Version classiqueVersion mobile

France and Nigeria : issues in comparative studies

 | 
Haruna J. Jacob
, 
Massoud Omar

Chapter Six

An application of the concept of interdependence to the study of bilateral relations: The case of Nigeria and France

Olufemi Adelusi

Texte intégral

Introduction

1By their very nature, bilateral relations cover a wide range of areas of cooperation and conflict. The relations between Nigeria and France share this attribute. An analysis of bilateral relations between two States raises certain questions, among them the character and nature of such relations. An examination of the character of bilateral relations sometimes involves dealing with the notions of patron-client relations, dependency, most favoured relations and interdependency.

2In this study, our intention is to analyse the bilateral relations between Nigeria and France within the conceptual optic of interdependency. In this connection, certain questions come up such as: what definition of the concept of interdependency could best be applied to Nigeria-France relations, given the myriad of definitions of this concept? At what level do we consider the bilateral relations between these countries as being interdependent? What sectors of these relations demonstrate interdependency? An attempt will be made here to answer these questions. In the application of the concept of interdependence, however, the study will focus mainly on the political and economic relations between Nigeria and France.

Definition of the concept of interdependence

3There are many definitions of the concept of interdependence. Thus, in order to know which of the definitions might be best suited to our discussion, a review is indispensable. The review will be on two levels. This is because while it is true that there is not yet a fixed definition of the concept of interdependence in international relations, there exist two analytical levels in the discussion of the concept.

  • 1  O. Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Bost (...)
  • 2  ibid.

4The first level of analysis is largely rhetorical, this being the level where statesmen and politicians use the concept to explain the sense in which their different policies on economic or political relations with other States have to be seen by their home constituencies and especially by the relevant pressure and interest groups. The statesmen and politicians usually assert that interdependence is a natural necessity1 and thus call on the pressure groups to adapt themselves to the conditions imposed by the situation of interdependence. The statesmen do not stop there. They also postulate that conflicts of interest are reduced by the state of interdependence between nations and that it is only through inter-State cooperation that the answers to world problems can be founds.2

  • 3  Kenneth Waltz, "The Myth of National Interdependence” in Charles Kindleberger (ed), The Internatio (...)

5An example of such rhetoric would be when the head of State of a dominant country (which belongs to the group of countries dubbed "centre" in the centre-periphery analysis of international relations) addresses heads of State from the periphery and describes the dependent and clientelist relationship between his State and the satellite or client States as an example of successful interdependent relations. The function of the rhetoric is to assure his fellow heads of State and to convince them of the necessity to retain the existing relationship. The use of the notion of "interdependence" in such a case obscures the inequality in the national capacities of the States involved.3

  • 4  O. R. Keohane and J. S. Nye, op cit, p. 8.
  • 5  ibid.
  • 6  W. K. Ruf, M. Nancy, H. Sanson, M. Flory et al, Indépendance et interdépendance au Maghreb (Paris: (...)
  • 7  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 8.
  • 8  K. Waltz, op cit, P. 210.

6The second level of analysis of the concept of interdependence is more rigorous. It represents the concept as an analytical tool in the study of international relations.4 If we accept that "dependence" means the state of being determined or significantly affected by external forces,5 or otherwise if we agree that the concept refers to all the phenomena which in one way or the other reduce the self-determination of an individual, a group, a social class or a whole Nation-State,6 the concept of interdependence then has to be taken as implying mutual dependence.7 Mutual dependence is said to exist between two States only when they count on each other when it comes to buying goods and services which are difficult for each State to produce internally. The concept of interdependence, seen in this light, is taken as being difficult or costly to break.8

  • 9  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 9.

7Interdependence in world politics is taken as a concept that refers to situations characterised by reciprocal effects among countries or among actors in different countries.9 It is important to note that when the concept is seen from this perspective, importance is attached to costs and autonomy in the relations between States. But it is difficult to determine the proportion of benefits over costs in such a relation.

8This definition of interdependence shows that interactions between States which does not involve costly effects denotes a state of interconnectedness, this being a distinction which sets apart the above definition as regards an understanding of the whole debate surrounding the concept of interdependence. If the definition offered by Keohane and Nye did not limit its range of cost involvement to the economic sphere, the following definition by Richard Cooper clearly identifies and examines the concept of economic interdependence in relation to foreign policy.

