Spokesperson of the Northern Elders Forum, a think-tank for the 19 Northern states, Prof. Ango Abdullahi has said that the north is ready if Nigeria decides to break up.

Prof. Abdullahi who is a professor of Agronomy and one-time Vice Chancellor of Ahmadu Bello University threw a challenge to those who think that the North is afraid of Nigeria’s disintegration into more basic constituents, saying the North was ever ready for the dissolution.

In an interview with Sunday Sun, Prof. Abdullahi opined that the way to go about it was through the calling of a formal meeting with complete powers to terminate the legal relationships between the constituent parts in Nigeria.

According to him, “If we agree that we should live together as a people and as a country, so be it, but if the general consensus is that Nigerians want to go their separate ways either on the basis of ethnicity, culture, history or religion, why not?” adding, “if anybody tells you that the large informed opinion in the North is against the dissolution of Nigeria, he is telling you lies.”

Reacting to a question on the readiness of the North for a dissolution, the agronomist, replied: “Absolutely, absolutely, we are. It all depends on the selfish way people want to negotiate.”

“I am 78 now and I also went to the only university in the country at the time in Ibadan. Nobody can tell me about the history of this country.”

“I know a lot about it because I was very much awake and a grown up person to know what happened.”

“The people who argued for the creation of states in 1966/67 are the same people today who are asking for the restructuring of Nigeria with particular preference for regional arrangements.”

“The South-west wants preferably a region, a region that was at one time under the leadership of Chief Awolowo, unless, of course, you are trying to ignore all the writings, all the things that had been written, particularly in their declaration called DAWN, Development Agenda for Western Nigeria, then you can ignore this.”

He further noted that “Biafrans who are saying the same thing. Chief Ekwueme is my respected leader.

“He was in the 1995/96 conference. In fact, he led the Igbo socio-cultural group to the conference and their proposal in that conference was for Nigeria to become a confederate unit. And of course, at that time, perhaps, there was still the feeling that some hopes still remain that Nigeria should paddle along and perhaps they will overcome some of these differences.”

“His proposal for a confederate arrangement was defeated in the conference. I was there. But when he got the opportunity to review the report of the conference, a committee was set up to look at the report of the conference.”

“He was the one who really worked for these so-called geo-political areas that is totally unconstitutional.”

“They are not part of our constitution and this is one of the mistakes that the country is going through. Geo-political zones are not units in our constitutional arrangements.”

“They are selfish conveniences of people who are perhaps clamouring for political positions, elective or otherwise, that are operating today to the detriment of good governance in this country.”

Prof Ango Abdullahi further reacted to why the North is ready for dissolution, speaking on the indices, he said: “The biggest indices is that other Nigerians do not want Nigeria; so I don’t see why the North should insist on having Nigeria. That is the biggest index I have. And this is on the basis of the recent statements.

http://www.herald.ng/northern-elders-forum-ready-divide-nigeria-now/

North ready for Nigeria's break up?? Prof. Ango Abdullahi should tell us another story

lol awusa too wan divide.. wetin man no go ever see

ok

when I say that Ipob are liars they will abuse me this was carried on Radio Biafra London. See link see photo from IgbereTv pls ignore



https://mobile./222919287822515?view=permalink&id=1380939478687151&refid=18&ref=opera_speed_dial&_ft_=qid.6402283414934086031%3Amf_story_key.1380939478687151%3Atop_level_post_id.1380939478687151%3Atl_objid.1380939478687151






This is the igbere link pls ignore them.

That is why they are called Liepods




http://igberetvnews.com/334675?utm_source=&utm_medium=facebook

But, If The North Are Ready For Nigeria's Break Up, Why Do They Shiver Whenever One Part Of The Country Talks About Seceding From Nigeria??



Prof. Ango Abdullahi Is Better Of A Stand-Up Comedian

Good one
But your slaves will not like this

North is ready but your illiterate son is holding Nnamdi hostage at Kuje

The day KANU is released, then I will believe that the North is ready for disintegration

Can you imagine that the North wants to break up but Afonjas are still doing One Nigeria

Is this man really serious about what he's saying? Did he realise that we are now in the 21st century and the claim of 19 Northern state will fall like a pack of wool?

