Admin

By Abdulhaleem Ishaq Ringim

By Ibrahim Siraj

There are indications that Nigeria’s main opposition party, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), would zone its presidential ticket to the Southern part of the country. This follows the decision of the party to zone the national chairmanship seat to the North ahead of its national convention coming up later this month. 

Although the party is yet to formally decide on the zone that will produce its flagbearer in the 2023 presidential election, the latest decision provides some clue because, based on convention, the party has never zoned the two coveted offices to the same region.

Announcing the decision Thursday, Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi of Enugu State, who is also the Chairman of the party’s zoning committee, said the decision was arrived at at the end of his committee’s meeting.

He said his committee was not mandated to zone the presidential ticket. According to him, “The mandate of the committee does not include zoning of the president, vice president and other executive and legislative offices of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.  

The decision of the party to zone the offices, the Governor adds, “is in line with the constitution of the party on zoning and rotation of party and national offices in the interest of justice, equity and fairness”.

By implication, the decision by PDP to push the national chairmanship seat to the North is likely to dash the hope of politicians eyeing the party’s presidential ticket from the North. Going by tradition, it is almost impossible for the party’s national chairman and presidential candidate to come from one zone.

Prominent among those affected by the party’s decision are former vice president Atiku Abubakar, former Senate President Bukola Saraki, Governor of Sokoto State Aminu Tambuwal and former Kano State Governor Rabi’u Musa Kwankwaso. These four politicians are among many others of Northern extraction who dominated the party’s presidential convention in 2019, with Atiku Abubakar eventually emerging as the winner. However, Mr Atiku was defeated by President Muhammadu Buhari of the ruling APC to win reelection.

Atiku unperturbed – Campaign Group

Speaking to The Daily Reality on the development, Alhaji Abdullahi Abdulkarim Gama, leader of Atiku Arewa Reporters, a campaign group rooting for the candidature of the former vice president, said his principal remains unperturbed. He said as far as they are concerned, the decision of the zoning committee is not final and only reflects the position of PDP governors. Moreso, he said, the Governor Ahmad Fintiri-led Convention committee is yet to conclude its assignment and submit its report regarding the party’s convention. He maintained that scheming for the party’s presidential ticket would continue until the last minute.

Situation sceptical yet no cause for alarm – Kwankwasiyya leader

On his part, Dr Aliyu Isa Aliyu, a leading Kwankwasiyya member in Kano, warned that the situation remains sceptical even though no cause for alarm as far as Kwankwaso’s presidential ambition is concerned given that the party has not formally taken a final position on the matter. He cited a situation in 2007 wherein late President YarAdua emerged as PDP’s presidential candidate and went ahead to win the presidency even though the national chairman at the time, Col Ahmadu Ali (Rtd), was also a Northerner. Col. Ali was replaced in 2008 by Chief Vincent Ogbulafor following the zoning of the position to the South. 

Agitation for power rotation not in the interest of Nigerian masses – Don

PDP’s decisions came when the North and the South are deeply entangled in a heated agitation for power rotation. The Southern governors have, on several occasions, made it utterly clear that power must shift to their region, and the North must shelve any thought of retaining the presidency beyond 2023. This position was, however, countered by Northern governors who consider it as “foolish”, “unconstitutional”, and “undemocratic” any attempt to dictate to the North who to vote for as president.

At the end of the governors’ meeting earlier this week which other leaders from the region also attended, the governors advised their Southern counterparts to explore dialogue and compromise as against confrontation and undemocratic tendencies if they are really interested in securing the support of the North for power to shift to the South. 

As the political tug of war between the North and the South continues over the zone that produces the next president, a university don has warned that the rotational presidency is undemocratic and thus has no place in Nigeria’s Constitution.  Answering enquiry from TDR, Dr Riyauddeen Zubairu Maitama of the Department of Political Science, Bayero Univerisity, Kano, explains that although so much importance has been attached to the issue of power rotation, what should be more significant for the citizens is justice and development. Of utmost importance to Nigerians, he said, is choosing a leader who will tackle corruption, poverty and widespread insecurity irrespective of the political party or the region such a leader comes from.

