How marginalisation has kept agitations for Biafra alive

It is 45 years since the Biafran war ended, but the hope of actualizing a sovereign state of Biafra has continued to linger in the South East region. What is the driving force behind the renewed quest for Biafra? EZUGWUOBINNA writes

It is now 45 long years since the Nigeria civil war, alternatively called Biafra war ended, but even after these years, the situation that led to the war has been left largely unaddressed and the quest for separation over which the war was fought has persisted.

The period between 1967 and 1970 was a dark period in Nigerian history, it was the period Nigeria fought an ugly civil war over the secession bid of the then Eastern Region under Biafra. It was a war that left over three million of hercitizens, mostly from Eastern Nigeria dead; many through direct bullet wounds, but even more by starvation.

Some have described the war as genocide against the Igbo, others have noted it was a necessary sacrifice to keep Nigeria one. In the final analysis, it was a war that visited untold hardship on the old Eastern Region of Nigeria.

The war endedin 1970 with Biafra coerced back into one united Nigeria. The federal government led by Gen. Yakubu Gowon gave a “no victor, no vanquished” verdict and embarked on the famous three Rs: Reconstruction, Reconciliation and Rehabilitation in a bid to heal the wounds of the war.

But Gowon’s wordswere sharply contradicted by his actions. He started his rehabilitation programme by givingevery account holder in the war ravaged, starving Eastern Region a meagre 20 pounds. It did not matter if you had a million pounds in your account. You were just given 20 pounds; take it or leave it. And with that, they were expected to threat kwashiorkor, hunger and put roofs over their heads.

But that was not all, in 1971, shortly after the war, the policy of indigenization started. Most foreign companies were sold to Nigerians and with 20 pounds, the Eastern Region was supposed to participate… as part of the reconciliation perhaps.

In the civil service, the reconciliation continued years afterwards with top civil servants of Igbo origin dismissed from their jobs for the crime of being Igbo. Not to mention, it became a matter of policy to neglect the region in the location of federal establishments and infrastructure.

More recently, Nigeria was divided into six geopolitical zones with the old Eastern Region constituting the present day South East and South-South zones. The division succeeded in separating other ethnic groups from the Igbo as they were grouped largely under one zone; the South East zone, and the anti-Eastern region policies consequently continued with the South East.

It is 45 years down the line however, and ordinarily the South East question ought to have been addressed for good so the country can move forward. But what is the state of the South East today? Has the resultant challenges of the zone been addressed to, at least, an extent that would have portrayed insensitivity in the rejuvenated calls for Biafra?

The South East obviously, has continued to be marginalized by successive governments in many ways. The lack of federal government presence is still noticeable till the present day, no federal establishments; most federal roads are in a state of disrepair. To give the zone a point of contact with the outside world took only the immediate past president of the country, Goodluck Jonathan who after years of yearning conferred the Enugu airport with international status.

Even more glaring is the confining of the South East zone into five states, while every other zone in the country has at least six. And since then, any attempt to address the injustice has been severally resisted by other political blocs who are bent on marginalizing the zone.

For some years now, a second Niger Bridge has been on the wish list of the South East, but despite the economic implications of the bridge to the entire country, the question of carrying the project out has been answered mostly in political tones with some going as far as stating that it was the Biafrans that blew up the bridge after all.

Although, one has to admit that the South East has come of age and has built enough capacity as a group, but that has come generally through self help. The sense of marginalization is still present and that is what, according to some stakeholders of the zone, has kept the Biafran agitations alive.

Mr.AbiaOnyike, a foremost politician from Ebonyi State for instance,in the wake of the recent calls for Biafra opined that what gives rise to such agitations for self determination is marginalization. He went ahead tocall for a new understanding among different groups in Nigeria as a way of addressing existing issues and put an end to the ongoing secession quests in the interest of a united, progressive country.

“What gives rise to such is marginalization. I am therefore calling for a new form of understanding within the Nigerian state. Every Nigerian should be made to have a sense of belonging so that people will not have a need to agitate for a separate state,” he said.

While the recent Biafra agitations have been attributed in some quarters to the defeat of Jonathan in the March 28 presidential election, Onyike shares contrary views. “I don’t think it has anything to do with Jonathan, the quest for self determination is a global phenomenon. Many countries of the world have done it at one point or the other, Nigeria is not an exception; the country is an amalgamation of three dominant ethnic groups and other smaller ones by the British colonial masters. If one ethnic group feels they are ripe to pursue self determination that is it.”

Chief UdokaUdeogaranya, the leader of Ndigbo Cultural Society of Nigeria (NCSN) re-echoed Mr.Onyike’s assertions. He emphasized that any group that feels its interest is not protected by the country’s authorities has the right to ask questions as such is recognized by international law.

“The United Nations has, through the international law, recognized the people’s right to self determination. Therefore, if any group of persons feels that their rights are not being protected by their government, they have a right to demand for self determination, he stated.

He further suggested that such agitations may at some point be decided through a referendum as has been done elsewhere. “It would come to a point when such would be decided in a referendum, where people would have to decide for themselves whether they want a separate state or not. It was done in Scotland and the Scots decided to remain with the rest of Britain; that’s the thing.”

Speaking further, Udeogaranya explainedthat contrary to widely held speculations, the growing quest for Biafra was not prompted by the defeat of Jonathan in the recently held presidential election, recalling that the quest has been on for a long time.

“I wouldn’t know what the reasons for the sudden resurgence in the quest for Biafra are, but it would be wrong to think it is because of Jonathan’s defeat. They have been making the agitation even when Jonathan was the president; it has been an age long agitation, even when Ojukwu was alive so it has nothing to do with Jonathan’s defeat,” he affirmed.