The Igbo nation has a vibrant and resourceful population of 50 million (about twice the
population of Texas). Within this teeming population there is a sufficiently developed bank of
human resources capital living in a physical geographical space known as Igbo land. Igbo people
have an unmistakable unique identity, a well-developed set of national cultural values and
clearly defined and distinct worldviews. Overall, the Igbo nation has everything it takes to exist
and manage their affairs independently of other people. So, the Igbo are prepared to take their
own fate in their hands and will not for any reason continue to play any second fiddle or remain
subservient to any other group of people. Therefore, Igbo people are out to do everything in
their power to achieve Igbo self-determination, regional autonomy and political independence
from Nigeria.
On the 29th of May 1966, the Igbo renounced their Nigerian citizenship forever. Starting from
that fateful day the Igbo determined to reclaim and reassume their national sovereignty and
political independence outside Nigeria. That day marked the beginning of the Nigerian state’s
pogrom of the Igbo and other ethnic nationalities from the former Eastern Region. The aim and
scope of the pogrom was the total extermination of all Igbo from Nigeria. This made the Igbo
along with these other affected peoples and Igbo neighbors to secede from Nigeria as the
Republic of Biafra. On the 30th of May 1967, the Biafrans unilaterally declared the
independence of their region from Nigeria. After the declaration of independence, the Nigerian
state declared war on the new country on 6th July 1967. The war between the two states lasted
till the 15th of January 1970. In the end Biafra was defeated. The Igbo got reabsorbed into
Nigeria. But many systemic policies were put in place by the Nigerian state to marginalize and
further punish the Igbo for attempting to secede.
After the war despite the many oppressive state policies, threats, intimidations, and actual
killings of the Igbo, they still refused to be deterred and continued clandestinely the struggle for
a total and absolute secession and independence of Igbo land from Nigeria. But unlike the 1967
to 1970 struggle for Biafra independence, the new and ongoing struggle to free Igbo from
Nigeria is exclusively an Igbo initiative and project which does not involve any of their
neighboring ethnic nationalities or their lands. The extent of this Igbo state covers all and only
Igbo lands as they were before the advent of the European colonialists who amalgamated the
different ethnic nationalities with divergent and irreconcilable cultures, worldviews, and lands
into a dysfunctional unitary Nigerian country. In this new struggle for Igbo independence, the
exceptional circumstances that necessitated the joint multi-ethnic independent project in the
past are not present. Therefore, this new Igbo state is not Biafra and cannot justifiably be called
Biafra because it has no resemblance to the former joint multi-ethnic struggle for an
independent state in the 1960s.
This new agitation for Igbo independence that began in 1970 soon after the Biafra War is
fundamentally different from the 1967 to 1970 Biafra war for independence. The 1960s
struggle is what I generally refer to as Ojukwu’s Biafra. In this new struggle it is simply and
unambiguously the struggle for the creation of a modern and exclusive Igbo-only autonomous/
independent state. This fundamental difference between the old and the new struggles cannot
be overemphasized, and no one needs to misunderstand it.
This difference should be understood in the light that it is typically said that every generation
fights their own battle in their own unique way based on their unique circumstances. What
drove the former and what is driving the present movements are different. In the 1960s
starting from May 29, 1966, the systemic countrywide mass killing of the Igbo and the
destruction of their properties began and it was geared towards cleansing out the ethnic Igbo
from the Nigerian space. This was what produced the declaration of Biafra independence.
Starting from 29th May 1966 these government backed killings of the Igbo continued
throughout Nigeria for one year despite all efforts by the Igbo to reconcile and make peace with
Nigeria. After one year of unabated killings and destruction of Igbo properties and, with the
death toll of over 100,000 Igbo and the other Easterners who were the victims jointly decided
to secede from Nigeria. So, they unilaterally declared independence from Nigeria as the
Republic of Biafra. For them Biafra was their best move to protect and preserve the lives and
properties of all those within the boundaries of the new state. To prove their determined
resolve to defend themselves and their land they fought a bitter war for about three years
which ended up costing the Igbo a total of 3.1 million lives in addition to the 400,000 deaths of
the other Biafrans.