Dr Riyauddeen further lamented how politicians from both divides are becoming more preoccupied with zoning and power rotation at the expense of the welfare of the Nigerian masses who voted for them.  He described the agitation for secession championed by the likes of Sunday Igboho as Southern Nigeria’s gimmick to harass the North and to exact political concession ahead of the presidential election. 

Crucial months ahead

With less than a year and a half to Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election, the next few months will be crucial as zoning, and other issues are expected to dominate the discourse on the political scene. While the major political parties continue to gear up for their separate national conventions to choose national officers, Nigerians will continue to observe with keen interest how political events will unfold in search of President Buhari’s successor in 2023. The pertinent question for now is: can zoning succeed in ultimately sealing the fate of those presidential hopefuls from the North, or would they be able to come up with something dramatic to turn things around? Only time will tell!

By MA Iliasu

By Muhammad Sabiu

All is set for the launch of the copy of the Nigerian constitution (1999), which was translated into Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba by Prince Ade Ajayi Foundation Centre for Constitutional Literacy and Civic Education.

President of the foundation, Mr Ajayi, made the disclosure to journalists in Lagos on Friday.

He said that the translation work into the three languages, whose launch is scheduled to be held on the 25th day of November, took them six years.

According to him, the task aims to promote unity, national orientation.

He added that a book titled ‘I Love Nigeria, My Country’, would also be launched in the hope that national cohesion would be enhanced.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) quoted him as saying: “Of 4,000 Nigerians randomly sampled in urban areas, over 80 per cent had never seen or read in whole or part, a soft or hard copy of the 1999 constitution.

“Of those who had, more than half could not recall what they had read. The statistics in rural areas are abysmal, largely due to literacy levels.

“We believe that the first step in national orientation is adequate civic education. This cannot take place where citizens do not have access to the one document that can most wholesomely, inform them.”

By Aliyu Nuhu

At 61 years of age the only progress Nigeria made is in population growth, something that is not properly managed. It jumps from 36 million people formerly, we are now approximately 200 million. A clear case of quantity without quality.

What do we have to celebrate while Nigeria today is in company of Somalia, DRC, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Niger, Iraq, Pakistan and host of other failed states in terms of development?

According to UNICEF about 20 million Nigerian children are not attending primary school, about 6 million that are attending will still come out illiterate due to poor quality of teaching. The worst is that the government pretends that all is well and is doing nothing about it. Almajiri system of education is still in practice and not properly managed. It is one of the indicators that Nigeria is not serious about its future.

Another tragedy is that, around 80 million Nigerians are unemployed, in fact about 98% of Nigerian youths are all without job or any form of social and economic engagement. Suddenly, Covid-19 came and made matters worse as more people are losing their means of livelihood. Banditry and kidnapping have chased people away from their farmlands.

Nigeria is without electricity, roads, railways, good airports, clean water and sanitation, public toilets and all other critical social and economic infrastructures.

The government naively claimed that the economy is growing forgetting the relationship between economic growth and job creation. How can growth be justified with 80 million unemployed citizens? How can growth be justified with 3000mw of electricity? That is far below what South Africa generates from renewable energy. According to the Ministry of Energy, South Africa’s total domestic electricity generation capacity is 51,309 megawatts. About 91.2%, or 46,776 MW comes from thermal power stations, while 4,533 MW or 8.8%, is generated from renewable energy sources.

How can growth be justified with industries failing, the entire Northern Nigeria is without viable industry! All the critical sectors that make a nation strong are either absent in Nigeria or in shambles. The chemical, commercial, communication, manufacturing sectors, dams, defense, emergency services, energy, banking and other financial services, food and agriculture, health care, information technology, nuclear reactor, material and wastes management, transport and waterways, all and sundry are either not working or completely corrupt and dubious.

Don’t roll the drum to celebrate, as a matter of fact we should remain in our houses and mourn our collective failure as a nation.

The Mo Ibrahim foundation just placed us among the 10 worst governed countries in Africa. The Economic intelligence Unit (of the London Economist) placed us among the world’s failed nations. And these institutions are not the opposition, it is not PDP that is giving this grim picture of our country.

