ABSTRACT

The work set out to investigate the impact of the European Union (EU) on Nigeria’s diplomatic relations (1999-2010) in terms of their trade Balance While observing that Nigeria has unfavorable trade access to the European Union Market (1999-2010), hence the hypothesis that the trade balance existing between Nigeria and European Union is unfavourable to Nigeria.The theory of complex interdependence was used as our framework for analyzing the European Union (EU) and Nigeria’s relations in terms of trade cooperation. The study made use of the observation method of secondary source of data collection, such as textbooks, journals, magazines, conference papers, official documents and Internet sources. Using the qualitative description of statistical data guides our understanding of the work and is supported by the adoption of one-shot case study research design for controlling the variable under study. Our recommendation was also based on the findings of our research work which was already articulated in our conclusion.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY Nigeria’s diplomatic relations with the European Union (E.U) dates back to 1960 when Nigeria gained independence from Britain, a member country of the Union that ruled it for nearly a century and had a complete grip on the country – politically, economically, religiously and socio-culturally. Its relations with African countries especially Nigeria has remained the same. The European Union is an international economic organisation comprising of some advanced countries of the north, which originally included France, West Germany, Belgium, Italy, Luxemburg and the Netherlands. It has however, expanded to include nine other countries namely united Kingdom (Britain), Denmark, Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Austria and Finland, including Romania that joined the union recently (Sanu and Onwuka, 1997) Much of the history of the European Union during its early years was one of steady economic growth for member states. Goldsmith and Klausen, (1998) argued that a country as former West Germany did establish itself as a leading world economic power over this period, and a dominant force in the New European Union. France transformed itself from a predominantly agricultural economy to one much more industrialised. The whole world became concerned about the implication of the unification on the global economy, as Europe in 1992, headed towards realizing a long dream of establishing a single integrated market and economic unification. For Nigeria, and Africa as a whole, this was more glaring because of the nature of the Euro-African relations over the centuries. Europe, pre-occupied with its own problems as it moved towards the establishment of a single integrated market in 1992, and with the growing instability on its Eastern borders following the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, appeared in the early 90s’ to have lost enthusiasm for its development contact with Africa (including Nigeria). Disillusioned with meager effects of project aid, donor governments increasingly tied their aid to political reform and often to the adoption of IMF approved Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). The relegation of Africa to the exclusive role of raw material producers, producing or growing cash crops that were irrelevant to Africa and Africans in turn, importing goods they did not really need, a phenomenon aptly termed growth without development was as a result of European domination of Africa. A study of the relationship between Nigeria and European Union becomes a study of the economic relations between a third world country and the major developed market economy comprising countries in the international economic system. The complex relationship marked by profound inequalities in power in international division of labour and benefits, is what likened these two categories of states.

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.