  • 10  Richard N. Cooper, "Economic Interdependence and Foreign Policy in the Seventies” in World Politic (...)

9Accordingly, for Cooper, "economic interdependence" refers to the sensitivity of economic transactions between two or more nations to economic developments within these nations.10 He went on to argue that two countries which engage in mutual trade would still experience a low degree of interdependence if the value of that trade is not sensitive to price and income developments in the two countries. The contrary situation indicates a high degree of interdependence.

  • 11  Robert D. Tollison and Thomas D. Willet, "International Integration and the Interpendence of Econo (...)
  • 12  Marina V. N. Witman, Reflections on Interdependence: Issues for Economic Theory and US Policy (Pit (...)
  • 13  K. Waltz, Theory of Interational Politics (Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesly, 1979), p. 139

10Marina V. N. Witman reasons along the same line, reinforcing the definition given by Tollison and Willet11 that, in the economic sense, the concept of interdependence refers to the susceptibility of the economic behaviour in a country to developments or policies which originate outside its borders.12 Kenneth Walts shares this perception of interdependence, most especially the emphasis placed on "susceptibility", but he confesses that that definition is more or less that of an economist, sustained purely by economic interest.13

  • 14  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 13.

11There is another angle to the analysis of economic interdependence: the place of "vulnerability". According to Keohane and Nye (who made the distinction between susceptibility and vulnerability in economic interdependence), "the vulnerability dimension of interdependence rests on the relative availability and costliness of the alternatives that various actors face."14

  • 15  Robert W. Tucker, The Inequality of Nations (New York: Basic Books, 1977), p. 97.
  • 16  Richard Rosecrance and Arthur Stein, "Interdependence: Myth or Reality?" in World Politics Vol. XX (...)

12Robert Tucker makes a distinction between "positive interdependence", in which the actors’ interests in international relations vary directly, and the "negative interdependence" in which the interests of the actors are inversely varied.15 This distinction was further developed by Richard Rosecrance and Arthur Stein. For them, if the relations between military allies could be described as positively interdependent, then enemies or adversaries manifest a high degree of negative interdependence.16 These two groups of actors have their interests crucially linked. Rosecrance and Stein argued that it is assumed that if one member within each group improves his position, the other members of the groups suffer. They also argued that "the interdependence of antagonists arises in part because rivals are alike; they compete for the same goals, utilize similar techniques and seek to win over the same allies or to acquire the same real estate". Furthermore, "aggressive nationalism may lead to higher negative interdependence".

13From whatever angle one looks at it, both negative and positive interdependence indicate the existence of interdependent relations between nations or groups of nations, such that a change in decision on the part of a State affects the behaviour of another State or other States involved in such relations.

  • 17  See International Organization, 31, Summer 1977, p. 425.
  • 18  Ibid, p. 425.

14The above conception of interdependence appeared in a modified form in the work of Richard Rosecrance and others, "Whither interdependence?"17 where they postulate that "interdependence can be defined as the direct and positive linkage of the interests of States where a change in the position of one State affects the position of others and in the same direction". Accordingly, they argue that the concept can be measured in two ways: by the flow of goods between States (what they qualify as Horizontal interdependence); and by the equalization of factor prices among States – what has been referred to as Vertical interdependence.18

  • 19  Marshall R. Singer, Weak States in a World of Powers: The Dynamics of International Relations (New (...)

15Marshall R. Singer considers the concept under discussion as the form of "Psychological relationship between individuals, groups or States that feel themselves autonomous and more or less equal, but recognize the advantages of reciprocal dependence".19 He argues further that each unit taking part in such a relationship feels that it has something to contribute to the other. He concluded his argument with the fact that it is the perceived complementarity that leads to the establishment of interdependence.

  • 20  Klaus Knorr, The Power of Nations: The Political Economy of International Relations (New York: Bas (...)
  • 21  ibid.

16The relationship between the concepts of Power, Influence and Interdependence has been pointed out by Klaus Knorr. According to him, these three concepts are inextricably related.20 He argues that two States can be in conflict over some issues while cooperating on others. He says: "When they cooperate, they benefit from the creation of new values, material or non material, when they are in conflict, they attempt to gain values at each other’s expense".21 In either case, they are interdependent, he added. Furthermore, he linked the concept of Power to conflictual situations whereas the concept of Influence is central to both circumstances of conflict and in cooperative relations, he opined.

