WHY NDI IGBO MUST IGNORE NNAMDI KANU AND IPOB

WHY NDI IGBO MUST IGNORE NNAMDI KANU AND IPOB

Political tensions in Nigeria have reached fever pitch. Nnamdi Kanu is notoriously more popular than incumbent president Buhari for championing Biafra’s independence from Nigeria through hate speech and violence.

 

While his support base continues to grow in numbers, it is instructive to note the following about independence movements and the correct procedure for actualizing statehood in the 21st century. While the United Nations charter maintains that people have a right to self-determination, the process of calling upon that doctrine as a right is not a 100% bet to actualize that ambition. 

The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization tasked to promote international co-operation and to create and maintain international order.  The United Nations does not rule or govern the world as many Nigerians imagine. Its role is primarily to promote peace and where necessary act as mediator to resolve conflicts. The charter of the United Nations has never been interpreted to be superior to local legislations that govern sovereign nations.

For a secession to take place correctly, the host (mother) nation must grant the seceding nation independence.  Where this is not done, the seceding nation would not be recognized by the same United Nations that provides for rights to self-determination in its charter. Without a valid UN recognition, that nation would exist only with itself and the few other sympathizing nations that recognize it.  Indeed, it is pertinent to note that the UN General Assembly in 1970 stated: “The right of self-determination, cannot, as a general principle, be construed as “authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States. . . .”

 

Nigeria is a sovereign, independent nation, a member of the UN, African Union, Common Wealth of Nations, ECOWAS and NATO. This means that none of these bodies would recognize any forced breakaway from Nigeria. So what is the way forward for Biafra and its agitators?

First, the hate speech must stop as well as all forms of harassment and violence. This is not only instructive but necessary. The hate speech is counter-productive as it will only create ethnic tensions leading to civil unrest or war in the country at large or the daughter nation’s territory.

Next, the agitators need to organize themselves into a proper political movement within the Nigerian framework. Setting up a political party would be the smart move and then sponsor candidates to vie for elective positions in Nigeria’s National Assembly.

The agenda of these elected representatives and senators would be to create a clause for breakaway within Nigeria’s constitution. This is not impossible but a daunting task. After that is actualized the next is to demand for a referendum and a campaign to secure at least 60% of the votes. Interestingly, it does not end there.

I’m keeping the next phase as simple as possible as the language can get pretty complicated. Next the people of Biafra must elect leadership to handle the next phase of independence which includes the following:

Foreign Reserve Share: The two nations must enter a conversation to discuss in what ratio the foreign reserves of the previous nation would be distributed and how. This becomes necessary as the daughter nation contributed somewhat to this foreign reserve and as such cannot exit without some of this foreign asset.

Foreign Debt Distribution: Much similar to the point above, foreign debts must also be passed on to the daughter nation. This must be discussed and agreed to prior to full independence of the daughter nation.

Domestic Asset and Debt Distribution: Domestic debts must also be discussed and agreed upon prior to full independence of the nations involved as the lending institutions cannot be made to assume a bad debt. Conversely, local assets such as refineries, hospitals, public institutions and more need to be properly discussed with a view to determining the future.

Foreign Treaties and Pacts: There are several treaties, pacts and international agreements the mother nation entered into prior to the eventual independence. Some of these have binding implications on the daughter nation and some may not. These have to be discussed to ensure that both nations are properly kept abreast of these issues some of which may have far reaching implications on either or both nations.

Domestic Agreements and Licenses: Patents, licenses to telecommunication companies, transportation and television companies, etc are all issued operative licenses for several years. These licenses may become affected with some of the beneficiary companies represented to discuss implications of the secession on their operations.

Currency Change: Currency change is most likely to occur in both or either nations and this is a critical issue that needs to be ratified with both countries agreeing or at least entering a new pact for a time being. Where this is not handled correctly, some people may lose bank deposits or cash held at the time of independence. 

These are very complex negotiations that take months, leading to years to fully settle and some of which may not go down well for Biafra.

The path to independence is a long and arduous process. It is not an easy task by any stretch of the imagination. Few nations have achieved full secession or been granted independence through a quiet process and the typical case in mind is Czechoslovakia that split into Czech and Slovak republics through the Velvet Divorce. 

It is not just about setting a date for a referendum and then voting. Indeed the UN’s charter proclaiming the right of peoples to self-determination envisioned that right for colonies; not same border territories of member nations as that would amount to giving right to mob rule of ethnic militias in many places. Imagine that any gang of people could wake up one day, coerce the people into voting yes at a forced referendum and that's all it took to form a country; imagine how unstable the world would be. The UN charter on self determination does not support unseasoned movements of irredentism. It is possible that a gang led by an Nnamdi Kanu may recruit thugs who then intimidate a town into demanding for statehood from the parent country. And then left unchecked, a referendum is called, you will have 500 nations every two years and 1000 nations in the next until probably every individual is a nation for himself. That is not what the UN member nations agreed to. That is the reason secessionist or self determination movements are not so successful the world over.

Besides, the 5 permanent member states of the UN Security Council are predominantly opposed to independence movements with the exception of Russia who has been guilty of claiming parts of Georgia, Ukraine to start up new nations. The others are US, UK, China, and France. The other present members of the 15 nation Security Council are made up of nations somewhat opposed to secessionist movements at least in the past.This means that the UN is unlikely going to recognize Biafra if it pursues independence through violence or forceful means. Forceful means imply, any path not agreed to by Nigeria's parliament.

Not every country that declared itself independent has been recognized nor would they be recognized. Indeed, not every country that was forcefully taken away from another has been recognized. Ossetia, Northern Cyprus, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and Somaliland are just a few. Sahrawi and Somaliland are here in Africa.

While Nnamdi Kanu continues his hate speech narrative and gathers support, it is imperative that ndi Igbo be wary of the trappings of secessionist movements in order to progress correctly. If Nigeria refuses to grant independence to Biafra, no amount of strife, hate speech or even war would provide the much needed international recognition by the UN, AU or member nations to Biafra. This would mean limited ability to travel outside Biafra. Nations with unrecognized passports need to acquire recognized passports for international movement. Limited Immigration would spell doom for ndi Igbo who by nature are very venturesome and adventurous.

Limited International Trade: Failure to get proper UN, AU, ECOWAS and member state recognition would be a terrible blow to Biafra. International trade is made possible by having international recognition to enable local banks participate in the exchange facilitation or currency trade as well as export considerations. Where these are lacking due to lack of recognition, Biafra would be just as Ossetia, Sahrawi Republic or Somaliland.

Marginalization is unjust and must be resisted. It must not be resisted with secession but with calls for restructuring such that the reasons that gave rise to marginalization in the first place do not arise any longer.  Secession from Nigeria is realistically and futuristically speaking, not in the interest of ndi Igbo. Another piece would tackle that. But for now, we must realize that lending support to Nnamdi Kanu or IPOB and MASSOB is akin to worsening our relationship with our neigbours within the commonwealth of Nigeria and that is frankly speaking unhealthy for us, our local economy and our children. 

After all these, it is just wise for ndi Igbo, her elders and teeming youths to ignore Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB. It may seem cowardly given the momentum his rabble has raised, but discretion is the better part of valour. Odumegwu Ojukwu was truly perceptive when he said: "we may have lost the civil war, but we must not lose our place in Nigeria." The Biafra agitation is not evil, but it is too futuristic and of little economic or political advantage when realized. It would only be better for Ndi Igbo today to pursue a better future for our people within Nigeria.