1

THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN AFRICAN CONFLICTS: THE CASES OF NIGERIA AND SUDAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Religion is a controversial issue in world affairs. Especially in Africa, religion has been at the

heart of much of the contemporary conflicts. Religion is often depicted as a trigger factor in

many conflicts. Religion is also often being blamed as a tool to mobilise people during

conflicts. In many parts of the world people from different religions live in peace and coexist

without any conflict. Then why is religion such a great cause of conflict in other parts of the

world?

People are sensitive about religion because religion forms part of an individuals’ identity.

Religion is not only an integrated part of individual identities, but it is also important for group

identity Religion and nationalism goes hand in hand.1 The Scottish, Russians, Jews,

Mormons and Afrikaners all at some time argued that they are “Gods people”.2 Religion is at

the heart of a community’s value system in most parts of the world, so people who practice a

different religion are easily labelled as worthless.3 A threat to one’s beliefs is also a threat to

one’s very being and that is why people are willing to fight for their religious beliefs.

Religion is a glue that can bind and unify a nation or a group of people, or it can lead to the

destruction of nations as well as lead to intra-state conflicts. The relationship between

religion and conflict is a complex one, and one need to take into consideration many factors

before one can argue that religion is the main cause of conflict. Faith make people feel

safe, because they can predict what is going to happen in the future (especially in the

afterlife). Most religions teach that war is wrong and that violence must only be used as a

last resort. The religious scripts give guidelines on when it is just to use violence, but

people can interpret these scripts in different ways. One can ask the question: So why is

religion a factor in war at all when all the main faiths have little time for violence and

advocate peace?

1 Kellas, G.K. 1998. The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity, (2nd edition). London: Macmillan Press Ltd. p. 61.2 Ibid, p. 33.3 Goldstein, J.S. 1994. International Relations. New York:: HarperCollins College Publishers. p. 159.

2

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM

The research problem stems from the idea that fault lines in religion may lead to conflict. In

this case religion-based fault lines may create conflict generating conditions. However is

religious difference a cause of conflicts, or merely a character of the conflict? Or is religion

an instrument used to mobilise the population for conflict?

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION

The research question is a deduction from the research problem above. The research

question is: What role does religion play in the conflicts in Sudan and Nigeria? The research

question will be answered by examining the conflicts in the selected case studies.

1.4 THE PURPOSE AND SIGNFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

The African continent has been plagued by conflict for many years and a large proportion of

the conflict is claimed to be the result of fault lines in religion. The purpose of this research is

to examine the relationship between religion and conflict in the case of Sudan and Nigeria.

The significance of this research is that the role of religion in conflict has been studied widely,

but not enough is written about the religious conflicts in Africa. This research will focus on

the cases of Sudan and Nigeria as examples of religious conflicts. This research will

contribute to the understanding of religious-based African conflicts and as a result can aid in

conflict resolution on the continent. Conflict is impeding the economic growth of both Sudan

and Nigeria, so if the conflict can be resolved the countries may see an improvement in their

economies.

1.5 OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

The topic of religious conflict has been studied for many years, so there are an abundance of

sources available on the topic. Unfortunately, not so much has been written on African

religious conflicts. Literature regarding theories on religious conflicts includes Huntington

(1996), Stewart (2009), Hoffman (1993) and Appleby (2000). Hicks (2001), Kriesberg (2003)

and Turner (1982, 1985) all contributed to literature on identity and identity theories. Gellner

(1986) provided literature on nations and nationalism which plays an important role in identity

building. Horowitz (1985) and Noel (1968) wrote articles on ethnicity and how it contributes to

religious conflicts.

3

On the topic of Nigeria and the culture of the Nigerian people, Toyin Falola (1999, 2005,

2007) is regarded as one of the leading experts. Martin Meridith (2005) is also considered to

be an expert on African issues and he has included interesting work on Nigeria in some of

his books. There are also research centres like the Centre for Research and Inequality

Human Security and Ethnicity with authors such as Osaghae, E.E. & R. T. Suberu (2005)

and the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance IDEA who did studies on Nigeria

and the conflicts pertaining to Nigeria. Some of the academic journals that have published

articles on Nigeria’s conflicts include the Journal of Modern Studies (Ukiwo, 2003), Dialetical

Anthropology (Aguwa, 1997) and African Issue (Dauda, 2001).

With regards to literature on the Sudanese conflicts there are number of Non Governmental

Organisations (NGOs) like the Crimes of War Project, Stifftung Wissenschaft und Politik

German Institute for International and Security Affairs (Sullivan, 2006), The African Studies

Centre at the University of Leiden (Max, 1979) and the Peace and Conflict Monitor

(Katendeko, 2003) that has done research on the conflicts in Sudan. A number of academic

journals such as the Journal of Religion, Conflict and Peace (Wadlow, 2008), Journal of

International Affairs (Deng, 1994) and the Journal of Religion in Africa (Wills, 2003) has

published articles on wars in Sudan. Daly (2007) can be regarded as an authoritative source

on the Darfur conflict.

The above mentioned sources together with others will be used during the research.

Unfortunately some of the sources that could have contributed to the study are written in

Arabic or other African languages, so they are inaccessible to the author. As a result only

English sources will be used to conduct the research.

1.6 METHODOLOGY

The study is qualitative and mainly descriptive. It will be based on a literature study and

available factual data. The study investigates the role that religion played in two African

conflicts as selected case studies. A state-centric approach will be followed and the units of

analysis will be Nigeria and Sudan. Religion will serve as the variable to be studied. Where

applicable comparative insights gleaned from the case studies will be shared with the reader.

Specific qualitative measures such as scheduled interviews, questionnaires and field

research will not be used during the research. Only secondary sources will be used during

the research. Interviews and surveys cannot be used during the research, because the

4

researcher does not have any understanding of the Arabic language and lack the financial

resources to operationalise such a methodology.

1.7 STRUCTURE OF THE PAPER

The first chapter of the paper will deal with the introduction of the research. It will contain the

research problem and the research question. The purpose and significance of the study will

also be explained in this chapter. The methodology to be used during the research will be

further clarified to the reader. The first chapter will end with a brief conclusion.

Chapter two of the paper will explore selected theories on the topic of religious warfare.

Firstly the theory on identity will be explored, because religion is an integral part of a person’s

identity. The theory will also contain information on identity wars, because religious wars are

also identity wars. Theory on ethnicity will also be discussed seeing that religion and

ethnicity is intertwined. The last part of this chapter will explore fault lines and the emphasis

will be on Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations.

The third chapter will investigate historical instances of religious conflict in order to get a

background understanding of the topic. The historical era’s that will be investigated are the

Crusades, the Arab-Israeli conflict and the 9/11 attack on America. These cases will also

show how religious warfare has persisted throughout the past and present. This chapter will

also deal with trends in religious conflict by describing some of the causes and

characteristics of religious wars.

Chapter four is the main part of the paper and will deal with the selected case studies. In this

chapter it will be determined what role religion played in the conflicts. The paper only

focuses on the era after independence of both the countries. Some of the issues that will be

discussed in this chapter are the arrival of Islam and Christianity to the selected countries, as

well as the geographic locations of the two religious factions in the countries. The paper will

also explore the various conflicts and whether they were really religious conflicts, or whether

religion was just one element of the conflict.

The last chapter of the paper will give a brief summary of each chapter. The paper will end

with a conclusion on the research done.

5

1.8 CONCLUSION

Religion provides an encompassing world view to its followers and serves as a rationale for

their activities. Every religion want the rest of the world to have the same beliefs as they

have, so religion is about changing people’s minds to believe the same as what the religion

belief. Religious conflict breaks out when preaching to the “non”-believers failed and some

members of the religion take it in their hands to force the non believers to follow their religion.

Religion can also be used to mobilise ethnic groups or racial identities and to take control

over scarce resources. This phenomenon had taken place all over the world for ages and will

probably still continue for ages. One will also find that in much of the conflict that took place

in the name of religion, religion was just a disguise. Sometimes the reasons for the conflict

were economical or territorial, but religion was used to make it a “just” war. The findings in

this research paper will explore what role religion has played in the Sudanese and Nigerian

conflicts.

CHAPTER 2: THEORY ON RELIGIOUS CONFLICT

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Since the beginning of time, mankind had been caught up in countless conflicts. Some

conflicts arise as a result of scarcity of resources or over territory. Other conflicts are a result

of differences between people, groups or nations. African conflicts are caused by a variety of

factors, such ethnicity, race, resources and religion. For the purpose of this paper, most of

the focus will be on religion as a factor in conflict on the African continent.

Conflict develops from objective factors, subjective factors and trigger factors. Objective

factors are factors such as fighting for control over territory or resources. Subjective factors

can be factors like religion, race, ethnicity or language. Trigger factors ‘may be

instantaneous or act as a trigger (but in themselves they do not explain the causes of

conflict). These events may include political assassination, new enforced discriminatory

policies, electoral fraud, or manifested in longstanding political and socio-economic structure

of society.’4

4 Mpanyane, T. 2009. Conflict in Africa: entering the Age of Hope Institute for Security Studies, http://www.africagoodnews.com/plugins/system/jceutilities/js/mediaobject.js"

type=text/javascript></SCRIPT> (accessed 14 January 2010).

6

Religious conflict is a type of identity based conflict. Identity based conflict is conflict that

arise as a result of differences in identity. Religion is also regarded as a subset of ethnicity;

therefore some theory on ethnicity will also be discussed in this chapter.