Let him know for the record, that the Hausa/Fulani power block that has been holding the north won't be able to hold back the so called North if the South should go. First, the middle - belt will separate from the NW Hausa /Fulani control. The Benue, Plateau, Taraba and part of Kogi and Niger state will separate from the Muslim Northern control because if Ango realises his dream, then the heardmen will only spend less than a year to eliminate non Muslims in the north.

Another issue is the ethics groups in the so called North. He should realise that in the event of breakup, the Yorubas in Kwara state and Kogi State will not go with the Ango's north. Consequently the South West will own the boundaries of River Niger from Jebba to Lokoja.
Finally, the economic implications, Ango's nortb will not have assess to any sea port and shall not be able to operate Inland water port linked to the sea without alliance with South, therefore, be guided.

BeeBeeOoh:
But, If The North Are Ready For Nigeria's Break Up, Why Do They Shiver Whenever One Part Of The Country Talks About Seceding From Nigeria??



Prof. Ango Abdullahi Is Better Of A Stand-Up Comedian

That has been the position of the North even b4 independence, go and read history. The Northerners actually wanted a separation clause to be included in the constitution but Zik's superior argument against that did not allow the idea to see the light of the day.
If the east really want to separate, they know how exactly to go about it, not taking to streets by some placard carrying touts.

middlebelter:
Is this man really serious about what he's saying? Did he realise that we are now in the 21st century and the claim of 19 Northern state will fall like a pack of wool?

Let him know for the record, that the Hausa/Fulani power block that has been holding the north won't be able to hold back the so called North if the South should go. First, the middle - belt will separate from the NW Hausa /Fulani control. The Benue, Plateau, Taraba and part of Kogi and Niger state will separate from the Muslim Northern control because if Ango realises his dream, then the heardmen will only spend less than a year to eliminate non Muslims in the north.

Another issue is the ethics groups in the so called North. He should realise that in the event of breakup, the Yorubas in Kwara state and Kogi State will not go with the Ango's north. Consequently the South West will own the boundaries of River Niger from Jebba to Lokoja.
Finally, the econoic implications, Ango's nothing will North have assess to any sea port and shall not be able to operate Inland water port linked to the sea without alliance with South, therefore, be guided.

The koko is that the North is ready for separation, forget all these distracting conditions for experts to decide. Whether or not the North can hold shouldn't be of any concern to you, just advocate for the separation process.

LionDeLeo:


That has been the position of the North even b4 independence, go and read history. The Northerners actually wanted a separation clause to be included in the constitution but Zik's superior argument against that did not allow the idea to see the light of the day.
If the east really want to separate, they know how exactly to go about it, not taking to streets by some placard carrying touts.

Please come again

BeeBeeOoh:
Please come again

Yeah, exactly what you read.

LionDeLeo:


Yeah, exactly what you read.

Believe me, you'll basketmouth a run for his money

BeeBeeOoh:
Believe me, you'll basketmouth a run for his money

Abeg, I no fit shout.

1953 when Northern Nigerians were beginning to consider secession from the Nigerian colony that would soon be a nation, Nnamdi Azikiwe gave a speech before the caucus of his political party, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in Yaba, Nigeria on May 12, 1953. That speech, while not disallowing secession, suggested that there would be grave consequences if the Northern region became an independent nation.

I have invited you to attend this caucus because I would like you to make clear our stand on the issue of secession. As a party, we would have preferred Nigeria to remain intact, but lest there be doubt as to our willingness to concede to any shade of political opinion the right to determine its policy, I am obliged to issue a solemn warning to those who are goading the North towards secession. If you agree with my views, then I hope that in course of our deliberations tonight, you will endorse them, to enable me to publicize them in the Press.

In my opinion, the Northerners are perfectly entitled to consider whether or not they should secede from the indissoluble union which nature has formed between it and the South, but it would be calamitous to the corporate existence of the North should the clamour for secession prevail. I, therefore, counsel Northern leaders to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of secession before embarking upon this dangerous course.

