₦airaland Forum

free2ryhme: a typical Ibo man would not want any development from which he will not benefit directly financially... Why do u think they always refer to themselves as autonomous before the village/town name follows ... They are greedy

lastpage: I am not advocating regional autonomy in my post. I was "reacting" to those who say that once the Igbo leave Lagos, it is doomed.
having said that, l think in order of priority, the Yorubas:


1.) Yorubas will prefer "Confederacy" where each region is semi-autonomous in terms of "development, income and expenditure) ....and we contribute "a percentage" to the central government. We actually prefer this the most as we get the benefit of a big country (big market, big population, e.t.c) while maintaining our "ability and flexibility" to develop at our own pace and challenge ourselves. Best of both worlds!
It might even sound arrogant but l think the Yorubas "think" they are "a cut above the rest", within the Nigerian setting. The "Old Western region" was an example of what we think we can do, if Confederacy is selected.

2.) If the above is difficult to achieve (as we stand now), they Yorubas will advocate a "fair share" of what is on the table...which can be seen for our agitation for "Presidency Role", ....and l guess 2-terms on the go, is a starting point. Any objective observer will agree that Yorubas have a way of getting what they want without "warring" or "prostituting their rights".


3.) As a last resort, Yorubas will prefer "complete regional autonomy" but would not go to war to drive it home (under certain conditions). I have said it before that it is very difficult, if not completely impossible for "one major tribe" to decide to break-away, without the support of another major tribe.
And Yorubas are not suicidal by nature.

That is why l wonder when my Igbo brothers chant "Biafra" and yet "openly declare so much hatred for their Yoruba folks".....who seem their only possible ticket for self determination! Or do you think 'the North' would allow them now, when they did not allow them in 1967? Even, current events point otherwise.

Only a "simultaneous break-away" of TWO MAJOR TRIBES can succeed....since the third tribe cannot fight two wars on two front, moreover, access to "open sea" is a major advantage in war time as modern warfare is "Air and Sea", with the "Air-power" depending so much on a "Sea Platform". (that is one problem the Free Syrian Army has now, for getting weapons from outsiders; they are land-locked! )