To classify a conflict as a religious conflict is a complex task. Academics like Hoffman and

Gurr is of the opinion that many conflicts which are classified as religious conflicts are not

actually religious conflicts. They base their argument on the fact that in many cases, the root

causes of conflict is either political or economical factors.5 They argue that religion is just a

way of mobilising the people to participate in the conflict.6 Stewart takes a different approach.

Stewart’s approach is that

‘while all conflicts have several motives with political and/or economic ones

generally central, mobilisation frequently occurs on the basis of particular

identities, and conflicts can then be classified as ‘ethnic’ or ‘religious’, or class or

ideological, on the basis of how people are mobilised rather than with respect to

the political or economic motives for such mobilization’7

Therefore Stewart and Seul8 agrees that a conflict can be classified as religious conflict if the

main mobilising or organising identity is religion, irrespective if there are other real or

‘underlying motives and objectives.’9

2.2 IDENTITY

It is in the human nature to make distinctions between the self and others. That is why

humans have to establish their own identity. According to Hicks, ‘individuals construct

independent and different pictures of reality (whether the individuals be people or other

entities that develop identity and formulate shared realities, such as families, working groups

and teams, organisations, ethnic groups, nations, and cultures).’10 Almost everything that

5 Hoffman, B. 1993 '"Holy terror": the implications of terrorism motivated by a religious imperative' Worldwide Department of Defense Combating Terrorism Conference, Virginia Beach, VA and Gurr, T. R. 1993 Minorities at risk: a global view of ethnopolitical conflicts, Washington DC: Institute of Peace Press.6 Stewart, F., 2009. Religion versus Ethnicity as a Source of Mobilisation: Are There Differences?, MICROCON Research Working Paper 18, p. 5.7 Stewart, op cit, p. 5. 8 Seul, J. R. 1999 ''Ours is the way of God': religion, identity and intergroup conflict', Journal of Peace Research 36(5): p553-569. 9 Stewart, op cit, p. 5. 10 Hicks, T. Another Look at Identity-Based Conflict: The Roots of Conflict in the Psychology of Consciousness, Negotiation Journal, January 2001, p. 36.

7

humans do helps to establish and maintain their sense of identity. Hicks argued that without

identity, humans would be unable to survive psychologically and socially.11

No person wants to think that everything they believe in is wrong and untrue. It is natural for

a person to believe that their view of the world is accurate and true. That is why humans are

comfortable around others who have the same views and identity as them. When humans

disagree with each other, they are directly questioning each other’s identity. Challenging

someone else’s identity could lead to a violent reaction which could lead to identity based

conflict.12 Religion is one of the cornerstones of a person’s identity. That is why people are

so sensitive when someone challenges their religious beliefs.

2.2.1 Identity based conflict

Hicks defined identity based conflicts as ‘social conflicts (at both the national or group and

the interpersonal levels) that are based on ethnic, cultural, religious, or national-identity

differences.’13 One of the characteristics of identity based conflicts is that the participants in

the conflict are very passionate about what they are fighting for. As a result, identity based

conflicts had been some of the most fierce and violent conflicts that ever took place. Another

characteristic of identity based conflicts is that this type of conflicts is usually protracted. The

reason for the protracted nature of identity based conflicts was mentioned earlier when the

paper explained that no person would want to admit that their view of the world is wrong and

false. In order for an inter-group (e.g., religions) conflict to transpire, there must be at least

two opponents with a difference sense of collective identity.

2.2.2 The nature of identity

It is important for every individual human being to develop a sense of self. Every person’s

self is a combination of different identifications such as race, gender, ethnicity and religion.

These identifications are all necessary to create individual identity, but for the purpose of this

paper, collective identity is more important.

A collective identity can be defined as people who share a similar collective identity and they

think of themselves as having a common interest and a common fate.14 Collective identities

include the identities of countries, ethnic groups, language groups and religious groups.

11 Ibid.12 Hicks, op cit, p. 37.13 Ibid, p. 38.14 Kriesberg, L. “Us” vs “Them”, http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/identity_issues, (accessed July 2003).

8

According to Kriesberg, people who belong to collective identities, ‘feel injured when other

persons sharing their identity are injured or killed.’15 In some instances, individuals are willing

to sacrifice their lives in order to protect their collective identity.

2.2.3 Sources of identity

There are many traits and experiences that can influence the development of identity. Some

of the traits are fixed at birth, which means that the traits will influence the development of

the self from the birth of the individual. The individual is still too young to make decisions, so

the traits will automatically influence the development of the identity of the individual. Some

of the fixed traits include ethnicity, religion, gender, language and skin colour.16

As people mature, they can make decisions. Therefore other traits can be attained or the

existing traits could be modified. Some of the traits that can be changed as the individual

mature are religion, language, or the food that the individual eat. As a result, the identity of

the individual will change together with the new traits.17

2.3 THEORIES OF IDENTITY

2.3.1 The social identity theory

The Social Identity Theory was developed in 1979 by Tajfel and Turner. The theory was

developed to understand the psychological basis of intergroup discrimination.18 The Social

Identity Theory proposes that membership to social groups forms an important part of an

individual’s identity. Tajfel and Turner argued that ‘people tend to classify themselves and

others into various social categories, such as organizational membership, religious affiliation,

gender, and age cohort.’19

The Social Identity Theory asserts that a person has not one, “personal self”, but rather

several selves that correspond to widening circles of group membership. Different social

15 L. Kriesberg, op cit.16 Brewer, M. B. 2001. The many faces of Social Identity: Implications for Political Psychology. International Society of Political Psychology. Vol 22, No1. p. 122.17 L. Kriesberg, op cit.18 Anon, Social Identity Theory, http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/In (accessed 11 December 2009). 19 Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1985) The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour, in S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed.). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. pp. 7-24.

9

contexts may trigger an individual to think, feel and act on basis of his personal, family or

national “level of self”.20 Accordingly, an individual also has a number of social identities.

According to the Social Identity Theory, members of a group create a sense of ingroup

feeling; therefore they will favour their own group at the expense of other groups.

Consequently the theory asserts that when an individual is interacting with someone else,

they will not act as a single individual but they rather act as a representative of a whole group

or category of people. Even during a single conversation an individual may interact with

another person both on a personal level and as a member of a particular group.21

In summary, the social identity theory purports that firstly ‘social identification is a perception

of oneness with a group of persons’22Secondly social identification involves the forming of

ingroups and outgroups. Thirdly, ‘social identification leads to activities that are congruent

with the identity, support for institutions that embody the identity, stereotypical perceptions of

self and others, and outcomes that traditionally are associated with group formation, and it

reinforces the antecedents of identification.’23

2.4 ETHNICITY AS A BUILDING BLOCK OF IDENTITY

It is difficult to attach a specific definition to ethnicity or an ethnic group, because the word is

used in many different contexts. Ethnicity is especially difficult to define in the African

context. Daley argued that literature on ethnicities in Africa has changed in recent years by

becoming more diverse, as scholars, historians in particular, challenged the popular

understanding of their primordial origins and shifted the debate to reveal the social

construction of many groups under colonialism.24

Horowitz defined ethnic groups as groups ‘which are defined by ascriptive differences,

whether the indicum is colour, appearance, language, religion, some other indicator of

common origin, or some combination thereof’25 There are three main views on ethnicity as

identity. The first view is ethnicity as a primordial identity. According to the primordial view,

20 Turner, J. C., 1982. Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.21 Holah, M., Social Identity Theory, http://www.psychexchange.co.uk/glossary/social-identity-theory-421/(accessed 11 December 2009).22 Ashforth, B. E. and F. Mael, 1989. Social Identity Theory and the Organisation. Academy of Management Review, Vol 14, No1, pp. 20-39. 23 Ibid, p. 20. 24 Daley, P. 2006. Ethnicity and political violence in Africa: The challenge to the Burundi state, Political Geography,Vol 25 (2006), pp. 657-679. 25 Horowitz, D. 1985 Ethnic groups in conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press. p.17.

10

ethnicity is one of the earliest forms of group identity and that ethnic differences are

unchangeable. The second view is that of ethnicity as an instrumental identity. This view

holds that that ethnicity is the basis for a hierarchical arrangement of individuals.26 The third

view of ethnicity is ethnicity as a constructed identity. This view purports that ethnic identities

are constructed through social interactions and that an individual’s ethnicity can be

changed.27

2.5 RELIGION AS A BUILDING BLOCK OF IDENTITY

Religion is treated by many conflict analysts as a detachment of ethnicity. Stewart argued

that religious organisations are usually stronger than ethnic organisations. Religious groups

also receive more external support than ethnic organisations. 28 As religion plays such an

important role in a person’s identity, it is important to understand the definition of religion.

Appleby defined religion as ‘the human response to a reality perceived as sacred.’29 Religion

may also refer to a ‘formally organised community of faith’, but can also refer to ‘’the beliefs

and spirituality of individual members, subgroups, or movements operating at various

psychological and social distances from the institution and the official custodians of the

tradition.’30

All religions have their established doctrine and principles, which followers of the religion

must accept and obey without question. Many religions have almost similar doctrines, but

then there are also religions which are exactly the opposite of each other. The fact that

religions differ from each other leads to conflict, because the followers of every religion is

convinced that their religion is the “right” and the only true religion. One of the problems with

religion is that the scriptures are sometimes vague and people can interpret it differently

depending on the time and context. Therefore different interpretations of religious scripture

can also lead to conflict.31

2.5.1 Religious conflict theory

26 Noel, D. L. (1968). "A Theory of the Origin of Ethnic Stratification". Social Problems 16 (2): pp.157–172. 27 Stewart, op cit, p. 7. 28 Stewart, op cit, p.1.29 Appleby, R.S., 2000, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence and Reconciliation. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc, p. 8.30 Ibid. 31 Brahm, E., 2005. Religion and Conflict, http://www.beyondintractablility.org/essay/religion_and _conflict/?nid=6725 (accessed 11 December 2009).

