www.ooduapathfinder.com
By adminadmin on December 13, 2015



We, at “ooduapathfinder” are writing you this Letter in response to your intervention on the current agitation for Biafra. Being a credible participant in the events of those years, including spending time in prison for your support for the Eastern Region, you cannot be said to be unaware of the causes of the problems, then and now, as well as the various solutions that were suggested, including those ignored by the convening authorities.
We are however obliged to interrogate your conclusions, to wit: “once an idea has taken hold, you cannot destroy that idea…You may destroy the people that carry the idea on the battlefield, but, ultimately, it is not the end of the story…..So, let us sit down, let us talk once again about restructuring the nation in a way that no one will want to leave. The agitations, for me, are not surprising. It was expected that it would happen sooner or later……So, I am referring to a genuine and authentic National Conference. Not like the one that former President Olusegun Obasanjo called which was meant to try to perpetuate himself in office……The one under Jonathan was extensive; it covered lots and lots of ground. It proposed some far-reaching changes, not far-reaching for me, but far-reaching. It is about time we went back to efforts like that; genuine ones like that…”
Since you are referencing the agitation for Biafra as the “idea that has taken hold…”, we are of the view that as far as Nigeria is concerned, Biafra is not the only idea that has taken hold; and it cannot be, in any case, unless the rest of us has been consigned into non-ideational entities, lacking the capacity to generate an “idea” and hold on to it, the only condition for its being able to withstand destruction.

Even if we limit ourselves to issues about self-determination, the agitation for Biafra was a latter-day experience, unless it is being said that Biafra was and is what was proposed by Nnamidi Azikiwe during the anti-colonial period. If not, what is now regarded as the reason for Biafra was the “idea” behind the proposals for Federalism in a multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-national country like Nigeria right from the anti-colonial days.
That Biafra is an agitation for independence from Nigeria does not vitiate any other solution outside the confines of independence; independence would be a valid option not only for Biafra but for any other Nationality, the main reason for the Action Group’s insistence on a Secession Clause in the negotiations that led to Independence which the East was vehemently opposed to, at the time.

Current Biafran agitation is hinged on the ability of Nigeria to address the issues they perceive as germane to their continued existence in Nigeria; one of which is having one more State for the East, which, incidentally, other Nationalities are also demanding. Hence, if Biafran self-determination is an idea that cannot be destroyed, it cannot obviously be limited to only Biafra when there are many Nationalities in Nigeria, silently or openly agitating for redress to whatever they perceive as their grievances.
Thus, when Biafra demands for another state as part of her quest for justice, the Gwari, for example, would even be more justified, in that they were scattered among several states and without any formal state of their own whereas Biafra is demanding for an additional state. What Biafra thus considers as injustice in terms of lack of equitable number of states, is worse for the Gwari with not even a single state of their own. If another state is good for Biafra, certainly a single state would be good for the Gwari, if they choose to want one; the question being how this choice will be made if not by a referendum or plebiscite among the Gwari? Which brings into focus your call for a “genuine National Conference”; for this question is in the nature of the call itself: how is a “genuine National Conference” defined or how will it be arrived at?
To answer this, we start from the premise that it is not Biafra or its agitation that is an idea that cannot be destroyed but what you stated as “sitting down and talking about restructuring the nation in a way that no one will want to leave”; the very reason why every Government in Nigeria, military or civil, always create room for some type of Conference to address this particular issue.
The inability of these Conferences to arrive at such a solution is the only reason for all sorts of agitation, including Biafra or any other agitation for self-determination and the solutions from these Conferences always end up negating the Federalist solution proposed during the anti-colonial period as necessary for a multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-National entity like Nigeria.
When you proposed an “authentic National Conference”, the question as to its possibility arises, especially since you stated that previous military and civilian Conferences had been self-serving and Jonathan’s Conference was not far-reaching enough. We posit that these Conferences were “add-ons” to governance hence cannot but be self-serving. The central Government, as the convening authority of these Conferences was able to separate their own “day-to-day” governance from the context of the Conference itself which was also possible because those Conferences lacked the participation of the Nationalities in and of themselves, since they were not considered the subjects(Federating Units) of such Conferences hence, for a “genuine National Conference” to succeed, the parameters for the Conference must change as to representation where, hitherto, the absence of a platform prevents an engagement between the Nationalities, as subjects-cum-Federating Units and the central government, with this lack of input into how the issues are addressed becoming the reason for Nigeria’s recurring problems in one form or the other.
A “genuine National Conference” that will “restructure in such a way that no one would want to leave”, would mean the central government is able to state what it is offering; none of the previous Governments did that; even when they say the unity of Nigeria is non-negotiable, they always fail to tell us the parameters for such non-negotiablity, that is, what Nigeria is offering to the Nationalities which needs no negotiation; even though getting to this point would mean Nigeria must be symbolized, which role falls on the Government of the day.
Nigeria, with or without Biafran agitation, calls for a “sitting down”, especially with the current crisis where the Buhari Government has hinged its own solution on the three-pronged issues of employment, security and the fight against corruption. Although these arose from an electoral promise, they cannot be limited to simple fulfillment of such promises for they strike at the heart of the problem with Nigeria, especially with what we are being inundated with as having happened in the last six years whose solution must entail a restructuring of the political and economic system in place. In which case, they could be said to be the informal offerings of this Central Government .
While the Buhari Administration is engaged in retrieving as much of the stolen monies as possible and creating a new paradigm for governance, Nigeria’s historical experience has shown the fragility of the Nigerian State, capable of being manipulated at will, with inter-Nationality contradiction as its lever which can only be stopped by our “sitting down”.
On the other hand, structural solutions to these particular problems had been variously canvassed at previous Conferences, which solutions center on redefining the State as a vehicle for social, economic and cultural progress via Derivation, as opposed to “Allocation”, with its impact on political bureaucracy thus making it a more permanent solution to the anti-corruption fight as well as a major contributory factor to resolving unemployment issues directly translating into the security arena where, for example, the security architecture would be transformed by absorbing civilians and “hunters” permanently into the armed services thus creating another layer of employment especially considering the roles attributed to the “hunters” in the current war against Boko Haram.
The general template for engaging the central government on a “genuine National Conference” thus already exist, from the solution offered by the administration itself, which, coupled with representation by the Nationalities for and by themselves, would prevent the dissonance associated with previous Conferences. Of course, any Nationality that is not comfortable with those options would be free to leave, which would determine the indestructibility or otherwise of any idea.

This has to be the worst editorial from odua pathfinder.
Started well but went into aimless spin.
On the other hand, is it not time for the likes of soyinka to concentrate on the homeland.
If you spend your entire life fighting a lost cause(Nigeria) and the cause continues to self destruct.