IPOB 4 identity misfired

By

Sampson I. Onwuka

We are making a fuss with the different religions of the world – we are failing to enact the point that the more appropriate model between Spanish and Portuguese Society at the eve of the expulsion 1492 is Nigeria at the eve of their independence in 1960. Can a people of different with religion live together especially when they speak different languages and when they are seated in specific economic geography and share an undiluted past? What was Nigeria at the eve of its independence, a Country riven in three by the people’s ethnicity, politics, and their religion. They were operating as if they were different from each other from the beginning – as they were forced to live together by Britain and once Britain left the scene, it was up to the rest of the society to shape up.

There is no need to question the integrity of the separatist group including IPOB, saving the fact that we are not sure we understand the group very well and what their intentions are. For record, I want to mention that there is more than a historical link between the ‘peoples’ of Biafra in Nigeria, including the Bini who trace their origins to Igbo; the Nri, the Eri, Igbo-ukwu of the epicenters of the Nigerian Igbo, and others in Nigeria. For instance, the oral history of Yoruba say that they got their name from Igbos who call them ‘servants of the Oba’ or ‘devoted to the oba’, and it is really useful when Yoruba point that their name was not based on ‘Oyo’ or its empire. What does ‘servants of oba’ mean in Igbo; it means ‘oru oba’, and for a group you can ‘ndi oru oba’, and first person singular we use ‘onye’. We are not suggesting this is how the name came to be but 'devoted to Oba' 'devoted/subject/servant of the oba' is in Igbo 'oru obah'. Yes, am aware of Louis Oraka, Catherine Acholonu, F.C Ogbalu, Osare Omeregie, Elizabeth Isichei, Adiele Afigbo, Thomas Ozodi (Onye mmuta dina aka), Merrit Ruhlen*, Michael Onwuejeonwu, etc., but they are speaking to the varied origins of the Igbos and perhaps Biafra from information available to them. We should not miss the point that the Igbo language has origins that are not fully explored, to these relevant authors, I want to maintain, that Kemit (Egyptian language) show reasonable relationship with Igbo, for instance words for ‘face’ is heru is Egyptian Kemit, in Igbo it is ‘iru’, and in Hebrew ‘Ruben’ is interpreted as ‘ahead (in front) of the rest), Egyptian Kemit also say nii for the nile, for instance ‘ado-nija’ >lord of Nile, and in Igbo the river is called ‘inyi’, for instance ‘E Be inyi’ in Igbo is ‘by the River’ English and not that dissimilar from ‘be nii’, which is to be confused with ‘bini’ or as the Igbo call a branch of their Ivo, Yekebe, ‘bini izaa’ - may suggest other meaning. Egyptian Kemit for the neck is ‘ou’ which in Igbo ‘olu’ for neck, for instance olu uda, you are flirting with the English ‘loud’ for this is the meaning of the Igbo portmanteau olu-uda, loud voice. We may hint that there is historical linguistic between English and Igbo as so demonstrated elsewhere, ‘ride’ in English is the same meaning and the same word with Igbo ‘n’rida’ - to a point that ‘ride down’ is closer to the old ‘ridan’ aware from Igbo n’wuda. Taken together, we arrive at a possible root meaning of the Egyptian word ‘horus’ to be a Greek adaptation but on the context of Igbo> ‘oru’ meaning servant, a redeemed argument on the possible altar for Bini, for instance Ben nii, a little too hard to travel to the land of the translation ‘sons of the nile’? Or perhaps by the Nile, the River, etc.,. Speaking of sons, Hebrew refer to ‘ben’ in this day in age, for instance Benzion> “son/s of zion”, whereas ‘ben’ is not known in current Igbo to be ‘son’, the Hebrew ‘um’ for offspring does not shy from (h)‘omo’ Greek/ Yoruba, and closer still to the Igbo ‘umu’ for instance ‘umu ari’ descendants of ‘ari’ ‘struck for’ or ikpa ari ‘making a big deal about little things’ - a psychological defect of some kind, different from Hebrew ‘um’ ari’ ‘of tigers’ where Igbo ‘of tigers’ mean ‘umu agu’

It is necessary to maintain that it seems to the best of us that Nigerians were not aware of the fact that Igbos were physically large in number. The relationship between Igbo and other neighboring ethnic(/) groups in South South and so on, is due to the fact that they fill flooded by the large number of people whose presence they have problems identifying with. What decided the conflict – not war in Nigeria 1967 – 1970 was the lack of military presence in the East, an argument that Shell used to drag America and Britain to the side of what was the central Nigerian Government. Put it differently the war lasted for 3yrs because of the dense population in the East and if they had weapons – even half the quantity available in Lagos or Kaduna, it could have served as a deterrence until the end of hostilities – a Biafran military argument.