11

Religious conflict has been studied by scholars for many years. There are 4 types of

theories on religious conflict. The first type of theory usually looks at the nature of the

religions and the ideologies around them. These types of theories argue that certain types of

religions are more likely to cause conflicts than others.32 The second types of theories focus

on the political, social and economical environment in which the religious conflicts occur. An

example of such a theory is Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations theory. The third type of

theories on religious conflict takes a structural approach to the relationship between religion

and conflict. Kowalewski and Greil are of the opinion that the structure of the relationship

between religious and political elites determines the church’s involvement in conflict.33 The

fourth type is the ‘laundry list’ approach. This approach lists a number ways in which

“religion affects conflict but does not put them into a coherent conceptual framework.”34 Lewy

use the laundry list approach and list a number of ways in which religion can be used

politically to start or maintain conflict.35

There are a variety of ways in which a religion can view war. One of the views is the pacifist

view. A religion that adopts the pacifist view beliefs that all violence and killing is wrong and

immoral. Another view that can be adopted by a religion is the belief in “just” wars. This

means that it is believed that some wars are acceptable because they are in the interest of

justice. When this view is adopted, the religion believes that the war must be conducted

according to just and morally accepted rules. A third view that a religion can adopt, is the

belief in a Holy War. In the Islam religion it is called a jihad. If a religion assume this view

then they belief that their god command of them to make war on the people who do not

believe in their religion. They must also kill everyone who poses a threat to their religion.36

2.6 FAULTLINE WARS

One of Huntington’s arguments on fault line wars is that during the course of the war,

‘multiple identities fade and the identity most meaningful in relation to the conflict comes to

dominate. That identity is almost always is defined by religion.’37 Therefore, religious wars

can be classified as fault line wars. Huntington described fault line wars as ‘communal

conflicts between states or groups from different civilisations.’38 Fault line wars can be

between ‘states, between non-governmental groups, and between states and non-

32 Fox, F. 1999. Towards a dynamic theory of ethno-religious conflict. Nations and Nationalism, Vol 5, No 4. p. 422.33 Kowalewski, D. and A. L. Greil. 1990. Religion as opiate: religion as opiate in comparative perspective. Journal of Church and State, Vol 32, No 3. pp. 511-26. 34 Fox, op cit, p. 422.35 Lewy, G. 1974. Religion and Revolution. New York: Oxford, cited in Fox, op cit, p. 433.36 Brahm, op cit.37 Huntington, S.P. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order. London: Touchstone Books, p. 252. 38 Ibid, p. 267.

12

governmental groups.’39 Huntington further argued that fault line conflicts may involve groups

that are located in geographically distinct areas or groups that are geographically intermixed.

In some cases, fault line wars erupt as a result to obtain power over people. In other cases,

the source of fault line wars is for control over territory.

Wars between religious entities have been prevalent in every era and in every civilisation

because they are rooted in the identities of people.40 As a result, these types of wars tend to

be extremely bloody and prolonged. A military victory, by one side in an identity war could

likely evolve to genocide. It is also difficult to negotiate peace in fault line wars, because

fundamental issues of group identity are involved. In some cases of fault line wars, once

peace agreements have been reached, violence could erupt at any time again, because not

everyone who are affected by the conflict were satisfied by the peace agreements taken.

Therefore, religious wars are rarely resolved. According to Huntington, most identity wars

will only be completely over once one of the groups have been completely removed from the

face of the earth.41

CHAPTER THREE: HISTORICAL CASES OF RELIGIOUS WARFARE

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Surprisingly, violence and destruction had been part and parcel of religions from the biblical

times. Some of the questions asked by scholars are ‘[w]hy does religion seem to need

violence, and violence religion, and why is a divine mandate for destruction accepted with

such certainty by some believers?’42 It started with the wars of Islamic expansion beginning

in the 7th Century, and then came the Crusades starting in the 11th Century and the

Reformation wars beginning in the 16th Century).43 Mc Bride says that Roman Christians

have through the centuries murdered and massacred Jews and Muslims and pagans and

Protestants of all hues”44. These victims of the Roman Christians retaliated and this led to

centuries of religious conflict. Some people also view the Jewish genocide in Europe during

the Second World War as a religious conflict. They base their argument on the fact that the

Nazi’s was motivated to kill the Jews, because of their religious beliefs.45 In more recent

times the Muslim faith also came under the spotlight because of renewed religious conflict. 39 Ibid, p. 252 40 Ibid.41 Huntington, op cit, p. 253.42 Appleby, op cit, p. 7.43 Wooldridge, M. 2004. Can religion be blamed for war?, BBC News, 24 February 2004, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/wtwtgod/3513709.stm (accessed 12 January 2010).44 Mc Bride, J. 2002. Religion in Conflict. http://www.abcog.org/nh/conflict.htm (accessed 12 January 2010). 45 Ibid.

13

Some scholars will argue that the Iraqi invasion by the United States of America was also a

religious war.46

3.1.1 THE CRUSADES

Arguably the most prominent conflict between religions is between the Christian and Islamic

faiths. This conflict already started with the Crusades of the middle Ages. The Crusades was

a holy war conducted by Christians under authority of the pope against the enemies of

Christianity. At first, only the expeditions to Jerusalem and the area known as the Holy land

(see figure 1) were classified as crusades, but modern historians dubbed the campaigns

against heretics, pagans and Muslims in Europe as Crusades as well.47 The Crusades

began as a result of mistreatment of Christians by the Muslims in the Holy land. The

Muslims also threatened the Byzantine Empire, so Emperor Alexius asked Pope Urban II to

help him to ward of the Muslim onslaught on Christianity. Pope Urban II made a speech in

which he urged Christians to take back the Holy land from the Muslims. The result was

thousands of Christians getting together to start the first Crusade to the Holy land.48

(Figure1:Map of the Crusades. http://www.jesuschristsavior.net/Crusades.html (accessed

12 January 2010).

What followed was almost two hundred years (1095AD - 1291AD) of fighting between the

Christians and Muslims in order for the Christians to win back the Holy land. After that, more

46 Wooldridge, op cit. 47 Snell, M. 2009. Crusades Basics http://historymedren.about.com (accessed 12 January 2010).48 Ibid.

14

Crusades followed into the late 1500’s. Different historians have different opinions on how

many Crusades there actually were. Some historians argue that there were eight Crusades,

whereas other historians say that the seventh and eight Crusades should be seen as one

Crusade. Historians might disagree on how many Crusades there were and the time span of

the Crusades, but they agree that the Crusades were a time in history where many people

were killed in the name of religion. A more recent religious war is the Arab Israeli conflict.

3.1.2 The Arab-Israeli conflict

According to the Israeli Science and Technology Directory, the Arab Nations frequently

present the Arab-Israeli conflict as a religious conflict of the Muslims against the so called

infidel Jews.49 This website also argues that the Arab nations use religion as a tool to

mobilise Muslims and non-Muslims against Israel. The conflict started in 1947 and is still

continuing until this day.

The partitioning of the territory of Palestine West of the River Jordan by the United Nations

General Assembly on 29 November 1947 was the precipitating cause of the conflict. The

Jews were ecstatic about the decision, but the Arabs felt that they have been wronged. The

Arabs refused to accept the resolution and announced that they will fight the implementation

of the partitioning.’50 On the 30th of November 1947 a bus carrying Jewish passengers were

attacked and there were five Jewish casualties. This caused the Jewish population to take

up arms against Arab-Palestinians. Hence the Arab-Israeli conflict began. Most of the

fighting is based around religion and the possession of historically religious territory. Many

Arabs believes that the creation of Israel is the main reason for the fighting in the Middle

East.

The terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in America can be seen as an extension of the Arab-

Israeli conflict. The argument can be based on the fact that America is Israel’s most

prominent supporter, so by attacking a building on American soil, the Muslim extremist sent a

clear message to America and the world that they are willing to kill many people in the name

of Islam.

49 Anon. 2010. Arab-Israeli Conflict: Role of Religion. http://www.science.co.il/Israel-info.asp (accessed 6 February 2010).50 Herzog, C. 2004. The Arab-Israeli Wars: War and Peace in the Middle East. New York: Vintage Books. p. 11.

15

3.1.3 9/11 and religious terrorism

The terrorist attack on the twin tower buildings or better known as the 9/11 attack is still fresh

in the memory of the world even though it happened almost ten years ago. This attack can

be seen as an eye opener. Since the 9/11 attack the world is much more aware of the war

that is constantly taking place between Christianity and Islam worldwide.51

In many cases religion had provided groups of people with the ideology, motivation and

structure to act as terrorists. The aim of terrorism is to terrify people. Terrorism is derived

from the Latin word, terrere, which means ‘to cause to tremble’52 Therefore, religious

terrorism is terrorism that is justified by religion. The word religious terrorism is a paradox,

because people expect religion to provide peace and order, and not destruction.

Sometimes religious conflict is not carried out by a state, but by a group of people who do not

have the same military capacity of a government. Therefore, terrorism provides the

perpetrators with a cheap and effective tool to install fear and terror amongst the enemy and

the local population. The fear created by the terrorist acts could cause the local population to

support the terrorist’s views, just to stop the killing and destruction.

The common perception is that religious terrorism increased in the last decades of the

twentieth century.53 Juergensmeyer found that in 1980, the US State Department roster of

international terrorist groups listed only one religious terrorist group. Eighteen years later,

around fifteen of the world’s most dangerous terrorist groups, were religious groups. ‘They

were Jewish, Muslim and Buddhist.’54 Juergensmeyer also argued that if other violent

religious groups like some of the Christian militias found in America were included, the

number of religious terrorist groups on the list would increase significantly.

