IPOB 8 identity misfired

By

Sampson I. Onwuka

 

What is the purpose of IPOB, we are not entirely sure at this point saving that it looks to separate Biafra from Nigeria. It is not impossible that Biafra is to be separated from Nigeria, but it is really difficult to maintain IPOB as an organization that does not directly meet the requirement for a party largely for its activity in the interest of the founders of the organization away or within MASSOB whose activity in securing a kind of State inherits the demand for a Zionist away from Biafra Zionist Federation. The other group of separatist party is perhaps the Congress of Lower Niger – part and parcel of the armed resistance in the Niger Delta led in various forms by George Dokubo. The resistance group under Dokubo were granted Amnesty under President Jonathan Goodluck who went as far as physically annihilating members of MASSOB in Onitsha where the remains of their body were found floating on the water. This may or may not be an operation condoned by Jonathan but remain an issue given the incarceration of other members of the Biafra Zionist Federation including Benjamin Onwuka.

 

These groups are perhaps different from World Igbo Congress and Ohaneze – as if the four groups have their inherent bias with the idea of Nigeria – a sickness that may have started with the conduct of the Nigerian civil war.

These groups would not be expected to have progressed in the last few years, for how else could they have fared under President Buhari who in 2013 – on liberty Radio Programme in Kaduna faulted the Federal government clamp down on Boko Haram which they proscribed as terrorist group – while seeking amnesty for Niger-Delta. And Buhari made his argument in spite of the TPAA – Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013 (TPAA) which are matters of law as from acts directly involving Boko Haram, the Chibok girls and organized killing. In this case perhaps in other case, we are considering the limits of expectations of an organization primarily involved in Human Rights in Nigeria such as IPOB - an argument about Human Rights that others expected IPOB to have made - to a point that the claim of violet interdiction during Anambra election and local politics is failure to separate the former leader, Nnamdi Kanu (with rights to rule as individual ‘Renzhi’) from IPOB as an organization (with rights to rule as a party and by law ‘Fazhi’), and such failures also leads to a more secondary argument that he, Nnamdi Kanu, is not considered a Nigerian by the Federal Government given the excessive use of brigadier against him, against his onions as against his interest in politics (assuming this is the case), or perhaps the private Nnamdi Kanu was not to be respected as a social commentator in spite of his competence, or for competence in of itself, he is regarded as a new comer, a mere charlatan exorcising forensic influence through pure-play without recourse, to a point that we use a process of condemnation to make him a political figure when he is not, and to make him a Nigerian who has no right when he is not. If he be not Nigerian, ‘defense’ may be interested in why the Nigerian Government was interested in the direct use of treason to condemn Mr. Kanu. Taken together, we have to identity with Mr. Kanu without sympathy he was angst beseech, but the process taken apart, we presume incognito that such as a man must be worthy of the military army, to the extent that is he is ipso facto a bonafide member of Nigerian constituency. Nnamdi Kanu is therefore a political opponent of the ruling APC and Generals Buhari, Muhammed, also President of Nigeria and deserve the pain. Such action constituent acute personal deformity, that it seems we overrated an unarmed civilian who is considered powerful, whereas in the words of Ojukwu such powerful man is only a man with one vote.

I for one, may not be necessarily interested in the very organization calling for separation from what they call Nigeria, until the land of fact that actions taken by this organization did not include the attempt to block State elections, we may remind ourselves that all actions in civil society against a State and as against a private begins with preponderance to the rule of law, to renege decedent fellow is acting from an acceptable point of view - the convergence, then the deliberation on the applicable material evidence - the divergence, leading to a decision for people of the State or Nigeria not entirely the APC political block. Did Anambra bring in a law suit against IPOB?

