Gaddafi calls for partition of Nigeria.

[jcdf]

He's something of a loose cannon allright but he's a smart cookie nonetheless having survived 41 years as Leader of Libya.

He's made his peace with the West now so they don't care what he does so long as he doesn't back any more Liberation Groups.

Col Gadaffi is a thoroughly nasty piece of works. He is clever and sly, having controlled a large sparsely populated country with a huge border for 41 years while often having a large number of powerful enemies.

The air of authoritarian rule often is confused with pragmatism. Unfortunitly it is also infused with myriad failures which only remain hidden because of state censorship.

That depends on whether Arabs and or Muslims are psychologically capable of handling a Democracy. Most of the evidence to date would suggest they are not.

He may be right about partitioning Nigeria, i cannot see the tensions there going away easily, the level of violence taking place is too high and as the population approaches .5 billion it will probably not get any better. If killing is going on to this scale continuously and if the country is an artificial construct anyway (and this is true of many African countries where citizens seem to have more loyalty towards their tribes than their country eg Kenya) then maybe it should be partitioned, do Sudan too.... It would not be easy when it comes to deciding who owns oil rich areas and before the partition takes place they would need to watch to make sure either side doesn't try some final grab - but if they can make it work then it might be for the best... I am afraid this is the grim reality of multiculturalism and other social problems like poverty combined - you will notice that the ethnic violence doesn't eat much into the pockets of the country's elites also, any problems with multiculturalism generally only manifest for those on the bottom of the socioeconomic scale.

Gaddafi has a better record in Africa than virtually every Western leader who for decades promoted slaughter, dictatorship and strip mining countries of their resources, he has a good record for advocating the nationalisation of African resources for Africans in the past (and consider his next door neighbour in Ethiopia can't give HIS country's farmland away to foreign corporations fast enough), Libyans enjoy a good standard of living because they repelled the assaults which other African countries could not (eg Mobutu's Zaire).... It is short-sighted to judge what he says solely on some perception that he is speaking for Islam on the issue.

What source did you use to suggest Nigeria’s population would be 1/2 billion? According to the population projections Nigeria currently has a population of 150 million and is expected to grow to 300 million by 2050.

So you agree with me that Multiculturalism only works when people have money. This should be more fully explored.

Ethnic violence does not harm the elites or adversely affect their wealth. Many would argue with good point that ethnic violence is an instrument of control against those on the bottom of the socio-economic ladder. It is a very dangerous and thoroughly immoral instrument that can often backfire on the elites leading to possible civil war.

[Thranduil]

What source did you use to suggest Nigeria’s population would be 1/2 billion? According to the population projections Nigeria currently has a population of 150 million and is expected to grow to 300 million by 2050.

Well the graph shows that it tripled in the last 40 years and if you look at the latest part of it (post 2000) this is the steepest part of the curve, so to extrapolate that would lead to around .5 billion by 2050.

So you agree with me that Multiculturalism only works when people have money. This should be more fully explored.

Partly because the wealthy are more conscious of class than race, religion etc (look at the Saudi royalty - their playboy lifestyles belie the piety they seek to exude) - partly because they can choose to live in circumstances of security, wherever they wish (eg as demonstrated in the phenomenon of 'white flight' - thus giving them the ability to sequester themselves among others whom they can get along with even if they did have an issue with race).

Col Gadaffi is a thoroughly nasty piece of works. He is clever and sly, having controlled a large sparsely populated country with a huge border for 41 years while often having a large number of powerful enemies.

He has been successful and a survivor as you say here , not sure that makes him a 'nasty piece of work', when do you ever hear of major problems in Libya like civil unrest, government massacres, famines or major terror attacks? Given the neighbourhood near his country i think he deserves some congratulations for that.

Ethnic violence does not harm the elites or adversely affect their wealth. Many would argue with good point that ethnic violence is an instrument of control against those on the bottom of the socio-economic ladder. It is a very dangerous and thoroughly immoral instrument that can often backfire on the elites leading to possible civil war.

Absolutely, i concur - which is why i think Nigerians should reject the artifically created colonial legacy boundaries that tie them into an unstable state, the elites in the country are probably more worried about losing out if partition removed oil fields from their grasp than they are about being patriotic about Nigeria.