3.2 TRENDS IN RELIGOUS CONFLICTS

3.2.1 Causes of religious conflicts

The research done for the paper brought to light that a number of factors can start a religious

war. One of the factors that can lead to a religious conflict is when one religion tries to

51 Barker, J. 2003. The No-nonsense guide to Terrorism. Oxford: New Internationalist Publications. pp.13-16.52 Appleby, op cit, p.5. 53 Juergensmeyer, M. 2000. Terror in the Name of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Berkeley: University of California Press. p.6.54 Ibid.

16

impose its religion or religious practices on others. This was how the Crusades started when

the Muslims attempted to force their religion onto the Christians in the Holy land. Another

factor that can lead to religious conflict is when elites use religion as a smoke screen to

mobilise the people of a country in order for the elites to enrich themselves by taking over

resources or territory from another religious group. An example of such a case is the war in

Sudan, where the real reason for war is ownership over oil and oil-rich territory.55 Religious

conflicts have also broken out in the past as a result of ‘misinterpretation or perceived

misinterpretation and misrepresentation of a religion or text of it.’56 Some scholars will argue

that the extremist attacks from Al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremist groups are results of

the misinterpretation of a religious text.

3.2.2 Characteristics of religious conflicts

During religious conflict one or both of the sides will claim that God is on their side. An

example of this was during the American invasion of Iraq. During a prayer meeting before

the invasion of Iraq, George Bush said: “Behind all of life and all of history, there's a

dedication and purpose, set by the hand of a just and faithful God".57 But at the same time

Saddam Hussein was saying to his Islamic troops: "Fight as God ordered you to do”58

Another characteristic of religious conflicts is that these conflicts are usually prolonged.59

This could be a result of the fact that religion is deeply rooted in the culture and identity of

people. This in turn motivates people to fight to the bitter end to defend their religious beliefs

and to defend their fellow believers. Political socialisation through religious actors also

provides over time a large fresh reservoir of young foot soldiers that prolongs the conflict. As

a result of the longevity of religious conflicts, it is common to find that many people,

combatants and non-combatants, will die during a religious conflict.

55 Blair, B. 2009. South Sudan faces new war over oil. Telegraph Online. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/sudan/6034690/South-Sudan-faces-new-war-over-oil.html (accessed 12 September 2010).56 Bogoro, S.E. 2008. Management of Religious Conflicts from a Practitioners Viewpoint. Being a Special Practitioner’s Presentation during the 1st Annual National Conference of Society for Peace Studies and Practice (SPSP), 15th – 18th June, 2008 @ Sheraton Hotel and Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), Abuja, Nigeria. 57 Wooldridge, op cit.58 Wooldridge, op cit. 59 Metcalfe, A. 2003. Religious conflict. http://regentsprep.org/regents/global/themes/conflict/religious.cfm (accessed 08 February 2010).

17

CHAPTER FOUR: CASE STUDIES

4.1 Introduction

In some conflicts, religion is used as a disguise to hide the real reasons for making war,

because some people justify conflict by saying that they are fighting in the name of their

religion. Sometimes the real cause of conflict can be territory, because a certain religious

group argues that they occupied the territory first. Some will even go so far as to argue that

God gave the territory to them. Thus the people are actually fighting over territory, but they

use religion to justify their cause. In other cases, the real intentions for fighting could be over

scarce resources or political motives. Therefore religion can cause conflict, sustain conflict

and also end conflict. This paper will focus on two case studies namely Nigeria and the

Sudan to determine the role of religion in these two countries.

4.2 NIGERIA

Nigeria is renowned to be a country that has been plagued by conflict for a very long time.

Usually the violence in Nigeria is reported to be religious conflict between Christians and

Muslims. The issues of bad governance and corruption in Nigeria are also prominent in

world news. Osaghae and Suberu argued that by ‘virtue of its complex web of politically

salient identities and history of chronic and seemingly intractable conflicts and instability,

Nigeria can be rightly described as one of the most deeply divided states in Africa.’60 This

paper will take a look at the history of Islam and Christianity in order to provide the reader

with the necessary background for the rest of the content of the chapter.

4.2.1 The history of Islam and Christianity in Nigeria.

The introduction of Islam to the people of Nigeria started in 1804 with an Islamic revolution

that took place in Northern Nigeria according to Falola.61 Another researcher, Prof Doi

argues that Islam already reached Nigeria in the early 14th century when 40 Wangarawa

traders brought Islam with them from the Northern parts of Africa.62 In 1842 Christianity

reached Nigeria when Samuel Ajayi Crowther, who was part of the abolitionist movement of

the 1800’s, introduced Christianity to the Okwagbe people who belong to the Urhobo ethnic

60 Osaghae, E.E. & R. T. Suberu. 2005. A History of Identies, Violence and Stability in Nigeria. Centre for Research and Inequality Human Security and Ethnicity Working paper , No 6. p. 4.61 Falola, T. 1999. The History of Nigeria. Westport: Greenwood Press. p. 1.62 Doi, A.R.I. 2006. Spread of Islam in West Africa (part 3 of 3): The Empires of Kanem-Bornu and Hausa-Fulani Land. The Religion of Islam. www.islamreligion.com/articles/302 (accessed 25 June 2010).

18

group.63 Christianity spread successfully in the region and joined Islam as being the two

dominant religions in Nigeria.64

Muslims comprise of about 50% of the Nigerian population. They are mostly found in the

northern and south-western parts of the country. Christians constitute about 40% of the

Nigerian population. The Christians are mostly situated in the southern part of the country

and around the part known as the Middle belt. The 10% of the population that are neither

Muslims nor Christians are practicing ‘one form of indigenous religion or another.’65 Now that

the reader has a background of where the Christians and Muslims are situated in Nigeria, the

paper will explore how the religions affected the history of Nigeria from independence to

2010.

4.2.2 The importance of religion in Nigeria

Nigeria’s religiously diversified people make the process of nation-building very complicated

and difficult. According to McQuire, nation-building ‘refers to developing a country’s sense of

solidarity and identity as people.’66 In the second chapter of the paper it was discussed what

important role religion and ethnicity play in nation-building. In Nigeria, ethnic boundaries and

religion mostly overlap; the exception to this is the Yoruba ethnic group.67

The political sphere of Nigeria is highly influenced by religion. Political leaders use religion

as a means to mobilise the people behind them. They also use religious organisations to

bring in resources for the political party.68 The leaders of Christian groups are in constant

rivalry with the leaders of Islamic groups for political power. In some instances, religious

organisations have taken on the identity of political parties. One of the big debates that

arose as a result of religious differences is whether Nigeria should adopt the Islam law of

Sharia.

According to Aguwa, the nature of Islam is to always intertwine politics and religion.69 In

Nigeria, where 50% of the population is not Muslim, this creates a problem. The Muslims

63 Erivwo, S.U. 1979. The History of Christianity in Nigeria: The Urhobo, the Isoko and the Itsekiri. Urhobo Historical Society. www.waado.org/UrhoboCulture/Religion/Ervivo/Historyof Christianity/ChapterTwo.htm. (accessed 25 June 2010).64 Falola, op cit, p. 1.65 Ibid, p. 7.66 McQuire, M. B. 1987. Religion: The Social Context. Belmont CA: Wadsworth Publishing. p. 164.67 Ukiwo, U. 2003. Politics, ethno-religious conflict and democratic consolidation in Nigeria. Journal of Modern Studies, Vol 41, No1, p. 120.68 Aguwa, J. C. 1997. Religious Conflict in Nigeria: Impact on nation building. Dialetical Anthropology, Vol 22. p. 336.69 Ibid, p. 339.

19

want to create an Islamic state with Allah as the head of the state and a state where Sharia is

the official judicial system. The founder of the Sokoto Caliphate, dan Fodio, prescribed that

Christians would be allowed to live in the Islamic state of Nigeria, but they would have to be

subjected to the Islamic rule of law.70

Non-Muslims, especially the Christians of Nigeria realise that once Nigeria becomes an

Islamic state, they will have to adopt Islam as their religion otherwise they will be alienated or

even killed if they refuse. Therefore the Christians have been determined for many years,

through protests and violence, to refuse the government to declare Nigeria an Islamic state

and to implement Sharia as the ultimate law.

Figure 1: Map of Nigeria.71

70 Ibid.71 Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nigeria_political.png

20

4.3 CONFLICT AS A RESULT OF RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES IN NIGERIA

4.3.1 Religious conflict during the 1950’s, 60’s and 70’s

In the North where most of the Muslims live, Christians were seen as infidels and they were

treated as such in earlier years. When Christian people from the South immigrated to the

North during the 1950’s and 60’s, they were forced to place their children in separate schools

and they were compelled to live in segregated areas. Northerners were forbidden to have

any relationships with the Christian Southerners. 72 According to Meredith, some non-Muslim

minorities who lived in the North had long been trying to overthrow the Muslim leaders of the

region.73 This led to the Tiv resistance that exploded in the 1960’s.

Since then thousands of Nigerians have ‘lost their lives buildings and properties were

destroyed, and the country was pushed to the brink of a religious war between Muslims and

Christians.’74 Politicians have used the religious differences of Nigerians as a source of

manipulation. The politicians used religion as method to mobilise the people behind them.

Muslims and Christians recruited as many people as possible to fight their adversaries in the

name of their religious gods.