We are considering how the said organization may shift their agenda to politics without priors, and how how the politicians view IPOB (battled by President Buhari) – perhaps a danger to their voting block, dovetailing a possibility that the organization may no longer be considered as an offshoot of MASSOB which was battled by (President Obasanjo), or a new growth emerging from Biafra Zionist which was battled by (President Jonathan) but a group by itself capable of campaigning for change in Nigeria and Africa, directly or through the use of official representative in all classes of respect and ‘decorum’. We are also looking at what such an organization resembles and it’s likelihood to do x,y, z of political moratorium, or would have done to deserve the persecution from the State, to observe how such Human Rights 'act-on' party and organization are redefined as a terror group in course of their duty. How does any organization earn 'proscription' from its Federal Government on mere hunch that such an organization is underrated. If the political participation of IPOB, MASSOB, BIAFRA Zionist, Congress of the Lower Niger are taken totally with care to other parties, yes, they can vote their leaders into office, then there is a beginning of a 'bund' and a perhaps a sensitive recourse to the idea of Nigeria from which they are totally disfranchised.

Perhaps the case is not spared the contagious details of Ben Onwuka’s imprisonment over similar argument made by the Federal government. Why was that a proscription necessary for a Human Rights groups populated by Nigerians for Nigeria? Was it to further exercise the power of the military over a certain part of the East which can be argued as a way to counter the proscription of Boko Haram by Jonathan?, or is it to make the claim that the existence of Nigeria ‘is not debatable’ and such the ‘The treasonable felony’ imposed on Nnamdi Kanu was because the organization was considered a threat to the country.

It serves a second purpose, that it seems that IPOB, MASSOB, BIAFRA Zionist Federation, Congress of the Lower Niger, are to seek better alternative for instance to a party System under a measured canopy. There are other remedies beside the issue of separation which is what Biafrans under Ojukwu considered a final solution because Nigeria they claimed can not truly protect people of the East. The world kept quite that was the issue, but the point that in terms of what an organization looks like and stands for, we can compare what IPOB, MASSOB, Biafra Zionist Federation, CLN, is compelling their fellow Nigerians to understand. I think that the example that IPOB, MASSOB, Biafra Zionist Federation, CLN is setting is dependent on the example set in motion by Jewish parties in other parts of the world, and here we look at Zion and what it looks like for the foundation of Jewish State, and argue that Biafra which I still argue is 'Nigeria' can look at fielding their own party among the Biafrans especially in the South East, and holding their own business click, doing their own films, and featured artisan as a to remind the country and the Biafra(s) of the other side of our struggles.

Basle Program on August 23, 1897 featured Theodor Herzl who helped to convene the first World Zionist Congress, the goal was that “Zionism seeks to establish a home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured under public law”, it was an idea primarily driven by self-reliance and that Zionism was set to dissolve all other solution based group for Jews at this period in world history. The response to Zionism was primarily serious among the Eastern European Jewry and was opposed by rich Jews in Western region – an argument that took a new forms after the problems of Germany and Hitler’s Final Solution. The main thing was that Jews were their history not people of the guns and weapons of warfare for if we look at what has happened to the Jewish question since Israel became an armed republic and got the fair backing of the West especially America, we are led to accept that Jewish persecution in the world has been grossly reduced. Part of the pact with Zionism is to encourage Jews to respect and honor the laws of all the nations under which they find themselves. Herzl further argued in ‘Der Judenstaat’ that sovereignty of Israel “...be granted us over a portion of the globe large enough to satisfy the rightful requirements of a nation, the rest we shall manage for ourselves.” (The Making of Modern Zionism; the intellectual origins of the Jewish State by Avineri Shlomo) . The outcomes of the first Aliyah to Israel is the death of 12 Israeli representing the house of Israeli that went to Jerusalem to establish a home after the Napoleon’s proclamation of Israel. All of them perished, not heard from after a while, but the Second Aliyah under Theodor Herzl and eventually Chaim Weizmann proved a useful success in establishing Israel which ended with various services to Zion under ‘Workers of Zion’, the Mapai as a prolegomena to Labor Party and Jewish Bund.