In most developing countries, there is a disruption of the civil-military equilibrium usually assumed in liberal democracies.

In liberal tradition, the military is insulated from politics and subject to civilian control. In several developing countries, however, the military has not only intervened in the political process and overthrown the constitutional civilian authority, but it also often has established its supremacy over elected politicians. Even in those countries where the military has become almost a permanent feature of politics, military rule is still considered an aberration and symptomatic of a malfunctioning political system. In Nigeria, which typifies the scenario just presented, military rule was usually seen as a "rescue" operation necessary to save the country from civilian ineptitude. Military rule was not expected to last long; once the rescue operation was complete, the military should return to the barracks where they belonged and leave the governing to civilian politicians. The problem, however, was that although military officers accepted this rationale, military rule usually became self-sustaining. From the onset of independent government in Nigeria in 1960 to the end of 1990, the military had ruled for twenty-one years. Altogether there were five coups d'tat involving changes of government: those of January 15, 1966; July 29, 1966; July 29, 1975; December 31, 1983; and August 27, 1985. There was also an unsuccessful coup in which the head of state, General Murtala Muhammad, was killed in February 1976, and another was nipped in the bud in December 1985. An attempt to overthrow General Ibrahim Babangida was made in April 1990. Of these coups, only those of January 1966 and December 1983 were against civilian governments. Several explanations of military intervention have been added to those given by the coup plotters themselves. Whereas the latter have cited economic mismanagement and corruption, other explanations have ranged from the continuation of ethnoregional politics by military means to the personal ambitions of officers.

A military is an organization authorized by its greater society to use lethal force, usually including use of weapons, in defending its country by combating actual or perceived threats. The military may have additional functions of use to its greater society, such as advancing a political agenda e.g. communism during cold war era, supporting or promoting economic expansion through imperialism, and as a form of internal social control. As an adjective the term "military" is also used to refer to any property or aspect of a military. Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military communities. A military invention is an invention that was first created by a military. There are many inventions that were originally created by the military but are now used by civilians. BEFORE the infamous military incursion into governance in Nigeria in 1966, life was good and expectation for a better and greater nation was high. The regional leaders between 1960 and 1966 were competing to out-do one another in their respective regions. As a growing up school boy between 1960 and 1970 in my town,Iwo, of then Western Region now in Osun State, I enjoyed the good things the Western regional government under Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the first premier of the region offered. Read more:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Causes_of_military_intervention_in_politics_in_Nigeria#ixzz1xLH5 3DZG 4 PERSPECTIVES ON THE MILITARY IN POLITICS The military incursion into politics in Nigeria has attracted numerous opinions. The reasons given for this extra-constitutional intervention include colossal corruption and pathetic poverty, especially where there is popular disaffection, rigged elections, political deadlocks, and polarisation of the lite that has reached a point where the people could find no peaceful means of changing the existing government. In such cases, in the opinion of Tunde Adeniran (1985), the military come in to fill the political vacuum.