As one who was born in the North, I have a deep spiritual attachment to that part of the country, but it would be a capital political blunder if the North should break away from the South. The latter is in a better position to make rapid constitutional advance, so that if the North should become truncated from the South, it would benefit both Southerners and Northerners who are domiciled in the South more than their kith and kin who are domiciled in the North.

There are seven reasons for my holding to this view. Secession by the North may lead to internal political convulsion there when it is realized that militant nationalists and their organizations, like the NLPU, the Askianist Movement, and the Middle Zone League, have aspirations for self-government in 1956 identical with those of their Southern compatriots. It may lead to justifiable demands for the right of self-determination by non-Muslims, who form the majority of the population in the so-called ‘Pagan’ provinces, like Benue, Ilorin, Kabba, Niger and Plateau, not to mention the claims of non-Muslims who are domiciled in Adamawa and Bauchi Provinces.

It may lead to economic nationalism in the Eastern Region, which can pursue a policy of blockade of the North, by refusing it access to the sea, over and under the River Niger, except upon payment of tolls. It may lead to economic warfare between the North on the one hand, and the Eastern or Western regions on the other, should they decide to fix protective tariffs which will make the use of the ports of the Last and West uneconomic for the North.

The North may be rich in mineral resources and certain cash crops, but that is no guarantee that it would be capable of growing sufficient food crops to enable it to feed its teeming millions, unlike the East and the West. Secession may create hardship for Easterners and Westerners who are domiciled in the North, since the price of food crops to be imported into the North from the South is bound to be very high and to cause an increase in the cost of living. Lastly, it will endanger the relations with their neighbours of millions of Northerners who are domiciled in the East and West and Easterners and Westerners who reside in the North.

You may ask me whether there would be a prospect of civil war, if the North decided to secede? My answer would be that it is a hypothetical question which only time can answer. In any case, the plausible cause of a civil war might be a dispute as to the right of passage on the River Niger, or the right of flight over the territory of the Eastern or Western Region; but such disputes can be settled diplomatically, instead of by force.

Nevertheless, if civil war should become inevitable at this stage of our progress as a nation, then security considerations must be borne in mind by those who are charged with the responsibility of government of the North and the South. Military forces and installations are fairly distributed in all the three regions; if that is not the case, any of the regions can obtain military aid from certain interested Powers. It means that we cannot preclude the possibility of alliance with certain countries.

You may ask me to agree that if the British left Nigeria to its fate, the Northerners would continue their uninterrupted march to the sea, as was prophesied six years ago? My reply is that such an empty threat is devoid of historical substance and that so far as I know, the Eastern Region has never been subjugated by any indigenous African invader. At the price of being accused of overconfidence, I will risk a prophecy and say that, other things being equal, the Easterners will defend themselves gallantly, if and when they are invaded.

Let me take this opportunity to warn those who are making a mountain out of the molehill of the constitutional crisis to be more restrained and constructive. The dissemination of lies abroad; the publishing of flamboyant headlines about secessionist plans, and the goading of empty-headed careerists with gaseous ideas about their own importance in tile scheme of things in the North is being overdone in certain quarters. I feel that these quarters must be held responsible for any breach between the North and South, which nature had indissolubly united in a political, social and economic marriage of convenience. In my personal opinion, there is no sense in the North breaking away or the East or the West breaking away; it would be better if all the regions would address themselves to the task of crystallizing common nationality, irrespective of the extraneous influences at work. What history has joined together let no man put asunder. But history is a strange mistress which can cause strange things to happen!

Sources:

Nnamdi Azikiwe, Zik: A Selection from the Speeches of Nnamdi Azikiwe, Governor-General of the Federation of Nigeria formerly President of the Nigerian Senate formerly Premier of the Eastern Region of Nigeria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961).

LionDeLeo:


Abeg, I no fit shout.

1953 when Northern Nigerians were beginning to consider secession from the Nigerian colony that would soon be a nation, Nnamdi Azikiwe gave a speech before the caucus of his political party, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in Yaba, Nigeria on May 12, 1953. That speech, while not disallowing secession, suggested that there would be grave consequences if the Northern region became an independent nation.

