Wow, I couldn't help but notice that there was a huge lag in actually trying to provide solutions. What I'm about to suggest could perhaps be applied to the greater Nigeria, and benefit it as well as Igboland. Hopefully, it wouldn't have to equate to Nigeria splitting up (but should it be, then I support it as well). So here I go:

Much of the problems of poverty and unemployment in Nigeria clearly stems from the gross levels of misappropriation of public revenues on part of officials within the government. In fact, corruption appears to have manifested itself on a massive level within Nigeria’s political scheme, whether it’d be on the Federal, state, or local levels of government. Needless to say, this sheer level of corruption that is present within the administration has equated to the virtual crippling of the nation’s economic development; that is, ever since her independence from Britain the only figures that seem to have risen in terms of Nigeria’s history of development seems to have stemmed from only its population surge as well as its oil output. Yet after almost fifty years of sovereignty, no serious level of massive economic development has been experienced nor benefited by the populace at large. In essence, Nigeria’s political and economic schemes can be described as that of despotic corporatocracy (or ‘Corpocracy’ as referred by some), in which government and corporations are fundamentally inseparable due to the ties that exists between the two entities on an exceedingly pervasive level.

That said, one is left with a picture that seems bleak at first glance. The entire image appears to be that of a highly dysfunctional government that is mired in nothing but corrupt politicians with an insatiable appetite for wealth and power maximization. While that may be true to extent, it helps to rid the notion of tribalism, and indicates elements such as ethnic, religious, as well as linguistic divisions. That said, I would like to offer a possible remedy for such a conundrum. States tend to function better economically (and eventually politically) when the population has a firmly rooted commonality; more so, states tend to operate better should the population be homogenous or derive from closely related cultures. In the cases of China, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan for example (the largely hailed ‘Asian Tigers’), one major factor to their success was due to the fact that the people shared a common identity, a common principle, and therefore; a common objective. This factor can be attributed to their levels of efficiency, society, and economic prowess. That said I propose that the three roughly cut regions based on ethnic and religious lines, push for the restructuring of the federal government to be that of a confederacy as opposed to a federal republic. My reason being is that parties living within a State and are forced to do so will put up opposition due to the fact that they already have a developed sense of their national identity, particularly along ethnic lines. It is also to my belief that the three regions should be divided along those lines taking into consideration the sub-groups that exist within those given populaces.

It should then be the responsibility of those three polities to establish a political scheme that benefits all the groups residing in those regions and would otherwise be considered culturally related (though distinct). Secondly, it should be the objective of those polities to create a political scheme that will establish the three polities on an equal level of power as opposed to a hierarchy; much like that of Switzerland’s political-linguistic scheme. Thirdly, the polities must push for the move in establishing prowess in particular industries. In other words, they should divide their specialties in the economic spectrum of Nigeria. Since South Western Nigeria is currently home to the economic base of the nation, I posit that the Southwestern region should maximize her capabilities in the financial services, telecommunications industry, as well as the trading sector (i.e exploiting the capabilities of Lagos port). As for the southeastern region of Nigeria, I propose that they push for the development within the agricultural sector. I also propose that they establish an industry based on the extraction and production of oil, as well as the establishment of a manufacturing industry (particularly textiles and shipbuilding). For the Northern region of Nigeria, I propose that an industry be established based on the refinement of the oil extracted and produced from the Southeastern region. I also propose for the establishment of the transportation industry of the nation be centered in the north due to the fact that the north is in need of positions that will enable the populace to have steady employment (particularly in Aerospace, manufacturing buses, trains, etc.) As well as food and chemical processing.

That said, what I am attempting to offer is for there to be the establishing of a system that would enable for all the nations of Nigeria (beyond that of the ‘De Facto’ divisions) to equally benefit from. The cultural and perhaps linguistic commonalities (unlike the homogeneity of the East-Asian countries) within the polities would hopefully enable for there to be a more equal distribution of resources and power. Just as how in Switzerland there is the equal division in power and representation according to linguistic differences; in that the Swiss-French don’t get more representation than the Swiss-Germans, or the fact that Swiss-Italians don’t receive more resources than the Swiss-Romansch. By creating a platform of mutualism in regards to the relations of the polities, it could enable for there to be a system of peer-relations as opposed to one that is hierarchical and exploitative. Through the adoption of a system that promotes mutualism, I personally believe that it would be the one essential root of foundation for the nation; to find commonality along the notion that the nation will work to contribute towards the economic development of the Republic of Nigeria. This, is a notion that is essential to the survival of the Nigerian government as a whole; and its perhaps one that can be used to legitimize its existence as a state amongst its population.

As Far as how Igboland can start to salvage itself economically, there needs to be massive accommodations and subsidization for Igbo companies in Igboland states. There also needs to be a massive push on part of the Igboland state government alongside with Igbo companies that would encourage Igbos citizens to invest in. Should Igboland establish herself economically, she could eventually create a strong appeal towards Abuja to grant her autonomy to the degree that she may have her own separate economy and even her own currency. In other words, Igboland can very much so enjoy a high degree of autonomy like that of China's Hong Kong and Macau so long as the state governments strategically and stringently prioritize and sufficiently allocate funds towards the aforementioned sectors in my previous post.

However, I wouldn't dare to count on the state governments to be capable of properly distributing expenditures, which is why it is crucial that the state governments form a coalition (an infant unified government) and establish a committee comprised of local constituents holding essential roles and occupations in the region (ie. farmers, teachers, laborers, Etc.), an Ombudsman if you will. The committee will monitor all government transactions and will have no political ties to the government (ie. political parties don't have sway and legislators don't have stakes in the ombudsman). In essence, it would be the people's alternative to the judiciary Branch; which is always at high risk of being manipulated by the federal power. Even so, as the West Indians would a say; "I wouldn't rely on those politicians to fart on cotton and hand it to me to smell". The crooked quacks in the governments of the Igbo states are nothing more than mindless puppets of Abuja that need to be discounted overtly by the Igbo people. It's more than likely that they would be incapable of prioritizing the funds in reality.