, R., Lesser, E., & Levin, D.Z. (2003). Nurturing interpersonal trust in
[3] knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Executive, 17(4), 64–77.
[4] Block D. & Cameron D. (eds.) (2002). Globalization and Language Teaching. Oxford: Routledge. Bonner, D. (2000b), ``The knowledge management
[5] challenge: new roles and responsibilities for chief knowledge officers and chief learning officers'', in Phillips, J.J. and Bonner, D. (Eds), Leading Knowledge Management and Learning, American Society for Training & Development, Alexandria, VA,pp. 3-19.
[6] Burgess, T. , Fox, C. , & Goody, J. (2002). When the Hurly Burly's Done: What's Worth Fighting for in English in Education. Sheffield: National Association for Teaching of English.
[7] Crystal. D.(2002). Emerging English. English Language Professional. 14,3-.6.
[8] Damanpour, F. (1991), Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants andmoderators. Academic Management Journal, 34(3), 555–9
[9] Fisher, R.(2004). Embedding the literacy strategy: snapshots of change. Literacy, 38(3), 134-140
[10] Hanke, V. (2002). Improvisations around the National Literacy Strategy. Reading Literacy and Language, 36(2), 80-7.

Abstract:The present research "Pak-US Relations in Elite Press of Pakistan and US during the Democratic Government of Pakistan People‟s Party; March 2008 to February 2012 (Media & Foreign Policy Perspective)" is focused to study the foreign policies of Pakistan and the United States of America in the editorials of the elite press during the democratic government of Pakistan People‟s Party that came into the power after the general elections in 2008.In this study two elite English newspapers from United States and Pakistan were selected for the study, "New York Times" from US and "The Daily Dawn" from Pakistan from March 2008 to February 2012. The current study is intends to find out the relationship between Pakistan and US during the democratic government in Pakistan. The main purpose behind this study is to uncover the experience of the foreign policy making by the governments of the states under study and the role played by the mass media at present. The theoretical framework for the study in hand refers to the Agenda Setting Theory as the study is focused to determine the "Media Agenda‟ of the press of selected countries and to determine the different incidents relating to the present study. In this study the contents of the editorials of the selected newspapers related to Pak-US relations are considered. The findings of the study conclude that the Pakistani media in general and the US media in particular have not followed the view points of the respective governments regarding the foreign policy of the respective countries.
Keywords: Democratic, Elite Press, Pakistan, United States

[1] Albritton, R.B. and J.B. Manheim (1983) "News of Rhodesia: The Impact of a Public Relations Campaign" Journalism Quarterly 60: 622–8.
[2] Albritton, R.B. and J.B. Manheim (1985) "Public Relations Efforts for the Third World: Images in the News" Journal of Communication 35: 43–59.
[3] Ali, E. & Shahid, K. (2012). Media & Foreign Policy: A Study of Pak-US Relations in US and Pakistani Press, post 9/11 Era (2001- 2011). Lap Lambert Academic Publishing.
[4] Becker, L.B. (1977). Foreign policy and press performance, Journalism Quarterly, 54, 364-368.
[5] Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York: Free Press.
[6] Cohen, B.C. (1963). The Press and foreign policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[7] Hoge, J. (1993) "The End of Predictability" Media Studies Journal.
[8] Jacobsen, P. (1996) "National Interest, Humanitarianism or CNN: What triggers UN Peace Enforcement After the Cold War?" Journal of Peace Research. Vol. 33.
[9] Jacobsen, P. (2000) "Focus on the CNN Effect Misses the Point: The Real Media Impact on Conflict Management is Invisible and Indirect" Journal of Peace Research.
[10] Livingston and Eachus (1995) "humanitarian Crises and US Foreign Policy: Somalia and the CNN Effect Reconsidered" Political Communication. 12(4).