4.3.2 Religious conflict during the 1980’s

According to Falola, ‘religious violence became one of the most serious crises of the 1980’s

and beyond.’75 Falola argues that the religious violence during the 1980’s in Nigeria was a

result of internal economic and political decay.76 He further argues that religious tension was

building up from the 1970’s as a result of the role that religion played in politics. Religion was

used by political parties as a method to rally supporters behind them. Political parties were

in competition to get the support of religious leaders. Many religious organisations felt that

the society and its political leaders have decayed, so they rejected the constitution and called

for a theocratic state whose leaders would have better moral values.77

As the religious crisis of 1980’s unfolded, Muhammad Marwa, also known as Maitatsine,

became the leading figure of Islam’s struggle in Nigeria.78 He combined Islam with sorcery

72 Meredith, M, 2005. The State of Africa: A History of Fifty Years. London: Free Press. p. 76.73 Ibid. p. 77.74 Falola, T, op cit, p. 187.75 Ibid, p. 168.76 Ibid.77 Ibid, p. 169.78 Aguwa, op cit, p. 337.

21

and his preaching attracted large crowds. He believed that a leader must be spiritual, and

that symbols of materialism, the West and technology should be rejected by true Muslims.79

The worsening economic conditions at the time pushed more and more Nigerians to follow

radical Islamist such as Marwa. The followers of Marwa were willing to die for their beliefs.

Resultantly, there was no shortage of Muslims to fight against the ‘infidel’ Christians.

Another Muslim that promoted Islamic radicalism during the 1980’s was Sheik Abubaka

Mahmoud Gumi.80 He was known as the most distinguished Islamic scholar in Nigeria during

the 80’s. He once openly said that ‘once you are a Muslim, you cannot accept to choose a

non-Muslim as a leader…’81 He further promoted that Sharia courts should also be

implemented in the southern parts of Nigeria. He also argued that Nigeria should become an

Islamic state.82 His speeches and ideas influenced many Muslims to become radical

Islamists.

The burning of eight prominent churches in Kano by Muslims in October 1982 signalled the

beginning of a national religious war.83 A government tribunal who investigated the violence

concluded that the violence was a result of two things. Firstly was the fact that Kano (see

figure 1) was an Islamic city where the growing influence of Christianity worried Muslims.

That is why they burned the churches. Secondly the tribunal argued that radical Islamic

literature imported from Iran motivated the Muslims to start the fighting. The attacks on the

churches gave the Christians an opportunity to lift out their grievances

The Christians had a number of issues that they wanted to complain about. They

complained about discrimination in jobs, land allocation, and access to radio broadcasting,

and the takeover of their schools.84 Falola argue that one of the most major concerns of

Christians at that time was that they feared that the Muslims were trying to turn Abuja (the

capital of Nigeria) into an Islamic city. Their fears were justified by the building of a National

Mosque close to the presidential mansion and the building of other mosques around the

city.85

The Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs and the Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI) were the main

defenders of Islam in Nigeria during the 1980’s. One of their objectives was to replace

79 Falola, op cit, p. 169.80 Aguwa, op cit, p. 338.81 Ibid.82 Aguwa, op cit, p. 339.83 Falola, op cit, p.169.84 Ibid.85 Ibid.

22

Sunday with Friday as part of the weekend. Another of their demands was that all Judeo-

Christian symbols should be removed from schools and courts. The organisation that fought

for the defence of Christianity in Nigeria during the 1980’s was the Christian Association of

Nigeria (CAN). This organisation wanted the government to distance itself from Islam.86

The act of Babangida to register Nigeria as a member of the OIC in 1985 created a lot of

religious tension in Nigeria, because Christians saw this as an attempt to turn Nigeria into an

Islamic state.87 The Nigerian Christians were willing to put their lives on the line in order to

stop Nigeria from becoming an Islamic state.

4.3.3 Religious conflict during the 1990’s in Nigeria

In April 1991, religious rioting broke out in Nigeria after a magazine, the Fun Times (which

was a subsidiary of the Daily Times), published a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed and

Jesus Christ. A number of Muslims ransacked the offices of the Daily Times and burnt it to

the floor.88 Also during April 1991, religious violence broke out in the mainly Muslim state of

Bauchi (see figure 1). The violence started as a dispute between Muslims and Christians

over the use of a municipal abattoir. The Christians wanted to use the abattoir to slaughter

pigs, but the Islamic religion forbids its followers from any contact with pigs. Forty eight

people were killed in the violence that followed the dispute over the abattoir.89

The introduction of Obasanjo as president in 1999 caused an upsurge in religious violence.

This was because Obasanjo was a Christian from the South. The Northerners who helped to

get Obasanjo to be elected was disgruntled when they realised that he was not going to

dance to their tune. One of the factors that contributed to the renewed religious violence was

the fact that Obasanjo removed a number of senior army officers (most of them Northerners).

The Northerners saw this as a ‘hidden agenda’ from the Christians to suppress the Muslims.

The Muslims ‘used Sharia as a weapon to reassert northern solidarity.’90

In October of 1999, the governor of Zamfara (see figure 1), Ahmed Sani announced that the

state will adopt Sharia law as its only legal system with effect from January 2000. Sani

argued that Sharia will bring back morals and values to an immoral state. He maintained that

only Muslims would be affected by Sharia law, but he proposed bans on alcohol and

86 Ibid, p. 187.87 Ibid, p. 188.88 Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. 1993. Religion and Conflict. http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae6a80510.html (accessed 15 October 2010).89 Ibid.90 Meredith, op cit, p. 587.

23

prostitution for the entire state. Twelve other northern states decided to follow the example

of Zamfara and also adopt Sharia as its judicial system. The Christians who lived in the

North started to feel threatened. As a result they protested against the government.91

4.3.4 Religious conflict in the new Millennium

In January 2000 the government of the Zamfara state accomplished to implement Sharia as

its official judicial system.92 This was the spark that was needed for religious and ethnic

violence to flare up again in Nigeria. Even though the governors of the twelve states who

adopted the Sharia law, reassured Christians that Sharia will only implicate Muslims, the

Christians did not believe the governors. The ‘Christians point to the duplicity of the

governors of the north during the National Council of States meeting, which agreed that

Sharia will revert to the penal code.’93 The Christian’s fears were confirmed when the

governor of Zamfara stated that Sharia will also apply to non-Muslims.94

Meredith reports that during a protest in the city of Kaduna in February 2000, hundreds of

people were killed as a result of Muslim versus Christian fighting. At the same time whole

neighbourhoods were religiously cleansed by the Muslims.95 Most of the people that were

killed in these religious attacks were Igbos. As a result, Igbo groups in the southern parts of

Nigeria started to kill Hausa’s who immigrated from the north. The fleeing of Christians from

the north in turn caused religious tension in other parts of Nigeria as well. Okiwu confirms

the previous statement when he argues that the Jos riots of September 2001 was caused by

the movement of southerners from the northern states such as Kaduna and Kano.96 More

than 1000 people died in the Jos riots. Jos is the capital of the Plateau state. The Jos riots

were further complicated by the fact that the Christians argued that the Muslim commissioner

of police only sent police to protect mosques in the area, while the churches got no

protection from the government.97 Meredith reports that around 3000 people died in the

Plateau state during 2001.98

91 Ibid, p. 587.92 Ukiwo, op cit, p. 124.93 Ukiwo, op cit, p. 124.94 International IDEA. 2000. Democracy in Nigeria: Continuing dialogues for nation-building. Stockholm: International IDEA.95 Meredith, op cit, p. 587.96 Ukiwo, op cit, p. 125.97 Ibid, p. 129.98 Meredith, op cit, p. 587. The number of people who died could be less or even more, because different sources provide significantly different numbers. See Ostien, P. 2009. Johah Jang and the Jasawa: Ethno-religious conflict in Nigeria.

24

The Jos crisis of 2001 was the beginning of a serious of religious clashes. The fighting

spread through the rest of the Plateau state and continued until 2004. The International

Crisis Group reported that in February and May of 2004, more than 250 000 people were

displaced as a result of religious violence in the Plateau state.99 The fighting only subsided in

2004 when President Obasanjo declared a state of emergency and suspended the

government.100

The southern Christians felt so strongly opposed against the implementation of Sharia, that

groups situated in the Niger Delta told the federal government that Sharia states should not

be allowed to receive oil revenues from the federal government.101 This request created

even more tension between Muslims and Christians in the country. This is an indication that

the conflict was not only about religion anymore, but the actual fighting was over the oil

resources of the Niger Delta.

The 2008 elections in the Plateau state brought with it another surge of widespread religious

clashes. Two days of fighting left between 400 and 600 people dead in the city of Jos.102

According to Ostien, the fighting in Jos is not primarily as a result of religious differences. He

argues that religion is just a fuel to keep the fire going. Seemingly the real cause of the

fighting in Jos is ‘the alleged rights of indigenes, meaning roughly “earliest extant occupiers”,

to control particular locations, as opposed to the rights of “settlers” or “strangers” or more

generally “non-indigenes”, defined as everybody who came later.’103 Thus the conflict is

actually the result of quarrels over territory and therefore a resource driven conflict. But

because the Hausa from the north are Muslims and the indigenous people of the Plateau

state are majority Christians, religion is also dragged into the conflict.