It is easy for Nigerians to rise and say we are not a failed state, but going by the definition of state failure, a nation that fails to discharge its obligation to its citizens, is indeed heading to the direction of a failed state.

Everyone knows Nigeria cannot provide basic security to its citizens. We have hundreds of thousands of people displaced by insecurity. This is the kind of story associated with state failure because the state, after failing to secure lives, will also not be able to bring the criminals to justice.

We are never worse in terms of security, people are killed daily in our cities. They are kidnapped and attacked in their homes. Corruption has never been worse, yet the courts have simply joined the thieves. In Nigeria today, nobody gets jailed for corruption.

To me there is no need to celebrate, we should all put our hands on our heads and cry. Our leaders, both past and present should bury their heads in shame for bringing our country to its knees.

Nigeria is also practically not good for the poor and vulnerable. If you can’t get plum government appointment, just be rich.The rich are allowed to claim fuel subsidy, evade tax, have import duties, manipulate commodity prices, bet on stocks with privileged information they get from golf clubs. The equivalent of all these or even less, when done by the poor, is called stealing. And the poor also had their bad ways as well. Leaders looting by example while followers learning by instinct.

Nigeria allows great deal of latitude to the rich. The courts are even scared of them. This is our way of making up to them for creating a society in which everything can be done for money, while nothing is worth having at all.

I can only say happy independence to the Nigerian rich, they, along with our leaders, help in ruining this nation. They are now reaping the fruits of their labour. As things get so bad, there is no peace for them to enjoy their wealth. They are an endangered species on the highway. Kidnappers are looking for them the way hunters look for antelope. At home there is no peace. Even behind heavily fortified walls, they sleep with open eyes. It will continue to degenerate because peace exists only in a society that has shared prosperity among its people.

Sadly again, Nigeria is the most badly governed and mismanaged nation on earth. Most poor and backward countries owe their present condition to war, natural disasters, geography and size, but it is not the same with Nigeria. It is its people in the hierarchy of the leaders, the rich and the poor masses.

Vietnam was in a state of war for 20 years. Korea was at war for three years. Today they are developed economies.

Nigeria only witnessed civil war for three years and remained in peace for the best part of its 61 years existence, earning about $1 trillion from sale of oil. Yet with all that money it achieved nothing in terms of development. Most of it has been shamelessly mismanaged or stolen!Today Nigeria is 61 years old. Here are some reasons for sober reflection and adjustments by our leaders.

1. In 1960 Nigeria has only 2 universities. Today it has 40 federal universities, 40 state universities and 61 private universities. However its people have to run to Ghana, a country with only 9 universities to study. The reason is because the 141 universities in Nigeria are below international standard due to corruption, mismanagement and neglect. The country, according to UNICEF has 10.5 million children outside primary school. It means in 20 years, about 30% Nigerians will not be able to secure employment as security men, because the job will require basic literacy as qualification. Public primary and secondary education system has collapsed in Nigeria. Parents spend their earnings to educate their children. This goes to say adding weight is not equal to good health.

2. Twenty years ago India has the largest number of pure scientists in the world but it was considered a poor country compared to China because the number of scientists did not transform India into net exporter of goods and services. It was until India changed its ways and started producing technicians like China that it began manufacturing goods and earned the respect of the world. Numbers matter but vision matters most. The Indians were not seeing the world as the Chinese. Like India and China, Nigeria has abundant human and intellectual capital which have been wasted by neglect due to poor attention to education. And because of that our numbers produce nothing. In this age with our size we cannot produce needles, toys and bicycles. These are simple products that don’t require rocket science.

3. Today we have 193,600kms federal highway. Out of that length, only 28,200 kms are paved in the whole 60 years of the country’s existence. The paved highways are death traps killing hundreds of people daily. Meanwhile in 1960 Nigeria had 8,800km of paved federal highways in relatively good condition. The increase in the length without quality today does not translate to progress. Nigeria is considered the worst country among it’s neighbors in terms of road infrastructure. Quality matters more than numbers.