I have invited you to attend this caucus because I would like you to make clear our stand on the issue of secession. As a party, we would have preferred Nigeria to remain intact, but lest there be doubt as to our willingness to concede to any shade of political opinion the right to determine its policy, I am obliged to issue a solemn warning to those who are goading the North towards secession. If you agree with my views, then I hope that in course of our deliberations tonight, you will endorse them, to enable me to publicize them in the Press.

In my opinion, the Northerners are perfectly entitled to consider whether or not they should secede from the indissoluble union which nature has formed between it and the South, but it would be calamitous to the corporate existence of the North should the clamour for secession prevail. I, therefore, counsel Northern leaders to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of secession before embarking upon this dangerous course.

As one who was born in the North, I have a deep spiritual attachment to that part of the country, but it would be a capital political blunder if the North should break away from the South. The latter is in a better position to make rapid constitutional advance, so that if the North should become truncated from the South, it would benefit both Southerners and Northerners who are domiciled in the South more than their kith and kin who are domiciled in the North.

There are seven reasons for my holding to this view. Secession by the North may lead to internal political convulsion there when it is realized that militant nationalists and their organizations, like the NLPU, the Askianist Movement, and the Middle Zone League, have aspirations for self-government in 1956 identical with those of their Southern compatriots. It may lead to justifiable demands for the right of self-determination by non-Muslims, who form the majority of the population in the so-called ‘Pagan’ provinces, like Benue, Ilorin, Kabba, Niger and Plateau, not to mention the claims of non-Muslims who are domiciled in Adamawa and Bauchi Provinces.

It may lead to economic nationalism in the Eastern Region, which can pursue a policy of blockade of the North, by refusing it access to the sea, over and under the River Niger, except upon payment of tolls. It may lead to economic warfare between the North on the one hand, and the Eastern or Western regions on the other, should they decide to fix protective tariffs which will make the use of the ports of the Last and West uneconomic for the North.

The North may be rich in mineral resources and certain cash crops, but that is no guarantee that it would be capable of growing sufficient food crops to enable it to feed its teeming millions, unlike the East and the West. Secession may create hardship for Easterners and Westerners who are domiciled in the North, since the price of food crops to be imported into the North from the South is bound to be very high and to cause an increase in the cost of living. Lastly, it will endanger the relations with their neighbours of millions of Northerners who are domiciled in the East and West and Easterners and Westerners who reside in the North.

You may ask me whether there would be a prospect of civil war, if the North decided to secede? My answer would be that it is a hypothetical question which only time can answer. In any case, the plausible cause of a civil war might be a dispute as to the right of passage on the River Niger, or the right of flight over the territory of the Eastern or Western Region; but such disputes can be settled diplomatically, instead of by force.

Nevertheless, if civil war should become inevitable at this stage of our progress as a nation, then security considerations must be borne in mind by those who are charged with the responsibility of government of the North and the South. Military forces and installations are fairly distributed in all the three regions; if that is not the case, any of the regions can obtain military aid from certain interested Powers. It means that we cannot preclude the possibility of alliance with certain countries.

You may ask me to agree that if the British left Nigeria to its fate, the Northerners would continue their uninterrupted march to the sea, as was prophesied six years ago? My reply is that such an empty threat is devoid of historical substance and that so far as I know, the Eastern Region has never been subjugated by any indigenous African invader. At the price of being accused of overconfidence, I will risk a prophecy and say that, other things being equal, the Easterners will defend themselves gallantly, if and when they are invaded.

Let me take this opportunity to warn those who are making a mountain out of the molehill of the constitutional crisis to be more restrained and constructive. The dissemination of lies abroad; the publishing of flamboyant headlines about secessionist plans, and the goading of empty-headed careerists with gaseous ideas about their own importance in tile scheme of things in the North is being overdone in certain quarters. I feel that these quarters must be held responsible for any breach between the North and South, which nature had indissolubly united in a political, social and economic marriage of convenience. In my personal opinion, there is no sense in the North breaking away or the East or the West breaking away; it would be better if all the regions would address themselves to the task of crystallizing common nationality, irrespective of the extraneous influences at work. What history has joined together let no man put asunder. But history is a strange mistress which can cause strange things to happen!