  • 22  Op cit.
  • 23  Ibid, p. 159.
  • 24  Ibid, p. 160.

17The linkage between economic interdependence and foreign policy was developed by Richard Cooper in his article "Economic Interdependence and Foreign Policy in the Seventies".22 He defines the concept of economic interdependence in a more restricted sense as "the sensitivity of economic developments within those nations".23 He considers the concept of foreign policy as evoking three notions: firstly, "all points of contact between national governments”; secondly, "points of contact between governments concerning the territorial integrity of the Nation-State and the security of its citizens"; and thirdly, "a grand conception of world economic and political order that provides a consistent framework for, and guidance to, the month to month decisions that nations must take in their relations with other nations".24

  • 25  Ibid, p. 161.
  • 26  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 2.

18The main thrust of the Foreign Policy-Economic Interdependence linkage argument by Richard Cooper is that growing economic interdependence has implications for the first and third of his notions of foreign policy, that is, "for the number and character of contacts between governments" and for "the conception of a world economic and political order that is both desirable and attainable".25 Examining the relationship between the two concepts of Interdependence and Power, Robert Keohane and J. Nye both agreed to the fact that the "less dependent actors can often use the interdependent relationship as a source of power in bargaining over an issue and perhaps to affect other issues".26

The concept of interdependence in Nigeria-France relations

19Having examined some of the important definitions and theories of the concept of interdependence in international relations, the question which is uppermost in our mind is: can Nigeria-France relations from 1970 to 1985 be considered interdependent in the light of these definitions and theories?

20Among the definitions of the concept of interdependence discussed above, the one that defines it in terms of mutual dependence is useful in analysing Nigeria-France relations. It is true that political and economic relations between the two countries were at a low ebb between 1960 and 1974. Thus, one cannot analyse these relations concretely in terms of interdependence. On the other hand, there were considerable changes in these two areas – economic and political – during the period 1974-1985. Economic, political and diplomatic exchanges have since characterised the relations. Our analysis will thus dwell on these higher levels of relations in terms of interdependence.

Economic relations

  • 27  Source: Nigerian National Petroleum Cooperation (NNPC), Lagos, 1982.

21Nigeria’s economic growth and the development of its external commercial trade in the 1970s depended on the 1973/1974 and 1978 increases in the price of petroleum. One has to remember the important place occupied by petroleum in Nigeria’s total exports and in the Nigerian government’s revenues. It accounted for not less than 90 % of the total revenues from exports and 80 % of the total Federal Government of Nigeria’s collected revenue.27

  • 28  Jean-Pierre Cot, A l’epreuve du pouvoir: le tiers mondisme pourquoi faire? (Paris: Editions du Seu (...)

22The petroleum boom of the 1970s was important as a catalyst in the economic and commercial relations between Nigeria and France.28 Nigeria found an economic and commercial partner in France which bought a lot of its crude petroleum. On the other hand, France discovered in Nigeria a large market for its finished manufactured products and equipment. France also discovered in Nigeria a reliable source of petroleum which is very far away from the turbulent Middle and Far East. This development in economic relations brought Nigeria and France into a "desired interdependence".

  • 29  Statistics provided by the Centre français de commerce extérieur (CFCE).

23It is interesting to note that from 1975 to 1985, with the exception of 1978 and 1979, Nigeria occupied an important position among France’s commercial partners in Africa, south of the Sahara. The commercial exchange between the two countries grew from 1.2% to 1.7 % of French external trade between 1975 and 1980, and from 14.3 % to 22.3 % of French external trade with Africa.29

  • 30  Statistics provided by the Poste d’expansion dconomique (PEE), French Embassy, Lagos.

24An examination of the import and export transactions between Nigeria and France indicates that French imports from Nigeria from 1973 to 1983 involved only a list of ten items out of which crude petroleum was by far the most important. For example, crude petroleum represented 90.7 %, 98 %, 98.8 %, 98 % and 93.1 % of French imports from Nigeria in 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976 and 1977 respectively. The figures were 96.5 %, 98.7 %, 98.8 %, 99 %, 99 %, 99.3 % and 99.4 % for 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 and 1985 respectively. On the other hand, French exports to Nigeria were very diversified, including not less than twenty items.30

  • 31  Moniteur du commerce international No.250, 11 July, 1977, p. 21.
  • 32  Statistics supplied by the C. F. C. E. and the I. N. S. E. E., both based in Paris.
  • 33  See Mark W. Delancey, "Nigeria: Foreign Policy Alternatives" in T. M. Shaw and O. Aluko (eds), Nig (...)