Contrasting the 1960s Secession Effort with 2020 Effort
The 1960s effort to free Igbo from Nigeria was mostly necessitated by Nigeria’s pogrom against
the Igbo and the other easterners. This is not the same with today’s Igbo’s decision to seek
autonomy/ a better deal in Nigeria. In this 2020 and as it has been since the end of the war in
1970 Igbo are not fighting to free themselves from Nigeria entirely because of the ongoing
injustices and killings against them. Since the end of the war the Igbo have endured in Nigeria
many oppressive marginalizing polices and systemic denial of opportunities and without doubt,
these unjust and wicked treatments have been bad enough. But today’s Igbo decision to leave
Nigeria is based on the simple reason that they do not wish to remain Nigerians anymore. They
would instead be Igbo. As a people they would rather exist and live under their own Igbo
identity and manage their own affairs within an autonomous Igbo nation state within or outside
Nigeria.
As we already noted, Ojukwu’s Biafra was created along the boundary lines of the defunct
Eastern Region which he presided over as the governor prior to Biafra declaration of
independence. The irony of it is that Eastern Region of Nigeria split up Igbo population in two
with one on the east and the other half on west banks of the Niger River. This split the Igbo
resulted in the Western not being included in Ojukwu’s Biafra map. That exclusion of course is
unacceptable to the Igbo. The Eastern Region was created that way by the British colonialists.
They were obviously insensitive to the ugly divisive consequences of splitting up brothers so
long as it suited their business convenience and interests. The boundaries of the Eastern Region
were established to serve the business and economic interests of the foreign colonialists rather
than to work in the political and economic interests of the indigenous peoples.
After considering the circumstances surrounding the creation of the former Eastern Region
along whose boundaries were based Ojukwu’s Biafra, the Igbo totally rejected to adopt the
defunct Biafra’s map for the new Igbo nation state. Among the obvious reasons the Igbo give
for rejecting the old Biafra map is that the borders were established by the same foreigners
who created Nigeria. Over the year’s most analysts of the reasons for Nigeria’s failure as a
nation have come to the consensus that the Nigerian experiment failed principally because the
foreigners who created the Nigerian state failed to take into consideration the irreconcilable
differences that exist among the various ethnic peoples and cultures who were forced to live
together as citizens of the same country. Unfortunately, it is noticeably clear that the same
factors that orchestrated Nigeria’s failure are present within the borders of the defunct Biafra.
Ojukwu’s Biafra boundaries split Igbo people and their land and this is unacceptable and will
not apply to the new Igbo nation state.
Igbo and Biafra are not One and the Same
Prior to 1967 Igbo people were never known as Biafrans. At no other time in history except for
the brief period of two and half years (May 30, 1967, to January 15, 1970) were Igbo people
ever identified as Biafrans. Yet, since the past five decades after the war there has been this
prevalent misconception which has left some people confused. Since after the war, some
people have tended to use Igbo and Biafra identities interchangeably when referencing the
Igbo. This is wrong. The truth is that Igbo people along with other ethnic nationalities used the
name Biafra and its identity to fight a war known as Biafra War from 1967 to 1970. Biafra War
was fought by the Igbo and others from the former Eastern Region as a joint effort to free their
people and lands and gain independence from Nigeria. Unfortunately, the Biafran project failed
as the war ended in the defeat of Biafra.
At the war’s end Igbo people then reverted to their original Igbo national identity and ceased
being Biafrans. But out of ignorance despite the passage of many years some people continue
to send out mixed messages to observers about who the Igbo are and what their collective
national goal is. For the sake of clarity, it is important that we emphasis here that Igbo people
are no longer Biafrans, but Igbo and their goal is to establish an autonomous modern Igbo
nation state within or outside Nigeria.
Frustratingly however, one can still find a pocket of ignorant individuals who despite this clear
and unclouded known difference between Igbo and Biafran identities still use the words Igbo
and Biafra as if they were interchangeable or are the same thing. They are not.
Igbo is a nation or the national identity of the ethnic Igbo people. The land they occupy is called
Igbo land, the people are known and called Igbo, the culture they practice is Igbo culture and
their language is Igbo.
The Igbo are a national people that fit perfectly the current United Nations categorization and
definition of who national peoples are. And it is based on that definition that they declared in
their charter that any such group of people are legitimately and legally entitled to actively seek
for their self-determination and can aspire to be independent of all others and exist and thrive
on their own terms as a unique cultural and national group or state.
