By Aloy Ejimakor
 Published
October 14th, 2008
Creation of a new state has always been a hot-button issue
since the inception of Nigeria. The very first – the
creation of two protectorates of North and South was by
sheer colonial fiat and it was easier because the British
did not care to have any local input. They figured it was
not necessary anyway since they did it mainly for their own
administrative convenience and to drive the colonial agenda
of ‘divide and rule’.
The second, which split Nigeria into three large regions of
East, West and North was done in some recognition that
Nigeria comprised of three major nationalities (Igbo, Yoruba
and Hausa-Fulani). The British reckoned that the smaller
nationalities will have to make do with co-existing with
their larger neighbors. What emerged was a mixed
federal-unitary system that mimicked the Union of England,
Scotland and Ireland in the British homeland. That stuck for
awhile despite the agitations by the various minority groups
for their own separate regions.
The third, which led to the birth of the Midwest region
(after independence) was largely driven by the then dominant
NCNC which wanted to contain the Action Group through the
creation of a region out of the Western Region. Some called
it the Welsh of Nigeria – a fourth dimension of sorts to
complete the mimicry of the ‘three-plus-one’ arrangement of
the British homeland that included the Welsh as a fourth
region.
The fourth creation of states (not regions anymore) was by
Gowon in 1966 and it was targeted against the monolithic
(read: separatist and feared) Eastern Region and their
allies in the Midwest. Simply put, it was just meant to
defeat the gathering secessionist drumbeats. To Gowon’s
credit, the balance of power between the North and South was
maintained in a 12-state structure.
The fifth by Murtala was meant to correct the imbalances and
inequities (rightly or wrongly) of the harried creation done
by Gowon and also to break up the regional power hegemons.
Thus, greater considerations were given to balance between
the large tribes and neo-minority enclaves; yet, somehow,
the Igbo were left marginalized. That concluded the first
wave of state creations by military fiat. The coming of
Shagari brought a lull due to the constitutional
restrictions on creation of more states. When Buhari came,
he did not care, but Babangida and Abacha succumbed to
political expediency by creating additional states. In both
exercises, an attempt was made to reward the Igbos for past
injustices, yet both regimes did not go far enough, thus
resulting in the present persisting imbalance where the
South East has the least states out of all the geopolitical
zones in the country. Suffice it say that state creation,
even when done on the basis of administrative convenience or
political expediency, still tried to capture some common
elements, mostly bordering on considerations of large
populations and linguistic/ethnic homogeneity (South East,
South West, and Far Northern States); minority
self-determination (The Middle Belt States and the
South-South); and parity of regions (North-South divide,
tripod theories, and now ‘geopolitical parity’ or balance).
Intra-cultural affinity/identity and some fuzzy
considerations of contiguity are merely ancillary.
But most tellingly, there is no clear evidence that previous
creation of states occurring within and amongst a
homogeneous Yoruba, Igbo and Hausa/Fulani was based on any
notion of intra-cultural affinity or separateness from the
whole (as argued by promoters of Adada, Orashi, Aba and Orlu/Njaba).
The reason is because these three major ethnic groups are
assumed to be possessed of a single (undifferentiated)
cultural identity. Any opposite postulation is a fallacy and
bound to be divisive, if not unconvincing to the larger
Nigerian community that must approve the request for a new
state. The only two groups that had advanced such arguments
in the past, with some marginal success, were the Okun
Yoruba and the Ika Igbo; and even then, both have not
succeeded in selling it as a compelling reason to be created
as separate states. The Okuns are still in Kwara and Kogi
States with others; ditto for the Ikas in Delta State. To
now accept that Adada, Aba, Orashi or Orlu/Njaba deserve a
separate state because they are suddenly culturally
different from the rest of the Igbos will inflame the Okuns
and Ikas to competition. And if they renew their demands,
they will do so with reasons more compelling than the best
arguments advanced yet by promoters of Adada, Aba, Orashi
and Orlu/Njaba. In the end, ‘geopolitical parity’, which was
the sole reason that swayed other Nigerians to agree for the
Southeast to get one more state will be submerged under a
plethora of many new demands from other sections of Nigeria,
all to the point of gridlock and the certitude that in the
denial of all, the Southeast will again be denied.
Therefore, the creation of an additional state in the South
East will succeed only if it set aside considerations of
‘intra-cultural affinity’, flimsy stretches of differences
from the whole or other sectarian arguments in favor of the
more persuasive and sensible ‘geopolitical parity’ theory,
best represented by the compelling case that the new state
will comprise of swats of territories from all the existing
states of the South East. Reason: This is (again) the only
agitation in the history of state creation that is propelled
by the collective desire of Igbos as a whole for an
additional state and it was endorsed by the rest of Nigeria
for that reason alone. That means that it is the only one
that fits the current national temperament on state creation
and thus stands ready to pass the difficult legislative
muster of all the State Houses of Assembly in the
federation.
To be sure, the demand was for one more state in the
Southeast and it was never propelled by any of the ‘cultural
affinity/contiguity’ arguments now advanced to justify the
sectarian demand for Orashi, Adada, Orlu/Njaba or Aba state.
What was presented was a pan-Igbo collective request for an
additional state to bring South East to some par with the
other geopolitical zones. And that was the single rationale
that persuaded other Nigerians to sign on. Thus, to now
allow some sectarian group to take the bacon home and keep
it only for themselves will be tantamount to some sort of
political fraud on the larger Igbo, if not the larger
Nigeria that had contemplated otherwise.
The polarizing demands dusted up from closed history by
patchy groups of Igbos, so desperate to be now recognized as
culturally distinct from the rest of the Igbos, has long
been deemed inferior to the greater force and merits of the
‘geopolitical parity’ theory. Reason: All well-meaning Igbos
everywhere fear (with some historical justification) that if
allowed to proliferate, the purveyors of this ‘we are
separate’ arguments will again frustrate what was initially
a ‘one-Igbo’ effort, split Igbos into bitter groups against
one another and eventually create the scary situation where
other Nigerians may withdraw their universal support and
deny the Igbo while pointing to their famous (or infamous)
disunity as the sole reason. Thus, the only viable option is
to push for a new state that will be neutral and not one
that will appear to be recognizing and rewarding the
selfishness found in the demand for the creation of Adada,
Aba, and Orlu/Njaba or Orashi states.
 Ejimakor writes out of Washington DC
|