25As a result of this intensity of transactions between the two countries, Nigeria became France’s fifteenth trade client, coming third in France’s trade with Africa, after Algeria and Morocco.31 Just a few years earlier, in 1972, Nigeria occupied the fourty-seventh position as France’s trade client and her twelfth on the African continent. In 1980, Nigeria became the twelfth supplier and the thirteenth French trade client in the worlds.32 Earlier, in 1978, Nigeria was France’s largest market in sub-Saharan Africa and the fourth largest location for French investments.33 The economic relations between the two countries were so important that during the period 1981-1985, business circles in France were fond of saying that huge contracts rained in Nigeria.

  • 34  Kenneth Waltz, "The Myth of National Interdependence" in C. Kindleberger (ed), The International C (...)

26The question now is: can one describe the economic relations existing between Nigeria and France in terms of interdependence? Kenneth Waltz’s definition of mutual dependence is appropriate here. He considers States as being mutually dependent if they rely on each other for goods and services that cannot be easily produced at home and that this kind of interdependence is difficult or costly to break.34

27Now, while it is true that the economic relations between Nigeria and France are such that the two countries buy from one another those goods and services that cannot be easily produced at home, one cannot conclude that such relations constitute interdependence, however difficult or costly they may be to break. The fact is that Nigeria has diversified its sources of dependence, that is to say, its trading and commercial partners. But this notwithstanding, the mutuality or otherwise of the dependence in Nigeria-France relations would still need to be addressed.

  • 35  Richard N. Cooper, "Economic Interdependence and Foreign Policy in the Seventies”, op cit, pp.159- (...)

28Richard Cooper’s definition of economic interdependence is useful in determining the extent to which Nigeria’s relations with France could be described as mutually dependent. Cooper used the term economic interdependence in its more restricted sense to denote "the sensitivity of economic transactions between two or more nations to economic developments within those nations".35 For Cooper, there is a low degree of interdependence between two countries with a lot of mutual trade if the value of that trade is not sensitive to price and income development in the two countries. On the other hand, a high degree of interdependence exists beween the two countries if transactions are greatly sensitive to economic developments. Thus, the concept of interdependence as viewed from this economic perspective implies a two-way sensitivity, with one-way sensitivity leading to a dependent economy.

  • 36  Vincent N. Berger, "Nigeria-French trade relations" in Directory: Franco-Nigerian Chamber of Comme (...)
  • 37  See Marchés tropicaux et méditerranéens August 1985, p. 142.

29The trade and commercial transactions between Nigeria and France are sensitive to the economic developments in each of the two countries. They are more sensitive to Nigeria’s economic development than they are to France’s partly because crude oil, which is the main item of transaction, is Nigeria’s principal revenue yielding source and determines to a large extent the pace and rhythm of her development efforts. On the other hand, it can be argued that French economic development is also sensitive to the transactions between France and Nigeria. It is true, for example, that in 1984, Nigeria became the second most important supplier (after the United Kingdom), of French petroleum needs, supplying 14 % of total French oil imports.36 At the same time, petroleum imports represented 99.3 % of French imports from Nigeria.37 That provided her some relief from her earlier turbulent Middle and Far East sources.

  • 38  Mark W. Delancey, op cit.
  • 39  ibid.

30In addition to the petroleum factor, it is true that in 1978, Nigeria became the fourth largest location of French investments in the worlds38 and the largest market for French products in Africa, south of the Sahara.39 Nigeria became the second most important French trade client in 1980 and 1982, the third in 1983 and 1984, and the sixth in 1985. The importance of this high level of trade and commercial transactions between Nigeria and France makes it possible to argue that, in spite of the relatively less important place occupied by France-Nigeria economic relations in France’s overall external trade, the development of the French economy is influenced to some extent by France’s trade and commercial transactions with Nigeria.

Political relations

  • 40  ibid.

