By Chris Nwedo
Written in July 2016
It is not wrong, but rather an obligation of enormous importance, for people who feel deprived, marginalized, or oppressed to actively work towards rectifying their ill-treatment. It is essential to rise, determined, against any potent threat to one’s comfort and existence. It is a duty to save oneself from the dangers of repression or subjugation of any kind. A strong-minded fight to overcome dehumanization is always positive. Nature allows every living being to go to great lengths in defense of the gift of life. The imperative for survival is in line with the law of nature, and this is an indisputable truth. This is because the fact is deeply rooted in nature: God has endowed every existence with the unassailable force to continue living and greater capacities to confront any threats to their vitality.
On a societal level, collective struggles for emancipation are rationalized and supported across all frontiers, often with compassionate and universal sentiment. This solidarity is cross-cultural and transcends borders. However, one element that often puts human solidarity at risk is the methodology of the struggle. The tools or instruments used for the fight are crucial. For example, while the world firmly supports Israel and condemns the frequent rocket attacks from Palestinian militants that harm or kill Jews, the world also vociferously denounces the Israeli military’s disproportionate responses. The Israeli army has killed hundreds of Palestinians, destroyed properties of immense value, and displaced tens of thousands for the death of one Israeli. Meanwhile, the uncoordinated violence and propaganda from Palestinian militants have burdened Palestine, complicating peace processes and prolonging the conflict. The illusion that violence alone will end the conflict harms the cause and makes a resolution more difficult to achieve.
When the tools for opposing cruelty are appropriate and objective, the struggle is focused and efficient, with growing support. On the other hand, if the instruments used in the struggle are tainted by the caprices of the leaders, cracks naturally emerge that weaken popular support. Once this support begins to erode, infiltrators can destroy the movement. Distractions in the structure of the movement make it impossible to remain focused on the original goals of the struggle.
In the midst of the turmoil surrounding the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), my concern is the methodology for achieving their objectives. The failure of a struggle due to poor methodology will lead to ruin for many. The untimely deaths during Biafran Day on May 30, 2016, are a tragic reminder of the importance of choosing the right methods. I am baffled by the assumption that the life of an Igbo person has become so devalued that they are encouraged to walk into danger senselessly. The Igbo person is resilient, perceptive, and articulate, and therefore should not easily succumb to eccentric and imprecise visions of an idyllic, pain-free world. It is strange to think that the Igbo person has suddenly become impulsive; it is not in their nature. When balanced, they will not be led by the dictates of unfounded and dangerous propaganda.
There have been enough such movements across the world that ended disastrously because of the imprudent actions of their leaders. The right to liberty, though inalienable, carries a heavy obligation, including the responsibility to ensure one’s safety and that of others. For the sake of clarity, I will address the methodology in question from three perspectives:
The physical tools in the struggle.
The intellectual tools in the struggle.
The definitive goals of the leaders in the struggle.
The purpose of this reflection is to raise awareness among IPOB leaders and supporters regarding the importance of the tools they use. It is undeniable that without the proper tools, it will be impossible to constructively pursue the “new earth” that many hope for. Many of these supporters, unfortunately, are not fully informed and are blindly rushing forward with inadequate guidance. The call to disobey, protest, and challenge Nigerian security forces with the hope of attaining a magical paradise is confusing. Nigeria’s democracy is flawed, but the way to improve it is through active participation, intelligent negotiation, building positive alliances, and insisting on justice and fairness. Violence and division are not the answers—they will lead to harm. I am not advocating for fear, but for a solid and strategic effort to achieve the goal. Fear is unnecessary because it is a “failure of help offered by reason.”
Physical Tools in the Struggle
These should not be interpreted as the use of weapons. Introducing arms into the agitation would invite both “legitimate” and “illegitimate” armed forces. “Legitimate arms bearers” refers to state security forces, whose responsibility is to quell dissent using force, as mandated by law. Since the challenge is against the state, it is unlikely that the authorities will be fair or proportionate in their response. The government will likely act with prejudice and insensitivity, as seen with the ongoing crisis caused by Boko Haram, where government inaction has worsened the situation. Provoking the aggressive forces of the state is a reckless move.
The Nigerian government has vowed to crush any agitation for Biafra. The president has repeatedly stated that under his administration, there will be no Biafra, and he will use all available resources to ensure the unity of Nigeria. The government controls what the state security forces do, and the president is obligated to protect the nation from both internal and external subversion. This vow is binding, and the president justifies his actions under the guise of national security. However, Nigeria is not a liberal society, given the prevailing impunity and hypocrisy. Security forces have been involved in corruption and abuse of power, sometimes even murdering citizens with impunity.
On the other hand, there are illegitimate arms carriers within IPOB itself. These rogue elements have the potential to derail the movement in favor of illicit interests. They have acquired weapons, which they use for terrorizing and extorting people. Some of these individuals, who once lacked the courage to be armed, now carry weapons because of their association with IPOB. The crucial question is: if arms cannot be used in the struggle, what other options are available? There are alternatives such as peaceful demonstrations, strikes, hunger strikes, and nonviolent civil disobedience. Thankfully, the IPOB leadership has advocated for civil disobedience and “direct action.”
Peaceful Demonstration
In Nigeria, most demonstrations have a disruptive nature. Non-violent demonstrations are virtually nonexistent due to a lack of enlightenment among the people. Earlier, IPOB demonstrators disrupted Onitsha and staged a “One Million Man March” calling for the immediate release of Nnamdi Kanu. While the demonstration rattled the state, it resulted in violence, death, and destruction, which cannot be justified as successful. Similarly, the May 30, 2016, killings of many Igbo people during a peaceful demonstration proved to be a tragic outcome of a poorly planned protest. The protesters not only caused havoc but also trapped fellow Igbo citizens, robbed, and destroyed their properties.
The movement has already cost the lives of over 1,000 Igbo people since August 2015. This is in addition to the more than 2.5 million innocent victims in the 1967 conflict. The recurring experiences of death and destruction among the Igbo people are deeply troubling. The leaders of IPOB have failed to effectively contain rebellious elements within the movement, and as a result, the integrity of the struggle has been compromised.
Intellectual Components in the Struggle
The intellectual approach to the struggle must also be considered. Do the IPOB leaders have a clear and well-defined vision for achieving the movement’s ultimate goals? What strategies do they have in place to access the necessary tools, especially on the international front? Are the goals of the movement realistic in today’s context? What does the realization of these goals mean for the collective interest of the Igbo people? How prepared are the leaders to manage success, should the goals be achieved?
A clear understanding of the tools needed to reach these objectives is essential. An unclear beginning sends negative signals, which only attract skepticism and detractors. In such an environment, arrogant and reckless leaders who rely on invective and blame games only detract from the movement’s credibility. These leaders breed division, wasting time on unproductive arguments rather than focusing on achieving the movement’s goals. In the end, the continued reliance on disparagement and verbal abuse shows that IPOB’s leaders may not be equipped with the correct methodology for the struggle.
