CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1      BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Conflicts of varying scales and intensities have been witnessed in this century in different parts of the world. It is difficult to ascertain the exact number of these conflicts but it is safe to say that these social unrests have taken a toll on humanity in terms of deaths, displacements and disruption of economic and social activities. Indeed massive violent conflicts on a scale previously unimaginable have come to stare humanity in the face with their attendant adverse effects on the socio-economic development of the society. 

Conflicts in general are not new to human societies, they are as old as human society because they have been in existence in all spheres of human life since the beginning of history. According to Otite and Albert, conflicts are necessary characteristics of every human society- a “normal process of interaction particularly in complex societies in which resources are usually scarce” (1). A conflict however, becomes an abnormality when it results to violence. The religious dimension in conflict is also not a new phenomenon, as casual checks of some religious texts reveal accounts of bloody conflicts fought in the name of religion. Religion has the capacity to serve as both a force for good and for evil in violent conflict situations.  However, experiences have shown that many of those involved in violent conflict situations have used religion or ethnic identities to rally support, justify their actions and proclaim a “moral superiority” over others. Whereas religion was once the preserve of specialists, it has become the concern of all and sundry including journalists and academics across various areas of study after the New York World Trade Centre terrorists‟ bombing of 11th September, 2001. Nowhere is this shift more significantly witnessed than in the area of religious, ethnic, social, and political conflicts. 

Scholars from various areas of study have written so much about conflicts in general and ethno-religious conflicts in particular. It is however worthy of note that many violent conflicts still remain unrecorded. So also, scholars of various fields have proffered solutions to violent conflicts, yet violent conflicts continue to afflict mankind. 

Nigeria has recorded bitter experiences of violent conflicts in various forms and ethno-religious conflicts in particular. Since the early 1980s, ethnic and religious crises have become a re-occurring decimal, especially in northern Nigeria. Amongst the 19 states that constitute Northern Nigeria, there is virtually none that has not witnessed one form of conflict or the other. The spate of violence has been on a steady increase. Some of the conflicts include: Maitatsine crises in Kano, 1980, Zuru 1980, Maiduguri 1982, Yola 1984, Ilorin 1984, Bauchi 1984 and Kano 1984.  Others are the crises in Kafanchan 1987, Gure Kahugu 1987, Birnin Kebbi 1990, Katsina 1991, Tafawa Balewa 1991, Kano 1991, Jalingo 1992, Kaduna Polytechnic 1992, Kasuwar Magani (Kaduna) 1994, Kaduna 2000, Jos 2001, Kano 2001, Tafawa Balewa (since 2000) and Nasarawa 2001, Jos 2004, 2008 and 2010. There have also been the Chamba-Kuteb crises in Taraba State 2013, Tiv-Jukun crisis 2013, Bassa-

Igbira crisis in Toto 2012 and a host of others. 

Ikenga Metuh identified three broad types of religious conflicts, namely:  …intra-religious which occur between different denominations or sects; interreligious conflicts prevalent between adherents of different religious beliefs, but capable of assuming socio-ethnic dimension; and inter-religious conflicts which though have socio-economic origin end up in the form of religious conflicts (111-112). 

  With particular reference to Nigeria, Metuh observes further that most interreligious conflicts usually developed into inter-ethnic conflicts even where and when they begin as purely religious disagreements.  The reverse is also often the case that some socio-ethnic or political conflicts are deflected and fought under the interreligious banner (112). Conflicts according to Alemika are “often categorised in terms of their origin, domain of expression and issues or grievances that are canvassed” (3).

1. 1. This material content is developed to serve as a GUIDE for students to conduct academic research work
2. 2. As a source for additional understanding of the subject.
3. 3. As a source for ideas for your own research work (if properly referenced).
4. 4. For PROPER paraphrasing (see your university definition of plagiarism and acceptable paraphrase)
5. 5. Direct citing (if referenced properly)
Thank you so much for your respect to the authors copyright.