4. In 1960 Nigeria had 118 mission hospitals, and 101 government hospitals. Today it has 22 Federal Medical Centers, 23 giant teaching hospitals, about 46,000 state owned hospitals/health centers and hundreds of thousands private hospitals, clinics and dispensaries. But Nigerians run to Ghana to treat skin infection and UK to treat ear infections! For most heart and brain surgeries we have to go to India or Egypt. Some of us go to Niger and other neighbouring countries!

5. In 1841 Britain and Wales had a population of 15 million people. However Great Britain virtually held the entire world by the jugular, colonising all and every important nation and defining their destiny. Dynamites come in small sizes.

6. Today the US has a population of 325 million people but controls and sets standards for the world with a population of 8 billion. By contrast Nigeria has a population of 182m and military of 400,000 strength but is overwhelmed by a rag tag Boko Haram with a strength of 16,000 followers or even less.

7. Nigeria has 91 million hectares of arable land of which it is able to cultivate only 42% of it using crude and simple tools. Industrial scale holding is nonexistent in Nigeria. Despite being able to produce large quantities of rice, beans, sesame, cashew, cassava, cocoa beans, groundnuts, gum arabic, kolanut, maize (corn), melon, millet, palm kernels, palm oil, plantains, rice, rubber, sorghum, soybeans, bananas and yam; Nigeria is not a net exporter of agricultural products and it imports food to feed its population. FOA report put Nigeria slightly ahead of Niger, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Burkina Fasso and Sierra Leone in food security. Today Nigeria is facing food crisis due to inflation. Most households cannot feed. Those barely eat, eat poisonous, damaged or expired foodstuffs.

It is not how old you are but how well you are. It’s not your numbers that matter but the quality. I feel we have nothing to celebrate. Let’s not be a bunch of jokers!

Aliyu Nuhu, a public commentator, writes from Abuja, Nigeria.

By Sumayyah Auwal Ishaq

The Government of Zamfara State has directed for the restoration of telecommunications services within the state capital of Gusau with effect from today, Friday, 1st October, 2021.

According to the State Governor’s Special Adviser on Public Enlightenment, Media and Communications, Mr. Zailani Bappa, the restoration of the service at the state capital becomes imperative following the tremendous success recorded in the fight against banditry in the state and to ease the hardship faced by both the private and public sectors of the state.

Mr. Bappa further stated that the “Government finds it necessary to ease the tight measure after the recorded success desired of it which has no doubt destabilised the syndicate of criminals terrorising the state leading to the successes recorded against them by the security operatives”

By Muhammad Sabiu

Following the ban placed on telecommunication services and other commercial activities in Zamfara State due to incessant killings and kidnappings, the government on Thursday says about 2000 suspected informers assisting bandits have been apprehended.

Ibrahim Dodara, Zamfara State Commissioner for Information, disclosed this during a press conference in Kaduna.

Mr Dosara was quoted as saying, “The government has set up a situation room where complaints are being received to ensure prompt action.

He added that the terrorists are being eliminated by troops and have been hit by acute hunger due to the ban placed on commercial activities in the state.

“Many bandits have been neutralised by the army. Most of them are forced to eat raw food like millet because they have been cut off from their collaborators in town,” he said.

Based on the reports coming from the state in recent weeks, there has been tremendous success in the area of the fight against the terrorists in north-western Nigeria.

By Aminu Rabiu Kano

The history of Afghanistan is one characterized by epic tragedy. The narrative of the “Afghan problem” has been diverse, with each actor telling their side of the story in a bid to justify their action or inaction as the case may be. A poor, landlocked Afghanistan is one of the few countries in the world which events happening in and around it have been dominating the headlines for decades. Both the mainstream and social media are obsessed with happenings in the country. Indeed, even the layman on the street is more or less interested in the Afghan problem to the extent that virtually everyone can say one or two things about it. The question that follows, therefore, is, why is the world interested in happenings in Afghanistan? In other words, why are developments in Afghanistan capable of generating reactions around the world? Also, why have the superpowers in history found it necessary to invade Afghanistan?

