By Okey Ndibe
I have been distressed beyond words by what has crystallized
as an agitation for Biafra’s divorce from Nigeria . I am disturbed that this
agitation has become another occasion for the Nigerian state to demonstrate its
disdain for the rule of law and the rights of citizens. I’m appalled by the
violence spawned by the actions of the agitators and the state’s reaction. The
immediate impetus for the violent turn is the continued detention of Nnamdi
Kanu, leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), indeed the rabble
rouser-in-chief of the neo-Biafran cause.
The
government ought to release Mr. Kanu immediately, both because that’s the
wisdom of the court and it’s the quickest way to defuse tension.
But Mr.
Kanu’s release will not, by itself, erase the frenzied propagation of Biafra , an idea that represents a nightmare to some, and
a fantasy to others. Sooner or later—sooner, one hopes, than later—Nigeria has to
confront the inescapable question of what it means to be called a Nigerian.
That
question (or the reluctance to engage it in any serious and sustained way) is
one reason Nigeria
has remained an alien and alienating idea, and susceptible to frequent acts of
rejection by its ostensible citizens. Periodically, those expressions of
everyday individual resentment and disaffection build into mass resistance.
It’s
important to put the agitation for Biafra in
the broader context of Nigerians’ longstanding disillusionment with their
country. For the avoidance of doubt, this is no new phenomenon. Nigeria ’s two literary giants, Wole Soyinka and
the late Chinua Achebe, have wrestled with the confounding matter of Nigeria . A few
years ago, Nobel laureate Soyinka asserted at a series of talks he gave at Harvard University
that there was no nation yet in the space called Nigeria . Years earlier, Achebe had
said to me in an interview that Nigeria
had not yet been founded.
Nothing
in the two writers’ claims amounted to a repudiation of Nigeria as
such. No, they were making what I’d call statements of fact. The fact that Nigeria had yet
to achieve a sense of national identity did not imply that such a prospect was
doomed. I’d say that the two writers were warning the rest of us about what
needed to be done in order to translate the abstract, ill-formed idea called Nigeria into a
concrete, organic, salutary and regenerative reality.