Reasons For Military Intervention In Politics

   
With exception of Egypt and Sudan where officers seized power in 1956 and 1958 respectively, there was no military intervention that occurred in Africa until in the 1960s where officers in Togo led the way in 1963, followed by the central African republic and Nigeria in 1966. By the end of 1966, military intervention in politics in Africa had become endemic with some countries suffering from coups and counter coups.

Many reasons have been adduced to explain the frequency of military intervention in the politics of African states with Nigeria as a case study. Such reasons include corruption and bribery, mismanagement of funds, nepotism and favoritism, political  crisis, class interest etc.

As indicated above, one of the most important factors that inspired the military to intervene in politics is corruption and bribery.

According to Obikeze and Obi (2003),"most of the  military coups in the third world had always been predicted on the need to rid the society of corruption.

The first coup in Nigeria had corruption as one of its justification." This is evidenced from the first
broadcast of the leader of the January, 1966 coup, Major Chukwuma Nzeogwu.

"Our enemies are the political profiteers , the swindlers, the men in high and low places that receive bribes and demands 10%, those that seek to keep the country divided permanently so that they can remain in office as ministers or VIPS at least, the tribalists, the nepotists, those that make the country look big for nothing before international circles; those that have corrupted our society and put the Nigerian calendar back by their words and deed.

"Nzeogwu and other subsequent coup plotters believed that the military was more  disciplined and less prone to corruption than the civilian politicians. Indeed, the nefarious activities of civilian politicians lead some Nigerians to crave for military intervention.

Another factor of military intervention in politics is mismanagement of funds meant for prioritized developmental projects.

The civilian politicians where accused of mismanaging such funds; this is usually due to the selfish ambition to become millionaires within a short period of time .

They use their positions and offices to loot government properties and divert government funds into their private bank account. This results in the economies of these state stagnating.

"In cases where the economies experienced growth, it was growth without development as the benefit of growth did not trickle down to the people. In some proven cases, the living condition of the people deteriorated. The people where seriously disappointed. "(Ibid).

Nepotism and favoritism play prominent role in ushering in military into the political process of the state, in most cases, appointment and promotions under civilian government were not being carried out based on political qualification and experience, rather they were based on political considerations.

For instance, those who supported the party during electioneering enjoy this privileged without due regards to their qualification and experience. Civilian politicians tend to favor more people from the same ethnic background with them. "Since most African countries are multi-ethnic, people are always interested in the ethnic origins of those in power and how they use state power to allocate the state's resources.

When therefore an ethnic group feels highly marginalized by another or other ethnic group it can plan to change the status-quo through a coup."

 Political crisis is another salient factor that is adduced to be responsible for military intervention in the political process of the state.

 In an attempt to explain this factor, we have to  look at the socio-political set of factors which relates to the failure of the civil political order.

In Nigeria, for instance, there were catalogue of socio-political events and crisis that marked  the breakdown of civil political order arrangements, which encourage the military to take over power.

Some of this crises include the self-government in 1956 motion crisis; the Kano riot of 1953, the action group crisis of 1962, the 1962/63 census controversy, and the 1964 Federal Election Crisis.

Inordinate ambition of the military is another reason why the military intervene in the political process. This ambition is some times personal to the individual officers and at times corporate
to the whole military force. They intervene in the political process in order to protect their interest.

The truth is that the military does not move against any regime except its interest has been threatened.

Many of the military officers saw coup and military intervention as the easiest way of accumulating wealth.  Once in power, they become worse than the politicians.