To answer the above questions, we must begin by establishing the geopolitical relevance of Afghanistan on the world map. Afghanistan is doubtlessly strategically located. It is at the crossroads of Central and South Asia. It borders Pakistan, China, Iran, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. It is predominantly mountainous and inhabited by approximately 32 million people – nearly 45% of whom speak the Pashtun language. Moreover, the Afghan population is primarily Muslim. This reason, coupled with the fact that it borders Iran, Afghanistan is sometimes seen as a part of the “Wider Middle East.”

From the list of the countries bordering Afghanistan, one will realize the geographical importance of Afghanistan in the international political environment. Of the five countries that bordered it, Iran and China stand out. However, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan had been part of the former Soviet Union that fell apart in the 1990s. This implies that Afghanistan has been a neighbour to glorious powers both in the past and present.

Therefore, it was invaded severally by several empires across ages due to its essential, strategic location. For example, Alexander The Great of the Macedonian empire invaded Afghanistan in 330 BC as part of the war against Persia. Alexander saw that he could only get the Persian empire subdued by invading Afghanistan. Similarly, foreign powers such as the Persian Empires, the Mongol Empire led by Khan Ghengis, the Mughal Empire, the Timurid Empire, the Rashidun Caliphate, and the Sikh Empire conquered Afghanistan.

Little wonder, Afghanistan, even in the modern era, grappled with yet other rounds of invasions, but this time around by the “superpowers”. The superpowers being the USA and the USSR. During the cold war, these superpowers used Afghanistan, among other countries, to test their military, economic and political powers. It all started when, in April 1978, the People Democratic Party of Afghanistan overthrew the Afghanistan government. Nur Muhammad Taraki, secretary of the PDPA, became president of Afghanistan. But Taraki’s government was communist in orientation and enacted some policies that were not well received by the masses. Thus, the masses hated government, and, as a result, Taraki was overthrown by Hafizullah Amin in September 1979. Despite the change of government from Taraki to Amin, opposition to communist rule continued even under Amin. In December 1979, Amin was shot and replaced by Babrak Kamal, who was in exile in Moscow. Kamal’s government heavily relied on the Soviet military for support and protection against his vast opponents.

Opposition to the communist government continued, which prompted the USSR to invade Afghanistan, deploying more than 50,000 soldiers. This occupation was even met by fierce resistance by Afghans, who have joined the Mujahedeen – a guerilla movement that proclaimed to be fighting anti-Islamic forces in Muslim lands. The Mujahedeen would later be referred to as the “Taliban”. The Taliban was formed by Mullah Muhammad Umar, who recruited young Muslim students from Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan to fight the Soviet Military. Over the next ten years, hundreds of thousands of lives were lost. In the end, the Soviet military was forced to withdraw from Afghanistan.

However, the mujahedeen (or the Taliban, if you like) did not fight the war alone: they were heavily supported, armed and financed by the USA, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. USA was mainly instrumental in its support to the Taliban because it feared that if the USSR succeeded in occupying Afghanistan, its national interests would be threatened. In fact, the US’s intervention was informed by the need to resist the advance of what former President Reagan called the “evil vampire”. Then, the two superpowers – the USA and USSR – were in the heat of the cold war. Therefore, the US saw that if the Soviet Union succeeded in implanting communist rule in Afghanistan, the domino theory would materialize. This means that the USSR would also succeed in spreading communist ideology into those countries neighbouring Afghanistan. Most Fundamentally, by gaining the control of the Middle East, the USSR would determine oil and gas supply to the US and its allies in the West. This meant that the Soviets could do great harm to the US economy and those of its allies by cutting off the oil supply since oil was a vital product so crucial that military and industrial operations heavily depended on it.