In 2009 religious clashes broke out in Nigeria as a result of the implementation of Sharia in

some states. Muslim fundamentalist killed about 80 people, because they demanded that

more states should implement Sharia in their judicial systems. The radical group Boko

Haram (who has ties with Al-Qaeda) claimed recognition for the killings.104

99 International Crisis Group. 2006. Nigeria’s faltering federal experiment. Africa Report No119. http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id+4464&1=1, (accessed 01 March 2010).100 Ostien, P. 2009. Johah Jang and the Jasawa: Ethno-religious conflict in Nigeria. www. Sharia-in-Africa.net/pages/publications.php, (accessed 01 March 2010). p14.101 Dauda, D. 2001. Ethnic identity, democratization and the future of the African state: lessons from Nigeria. African Issue 29. p. 34. 102 Ostien, op cit, p. 2.103 Ibid, p. 3.104 Euronews. 2009. Nigeria: Scores dead in religious violence. http://www.euronews.net/2009/07/28/nigeria-scores-dead-in-religious-violence (accessed 09 March 2010).

25

Religious clashes have also been paramount in 2010. In the month of January between 200

and 400 people were killed and some 17 000 were displaced as a result of clashes in Kuru

Karama, a village near Jos. In this attack, it was mostly Muslim men who were the targets of

the four day long assault. One of the witnesses said that it was not Christians from their

village who launched the attack; it was Christians from one of the surrounding villages.105

Muslim women and children were also not spared in the attack. The reason for the attack is

thought to be as the result of the coming 2011 national elections and there was at the time

no certainty of who was in charge, because the president was hospitalised in Saudi Arabia

due to illness.

The most recent religious violence took place on the night of 7 March 2010 where it is

reported that more than 500 people were killed. The targets in this attack were mainly

Christian women and children. Fish nets were used to catch the people that tried to escape

and then they were hacked to death with machetes. The Mail and Guardian reported that

most of the violence took place around the village of Dogo Nahawa.106 The attacks were

carried out mainly by Muslim Fulani’s. The cause of the attack is thought to be ‘the result of

a spiralling feud between the Fulani and the rival Berom clan, which had been first ignited by

a theft of cattle and then further fuelled by a deadly revenge attack.’107 Thus it was once

again a resource driven conflict that was blamed on religion.

4.4 SUDAN

Since Sudan’s independence in 1956, only ten out of the 54 years have been peaceful. The

rest was filled with the violence and bloodshed of two civil wars and the war in Darfur.108 The

conflict in Sudan is usually described as conflict between North versus South, Arab versus

African or Muslims versus Christians.109 Johnson support the previous statement when he

writes that the “…Sudan conflict is frequently presented as either the continuation of an age-

old confrontation between ‘cultures’ defined by blood-lines (‘Arabs’ vs ‘Africans’), or the

consequence of an artificial division imposed by colonial powers.”110 Religion served as a

marker of national identity in both the civil wars, but religion was never exclusively the root

105 Mohammed, S. 2010. Bodies pulled from wells after Nigeria clashes. Mail and Guardian online, 25 January 2010.

106 Abu Bakr, A. 2010. Nigeria sends in troops after massacre kills 500. Mail and Guardian online, 08 March 2010.107 Abu Bakr, A, op cit.108 Brown, S. 2009. Conflict in Sudan: Root Causes. Examiner.com. http://www.examiner.com/ff_examiner.xml (accessed 25 March 2010). 109 Domke, M. 1997. Civil War in the Sudan: Resources or Religion? ICE Case studies. http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/sudan.htm (accessed 25 March 2010).110 Johnson, D. H. 2003. The Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars. Indiana: Indiana University Press. p. xii.

26

cause of the conflicts.111 Since the discovery of large oil reserves in Sudan, the war in Sudan

has changed to mainly an economic or resource war. Whenever scarce resources are

unequally divided amongst different cultural, religious or political groups within a country, civil

war is inevitable.112 This can be clearly seen in the case of Sudan.

The conflict in Sudan is often more complex than just North versus South, Arab versus

African or Muslim versus Christian. Ryle argues that the conflict in Sudan is better

understood as a number of interlocking civil wars, where southerners fight against

southerners and northerners are pitched against northerners as well as northerner against

southerner.113 This chapter of the paper will therefore explore the history of the conflict in

Sudan after independence in order to determine what the role of religion was in the conflicts.

4.5 THE HISTORY OF CONFLICT IN SUDAN AFTER INDEPENDENCE

4.5.1 The First Civil War (1955-1972)

In 1955, the year before independence, a civil war broke out in Sudan. This particular civil

war continued until 1972. The conflict was between North and South Sudan. The conflict

flared up as a result of the southerner’s fear that the Northerners will overpower them once

Sudan gained independence. The North sought to impose Islam and the Arabic lifestyle onto

the Southerners and they refused to be Islamicised. The Southerners wanted an

autonomous state after independence, but they realised that the Northerners will not allow

that to happen.114 As a result some Southerner officers mutinied and started the Anya Nya

guerrilla army. The Northerners reacted militarily to the mutiny.

The government viewed all Southerners as potential allies of the Anya Nya, so they adopted

a strategy similar to the scorched earth strategy. The government troops burned down

villages; they killed prisoners and displaced as many Southerners as possible in order to

avoid the population to support the Anya Nya. The Northern government always tried to play

on the two fault lines of the South namely: ethnicity and religion.115 This means that the

government pointed out to the Northerners that almost all of the officers from the South were

111 Anon. 2009. Sudan: Race and Religion in Civil War. Berkeley Centre for Religion, Peace and World Affairs. Washington: Georgetown University. p. 1.112 Mohamed, A.A. 2002. Intergroup Conflict and Customary Mediation: Experience from Sudan. www.sabinet.co.za/abstracts/accordr/accordr_v2_n2_a5.xml (accessed 25 March 2010).113 Ryle, J. 2002. The Burden of History. The Crimes of War Project. www.crimesofwar.org/sudan-mag/sudan-overview.html (accessed 05 April 2010).114 Anon, 2009, op cit, pp. 1-2.115 Wadlow, R. 2008. Sudan: Race, Religion and Violence. Journal of Religion, Conflict and Peace, Volume 1, Issue 2, Spring 2008. p. 2.

27

Christians, whereas most of the Northerners were Muslim. That is why the conflict is often

described as a religious war, but in fact it was just war against the oppression on the

Southerners.

Sudan gained independence on 1 January 1956 with a myriad of its issues on nationhood

still uncertain.116 When the British withdrew from Sudan, they drafted a temporary

constitution for the Sudanese. At that time, there were two issues that delayed the drafting of

a permanent constitution. The first issue was whether “the Sudan should be a federal or

unitary state.”117 The second issue was whether the country should have a secular or an

Islamic constitution.

By the late 1960’s more than 500 000 people had died and much more were displaced as a

result of the civil war.118 The Anya Nya was able to militarily stand up against the

government by receiving aid from foreign countries. Israel helped to train Anya Nya recruits

and also provided them with weapons. The Anya Nya was also able to buy weapons from

Congolese rebels and international arms dealers from money that they collected from

Sudanese exile communities.119

Joseph Lagu, a former army lieutenant, formed the Southern Sudan Liberation Movement

(SSLM) in 1971. The SSLM was composed of a number of different southerner guerrilla

groups. It was the first time in the history of the civil war that the separatist movement had a

unified command structure.120 This for once allowed the Southerners to negotiate with the

Khartoum government as one voice.

The first civil war ended in 1972, when the North and South agreed on the same terms of the

Addis Ababa Agreement. The talks between the two sides were backed by the World

Council of Churches. The Southerners were allowed to have a single southern

administrative region with explicitly defined powers.121 The agreement also entailed that

Arabic would be the official language of Sudan, but English would be the principal language

of the South. This meant that the administrative language of the South would be English.122

The seventeen year long war took the lives of more than five hundred thousand people. It is

116 Johnson, op cit, p. 29.117 Anon, op cit, p. 30.118 Global Security. 2005. Sudan First Civil War. Global Security.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/sudan-civil-war1.htm (accessed 05 April 2010).119 Anon, op cit, p. 30.120 Ibid, p. 2.121 Ibid122 Global Security, op cit.

28

estimated that only twenty percent of the people who died were armed combatants, the rest

were civilians.123

It can be argued that religion was a causal factor in this war, because the Northerners

wanted to have an Islamic state, but the Southerners refused. As a result of the religious

differences between North and South, the First Civil War broke out. During the course of the

war, religion also played a role in the sustainment of the civil war. Ten years of peace

followed the Addis Ababa Agreement.

4.5.2 The Second Civil War (1983-2005)

In 1983, President Nimeiri attempted to create a federal state in Sudan which would have

included some southern states. He further intended to exploit the natural resources of the

South. He wanted to place the oil rich areas of the South under Northern control by

redrawing the boundaries to include more of the oil rich areas under Northern rule.124

Another reason for the renewed outbreak of violence was the government’s plan to build the

Jonglei canal which would divert water from the South to the North.125 The introduction of the

September Laws in 1983 was the spark that was needed to start the armed rebellion against

the government. The September Laws entailed that the strictest form of Sharia was imposed

in the North and South, on Christians, Muslims and animists.126

As a result of the actions taken by Nimeiri, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) was

formed by a number of soldiers who mutinied under the leadership of former army Colonel

Garang to oppose the government. The political arm of the organisation was known as the

Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).127 The objectives of the SPLM were to have a

democratic state where all people would be equal and their human rights be protected. They

further appealed for the abolishment of Sharia and that the government will make sure that

economic development of the South will take place in the future. This meant that the

Southerners would no longer accept domination by the Northern Arab-Muslim majority and

being neglected by the Khartoum government.128

123 Anon, op cit, p. 30124 Ryle, op cit.125 Deng, F. M. 1994. Civil War in Sudan: The Paradox of Human Rights and Sovereignty. Journal of international affairs, Vol 47, No 2. p. 501.126 Ibid.127 Ibid.128 Ibid, p. 502.