Sources:

Nnamdi Azikiwe, Zik: A Selection from the Speeches of Nnamdi Azikiwe, Governor-General of the Federation of Nigeria formerly President of the Nigerian Senate formerly Premier of the Eastern Region of Nigeria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961).

Nnamdi Azikiwe was actually making sense. i doubt if any rational being wouldnt believe that this experiment called Nigeria wouldn't be a success at that time. having gone through the process of experimentation,and seen that there is no logic nor success in our union,i think the best way is to renegotiate our amalgamation. the North after more than 50 years are still playing catch up with the might of the federal Government behind them through the use of quota system and federal character. then i dont think they are ready to have a Nation for them selves. let those who want to move forward be allowed to do so.

LionDeLeo:


Abeg, I no fit shout.

1953 when Northern Nigerians were beginning to consider secession from the Nigerian colony that would soon be a nation, Nnamdi Azikiwe gave a speech before the caucus of his political party, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in Yaba, Nigeria on May 12, 1953. That speech, while not disallowing secession, suggested that there would be grave consequences if the Northern region became an independent nation.

I have invited you to attend this caucus because I would like you to make clear our stand on the issue of secession. As a party, we would have preferred Nigeria to remain intact, but lest there be doubt as to our willingness to concede to any shade of political opinion the right to determine its policy, I am obliged to issue a solemn warning to those who are goading the North towards secession. If you agree with my views, then I hope that in course of our deliberations tonight, you will endorse them, to enable me to publicize them in the Press.

In my opinion, the Northerners are perfectly entitled to consider whether or not they should secede from the indissoluble union which nature has formed between it and the South, but it would be calamitous to the corporate existence of the North should the clamour for secession prevail. I, therefore, counsel Northern leaders to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of secession before embarking upon this dangerous course.

As one who was born in the North, I have a deep spiritual attachment to that part of the country, but it would be a capital political blunder if the North should break away from the South. The latter is in a better position to make rapid constitutional advance, so that if the North should become truncated from the South, it would benefit both Southerners and Northerners who are domiciled in the South more than their kith and kin who are domiciled in the North.

There are seven reasons for my holding to this view. Secession by the North may lead to internal political convulsion there when it is realized that militant nationalists and their organizations, like the NLPU, the Askianist Movement, and the Middle Zone League, have aspirations for self-government in 1956 identical with those of their Southern compatriots. It may lead to justifiable demands for the right of self-determination by non-Muslims, who form the majority of the population in the so-called ‘Pagan’ provinces, like Benue, Ilorin, Kabba, Niger and Plateau, not to mention the claims of non-Muslims who are domiciled in Adamawa and Bauchi Provinces.

It may lead to economic nationalism in the Eastern Region, which can pursue a policy of blockade of the North, by refusing it access to the sea, over and under the River Niger, except upon payment of tolls. It may lead to economic warfare between the North on the one hand, and the Eastern or Western regions on the other, should they decide to fix protective tariffs which will make the use of the ports of the Last and West uneconomic for the North.

The North may be rich in mineral resources and certain cash crops, but that is no guarantee that it would be capable of growing sufficient food crops to enable it to feed its teeming millions, unlike the East and the West. Secession may create hardship for Easterners and Westerners who are domiciled in the North, since the price of food crops to be imported into the North from the South is bound to be very high and to cause an increase in the cost of living. Lastly, it will endanger the relations with their neighbours of millions of Northerners who are domiciled in the East and West and Easterners and Westerners who reside in the North.

You may ask me whether there would be a prospect of civil war, if the North decided to secede? My answer would be that it is a hypothetical question which only time can answer. In any case, the plausible cause of a civil war might be a dispute as to the right of passage on the River Niger, or the right of flight over the territory of the Eastern or Western Region; but such disputes can be settled diplomatically, instead of by force.

Nevertheless, if civil war should become inevitable at this stage of our progress as a nation, then security considerations must be borne in mind by those who are charged with the responsibility of government of the North and the South. Military forces and installations are fairly distributed in all the three regions; if that is not the case, any of the regions can obtain military aid from certain interested Powers. It means that we cannot preclude the possibility of alliance with certain countries.

