Close button
The Guardian
Email YouTube Facebook Instagram Twitter WhatsApp

Nnamdi Kanu and his followers


Nnamdi Kanu

Sir: I have nothing against the leader of the Independent People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu. I see what he is doing as a child of circumstance. Somebody has to create an atmosphere in which people can see that things are not right when they are not right. That was what the leaders of the Boko Haram (BH) did when they formed their community. The community became an affront to the mainstream Islamic community that revels in controlling people and wealth imperialistically; an affront not in the sense of violence, since BH wasn’t violent, but naturally a thorn in the conscience of the imperialists. Hence they became restive and seeking ways of smashing the community. The former President, Olusegun Obasanjo (OBJ), saw no reason to attack BH, even though Femi Fani-Kayode, a former minister, indicated there was pressure on OBJ to do so.

Why should a sane man attack a peaceful community, comprising people of all ages, as well as wives, husbands, children, bachelors, spinsters, et al, for God’s sake? But that was what Islamic imperialists wanted and that was what OBJ’s successor did, taking undue advantage of the presidency of Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, later compounded by Yar’Adua’s successor and former Vice President, Goodluck Ebele Azikiwe Jonathan, and pursued vigorously by the current President, General Muhammadu Buhari (GMB). Hence those praising GMB for reducing BH don’t know what they are talking about. Where is the justification for attacking BH in the first instance?

Under Yar’Adua, I didn’t understand the issues involved. We were all led to believe that BH meant “Western education is evil,” rather than the prevalent Boko Haram (fraud committed through pen on paper). When I came to understand the points at issue as bordering on Islamic imperialism, aided by Jonathan’s inordinate ambition and belligerent spirit, I started calling for dialogue, which only exposed Jonathan and GMB as irredeemable enemies of peace and progress. GMB keeps saying Nigeria’s unity is non-negotiable because he wields the scepter. Some “Yoruba leaders” who want to control their own states (Fayose in Ekiti; Mimiko from Ondo State, et al) also oppose a regional government that will deny them local imperialisms, and so proposed a restructure that will not tamper with state/local status quo. Thus, if you don’t have Kanu, what else will you have?


Rochas Okorocha has joined Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Association of House and Shop Demolishers, and some other Igbo rulers are not different from the “Yoruba leaders” who don’t want anybody to tamper with their local estates. Igbo legislators in the national assemblies, like their counterparts from the rest of Nigeria, are more interested in the money they are getting than how to stabilize Nigeria. Nevertheless, a situation in which some followers of Kanu are wielding sticks and looking for Hausa people is extremely dangerous and reprehensible. There are more of Igbo people elsewhere in Nigeria than the reverse. Half a word is enough for the wise.

Prof Oyeniran Abioje, PhD, University of Ilorin.

Receive News Alerts on Whatsapp: +2348136370421

No comments yet