After the withdrawal of the Soviet military from Afghanistan, the Taliban formed an Islamic government. Osama Bin Laden – a Saudi citizen – was instrumental in fighting the Soviet army. As the son of a rich and influential citizen in Saudi Arabia, Osama contributed substantial financial resources to the Afghanistan war that lasted for ten years. He later formed Al-Qaeda, which was said to be a terrorist movement determined to liberate the Muslim land from Western influence. On 11 September 2001, 4 aeroplanes were hijacked by, allegedly, the Al-Qaeda. Two were flown to the Twin Towers housing the World Trade Centre, one flown to the Pentagon and the other to Pennsylvania. As a result, more than 5000 people lost their lives, and critical government infrastructures were destroyed.

The US was quick to blame Osama’s Al-Qaeda for the tragic 9/11 event. The US President George Bush soon declared war on terror. The war was first on Afghanistan, which led to the overthrow of the Taliban government. After that, the American forces established a democratic government with its foundation in and allegiance to American imperialism. However, after 20 years of occupation, the Taliban expediently returned to power when the US forces willingly decided to withdraw from Afghanistan.

From the foregoing, three lessons can be learned. One, Afghans have a genetic history of resistance to foreign domination. Second, Afghanistan is a strategic country that played an important part in the Great Game power struggles for centuries. Finally, it is evident from the above that Afghanistan’s series of invasions was no end in itself, but a means to an end. Put it more succinctly, Afghanistan is a gateway for foreign powers. Its invasion would allow the superpowers to dominate the Asian continent, including the oil-rich Arab world. Overall, Afghanistan, despite its myriad of aggression by foreign superpowers, is still in existence. It survives!

Aminu Rabiu Kano is a political and public affairs analyst. He can be reached via 08062669232.

By Ahmadu Shehu, PhD.

It is no longer debatable that Nigeria, despite its crippling challenges, may never disintegrate, at least geographically. Of course, the animosities, hatred and distrust between the ethnic and regional nationalities might worsen, but Nigeria’s elasticity is exemplary and uncommon. However, I still do not accept the convenient folktale deployed by politicians that our country’s unity is non-negotiable. By now, our experience as a nation should have liberated our minds to begin a conversation on any topic of national interest, no matter the controversy or emotional delicacy.

As we approach the 61^st birthday of our beloved country, I find it imperative to discuss this controversial but important issue. From the outset, let me clarify that this article is not about the Igbo as an ethnic group or the southeast as a region. Given the rise in pro-Biafra sentiments and agitations at the moment, this article is only meant to provide an outsider view of some arguments espoused by the secessionists in their attempt to generate sympathy and popularity.

When you think of Nigeria’s disintegration, the first thing that comes to mind is Biafra – a defunct Igbo separatist nation in the country’s southeastern part. The attempt to curve this region from Nigeria in 1967 remains one of the most gruelling experiences of our country. A barely six-year-old nation was thrown into chaos by a set of greedy politicians and unscrupulous military officers who wanted power at the centre. Within those thirty months, millions of innocent citizens lost their lives, got injured or lost their possessions. In addition, Nigeria lost a large chunk of its national treasury meant to set the country on the right footing. The rest, as they say, is history.

Instead of learning from our past mistakes to avoid the recurrence of this destructive, reckless and unnecessary event, Nigerians of this generation seem to be oblivious of the necessary truth. As with most factual historical events in the Nigerian psyche, this painful experience, its true causes, and damning consequences are not well-known to the younger generations. The biased narratives in various country sections ensure that our population only hear the stories that suit their mindsets without alternative facts that would open their minds to self-criticism.

In the case of Biafra, most of the young Igbo folks have a pretty false image of their fate as a people if Biafra had happened. This skewed imagination is not unconnected with the biased, often imaginative stories these young Nigerians were told about their defunct “nation”. The Igbo popular culture and the intelligentsia depict a fictional image of Biafra as a dream-nation where the Igbos shall live in peace and prosperity devoid of challenges.

They imagine, albeit naively, that Biafra will be unlike Nigeria and that their lot would have been better than it is today. These unsuspecting chaps are led into believing a mirage of living in a nation flowing with honey and milk. They are also told that other ethnic and geopolitical sections of Nigeria are responsible for all their woes. They argue, albeit ignorantly, that if not for the North, the West, Hausa, Fulani, Yoruba, etc., theirs would have been a heaven on earth. These ignorant tales conclude that a united Nigeria does not help their course as a people.