29

In 1985, Nimeiri was overthrown by the military. A democratic election was held, but the

majority of the Southerners could not vote as a result of the ongoing civil war, so the new

government was once again dominated by Northerners.129 Sadiq al Mahdi of the Umma

Party won the elections and resultantly become the new president of Sudan. The war

continued but Mahdi attempted to stop the conflict by negotiating with the SPLM. In August

1986, the SPLA shot down a civilian aircraft of the Red Cross and all negotiations between

the government and the SPLM were stopped. The war once again escalated. After the

aircraft incident, Mahdi joined forces with the National Islamic Front of the Muslim Brothers

(NIF). This led to greater enforcement of Sharia on everyone.130

In 1989, Mahdi once again attempted negations with the SPLM. It looked as if Mahdi was

going to accept the SPLM’s request that Sharia should be abolished. The NIF did not

approve of this. As a result the NIF overthrew the government of Mahdi on 30 June 1989.

Omar al Bashir became the new president of Sudan. He declared that his main objectives

were to put an end to the civil war and to make Sudan a wealthy country. Bashir never held

an election and remained in power himself. He declared himself prime minister, defense

minister and commander in chief of the armed forces.131 He furthermore “suspended the

constitution, dissolved parliament, banned political parties, forbade civilian association

meetings without government permission, shut down the free press, declared a nationwide

state of emergency and set a curfew.”132

Bashir was elected as president in the 1996 and in the 2000 elections. In 2003 and 2004

peace talks between the rebels and government became more prominent. On 9 January

2005 The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed between the government

and the SPLM. According to Sullivan, the CPA

“is based on a fundamental compromise which gives the SPLM autonomy in the

South while ensuring Islamic-based Sharia law in the North. For a six year period, a

Government of National Unity is to be formed and to work toward making unity

attractive to the South, leading up to a referendum in 2011 when the South will

decide whether it wants to separate or remain a part of a united Sudan. Another key

provision of the CPA was that half of the oil revenues from the South will be given to

the government of the South.”133

129 Ibid.130 Ibid.131 Deng, op cit, p. 504.132 Ibid.133 Sullivan, D. P. 2006. Sudan’s Comprehensive Peace Agreement at One Year of Age: Cause for Celebration? Working Paper FG6. Stifftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs. pp. 1-3.

30

The CPA has brought an end to the Second Sudanese Civil War, but irreparable damage

was already done to the country and its people. It is estimated that more than 4 million

people were displaced and more than 2 million died during the second civil war in Sudan.134

The CPA only catered for the Civil War and did not include the conflict that is taking place in

the Darfur region.

The role of religion is more blurry in the Second Civil War than in the First Civil War. In the

First War, the ultimate cause for the conflict was religion, but in the Second War it was more

complicated. Religion was still a cause of the conflict in the Second War, but the ultimate

cause for the conflict was resources. Nimeiri merely used religion as a way to lure the

Southerners into fighting with him, in order for him to have a ‘valid’ reason for him to fight

them. But he actually wanted part of the oil rich territory of the South. Once again religion

was used to sustain the conflict when the Umma Party joined forces with the NIF. When the

Umma Party wanted to abolish Sharia and maybe end the conflict, the NIF decided that they

would rather overthrow the government than to allow the abolishment of Sharia law.

Therefore it can be argued that they used religion to sustain the conflict.

4.5.3 The Darfur conflict (2003-2010)

The Darfur region is a poor and remote area in the West of Sudan. The majority of the

population of the region are from the Fur tribe, hence the name Darfur (it means home of the

Fur). The conflict in the Darfur region in Sudan started in 2003 when the Sudan Liberation

Movement/Army (SLM/A) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) accused the

Sudanese government that they are oppressing the black Africans. The two groups felt that

the government only supported Arabs.135

The government was still militarily tied up on the Southern front, so they had to devise a plan

to deal with the new threat in the Darfur region. As a result, the government armed tribal

militias and as payment for their services to the government they could take everything they

found in the villages for them including: food, women and animals.136 This armed militia was

called the Janjaweed.137 The government’s policy that the Janjaweed could rape and plunder

as much as they want to led to the killing of many innocent people. The killing raids by the

134 Central Intelligence Agency. 2007. The CIA World Factbook 2008. New York: Skyhorse Publishing. p. 587.135 Daly, M. W. 2007. Darfur’s Sorrow: A History of Destruction and Genocide. New York: Cambridge University

Press. pp. 1-2.136 Wadlow, op cit, p. 5.137 Ibid. Janjaweed means the evil one on horseback.

31

Janjaweed are also responsible for a large amount of refugees fleeing to Chad and the

Central African Republic.138

On 5 May 2006, a ceasefire agreement was signed by The SLM and the Sudanese

government. On paper it seemed as if the conflict was over, but in reality the fighting

continued.139 The rebels that refused to sign the peace treaty continued the fighting. The

conflict was still carrying on into 2010 with millions of people being killed and displaced.

Conflict analysts have determined that the conflict in Darfur is definitely not the result of

religious differences. The analysts base their argument on the fact that the participants in

the conflict are not divided by means of religious lines. Both sides participating in the conflict

are comprised of Muslims.140 Furthermore, the indigenous population of Darfur is entirely

Muslim, so it is impossible that it is a religious conflict.141 It is also not a resource war,

because Darfur has no valuable mineral resources.142

4.6 THE CAUSES OF THE CONFLICT IN SUDAN

4.6.1 The historical North-South division

The conflict that persists until today can be traced back to hundreds of years ago.143 The

Moslem expansion period that swept through North and West Africa, stopped before

reaching Southern Sudan.144 That is why the Christian majority of Sudan is still in the south

of the country. The Muslim Arabs tried to convert the Christians from the south until the

British colonised Sudan. From 1899 – 1953, Sudan was under Anglo-Egyptian rule. When

the British colonised Sudan, they governed Northern and Southern Sudan separately. The

British governed the two areas separately in order to stop the Arabs from converting more

Southerners to Islam. This deepened the divide between North and South Sudan.145

Traditionally Northern Sudan has been better developed and more prosperous than the

South. The British focused on developing the North, while the South was insulated and

forgotten. The Sudanese government was also based in the North which led to the further

138 Ibid, p. 6.139 Daly, op cit, p. 1.140 Goodenough, P. 2006. Bin Laden tries to put religious spin on Darfur conflict. Student News Daily. http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/?css=site/site_css.v.1206128664 (accessed 25 March 2010).141 Daly, M. W, op cit, p. 13.142 Ibid, p. 1.143 Brown, op cit.144 Ibid.145 Anon, 2009, p 1.

32

degeneration of the South.146 The Sudanese government neglected the people of the South,

so the Southerners were less educated and there was virtually an absence of any form of

transportation. The government expected from the South to be the producers of raw

materials. As a result, the Southerners became labourers and one can almost say slaves to

the Northerners.147

Johnson argues that the conflict between North and South Sudan is usually misunderstood

by researchers. This is a result of the misrepresentation of the historical roots of the

conflict.148 The two most common explanations for the North – South divide is the “…

centuries of exploitation and slave-raiding by the ‘Arab’ North against the ‘African’ South” and

the splitting of Sudan by imperialist Britain.149 Johnson agrees that the two previous reasons

are true, but he is of the opinion that the situation in Sudan is much more complicated than

what the majority of the work on Sudan suggest. He further argues that religion, local

perceptions of race and social status, economic exploitation, and colonial and post-colonial

interventions all play a role in Sudan’s current civil war, but none, by itself, fully explains it.150

He is of the opinion that factors such as “... the role of successive Sudanese states in

producing regional underdevelopment and racial and cultural antagonism...”151 also play

important roles in the conflict.

4.6.2 Identity

National identity has always played an important role in Sudan. Especially group identity

plays an important role in the conflict of Sudan. According to Brown, the willingness of

people to become martyrs for the sake of their religion is evidence that some people in

Sudan will go to great lengths to fight for their identity group.152 Identity in Sudan is usually

based on religion or ethnicity. As a result religion and ethnicity is intertwined in Sudan.

Sudan’s first population census which took place from 1955-1956 estimated that seven major

ethnic group were living in Sudan. These seven groups were can then be further subdivided

into 46 smaller groups that spoke different languages and followed different religious

creeds.153

146 Zolberg, A.R.& A Suhrke & S. Aguayo. 1989. Escape From Violence: Conflict and the Refugee Crisis in the Developing World. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 50.147Katendeko, F. 2003. Sudan’s 50 year war. Peace and Conflict Monitor. www.monitor.upeace.org/printer.cfm?id_article=87 (accessed 25 March 2010).148 Anon, op cit. p. 1.149 Ibid150 Anon, op cit, p 1-2.151 Ibid, p. 2.152 Brown, op cit.153 Mohamed, op cit.

33

Brown argues that the Northern Sudanese are in “identity limbo”.154 Their limbo is a result of

the Arabs that resent the blacks who prevent Sudan of being a full-fledged Arab country.

This fuels tension between the two groupings in the North. The ruling elite view Sudan as a

Muslim country and integral part of the Arab world.155 So identity does not only cause tension

between Northerners and Southerners, but also between people from the same geographical

area. In many articles the major reason for identity conflict in Sudan is their differences in

religious beliefs.

It is difficult not to link religion and war in Sudan, because for such a long time, the wars have

been portrayed as religious wars.156 As mentioned earlier, the Northern government played

on the fault line of religion in the South to validate their aggression against the Southerners.

