What does Nnamdi Kanu want? What does Tony Nnadi want? What do their followers want? Anyone who follows the two will wonder at this simple question. But the question is necessary to situate this very discourse.
Both ofcourse want FREEDOM. Freedom from the chokehold of FULANDIA, i.e. Caliphate captive nation of Nigeria.
For Tony Nnadi, that freedom he seeks is not only for the entrapped area he identified as the Lower Niger that incorporates Biafra or former Eastern Nigeria but that also incorporates old Mid Western Nigeria.
This freedom he hopes to achieve through the collective actions of two other separate entities, Western Nigeria and Central Nigeria by isolating the twelve sharia states of Northern Nigeria.
For Nnamdi Kanu, the freedom he seeks is for the people of Biafra representing not only the old geopolitcal Biafra but an expanded Biafra that will contain chunks of the Middle Belt with affinity to Biafraland. Therefore and as stated earlier, both want Independence but with a few differences in geographical details.
The above seem where their sameness ended as from that point what confronts the onlooker is their sometimes often glaring difference and beligerence.
For Nnadi, this freedom task has taken over twenty years of behind the scene deep research and collection of relevant materials needed to argue the case for independence. It should be noted that as a forensic lawyer, Nnadi is very well equipped for this quest on research and academics including the legal fireworks needed to champion such a serious matter.
Kanu is not left behind in research and deep analysis either. He being a product of British education in Political Economics where he distinguished himself and equally saw and experienced first-hand the source of the economic dependency and the colonization and subjugation of his people.
As a political agitator Kanu was well equipped also to delve into the brand of the agitation he did and still doing.
While Nnadi has crisscrossed Nigeria and beyond agitating, discussing behind close doors with political, cultural and economic leaders on the need to shutdown the 1999 constitution which he sees as the latest instrument of en-shacklement, Kanu took his agitation into open galary and direct to the masses whom he believe are the direct victims and so stakeholders who must be emboldened to free themselves from Caliphate enslavement.
These two styles of agitation that naturally should not be mutually exclusive have been turned into a competition for leadership and of who's idea and strategy is the best for the freedom quest.
Therefore, no matter what Kanu or Nnadi choose to say, the contest for he with the best idea and strategy including leadership of the struggle is real yet unnecessary.
In their quest, brickbats and vitriolic have been thrown back and forth to the consternation of onlookers and interested parties.
Given that there have been attempts at securing an understanding between the two in the past, it seems that their personal nature, - I find it had to use the word, ego, has been at play at what ordinarily would have been a most wonderful symbiotic relationship.
And so they embark on a DEMARCHE across the world soliciting attention and support for the necessarily needed international input into the struggle. Across the United States recently, both spent energy and resources appealing to US government officials and International agencies and also holding town hall meetings with stakeholders. Same with Europe where Kanu had a series of well advertised international engagements recently.
It does not take a fortune teller to inform anyone that a meeting of minds and an ENTENTE not necessarily the subjugation of one person or one idea to the other or one group to the other is urgently need right now. The path to freedom being seriously sought after by their traumatized people may lay within these two working together in some sort of arrangement. This dissipation of energy is not helping the cause at all.
In all live's issues, despite all the theorizing, forms and strategies, there is hardly one sure path to a goal. While a goal and in this case, Freedom, remains constant, the path to it's achievement cannot be one single road cast in cement or iron.
The revolutions we have seen in the Arab countries did not start with theorizing or even mass mobilization. One cart pusher set himself on fire and the rest as they say became history. So why these penchant that 'my way is the only unalterable way.' It is stupid thinking and for the sake of the struggle must be disregarded and replaced with a more open minded approach and brotherly accommodation as LONG AS THE GOAL REMAINS ONE - FREEDOM.
I know these men and have seen these two men at very close quarters and worked with them. Are they passionate about what they are doing? YES. Does Nnadi have a firm grip on the technicalities involved for the struggle? YES. Is what Nnadi doing capable of shooting down this country? YES. Does Nnamdi Kanu have what it takes to achieve freedom for our people? YES. Does Kanu have the people necessary and needed to accomplish this mandate? YES. If these two work in unison, the sky will be no limit.
But then, one understands human nature and even revolutions and revolutionaries better. Differences in opinions are sometimes hardly reconcilable. There has always been differences amongst revolutionaries in almost all History of revolutions. Maybe this is no difference but with the urgency inherent and the real time bound existential threat we face, a mending of fences becomes top priority.
Are there elders still remaining in the house. Can we seat these two warriors down for an ENTENTE and see our quest achieved within a more reasonable short timeframe?
Sincerely,
Oluchi Ibe
(for Biafra Writers of Conscience)