Well, I think that these views are simplistic. I also believe that it is our responsibility to tell our brethren the truth that they need to hear. Firstly, the creation, proclamation of Biafra was not in the interest of the ordinary Igbo people. It was the last-ditch by Igbo politicians to hide their faces from problems they caused and ensure they stayed in power. Secondly, our brethren are mischievously told that the Igbo were so rich that the Igboland was the largest economic contributor to the federation. Unfortunately, the falsity of this assertion is not far-fetched, as the southeast was and is still the least contributor to the Nigerian GDP. Moreover, during the attempted secession, Nigeria’s GDP was mainly from the agricultural sector, predominantly from the North.

Thirdly, it seems that many people are misled into believing that Biafra would be an oil-rich country even though none of the Southeastern states is truly oil-producing. The Niger Delta, Nigeria’s oil pot, was not and will never be part of Biafra.

Fourthly, young Igbo people tend to believe that the southeast was Nigeria’s cash-cow at independence. The bitter truth is that even in the ’60s, the perceived strong Igbo economy depended entirely on other regions. This scenario is worse today as there are probably more Igbo people and Igbo businesses in other parts of the country than in Igboland. Worse still, the Igboland is closed and unfriendly to Nigerians, making external investments impossible.

The most supposedly intelligent argument advanced by the secessionists hinges on the current centralized federal system. They claim that the centre is too powerful and that Igbo states are marginalized. This is an argument of convenience, at best. Nigerians are not oblivious that the current unitary system was the handwork of Igbo politicians who saw a unitary arrangement as the answer to their political agenda. Today, the tides have turned, and these very people are calling for the system they abolished. Restructuring this country – whatever that means – might be a good idea, but only after a genuine debate that will ensure we do not return to the same vicious circle.

People with secessionist tendencies have used the challenges in northern Nigeria as reasons for disintegration. However, Biafra will by no means be a safer or better place. Currently, some of the most terrible crimes bedevilling this country are not unconnected with the southeast. From drugs to internet fraud, armed robbery and kidnapping to arms smuggling, if not worse, the southeast is not holier than other parts of this country.

Another commonplace argument is that the industrious nature of the Igbo people is enough evidence that Biafra will be a great country. But this argument, too, has failed to account for the fact that the wealthiest and most successful Igbo people and their businesses owe their success significantly to Nigeria and not Igboland. The Igbo people are traders, and the economic success of trading lies in the customer market, not the number of sellers. What do the Igbo people actually produce or sell that does not rely on the larger Nigerian population?

On the one hand, there is nothing that the southeast offers that cannot be produced or sold by other Nigerians. But, on the other hand, everything from food to livestock, energy, and the market for everything sold depend on the other regions. The southeast is asking to leave under this situation is the most absurd strategic blunder of the century.

Similarly, Igbo politicians and administrators have not distinguished themselves from the rotten Nigerian public servants. We do not see a difference between southeastern institutions or southeasterners in Nigerian public offices and their counterparts in other regions or ethnic groups. The same crop of people will lead Biafra. So, nobody should be enthusiastic.

Therefore, it is evident from the preceding that the viability of Biafra as an independent state is not assured. For one, it will be a landlocked, forty-one thousand kilometres square piece of land, which is just a half of Niger state and less than the size of Kaduna state. Worse still, it will be circled on all four corners by its biggest adversary, the Nigerian state. Secondly, it will depend on its biggest adversary for nearly everything except air, including waterways, food, and labour. Third, it would be one of the most overpopulated countries vis-à-vis its landmass and population.

The bitter truth is that these ecological, geographical, demographic and economic factors do not support the presupposition that the Igboland is better off as a separate entity than it is within the Nigerian federation. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that even if Biafra was to happen on a platter of gold, it is not going to be the rose garden these populists have configured our brothers to believe. Thus, we should all look before we leap!

Dr Ahmadu Shehu is a nomad cum herdsman, an Assistant Professor at the American University of Nigeria, Yola, and is passionate about the Nigerian project. You can reach him at ahmadsheehu@yahoo.com.