By Olakunle Agboola – Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, is a skillet of ethnic tensions, political mismanagement, and economic woes. With over 250 ethnic groups, the country has seen decades of agitation for self-determination, secession, and regional autonomy.
The Yoruba Nation’s recent submission of a letter to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom seeking to leave Nigeria, and the prolonged detention of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), are the latest manifestations of long-simmering frustrations.
These movements highlight a pressing reality: Nigeria’s political leadership seems ill-equipped or unwilling to steer the nation toward progress, instead stoking division and perpetuating an unsustainable status quo.
At the core of these challenges lies a fundamental question—can Nigeria’s politicians ever help the nation succeed? As corruption, greed, and the mismanagement of resources continue to hamper the nation’s development, alternative governance models, such as regional government, reformation, or the dismantling of central power structures, may offer solutions. However, these potential fixes must contend with an entrenched political elite that benefits from Nigeria’s dysfunction.
The Failure of Nigeria’s Leadership
Nigeria’s leadership is a paradox. The country is rich in natural resources, human capital, and potential, yet it consistently ranks low on key development indices, such as poverty reduction, infrastructure, healthcare, and education.
The failure of Nigeria’s politicians stems from a combination of corruption, nepotism, and a lack of accountability. These leaders are more focused on maintaining power and personal wealth than addressing the deep-rooted problems afflicting the country.
The constant cycle of political scandals, embezzlement, and the misuse of public funds continues to undermine Nigeria’s growth. From the oil sector to infrastructure development, nearly every aspect of governance is riddled with inefficiency.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Nigeria’s anti-corruption body, has itself been mired in allegations of corruption. The rot is systemic, extending to both major political parties, making meaningful change through conventional political processes almost impossible.
This dysfunction has given rise to movements like the Yoruba Nation and IPOB, both seeking autonomy as a way out of Nigeria’s political bog. These movements are not just secessionist; they reflect the disillusionment with Nigeria’s political class and the conviction that the country is incapable of reform under the current leadership.
Yoruba Nation Agitation: A Quest for Self-Determination
The Yoruba Nation, predominantly representing the south western region of Nigeria, has been one of the most vocal advocates for self-determination. Recently, a group advocating for Yoruba independence submitted a letter to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, calling for international recognition and intervention to facilitate the region’s exit from Nigeria.
Historically, the Yoruba people have been among the most politically and economically influential groups in Nigeria. However, under the leadership of President Buhari, they, like many other ethnic groups, have increasingly felt marginalized by the federal government.
This perceived marginalization has intensified their agitation for self-determination, with many in the Yoruba Nation calling for an exit from Nigeria as a solution to their grievances and for greater regional autonomy. The push for independence stems from a belief that the current political structure fails to represent their interests effectively.
Despite being a vital part of Nigeria’s economic engine, especially through Lagos, the nation’s commercial capital, the Yoruba believe that the central government has failed to address their socio-economic needs. They argue that Nigeria’s centralized system allows the political elite to siphon resources from the regions to sustain a bloated bureaucracy in Abuja, the capital.
For proponents of the Yoruba Nation, the quest for independence is framed to escape the entrenched corruption and inefficiency that plague the federal government. They envision a new government structure where the Yoruba people can control their resources, manage their affairs, and establish a society free from the toxic political culture of Nigeria.
However, the challenge facing the Yoruba Nation’s agitation is multifaceted. First, the Nigerian constitution does not provide for secession, meaning that any attempt to break away from the federation would likely be met with stiff resistance from the central government. Second, the agitation risks inflaming ethnic tensions in an already divided country, potentially leading to violent conflicts as seen during the Biafran War in the late 1960s.
The Biafran Struggle and Nnamdi Kanu’s Incarceration
The agitation for an independent Biafra, representing the Igbo people of south eastern Nigeria, is perhaps the most enduring secessionist movement in the country. Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB, has become the face of this struggle, advocating for the restoration of the Biafran Republic, which briefly existed from 1967 to 1970. Kanu’s rhetoric and methods have attracted widespread attention, but also severe crackdowns from the Nigerian government.
Kanu has been imprisoned on charges ranging from treason to terrorism, reflecting the government’s harsh stance on secessionist movements. Yet, his incarceration has only galvanized support for IPOB’s cause, as many Igbos see his detention as symptomatic of their broader marginalization within Nigeria. The southeast, like the southwest, is rich in resources and human capital but remains underdeveloped due to perceived neglect by the central government.
The agitation for Biafra is not merely about ethnic pride—it is a call for liberation from a system that, many argue, has continuously failed the Igbo people. Since the end of the Biafran War, critics contend that the south eastern region has been politically and economically marginalized.
For supporters of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu’s vision of an independent Biafra offers a chance to escape Nigeria’s dysfunction. They see this as an opportunity to build a new nation rooted in the principles of equity, justice, and self-determination, which they believe are lacking under the current federal system.
However, the Nigerian government views IPOB as a significant threat to national unity and sovereignty. Under President Buhari’s administration, the military was deployed to suppress the movement, often using heavy-handed and sometimes brutal force.
This approach has been marked by clashes between IPOB supporters and security forces, leading to accusations of human rights violations and further deepening the divide between the central government and the south eastern region.
IPOB’s struggle for independence, much like the Yoruba Nation agitation, faces significant constitutional and practical hurdles. The federal government’s persistent refusal to engage in dialogue or explore political solutions has further aggravated these tensions, heightening the risk of renewed violence in the region.
The lack of willingness to address the root causes of the agitation only deepens the existing divisions, making a peaceful resolution increasingly elusive.
Could Regional Government Be the Solution?
Considering the Yoruba Nation and Biafra agitations, one might ask whether a return to regional governance could offer a solution. Before Nigeria’s first military coup in 1966, the country operated under a regional system, where the regions enjoyed a significant degree of autonomy. This system allowed each region to manage its resources, foster development, and retain control over local affairs.
The return to a regional government could theoretically address the grievances of groups like the Yoruba and Igbo, giving them more control over their resources and political structures. It could also serve as a compromise solution, avoiding the spectre of secession while addressing the deep-seated issues of marginalization and underdevelopment.
However, regionalism is unlikely to gain traction among Nigeria’s current political elite. The centralization of power in Abuja benefits the political class, who rely on the federal structure to maintain their patronage networks. A return to regionalism would undermine the ability of these politicians to control the nation’s resources, which is why they are unlikely to support such reforms.
Fighting Greed and Corruption: The Ultimate Challenge
Ultimately, the root cause of Nigeria’s failure to succeed lies in the greed and corruption of its political elite. Whether through regional governance, constitutional reform, or outright secession, no solution will be effective unless it addresses this fundamental issue. Nigeria’s leaders have consistently demonstrated an unwillingness to prioritize the nation’s development over their enrichment.
For Nigeria to progress, there needs to be a revolution of values—one that prioritizes accountability, transparency, and the welfare of the people over the greed of the few. This will require not only political reform but also a fundamental shift in the way governance is practiced in Nigeria. Without such a transformation, movements like the Yoruba Nation and IPOB will continue to gain traction, as more Nigerians lose faith in the possibility of a united, successful Nigeria under its current leadership.
Nigeria’s leadership has failed the country, and without systemic changes, it is unlikely that they will ever help Nigeria succeed. The agitations for Yoruba and Biafran independence reflect the broader dissatisfaction with a system that perpetuates inequality, corruption, and underdevelopment. Whether through regional government or reformation, the path to a better Nigeria lies in confronting and dismantling the entrenched greed and incompetence that have held the country back for so long.
Kindly follow us on twitter:@AfricanVoice2
