Inside Northern Nigeria’s Power Imbalance: An Investigative Look At Ethnicity, Governance & A Region On Edge

NORTHERN Nigeria’s political landscape has long been shaped by complex historical, cultural, and ethnic forces. Today, the region’s distribution of political leadership has re-opened debates about representation, identity, and the legacy of power structures dating back more than a century.

Across the 19 northern states, each governed by an elected governor, a simple demographic breakdown tells a complicated story: 10 of the 19 governors are of Fulani extraction, while the remaining nine are drawn from over 300 other ethnic groups. Yet, the Hausa people—who make up more than half of the northern population—hold no governorship seat in any of the states traditionally considered “Hausa states.”

A Region Where Population Does Not Equal Power

According to demographic estimates often cited in regional analyses, the Hausa constitute the single largest ethnic group in the North and one of the largest in Africa. Yet states with large Hausa populations—Kano, Katsina, Kaduna, Bauchi, Jigawa, Sokoto, and Zamfara—are all governed by Fulani leaders.

This tension is not new. Historians point to the 19th-century Sokoto Caliphate, during which Fulani political dominance was entrenched across Hausa territories. Across generations, colonial and post-colonial structures reinforced this hierarchy. But what is sparking renewed concern today is not merely the past—it is what many see as an increasingly lopsided distribution of political authority in the present.

Ethnic Representation in the North: A Breakdown

• 10 Fulani governors across key states including Kano, Kaduna, Jigawa, Katsina, and Sokoto.

• 9 governors from other ethnic groups such as Tiv, Kanuri, Nupe, Jukun, Margi, and Mwaghavul.

• 0 Hausa governors, despite their population strength and political involvement at lower levels of government.

The imbalance has become a talking point among analysts who argue that political power has remained concentrated within a Fulani elite, leaving the Hausa—ironically the numerical majority—without direct political stewardship in their own historic territories.

Historical Accommodation, Modern Consequences

The longstanding relationship between Hausa communities and Fulani settlers was built on shared religion, trade, and cultural interaction. But political historians note that the Fulani entered northern palaces through positions of Islamic scholarship, eventually rising to the throne in many emirates.

This pattern, some analysts argue, created a political class that became deeply entrenched—and over time, Hausa leadership structures were either absorbed or replaced.

Today, critics of this arrangement say the consequences are visible:

• Declining educational opportunities in some predominantly Hausa communities

• A rise in economic hardship and social disillusionment

• Fragmented traditional leadership

• A sense of political marginalization despite numerical dominance

Community observers say this vacuum has created fertile ground for insecurity, manipulation, and exploitation.

Why Not All Northern Groups Share the Same Fate

In Borno and Yobe, the Kanuri have maintained control of their traditional and political institutions, resisting the Fulani political influence that reshaped the rest of the northwest. Some observers cite this as the reason the Kanuri remain politically assertive and culturally self-determined.

Expansion or Perception?

Concerns have also emerged from parts of the Middle Belt, particularly Kwara and Nasarawa, where Fulani political influence has grown in recent decades. Critics describe this as a strategic expansion; others see it as a natural outcome of demographic movement and political competition.

What is clear is that the anxiety around ethnic representation is real—and growing.

Communities in the Middle Belt Raise Alarms

In Benue and other Middle Belt states repeatedly affected by violent conflict, traditional leaders have attempted dialogue with armed groups linked to Fulani herders. But security experts say peace negotiations are futile without addressing root causes and ensuring accountability.

The recurring pattern of violence has deepened distrust and heightened fears around land ownership, cultural erosion, and political displacement.

A Controversial Case Study: Nasarawa Politics

Recent political contests in Nasarawa—including a Fulani candidate vying for a House of Representatives seat in a predominantly non-Fulani constituency—have triggered debates about identity, belonging, and long-term political strategy. Supporters say such candidacies reflect modern mobility and integration; critics worry they may be the beginning of deeper political restructuring that undermines indigenous autonomy.

What This Means for the Future

Although the narrative of a Fulani “agenda” is debated and often sensationalized, the structural imbalance in northern governance is undeniable. Whether through historical evolution or deliberate strategy, political power remains concentrated in a small ethnic subset of the region.

For states like Benue, Plateau, Nasarawa, and Taraba—where ethnic diversity intersects with violent conflict—the implications are even more critical. Weak traditional institutions, political fragmentation, and insecurity could create space for stronger external influence, further complicating already fragile communal relations.

Toward a More Representative North

A number of policy experts argue that the solution lies not in ethnic blame but in institutional reform:

• Strengthening local governance

• Ensuring fair political competition

• Reforming electoral systems

• Empowering marginalized communities

• Improving education and civic participation

The North’s future stability may depend on whether communities—and leaders—can critically assess how power is distributed, how identity is protected, and how history informs current realities.

What remains clear is that any region where demographic majorities feel politically sidelined is a region vulnerable to unrest, social fragmentation, and long-term instability.

And unless these questions are openly addressed, the debate about northern leadership may only grow louder in the years ahead.