The Bakassi War

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

Crisis Summary: CAMEROON-NIGERIA III
Background:
Nigeria and Cameroon were embroiled in another crisis over territory from the end of December 1993 until late November 1994.

Background
The borderland area of Bakassi consists largely of Nigerian nationals, mostly fishers. However, Nigeria had no legal claim to the territory. An Anglo-German treaty in 1913 had assigned the territory to the then-British colony of Southern Cameroon. And in the postindependence period Nigeria acknowledged Cameroon's sovereignty in the 1975 Maroua treaty.

Summary:
A crisis for Nigeria was triggered at the end of December 1993 when Cameroonian troops raided the fishing village of Abana, killing six persons. Nigeria responded on 3 January by occupying Diamond and Djsbana, Cameroonian islands in an oil-producing sector of the Gulf of Guinea. That act catalyzed a crisis for Cameroon, which, in turn, responded by dispatching troops in an attempt to reassert its claim to the islands.

From that initial tit-for-tat exchange the crisis oscillated between expressions of conciliation and minor clashes. Thus, on 6 January 1994, Cameroon's President, Paul Biya, and Nigeria's Foreign Minister, Baba Gana Kingibe, met in a friendly atmosphere and decided to establish joint patrols in the disputed area. On 17 February there were renewed clashes. Ten days later a French military mission arrived in Cameroon under the terms of their 1974 defense agreement. Nigeria reacted angrily, its foreign minister attacking France on 2 March for internationalizing the dispute.

Crisis diplomacy intensified in March. Cameroon submitted the dispute to the International Court of Justice and requested both the UN Security Council and the OAU to mediate. It also accepted a mediation offer by Togo. The foreign ministers of Nigeria and Cameroon met on 9-10 March. Peaceful crisis management suffered a setback when Cameroon's president made the withdrawal of Nigerian troops from the islands a condition for a summit meeting.

The OAU became active on 24 March when it passed a resolution calling on both parties to do the following: withdraw their troops from the disputed area; exercise restraint; take measures to restore confidence; and continue their negotiations. Neither party was pleased with this package. Again in mid-April the OAU offered to mediate by dispatching a delegation to the two capitals. Their task was aggravated by the apparent use of the Bakassi dispute by both heads of state to enhance domestic support for their authoritarian rule.

There was progress at a summit meeting between Biya and the head of Nigeria's military regime, General Abacha, in Tunis on 13 June: they agreed to set up a joint committee with a Togolese chairman to seek a peaceful solution. A commitment to finding a lasting solution to their territorial dispute was reaffirmed at a joint meeting on 4-6 July. However, a summit meeting scheduled for 18 July was postponed. And on 18 September 10 Cameroonian soldiers were killed in a surprise attack by Nigerian troops.

Thereafter the crisis de-escalated--and faded in late November. This is evident in expressions of "delight" at the maintenance of peace despite the continuing territorial dispute, at a meeting between Nigeria's president and foreign minister with Cameroon's ambassador on 6 December 1994. The dispute remains unresolved; but the 1993-94 crisis faded into a mutual acceptance of the status quo.

Neither the U.S. nor Russia was involved in the crisis. The UN did not respond to attempts by Cameroon to draw it into the dispute. Only the OAU, as noted, was active in crisis management.

(Despite the long-standing de facto cease-fire in the dispute over Bakassi, violence flared up again in late April 1996.)

References:
AR 1994; ARB 1994; ARec 1994; Keesing's 1994; WA 1994.

WI Nigeria and Cameroon had gone to war?

 

[Jason]

i suspect it wouldn't have lasted overly long. If I remember aright, Cameroon's military is quite small and whilst Nigeria's is fairly large I think in the early/mid 90s it had a lot of problems due to a lack of spares and other maintenance issues

 

[carlton_bach]

i suspect it wouldn't have lasted overly long. If I remember aright, Cameroon's military is quite small and whilst Nigeria's is fairly large I think in the early/mid 90s it had a lot of problems due to a lack of spares and other maintenance issues

Actually, that's a recipe for a long war. Countries with functioning militaries tend to fight short wars becuause the cost is prohibitive and at some point, one of them stops functioning either for lack of funding, supplies, effective weaponry, or political will. If you don't have a working military to start with, you're reduced to using local muscle and adapt to the infrastructure in place. That means militias, death squads, infantry units dependent on locally acquired food and improvised transport. Such a war is not easily won, but because its cost to the military and government is low it can be fought almost indefinitely. At some point, the local structure is so changed by war that it becomes almost impossible to stop.

Sounds unpleasant.