Osama bin Laden also tried to portray the conflict in Darfur as a religious war. Bin Laden

argued that the conflict is a result of a Western anti-Islamic crusade.157 Even though religion

is almost always cited as a reason for conflict in Sudan, it is actually quiet seldom the main

reason for conflict. The government and the rebel leaders of Sudan usually use religion as a

method to mobilise the population behind them and to add fuel to the tensions. The more

prominent reason for the conflict in the last decade has been over the resources of Sudan.

4.6.3 Resources

The 1993 population census in Sudan estimated that 71 percent of the Sudanese population

were living in the rural areas. These people all have to fight for the skimpy natural resources

that are found in the rural areas of Sudan.158 The majority of the people that live in Sudan

are dependent on agriculture for their survival. In order for their animals to survive, they

need pastures and at times the scarcity of green pastures forces the herders to move into the

territory of another tribe which leads to conflict. The scarcity of water in Sudan leads to

another source of resource war. Water is the fuel of life, but in Sudan water is a scarce

commodity, so people often fight over water sources.159

Johnson argues that the war in Sudan is being fought to gain total control over abundant oil

reserves.160 It can be argued that the Sudanese government have been manipulating ethnic 154 Ibid.155 Ryle, op cit.156 Wills, J. 2003. Religion in the Sudan: A Review Article. Journal of Religion in Africa, Vol 33, August 2003.

p. 328.157 Goodenough, op cit.158 Mohamed, op cit.159 Ibid.160 Johnson, p. xii.

34

and religious differences to get more oil resources.161 Oil has become one of the driving

forces of the conflict in Sudan. In Sudan, the largest oil reserves are found in the southern

parts of the country. The majority of Sudan’s export income (70%) is from oil revenue. As a

result, the Northerners fight the Southerners in order to get control over the oil resources.162

With the money that the government make out of oil, they buy more weapons that can help

them to get more oil from the Southerners. The Southerners on the other hand fight to keep

their oil, therefore the oil installations are popular targets for the rebels.163

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 SUMMARY

The purpose of the study was to examine the relationship between religion and conflict in the

selected cases of Nigeria and Sudan. The research problem was deducted from the idea

that fault lines in religion may lead to conflict. However the research problem was whether

religious difference is a cause of conflicts or merely a characteristic of the conflict? Or is

religion used as a tool to mobilise a segment of the population to participate in conflict? The

research questioned stemmed from the research problem. The research question was:

What role does religion play in the conflicts in Nigeria and Sudan?

In order to answer the research question, the paper explored some of the theories that exist

on religious warfare. It was found that a number of theories exist on religious warfare, but

there is nothing that specifically focuses on religious conflicts in Africa. In general there are

not much literature on religious conflict in Africa overall. This is where the significance of this

research paper comes in. Even though this paper only explores two of the case studies in

Africa where religious conflict is prevalent, it still contributes to help other researchers in their

studies on African conflicts and more specifically religion-based conflicts. The paper also

investigated historical cases of religious warfare in order to get a background on religious

conflict and to determine some characteristics of religious warfare. The majority of the study

focused on the two case studies in order to determine what role religion played in the

conflicts of Nigeria and Sudan.

This paper is a descriptive study, which focused on two case studies. A state-centric

approach was followed and the units of analysis were Nigeria and Sudan. Religion was the

161 Keen, D. 2000. Incentives and Disincentives for Violence In M, Berdal and D. M. Malone. Greed and Grievance: Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. London: Lynne Reinner Publishers. p. 35.

162 Brown, op cit.163 Ryle, op cit.

35

variable under the telescope. The study is a qualitative study based on a literature study and

available factual data. Only secondary sources were used during the research for the study.

Therefore the study cannot offer an exhaustive explanation on the role of religion in the

conflicts of Nigeria and Sudan. From the research done conclusions can be made and the

next segment of the paper will discuss the conclusions.

5.2 CONCLUSIONS

5.2.1 Theory on religious conflict

People view reality differently. When humans disagree with each other, they are directly

questioning each other’s identity. Religion forms part of a person’s identity, which is why

people are so sensitive when someone challenges their religious beliefs. As a result,

religious conflicts are usually fought by people who are passionate over their religious beliefs

and this leads to protracted conflicts. This chapter also discussed ethnicity as part of

identity, because ethnicity and religion are frequently intertwined. Research has shown that

there are four types of theories on religious conflicts. Chapter two has shown that there are

many written theories and speculations about the role that religion plays in conflict. Religion

is sometimes used by the elite to provoke conflict, in other cases religion is used to maintain

conflict and to motivate people to carry on fighting. Religion is also used to end conflicts.

5.2.2 Historical cases of religious conflict

The third chapter investigated some historical instances of religious conflict. The cases that

were used were the Crusades, the Arab-Israeli wars and the September 11 attacks on

America. This chapter proved that religious conflicts have been taking place for thousands of

years. This is because everybody has a different identity and when identities clash, religion is

an easy scapegoat to use as an excuse to make war. This chapter has shown that there will

always be a religious conflict somewhere in the world. It was found that religious conflicts are

usually prolonged wars, because nobody wants to admit that their identity is wrong or false.

Another characteristic of religious conflicts is that the people who fight in these conflicts are

usually very passionate for their cause and as a result religious conflicts are usually

extremely violent and no one will be spared.

5.2.3 Nigeria

36

From the research done for the paper, it is clear that religion definitely plays a major role in

the conflicts in Nigeria. In Nigeria, religion has been used to cause conflicts as well as to

sustain conflicts. The Islamic Nigerians have for many years looked down on the Christian

Nigerians. This can be seen in same context as apartheid in South Africa. The Christian

Nigerians refused to be treated as lesser people and that is why some of the first religious

conflicts in Nigeria broke out after independence. Since then religious leaders have used

religion to mobilise their members against each other.

Since religion and politics are so closely intertwined in Nigeria, political leaders competed to

gain the support of religious leaders. This in turn led to the political leaders to use religion as

a method to rally supporters behind them. These political leaders used religion as a fuel to

keep the conflict going by burning each other’s places of worship as was seen during the

1980’s. One of the biggest causes of religious conflict in Nigeria is when political leaders

wanted to implement Sharia law as the ultimate law in their states. A large proportion of the

conflict in Nigeria was resource driven, but was fuelled by religion and ethnic differences.

Therefore it can be argued the conflicts in Nigeria are a mixture of resource wars and

religious wars.

A possible solution to the religious conflict is that the president of Nigeria should put his foot

down and decide which states will be allowed to use Sharia and which states should stay

with Western laws. Then all the Muslim can go live in the Sharia states and the Christians

can live in the other states. The problem with this solution is that the different groups will

then fight over the resources of Nigeria. In order to cater for this problem the revenue made

from the natural resources should be divided equally between the people of Nigeria. Another

option is the upholding of a secular constitution together with guarantees for the protection of

minority belief-systems. This could ensure that religion is still part of everyday life, but it is left

out of government decisions. These are very simplistic solutions and there are many other

factors that must be taken into account, but at least it could serve as a starting block.

5.2.4 Sudan

Sudan has been plagued with conflict for many centuries. The conflict has been kept alive

through all the years by the population’s differences; differences such as ethnicity, culture,

religion and language. Some of the conflict has also been fuelled by contention over

37

resources such as water, grazing land and oil reserves. Religion has played a role of

sustainment in both the civil wars.

It is the opinion of the author that the conflict in Sudan is not purely an economic war, neither

is it purely a religious war. If it was solely an economic conflict, then there would not have

been suicide killers who are willing to give up their lives for their religion involved in the

conflict. In some of the clashes it is Muslims that are fighting Muslims and Africans that

fights Africans, so it is clear that the conflict in Sudan is not solely a religious conflict either.

Therefore religion is a mere character of the conflict in Sudan and the conflict is a mixture or

ethno-religious and economic conflict.

It seems as if the Southerners have always been pulling on the shortest end. Since

independence they wanted their own state where they could speak English and practice

Christianity. But they were “cursed” with natural resources. The North knew that they would

not be able to survive without the resources of the North, so they had to devise reasons to

fight the Southerners in order to gain control over the resources. In order to get the

population behind them, the Arabs often had to play on religion to mobilise the masses

against the “infidels” of the South. Therefore the paper is of the opinion that none of the

conflicts in Sudan after independence can be seen as religious wars. Religion was rather

used as an excuse to make war in order to get resources or to mobilise the people to fight

against each other. In both the civil wars religion was used as a method to sustain the

conflicts. The real reasons for the conflicts were rather the persisting economic and cultural

gap between North/Arab/Muslim and South/African/Christian

In conclusion, the blood of many Africans has been spilled as a result of their religious

beliefs. In many cases the people who fought in the wars never gained anything out of it, but

the leaders of the factions became very wealthy as a result of the resource rich territory that

they obtained as a result of the fighting. Religion has also been used as a way to classify a

large part of the population as lesser people and nobody want to feel as if they are less

valuable than anyone else. The patience of the people was not endless and they had to

revolt against the oppressors in the case of Sudan. In the case of Nigeria, religion played the

role of instigating the conflict as well as to maintain the conflict. In Sudan religion was used

to maintain the conflict and to mobilise the masses behind the leaders. Unfortunately in

neither of the cases religion could be used to facilitate the end of conflicts.

The only way to stop the religious conflicts in both Nigeria and Sudan would be for both of

the factions to negotiate a settlement to compromise a bit and accept that every person has

38

its own identity. If neither of the religions attempts to force their beliefs onto anyone, then

religious conflicts might also come to an end. In essence this means that there should be

freedom of religion and hence a secular constitution jointly negotiated and maintained by

both the religions should be upheld. I don’t believe that any religion prescribe to its people

that they should kill those who do not have the same beliefs, therefore all the bloodshed as a

result of religious differences have been unnecessary.