31In the application of the concept of interdependence to political relations between Nigeria and France, the definition offered by Klaus Knorr immediately comes to mind. According to him, two other concepts, Power and Influence, are inextricably linked with the concept of interdependence. That brings in an additional element to the definition of interdependence. In this form, two States can be in conflict over some issues while cooperating in others. The concept of Power is more relevant in conflictual situations, whereas Influence is central both in circumstances of conflict and in cooperative relationships.40

  • 41  See Embassy of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Paris, "Relations between Nigeria and France", m (...)

32One finds that some elements of this definition correspond to aspects of Nigeria-France relationships. It is true that Nigeria and France seem to have different approaches to, or conflictual relations on, certain international issues of special importance to each of them. Such issues include: the extirpation of the odious apartheid system practised in South Africa; the right of the Palestinians to a homeland; decolonisation and self-determination for all peoples, especially in Western Sahara, New Caledonia, Guadeloupe, Martinique and La Réunion; and the presence of French military bases and troops in West and Central Africa as well as in the Horn of Africa (Djibouti).41 However, this conflictual position has not hampered cooperative relationship in the domain of economic and commercial transactions. In fact, it is observable that on those issues where conflictual relations exist, it is the attempt made by each country to gain influence and prestige at the expense of the other that triumphs.

  • 42  Richard Cooper, op cit, p. 161.

33In the preceding section, we gave the definition of economic interdependence offered by Richard Cooper. What interests us in this section is the link that he established between this form of interdependence and Foreign Policy. According to him, "growing economic interdependence has important implications for [...] the number and character of contacts between governments and more importantly, for the conception of a world economic and political order that is both desirable and attainable"42

  • 43  See Rene Otayek, "L’Interveittion du Nigéria dans le conflit tchadien: heurs et malheurs d’un nouv (...)

34In the context of Nigeria’s relationship with France, it is possible to infer that the growing economic interdependence as recognised in the preceding analysis has important implications for the number and the character of contacts between the governments of the two countries between 1978 and 1985. In fact, the understanding that characterised the policies of the two countries over the efforts to settle the Chadian crisis in 1979 and 1981 could well illustrate this link between growing economic interdependence and foreign policy.43

  • 44  op cit.

35The notion of "negative interdependence" developed by Richard Rosecrance and Arthur Stein44 is relevant here. According to these two authors, besides those relations that qualify as "positive interdependence" (military alignments, among others), the notion of "negative interdependence" refers to the relationships between enemies or adversaries. Negative interdependence between two nations is further explained by its given characteristics:

  • 45  ibid, p. 2.

[...] their interests are crucially linked in that it is assumed that if one improves his position, the other suffers, [...] there is no necessary differentiation of functions or division of labour. They compete for the same goals, utilize similar techniques and seek to win the same allies or to acquire the same real estates.45

  • 46  Bola Akinterinwa, "Nigeria and France: The Need for a Better Political Relationship" in Nigerian J (...)

36The application of this notion to Nigeria’s relations with France calls for some clarification. Nigeria and France are not enemies or adversaries in military terms, nevertheless, their African policies make them qualify to be labelled as political rivals, especially in West and Central Africa.46 Nigerian and French policies in West and Central Africa aim at the same goal or objective. In the case of Nigeria, she wants an extended influence in the "francophone" countries who are her immediate neighbours and also constitute the majority of countries in these two regions. Such an influence would contribute to her being respected and accepted as the spokesman of African countries. French policy, in large measure, aims at exploiting its close relations with her former colonies and extending her influence in Africa south of the Sahara in order to increase its status among the big powers.

37Nigeria and France employ similar techniques and seek to win over or influence the same allies (the "francophone" African countries and the other bloc groups). The two countries give financial aid (in the form of soft loans and donations) and technical assistance. The French give quantitatively more of such aid than Nigeria because of the difference in their level of economic development. The two countries also seek to keep intact their influence where it already exists. Nigeria’s regional policy in West and Central Africa is directed towards this end. With Togo, she started ECOWAS. Her strong bilateral relations with other countries, the joint commissions she has created along with other nations, and the river basin commissions in which she is involved are all elements of this policy. France in her own case conducts her influence-seeking policy through a network of bilateral cooperation agreements. They were initially signed between herself and her former colonies as part of their independence package in 1960. They were later renegotiated in 1972 and 1973. She employs another instrument which is multilateral in nature, even though the initial concept was not France’s: the annual conference of French and African heads of State and government. The conference was initially attended only by her former colonies but have recently been opened to non-francophone States.