Most importantly, we need to state here that since the end of the war no one has been given
any Igbo mandate to re-impose the Biafran identity on the Igbo nation; the people and their
land. In 1967 the Igbo and their neighbors adopted Biafra as a collective identity on an ad hoc
and temporary basis. They adopted the Biafran banner and identity to defend themselves
against a common enemy. Beyond 1970 no one is authorized to continue to refer to Igbo as
Biafrans or their land as Biafra land. It is important to clearly state that Igbo’s abandonment of
the Biafran identity after 1970 does not mean that the Igbo at any time abandoned their quest
for self-determination, autonomy and perhaps independence from Nigeria. The Igbo are still
seeking to restore and reestablish their sovereign and political independence under Igbo
banner and identity instead of under the Biafran banner and identity.
Biafra is also a Foreign Nomenclature
One significant reason that some people who support the dissolution of the Nigerian union give
is that the name Nigeria is foreign to the local people. They assert that Nigeria as a country was
put together and christened Nigeria by foreigners. Yet these same people who oppose the use
of Nigeria’s nomenclature are still infatuated and hooked on Biafra as the name for their
proposed fantasy country. Such people overlook the fact that Biafra too is as foreign as any
foreign names can be. Some of them have argued and defended the name Biafra by imputing
strange and ridiculous local or Igbo meanings to the word to convince people that it is
indigenous. Some of the people can speculate and argue as much as they like but that does not
change the fact that the name Biafra has a European origin. The bight was christened so by the
Portuguese pioneer explorers who were the first to visit the West African coastal waters before
the other Europeans.
The first Europeans who encountered the coast dwellers of the Atlantic in West Africa were
from Portugal in the 15th and 16th centuries. Initially the interactions between the Europeans
and the natives were solely commercial. So, to aid them in their navigation and trade routes the
Europeans made the map of the territory for their convenience and gave it the name Biafra that
it bore except that the Nigerian government changed it to Bight of Benin after the war in their
bid to spite the former Biafrans.
Justifying the Igbo regional autonomy Project
Igbo as a people are unique and clearly identifiable with their own unique set of culture,
language, a set of unified customs and norms and a specific physical geographical space. They,
therefore, can justifiably seek to determine themselves or who they are. They do not need to
offer any other qualifications or reasons as a basis for them to seek to be independent and
autonomously manage their own affairs without any input or interference from any other
people. But because it is true, the Igbo can still make references to the issues of unjust systemic
mistreatments, marginalization, killings, and other such injustices to which they are subjected
in Nigeria. But those do not form the most important argument that the Igbo present for their
independence. Those unjust conditions and mistreatments can change but the Igbo persona
and identity does not change. So, the Igbo are campaigning for their self-determination and
independence based on who they are and not based on the adverse things that are happening
to them in Nigeria. The Igbo project to gain autonomy and control themselves within Nigeria
and perhaps become independent is grounded on the people’s collective wish to be free and
live autonomously based on who they are. It is people’s deliberate conscious effort that does
not depend on the vagaries of fortune or the flimsy and fleeting circumstances of human whims
or even the caprices of nature. The decision is immutable and continues to endure until the
goal is achieved.
Easily and without doubt the singular most important argument that any group of people can
present for wanting to be free, autonomous and independent from others is their desire to
preserve their identity and their way of life as a people. And this is what the Igbo are working to
achieve. We understand it may be harder to sustain for a long time when arguing for freedom
merely based on temporary unjust and unfavorable conditions the people are subjected to.
Such argument might be countered easily by some clever and cunny individuals who deal well
in sophistry, half-truths and less than honest rhetoric. Such individuals might produce the
insincere argument that others within the same space are going through the same pain and
injustice and as such the Igbo have no sufficient excuse to opt out or seek a change of the
status quo. Additionally, if Igbo’s argument is based mainly or solely on such ephemeral issues a
day might come when any astute politician could emerge in Nigeria and decide to take on those
challenges and injustices that Igbo are complaining about. Such effort pretentious or genuine, it
does not matter but it might help to weaken Igbo argument and make it harder to win the
argument for Igbo autonomy, self-determination and independence. On the contrary, the Igbo
will always have a valid argument if their need for autonomy and independence is always based
on the idea of their desire to preserve their Igbo unique and separate identity. Fundamentally
the Igbo can and do have the right to seek, autonomy, independence and self-determination
just for the sake of it and without giving any other reason other than that they are Igbo and a
part of humanity.