[Interista]

many other parts of the world like former Yugoslavia, Turkey and Iraq seem to contradict the the viability of multiculturalism

These are examples of sectarian/ethnic strife, not 'multiculturalism'. The people of the former Yugoslavia spoke the same language and had a very similar culture. Ditto Iraq and Turkey - the Iraqi Shia hardly have a radically different 'culture' from the Iraqi Sunni who live down the road and speak the same language.

[FutureTaoiseach]

These are examples of sectarian/ethnic strife, not 'multiculturalism'. The people of the former Yugoslavia spoke the same language and had a very similar culture. Ditto Iraq and Turkey - the Iraqi Shia hardly have a radically different 'culture' from the Iraqi Sunni who live down the road and speak the same language.

It's news to me that the Albanians and Slovenes spoke Serbo-Croat. The promotion of religious differences are part of multiculturalism, which promotes "diversity" for its own sake, regardless of the implications for societal-cohesion.

[Gadjodilo]

Well they only became ethnic groups in recent times due to Africa's massive population explosion. Over a century ago there was fewer than 100 million people on the whole continent and so they were divided into tribes.

So, you need a certain minimum number of members to be an ethnic group? According to another poster on this thread, the population of Nigeria in the early 1960s (around independence) was of the order of 40 million. So, the 6 major ethnic groups comprised on average 6 -8 million people - comparable to Finland or Sweden. Are the Finns and Swedes 'tribes'?

I think the use of the term 'tribe' in an African context betrays a particular belief about Africans as being all rural farmers or village-dwellers living in mudhuts etc. with all the other stereotypes that these settings entail.

[Gadjodilo]

It's not chauvinism - it's realism. Look at what happened in the UK and Holland. Facts cannot be racist because they are static. This is not about attacking an ethnicity, but rather attacking a failed ideology that has failed all concerned wherever it has been tried.

Even if the British had wanted to partition the country (and I'm pretty sure they didn't), they would probably have faced the opposition of the locally based elites who were poised to take over the reins of power when the British left. The structures were already there at national level for them to move into and a nation of 40 million would have had more rich pickings than one of 6 or 8 million.

[Gadjodilo]

The English weren't alone in making this mistake, when the French quit their colonies, they should have left the West African and Central African federal structures intact as parochial tribalism would have been avoided and the two new states would have become more viable politico-economic entities.

How do you know? Why would the imposition of a few large states avoid these problems? What is it about a West African federation that would have prevented the recent instability in, for example, Ivory Coast?

Africa is a patchwork of ethnic groups who love and/or hate each other just like Europe is. We Europeans didn't settle down and stop slaughtering each other until we all got our own mono-ethnic states.

[Ecoguy]

Its hard to have much hope for Nigeria - out of control populations growth(30 million in 1950 to a scary 150 million today), relegious hostilities growing by the day between North and South, rampant corruption by a powerfull wealth elite finaced by corporate criminals like SHELL etc.

[Thac0man]

which is why i think Nigerians should reject the artifically created colonial legacy boundaries that tie them into an unstable state, the elites in the country are probably more worried about losing out if partition removed oil fields from their grasp than they are about being patriotic about Nigeria.

On the face of it I agree. But such statements by Gaddafi stoke what would be a violent and bloody seperation, even if handled with minimum passion. The creation of modern Pakistan being a good example or an organised seperation, and they was aweful. But the worst case scenario can be glimpsed in the horrific Nigerian civil war.

But Gaddafi has another reason for speaking now, Nigerias new acting President 'Goodluck Johnson', is a Christian. I have looked up Goodluck Johnson, fascinating character:

BBC News - Profile: Goodluck Jonathan, Nigeria's unlikely leader

It is the oil rich Christian south that would gain most from any split, and Mr. Goodluck Johnson is an Ijaw, same tribe as the Delta militants and rebels. Gaddafi no doubt has in mind that either Nigeria or Sudan are going to provide a blue print for a national split along Muslim/Christian lines the other might use.

[Gadjodilo]

It is the oil rich Christian south that would gain most from any split, and Mr. Goodluck Johnson is an Ijaw, same tribe as the Delta militants and rebels. Gaddafi no doubt has in mind that either Nigeria or Sudan are going to provide a blue print for a national split along Muslim/Christian lines the other might use.

The Christian south would gain most by partition - there's no doubt about that. It would have the natural resources and leave the north as a landlocked, agrarian state. But, by trying to impose Sharia law, northern Muslims aren't doing much to convince their Christian compatriots that they want to share a future. If the south does break away in one or more states, the northerners only have themselves to blame.