38Rosecrance and Stein pursued their explanation of "negative interdependence" thus:

  • 47  47 R. Rosecrance and A. Stein, op cit, pp.3-4.

[...] the very continuance of competition over time [. ..] is likely to make them alike. Rivals may even develop certain positively interdependent goals. If they reside at the top of the hierarchy of nations, it may be a common interest to prevent inroads on their joint positions by other States.47

  • 48  B. Akinterinwa, "La Politique extérieure du Nigéria et les relations avec la France de 1958 a 1982 (...)

39The importance of this concluding part of the notion of negative interdependence for the analysis of Nigeria’s relations with France is that the continued "rivalry" between the two countries seems to have made them develop certain positively interdependent goals (such as finding "solutions" to the Chadian crisis in 1978 and 1981), to such an extent that it first appeared that a common interest to prevent any inroads by another State (Libya) on their joint positions in Chad was noted. Otherwise, how can one explain the fact that it was the French foreign affairs minister, Louis Gumrigaud, who prodded his Nigerian counterpart, Major General Henry Adefowope, to participate in resolving the Chadian crisis in 1979?48 This was an indication that France believed that Nigeria shared with her a common interest in keeping the Libyans out of the efforts to work out a solution to the Chadian crisis. We find here a confirmation of the assertion by Rosecrance and Stein that positively interdependent goals can result from negative interdependence between two States. Initially, it seemed that the two countries shared this goal but they later found themselves pursuing their usual antagonistic national interests and engaging in rivalry over the resolution of the Chadian crisis. Above all, this cooperation, even if it was of short duration, proved that Nigeria and France pursued interdependent relations, albeit a negative one.

40Marshall Singer’s definition of the concept of interdependence is of equal importance to the analysis of Nigeria’s relationship with France. According to Singer, the concept connotes:

  • 49  M. R. Singer, op cit, p. 44.

[...] the psychological relationship between individuals, groups or States that feel themselves autonomous and more or less equal, but recognize the advantages of reciprocal dependence. Each unit in the relationship feels that it has something to contribute to the other and the other has something to contribute to it. 49

41In the context of Nigeria’s relationship with France, one must admit that there exists the rhetorical aspect of the application of the concept of interdependence which is found in the appreciation of the political and economic relations by Nigerian diplomats and political representatives as well as their French counterparts, on the one hand, and accepted in the French business circles on the other. Concretely, the psychological aspect embedded in the definition of the concept of interdependence offered by Singer is absent in the analysis of the political and economic relations between Nigeria and France by their respective decision makers. Most analysts or observers of Nigeria’s relations with France have always seen these relations in terms of Power and Influence. In other words, the weight of psychological consciousness on the part of decision makers in both countries as sharing the advantages of "reciprocal dependence" is less compared to other plausible explanations.

Conclusion

42Our application of the concept of interdependence to the study of bilateral economic and political relations between Nigeria and France reveals two things. Firstly, our analysis of Nigerians relations with France reveals that the tangible level of interdependence identified is the type we have called the rhetorical one, at least as long as the two countries have not come out clearly to accept each other as the two powers operating on the African continent and trying to influence the States of West and Central Africa as well as other regions of the continent. Secondly, it is true that in spite of the rhetorical aspect of the concept of interdependence, there exists evidence to support the fact that the two countries could be described as being economically interdependent along the lines of our chosen definitions, however, political interdependence cannot yet adequately describe the level and nature of political and diplomatic relations between Nigeria and France. One is tempted to assume that there are some effects of good economic relations spilling over to enhance political relations even if such spillover effects are very few and difficult to identify correctly.

Notes

1  O. Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston, Toronto: Little Brown and Company, 1977), p. 7.

2  ibid.

3  Kenneth Waltz, "The Myth of National Interdependence” in Charles Kindleberger (ed), The International Corporation (Cambridge, Mass.: The M. I. T. Press, 1970), p. 220.

4  O. R. Keohane and J. S. Nye, op cit, p. 8.

5  ibid.

6  W. K. Ruf, M. Nancy, H. Sanson, M. Flory et al, Indépendance et interdépendance au Maghreb (Paris: C. N. R. S., 1974), p. 21.