Igbo Nation State is not Biafra State
For those who are clamoring for a new fantastic state of Biafra on the basis that Nigeria is a
foreign creation and therefore a fictitiously forced-on identity should also not overlook the fact
that the same applies to Biafra. Some people argue, and rightly so that Nigeria was created for
the natives, without their consent, by the British colonialists and, for this reason it is
unacceptable to the people who are going through the pain of the consequences of that
miscreation. Others also believe that Nigeria failed mostly because different peoples with
different and conflicting cultures, languages and world views were forced to share the same
Nigerian citizenship. They assert that ever from inception these incongruent ethnic and national
interests have continued to clash against each other. Undoubtedly, it is true because these
factors are responsible for the dysfunctional state of things in Nigeria and its ultimate failure.
Yet it boggles the imagination to see some of these same people fail to understand that in the
Biafra they are fighting to reestablish lies the same Nigerian failure-factors. Such individuals
continue to ignore the fact that the so-called defunct Eastern Region on whose map the old
Biafra was based was also the creation of the same British colonialists. If they have rejected
Nigeria as they rightly should then they should also reject the old Eastern Region. It was created
by the same British colonialists. What is more is that the same factors of diversities of peoples,
cultures, languages, and interests that brought about Nigeria’s failure, are clearly present in the
so-called old and proposed new Biafra. If Nigeria as it is presently configured failed based on
the enumerated reasons, what then is the guarantee that this new utopian Biafra will not fail.
An Igbo State by the Igbo and for the Igbo
There is nothing that is stopping the present generation of Igbo from founding a new modern
Igbo nation (country or state) for the Igbo and by the Igbo without any foreign input. We
believe that there is no excuse for this generation of Igbo to lazily choose to fashion this new
country like an existing foreign concept and cartography. This generation of Igbo must reject
the temptation of choosing the uncomplicated way out or traveling the path of least resistance
all because they do not want to put in some extra work and “think outside the box” of an
existing foreign concept. In this new autonomy/ independence project, everything must be
made new. The Igbo must draw a fresh new map of Igbo Nation by Igbo and for the Igbo. We
should roll up our sleeves and go to work to produce an authentic Igbo map that will serve this
generation and many more to come.
In some quarters some presumptuous and misguided Igbo nurse the ridiculous dream of one
day inventing what they refer to as a “United States of Biafra.” They believe that the Igbo will
sometime in the future after autonomy or independence go into a confederating alliance with
the other neighboring ethnic nationalities through a memorandum of understanding. It is as
clear as daylight and no one needs any soothsayer to see that this is presumptuously reckless as
it will only become a hopeless “Disunited States of Biafra,” an epitome of a house of cards.
Except by name such creation will not be anything quite different from the extant Nigeria. What
is amazing though is that one would have thought that after the disastrous experience of the
united Nigerian nightmare that some advocates for this new Biafra would have learned some
lessons. It is expected that by now a long time has passed, enough for such reckless dreamers
to reflect and avoid everything with the shape and appearances of Nigeria in Igbo quest for
autonomy and independence.
The Igbo do not have to copy what other people have done elsewhere to be accepted in the
comity of nations. Therefore, it’s not going to be because there is the United States of America,
the United Kingdom of Great Britain so, the Igbo must create a “United States of Biafra” just to
prove anything. U. K.’s lesson should be enough to warn those who harbor such impractical
fantasy to desist from committing such foolish and sentimental mistakes. In the case of Britain,
after 300 years of being together the union is crumbling, as everyone can see. The various
components of the realm are opting out. Igbo therefore at this point must not fall into a similar
mistake. In their effort to find a new modern Igbo state they can take a lesson from the British
experience and choose to get it right from the beginning. Every Igbo everywhere can and must
choose to reject the fictitious Biafran identity in favor of their Igbo identity.
