The recent threat by militant in the Niger Delta to cripple oil production in response to the trial of Nnamdi Kanu is concerning and dangerous. It is not only disturbing but also unreasonable and reckless. The demand for the unconditional release of Kanu without undergoing due process undermines the rule of law and sets a dangerous precedent for future cases.
By Abdul-Azeez Suleiman
Nigeria is economically dependent on oil production, and any disruption in this sector can have far-reaching consequences for the livelihoods of the country. Threatening to sabotage oil production as a means to achieve political goals is not only irresponsible but also shows a lack of consideration for the stability of the country.
Furthermore, the threat made by these militant groups only serves to escalate the already tense situation in the country. The government’s handling of the Kanu case is a matter of legal jurisdiction, and any attempts to pressure or intimidate the authorities into releasing him would only lead to further division and chaos in the country.
Respecting the legal process and allowing the courts to determine the outcome of the case should be the preferred approach to address grievances, rather than resorting to threats and acts of violence that only serve to worsen the situation.
The Igbo’s history of opposition to Nigeria’s unity dates back to the events of January 15, 1966, when their army officers staged a mutiny that resulted in the assassination of prominent figures in the Nigerian government. This marked a turning point in Nigeria’s political history, leading to a series of crises that culminated in the devastating civil war. The elements of ethnic bias and political ambition that fueled these events highlight the deep-rooted divisions within Nigerian society that continue to impact the nation’s unity and stability.
ALSO READ Nigeria needs consensus, national unity team to heal wounds – Pat Utomi
The unilateral actions taken by General Aguiyi-Ironsi following the 1966 mutiny further exacerbated tensions between different ethnic groups in Nigeria. Instead of returning power to the remnants of the first republic government, he consolidated power for the Igbo, leading to further suspicions and grievances among other ethnic groups. This lack of inclusivity and respect for the diversity of Nigerian society sowed the seeds of discord that eventually culminated in the civil war.
The subsequent secession of the Igbo from Nigeria and the formation of the republic of Biafra in 1967 marked a tragic chapter in Nigerian history. The civil war that ensued resulted in the loss of millions of lives and left deep scars on the nation’s psyche. The unconditional surrender of Biafran leaders in 1970 was a necessary step towards reconciliation and healing, but the wounds of the past continue to linger in the hearts and minds of many Nigerians.
The resurgence of calls for Biafra’s independence in recent years, spearheaded by groups like MASSOB and IPOB, represents a troubling trend towards separatism and division in Nigeria. The violent tactics employed by some of these groups, including the dissemination of hate speech and threats of violence, only serve to inflame tensions and undermine the country’s efforts towards peace and unity.
The involvement of international actors in the Biafran agitation, such as the UK and the US, raises concerns about external interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs. The failure of these countries to address the hate speech and violent rhetoric emanating from their territories by individuals like Nnamdi Kanu reflects a troubling disregard for the principles of non-interference and respect for sovereignty.
The principles of self-determination and respect for human rights are enshrined in international law and serve as the foundation for peaceful coexistence among nations. While the right to self-determination is a legitimate aspiration for any people, it must be pursued through peaceful and lawful means. The resort to violence and threats of secession only serve to undermine the rule of law and perpetuate conflict and division.
The need for a peaceful political process to address the grievances of aggrieved groups in Nigeria is paramount to prevent further escalation of tensions and conflict. Dialogue and negotiation are essential tools for resolving disputes and fostering understanding and reconciliation among diverse communities.
The role of leadership in promoting unity and inclusivity in Nigeria cannot be overstated. It is essential for political and opinion leaders to refrain from legitimizing violent rhetoric and hate speech that only serve to divide the country further. By promoting a culture of tolerance, respect, and dialogue, leaders can help build a more cohesive and prosperous nation that respects the rights and dignity of all its citizens.
A referendum is often viewed as the most democratic way for a people to decide their political future. In the case of the Igbo people in Nigeria, a referendum could be the best solution to address the longstanding issue of Biafra independence. For the majority of Igbo people, a referendum remains the only viable option to formally choose between remaining in Nigeria or seeking an independent Biafra. This decision is crucial not only for the Igbo people but also for the stability of the country as a whole.
ALSO READ [OPINION] Renewed Hope for Unity and Progress, by Hassan Gimba
The right of self-determination, recognized in international law, grants “people” the legal right to attain a certain degree of autonomy from a sovereign state through a legitimate political process. In this case, the Igbo people have a legitimate claim to exercise this right through a referendum. By conducting a referendum in a politically sane atmosphere, the Biafran Igbo could have a democratic voice over their future and the future of the nation as a whole.
The process of conducting a referendum should be inclusive of all Igbo people, both within Nigeria and in the Diaspora. This would ensure that all voices are heard and represented in the process. Converging in their region in the South-East for a plebiscite would allow for a direct and transparent vote on whether to remain with Nigeria or pursue an independent Biafra. Additionally, the supervision of the United Nations and other regional bodies would add credibility and legitimacy to the process.
Ultimately, the Nigerian authorities must respect the outcome of the referendum and implement whatever decision is agreed upon. This would not only put the recurring Biafran question to rest but also ensure that the future stability of the country is maintained. By allowing the Igbo people to have a say in their future through a referendum, the Nigerian government can demonstrate a commitment to democratic principles and respect for the rights of minority groups.
In conclusion, a referendum remains a crucial and necessary step for the Igbo people to determine their political future. By recognizing the right of self-determination and conducting a referendum in a fair and transparent manner, the Igbo people can have a democratic voice over their future. The implementation of the referendum’s outcome by the Nigerian authorities would not only put the Biafran question to rest but also contribute to the long-term stability of the country. It is time for all stakeholders to come together and support the Igbo people in their pursuit of self-determination through a referendum.