7  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 8.

8  K. Waltz, op cit, P. 210.

9  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 9.

10  Richard N. Cooper, "Economic Interdependence and Foreign Policy in the Seventies” in World Politics Vol. XXIV, January 1972, No.2, p. 159.

11  Robert D. Tollison and Thomas D. Willet, "International Integration and the Interpendence of Economic Variables" in International Organization, 27, Spring 1973, p. 259.

12  Marina V. N. Witman, Reflections on Interdependence: Issues for Economic Theory and US Policy (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1979), p. 265.

13  K. Waltz, Theory of Interational Politics (Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesly, 1979), p. 139

14  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 13.

15  Robert W. Tucker, The Inequality of Nations (New York: Basic Books, 1977), p. 97.

16  Richard Rosecrance and Arthur Stein, "Interdependence: Myth or Reality?" in World Politics Vol. XXVI, October 1973/July 1974, p. 127.

17  See International Organization, 31, Summer 1977, p. 425.

18  Ibid, p. 425.

19  Marshall R. Singer, Weak States in a World of Powers: The Dynamics of International Relations (New York: The Free Press, 1972), p. 44.

20  Klaus Knorr, The Power of Nations: The Political Economy of International Relations (New York: Basic Books, 1975), p. 3.

21  ibid.

22  Op cit.

23  Ibid, p. 159.

24  Ibid, p. 160.

25  Ibid, p. 161.

26  Keohane and Nye, op cit, p. 2.

27  Source: Nigerian National Petroleum Cooperation (NNPC), Lagos, 1982.

28  Jean-Pierre Cot, A l’epreuve du pouvoir: le tiers mondisme pourquoi faire? (Paris: Editions du Seuii, 1984), p. 124.

29  Statistics provided by the Centre français de commerce extérieur (CFCE).

30  Statistics provided by the Poste d’expansion dconomique (PEE), French Embassy, Lagos.

31  Moniteur du commerce international No.250, 11 July, 1977, p. 21.

32  Statistics supplied by the C. F. C. E. and the I. N. S. E. E., both based in Paris.

33  See Mark W. Delancey, "Nigeria: Foreign Policy Alternatives" in T. M. Shaw and O. Aluko (eds), Nigerian Foreign Policy: Alternative Perceptions and Projections (London: Macmillan, 1983).

34  Kenneth Waltz, "The Myth of National Interdependence" in C. Kindleberger (ed), The International Corporation (Cambridge, Mass.: M.l. T. Press, 1970), p. 210.

35  Richard N. Cooper, "Economic Interdependence and Foreign Policy in the Seventies”, op cit, pp.159-160.

36  Vincent N. Berger, "Nigeria-French trade relations" in Directory: Franco-Nigerian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Lagos: Bencod Press, 1986).

37  See Marchés tropicaux et méditerranéens August 1985, p. 142.

38  Mark W. Delancey, op cit.

39  ibid.

40  ibid.

41  See Embassy of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Paris, "Relations between Nigeria and France", mimeo, 1984, pp.5-13.

42  Richard Cooper, op cit, p. 161.

43  See Rene Otayek, "L’Interveittion du Nigéria dans le conflit tchadien: heurs et malheurs d’un nouveau centre du pouvoir" in Le mois en Afrique No.209-210, June-July, 1983, pp.51-66. He sees the cooperation between Nigeria and France over the Chadian crisis as a result of the increasing economic and commercial relations between the two States.

44  op cit.

45  ibid, p. 2.

46  Bola Akinterinwa, "Nigeria and France: The Need for a Better Political Relationship" in Nigerian Journal of International Affairs Vol. 12 Nos 1 and 2, 1986, p. 64.

47  47 R. Rosecrance and A. Stein, op cit, pp.3-4.

48  B. Akinterinwa, "La Politique extérieure du Nigéria et les relations avec la France de 1958 a 1982", Ph. D thesis, University of Paris I, 1983, p. 259.

49  M. R. Singer, op cit, p. 44.

Auteur

Studied at the University of Bordeaux where he worked on International Relations (Franco-Nigerian relations). He is at present Acting Head,

Department of Political Science and Defence Studies, Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna.

Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont sous Licence OpenEdition Books, sauf mention contraire.

Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.

Lire

Open access

Acheter

Volume papier

amazon.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search