Recently, Ralph Uwazurike, the
leader of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of
Biafra (MASSOB), called for a one day sit-at-home. I was deeply
disturbed that people, especially at Onitsha, heeded his call. But then,
the masses barely think, and consequently, are susceptible to political
manipulation. No wonder, Adolf Hitler once told an aide, “never worry
about what to tell the people because you can tell them anything and
they will believe, and the bigger the lie, the more believable it is to
them”. It also partially explains why the masses, irrespective of their
number, strength and righteous anger, cannot get anything done, unless,
they are directed strategically, that is, led. Ralph Uwazurike is an
uninformed dilettante that is strategically misdirecting the Igbo
masses.
I once met Ralph Uwazurike. He was in
Washington, DC with Chukwuemeka Ojukwu for the opening of the Biafran
“House”. Eager to assess this then emergent secessionist activist, I
listened to him very attentively and observed him very closely. After
the event, I penned my opinion of him, “Uwazurike is not a sober and
reflective crusader on a planned mission with carefully articulated
strategies and objectives. He is an impetus man dabbling recklessly into
an issue with potentially momentous consequences. He lacks both
charisma and oratorical flourishes. He is neither a scholar nor an
intellectual; a philosopher nor a deep thinker; a sophisticate nor a
cosmopolite. He is a homespun boyish looking man, with an air of
arrogance or the self-importance of a parvenu gloating in his new found
prominence.”
They were to cut the tape, declaring
the Biafran “House” open. They were about four hours late. Tired of
waiting for them, Prof. Elekwachi of the Biafran Foundation proceeded to
cut the tape and declare the Biafran “House” open. About 30 minutes
later, Ojukwu, his wife, Bianca, and Uwazurike arrived.
Ojukwu spoke first. He apologized
profusely for their lateness. Uwazurike made no apology for his
lateness. Evidently, not happy that the Biafran “House” was declared
open before their arrival, he said, “you could have gone ahead and done
whatever you wanted but whatever you did in the absence of Ojukwu and I
was useless”. I was stunned and offended by his bare-faced imprudence. I
though it was insensitive and insolent. Even, if it was the President
of the United States of America that kept his maids and houseboys
waiting for four hours, he would have been polite enough to offer them
an apology, no matter how understated.
So, who is this boorish upstart thrust
into the limelight by prattling his neo-Biafran nonsense that thinks he
could keep more than 100 men and women, some of them older than him,
waiting for more than 4 hours and not only refuses to apologize for his
lateness, but also, had the temerity to term whatever they did in his
absence useless. I was dismayed by his delusion of grandeur and false
feeling of indispensability. He continued, “Initially, I did not know
what I was doing, but, as democracy allows self expression, I decided to
express myself”. So, I started talking about Biafra, and as people
started listening to me, I continued.
I believe that up till now, he still
does not know what he is doing. He needs to stop “talking about Biafra,”
and first of all, endeavor to know what he is doing. He needs to be
tutored on the history of Nigeria and her social and political
temperament, the strengths and weaknesses of the Igbo nation, and the
principles of Nonviolence (which, according to him, informs his
activism). And then, the absurdity of his neo-Biafranism will
crystallize to him. .
Nigeria is not breaking up because the
generality of Nigerian, despite their vociferous denunciations of
Nigeria for her multiple woes, are committed to a united Nigeria. The
early attempt to create Biafra was the pipe-dream of an arrogant,
selfishly ambitious despot, who in his studied disdain for reason and
caution scorned the advice of his father and Nnamdi Azikiwe and
railroaded his self-appointed Consultative Assembly into assenting to
his secessionist bid.
Unlike the masses that were whipped
into a paranoiac frenzy by Ojukwu’s propaganda and falsehood, the
politically perceptive Igbo were opposed to Biafra. Like Sir Louis
Odumwgwu Ojukwu (before his death) and Nnamdi Azikiwe, the Igbo
political class was opposed to Biafra. However, intimidated by Ojukwu’s
broad-stroke labeling and chastisement of anyone that disagreed with him
as saboteur, they grudgingly conceded, “you can declare Biafra at your
earliest possible convenience” It was not a heartfelt, firm endorsement
but the reluctant consent of an intimidated Assembly.
Since those nightmare days when the
Igbo defeated, battered and tattered stumbled out of the last vestiges
of Biafra, we have made enormous progress across the whole spectrum of
the Nigerian social life and gained the respect and confidence of other
Nigerians. Uwazurike is undermining the credibility of the Igbo. He is
portraying the Igbo as subversive, unreliable and troublous elements and
implacable, irredeemable rebels.
Igbo land is landlocked with large
tracts of infertile land and a population density three times that of
Yoruba land. But countervailing these disadvantages are the Igbo’s
admirable qualities of courage, determination, hard-edged work ethic and
enterprising vigor. Our boundless resourceful energies and effervescent
entrepreneur spirit are unyieldingly spilling beyond the confines of
our regional borders, and have thus, driven us to every nook and cranny
of Nigeria. Operating within an expanded frontier – one Nigeria - is to
our advantage
Although MASSOB operatives are
sometimes armed and violent, Uwazurike professes that he is guided by
the principles of Nonviolence Civil Disobedience in his struggle for the
actualization of his Sovereign State of Biafra. To appreciate the
incongruity of this method with the Nigerian political environment and
his agitation for Biafra, he needs to read the writings of major
proponents of nonviolent protest: David Thoreau, Mahatma Gandhi and
Martin Luther King Jr.
The Igbo masses, like the masses,
universally, are not politically savvy, and therefore need to be
directed strategically. The man, Ralph Uwazurike, arrogating to himself
the role of directing them, admittedly, does not know what he is doing.
Is that not a classical case of the metaphorical blind leading the
blind?
No comments:
Post a Comment