Sentiments and Compromises do not build great and lasting structures
There is not any successful and progressive state that is founded and built up on sentiments. A
successful Igbo state is only that which is founded and built on Igbo ideas, cultural values, and
worldviews and not that which is sustained by borrowed or compromised ideas and cultural
values. Igbo’s collective goal at this point should be to find a functional and successful society
rather than trying too hard to appear “woke” and look pretty as a fanciful “multicultural”
borderless and dysfunctional society.
In the many years of my search, I am yet to come across any convincing argument on how the
Igbo persona will diminish if they choose to find and run an exclusive Igbo-only nation state. Of
course, such Igbo-ideology or Igbo-worldview-based country will not in any way be closed to
other people who are willing to get assimilated and become Igbo citizens through a standard
formal procedure. In the meanwhile, some of us have wondered without end what it is that
drives some Igbo to sometimes jettison their Igboness readily and willingly or at best
compromise and dilute it at the drop of a hat. The question is; what is there for anyone to be
ashamed of in a unique Igbo identity. Why should anyone have to compromise their Igboness
to prove to others that the Igbo are also a part of this universe and should rightfully hold their
own uniqueness in it. At this point, the importance of self-acceptance and pride in who the Igbo
are cannot be over emphasized. There can never come a time when it will become a virtue to
debase oneself to prove to the other people any point.
It will be an unforgivable collective amnesia if Igbo people can find it easy to forget the fact
which is still very fresh in the people’s mind how self-hurting compromises contributed so much
to causing the failure of Azikiwe’s Nigeria. Someone once said that compromises make for good
umbrellas but not good as roofs. In the light of this discussion, nothing could be truer. The Igbo
should learn to always think in long terms when Igbo national interests are the concern. An Igbo
should always ask how the decision will I make or the thing that I do affect Igbo individuals or
Igbo collective in the next twenty or fifty years.
Attaching Igbo’s destiny to those of others will always spell disaster. The Igbo must learn how
to believe in themselves and find peace in themselves, enough to always rely in their collective
inner strength. When entering any alliance either as individuals or as Igbo collective all Igbo
persons must always consider what will be the effects of those agreements in the lives of the
living and unborn generations of Igbo. No Igbo should ever decide or act in a way that will
knowingly hurt Igbo interests or individuals. Every Igbo is his brother’s keeper, onye ahana
nwanne ya. The Igbo do not have to sell themselves cheap, throw away their identity and tell
the others that there is nothing else to the Igbo. No, there is. There is “this” Igbo uniqueness.
This Igbo uniqueness is not in any way better than those of others. But it is theirs; and all Igbo
must endeavor to cherish and guard this Igboness from dishonor either from within or from
without. Some of us may have come across those who argue for a compromised Igbo state on
the premise that the Igbo and some of their neighboring ethnic nationalities are intricately
connected because they have lived in proximity for so long and for that reason, they have a few
things in common. They talk about intermarriages and even in some cases they cite instances of
common ancestral connections. That point of course is an emotional argument suffused with
sentiments. Remember we had argued earlier that sentiments are not sufficient when the goal
is to accomplish any meaningful thing in real life social engineering. In real life situations, no
matter how closely related we are, a time will come when for the sake of adventure and
expansion of human horizon, all responsible parents must cut loose the tie and free their lovely
children to go their separate ways. It is nothing different from the birthing process of a child.
No mother leaves the umbilical cord attached to the child after birthing to prove that the child
was born by them. Unfortunately, this is what the purveyors of the neighbor-connectedness
argument are trying to do. They pretend to forget that even children who were born to the
same parents eventually move away to find their unique, independent, and separate family
staid (obi.) And once these separations and independence begin to take place, it is only a
matter of time that all the traces of close consanguinity begin to fade away and prove harder to
establish. Yet, and very fortunately so, no matter how faded this relatedness becomes there
will never come a time when that inter connectedness of all humanity will be lost entirely. The
true story of our collective humanity has always shown that no matter how long or how far
apart we drift from each other that unbreakable brotherly link that connects humans in one big
family of our common humanity and brotherhood will still endure. Yet, despite this human
connectedness and, for the sake of variety and the constant need to continually open new
frontiers for humanity, we cannot stop this inevitable human separating experience.
*Osita Ebiem is a rights activist. He is an independent scholar and an advocate for Igbo selfdetermination and independence.