II

The Igbos, the Yorubas and other minorities in Nigeria who were primarily Christians and were located in the South, and in the North were the Muslim Fulanis and the Hausas who had other minorities and were primarily in the Northern Nigeria were confirming the worst fears, that the country didn’t know how to precede and had very little reason to co-exist. To a point that the Muslims under the leaders of Sarduana of Sokoto called South of Nigerians ‘Unbeliever’ who cannot lead them, especially the Igbos in the military who followed the warrant chiefs into Police and then army were also known as “Infidels” by the Northerners. It was serious enough to suggest that the advise of Sarduana that it was not proper for Muslims to be eat together in the Nigerian Army struck a chord that betwixt the clause in the protest mandate of 1959 and the ‘dual mandate’ > indirect rule to mention - and what the new Republic under the administration of Nigerians following independence from Britain was likely to accept. The Igbos call the Northerners ‘filth’, ‘uncircumcised’ and show degrees of disregard to both their honorable heads who were in the eyes of the Igbos victims of their past and the caste issue that was common in the North, and held their general public in disregard for not willing to do manual jobs saving the one approved by malam. It seem also that the political parties in later years in Nigeria were aware of the fact that the country called Nigeria could not hold under the Parliamentary system that left little power for the central government (FG), that the Governor General in Nigeria as the highest authority in the land needed executive powers – especially commander in Chief of the military. From here, it seems that the shift from Governor General of Nigeria as the head of the government in Nigeria in 1960 to Presidency in 1963 was to ensure that (1), the leader of the nation was more than a figure head – therefore had executive privilege (order) like those of the American President and as such is expected to directly guarantee under equal protection, (b) that constitutional amendments were binding to the States, (2), that ruling party exercised certain power within the constitution to the point that local Chiefs, elders, premier – if necessary, religious leaders including Sarduana himself may exercise legislative power over the North and the South through the approved Congressional caucus and through the Senate, grounds that no religious and local authority can supersede the Senate and the Presidency when so constituted through the general election, (3) they were also aware that it was a direct shift from United Kingdom style of administration to America. It is also to mention that advocates of American style of capitalist government, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Pius Orizu, K.O Mbadiwe, were all mostly N.C.N.C, Nationalist and American trained, and they influenced the attitude of Eastern Nigeria to Nigerian polity, others include Anthony Enahoro, K.O.K Onyioha, Michael Okpara, Alvan Ikoku(?), Udo Okure, Akanu Ibiam, to an extent Siddiq Abubakar III (who was the Sultan of Sokoto, one of the unsung heroes of Nationalism due to other matters) etc.,. To the advocates of UK style of parliamentary administration which remained a hot-button for a very long time in Nigerian politics are U.K trained administrators; Tafewa Balewa (Once Chief minister replacing Zik and then Prime Minister), Sarduana Ahmadu Bello (Premier of the North and head of the Northern People Congress), S.L Akintola, C. Odumegwu Ojukwu, and others in later day that still see U.K and its three Kingdoms under one, as a model for Nigeria. (4), the politicians realized that the position of the Prime minister of Nigeria with the new installed President (1963) was less active. The problem was that the party that elected the President Azikiwe didn’t have majority in the house, as such the confusion with Nigerian Prime Minister remained a hot-button – essentially unhampered until new realities. The N.P.C controlled the amended provisions, as such the re-installment of S.L Akintola after he lost in the elections in the Western Region was due to his siding with Northern People Congress. If we understand the minds of these American trained politicians, some of U.K, Northern People Congress didn’t have Executive powers. In essence the confusion over Azikiwe’s role in the 60’s and perhaps what now seem like an arrest, or takeover of Azikiwe’s administration is that he, Azikiwe, couldn’t asked for U.S, U.K to get the message across, and asked the military to arrest these ‘big boys’ of N.P.C which may suggest that he, was perhaps not unaware of the military use of force to arrest these men in 1966, and that it may require gunning them down since they had large urban following. It doesn’t however seem that Tafawa Balewa was against these political changes in Nigeria, they seem a natural progression, either does it seem that he was politically interested in forcing his own future – he was sick, from lung cancer and chronic bronchitis.

This confusion that Prime minister under the Presidency would have required amendments to be fully effective is still omitted in the narrative of political administration from 1963. It is important to mention that the toppling of power in 1966 didn’t seem to be an executive order, which the President can only authorize. It does seem that military arrest involves only a few things. We may argue still that Michael Okpara in the East was arrested and eventually released, there are elements of resistance to the arrest in the Western Region and the North, levitating elements of the so-called multiple orders for the round up. For that, Tafewa Balewa’s role as a leader in Nigeria was shifted to administration under Azikiwe, which gave more powers over the Premiers in the North, East, and West. It didn’t really change saving that the shift was gradually occurring that the Prime Minister’s role in a Presidency would either be a Nigerian model with executive power on the President as with Governor-General or that Prime Minister would shift his position to Vice President. The President as ‘the commander in chief of the armed forces’, and ‘head of states’ came later, but it was already part of the landscape that the Nigerian President was the highest authority in the land as the case with America not Britain and Christopher Welby Everard. Besides Everard as G.O.C who preceded Ironsi, there was Alhaji Muhammadu Ribadu (N.P.C) as part of Nigerian Defense. None of these people could really place National orders without the Cabinet, and it seems that the President Azikiwe was struggling with several degrees of interference. All that probable changed with Ironsi, who was he became G.O.C was bound to carry out orders. Whether he gave the last orders for the arrest in January 15th, 1966 was a second opinion.