You may ask me to agree that if the British left Nigeria to its fate, the Northerners would continue their uninterrupted march to the sea, as was prophesied six years ago? My reply is that such an empty threat is devoid of historical substance and that so far as I know, the Eastern Region has never been subjugated by any indigenous African invader. At the price of being accused of overconfidence, I will risk a prophecy and say that, other things being equal, the Easterners will defend themselves gallantly, if and when they are invaded.

Let me take this opportunity to warn those who are making a mountain out of the molehill of the constitutional crisis to be more restrained and constructive. The dissemination of lies abroad; the publishing of flamboyant headlines about secessionist plans, and the goading of empty-headed careerists with gaseous ideas about their own importance in tile scheme of things in the North is being overdone in certain quarters. I feel that these quarters must be held responsible for any breach between the North and South, which nature had indissolubly united in a political, social and economic marriage of convenience. In my personal opinion, there is no sense in the North breaking away or the East or the West breaking away; it would be better if all the regions would address themselves to the task of crystallizing common nationality, irrespective of the extraneous influences at work. What history has joined together let no man put asunder. But history is a strange mistress which can cause strange things to happen!

Sources:

Nnamdi Azikiwe, Zik: A Selection from the Speeches of Nnamdi Azikiwe, Governor-General of the Federation of Nigeria formerly President of the Nigerian Senate formerly Premier of the Eastern Region of Nigeria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961).

so did the west but the East forced this on us now they want to abandon ship mbanu we cannot take it. Amarabae, and biafranbushboy and any one shouting biafra and insulting others take note. The Iboz owe every Nigerian an apology. The Civil war happened people died, hey its war! Every strategy that reduce casualty on your side is welcomed. The East involved the midwest even after they declared their neutrality. The East tooktde war to their doors they lost loved ones but never blamed the east they moved on... Same with SS

meccuno:
Nnamdi Azikiwe was actually making sense. i doubt if any rational being wouldnt believe that this experiment called Nigeria wouldn't be a success at that time. having gone through the process of experimentation,and seen that there is no logic nor success in our union,i think the best way is to renegotiate our amalgamation. the North after more than 50 years are still playing catch up with the might of the federal Government behind them through the use of quota system and federal character. then i dont think they are ready to have a Nation for them selves. let those who want to move forward be allowed to do so.

For now you've read what the prof said. The North is not stopping any region who wants to separate and "move forward". I sincerely hope this is given due and speedy unconditional consideration to allow the other regions "move forward". We are tired of all these noise, abeg.
Obasanjo (Southerner) was there for 8 yrs, GEJ (Southerner) was there for another 6 yrs, nobody made noise about separation but few months after the coming of a Northerner, separation! Separation!! everywhere just to create impression that the North is stopping you? Now, Prof has spoken for the north again, and if you sincerely want to separate, you know exactly how to go about it rather than carrying placards and taking to streets, no, that is public disturbance pls.

Do that fast pls

BeeBeeOoh:
But, If The North Are Ready For Nigeria's Break Up, Why Do They Shiver Whenever One Part Of The Country Talks About Seceding From Nigeria??



Prof. Ango Abdullahi Is Better Of A Stand-Up Comedian

Dont mind those confused parasites and their slaves in the South West. The mention of Biafra alone gives them nightmares yet he is talking rubbish!

Then bubu should do d needful cos his kinsmen r now ready to go home

LionDeLeo:


Abeg, I no fit shout.

1953 when Northern Nigerians were beginning to consider secession from the Nigerian colony that would soon be a nation, Nnamdi Azikiwe gave a speech before the caucus of his political party, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in Yaba, Nigeria on May 12, 1953. That speech, while not disallowing secession, suggested that there would be grave consequences if the Northern region became an independent nation.

I have invited you to attend this caucus because I would like you to make clear our stand on the issue of secession. As a party, we would have preferred Nigeria to remain intact, but lest there be doubt as to our willingness to concede to any shade of political opinion the right to determine its policy, I am obliged to issue a solemn warning to those who are goading the North towards secession. If you agree with my views, then I hope that in course of our deliberations tonight, you will endorse them, to enable me to publicize them in the Press.

In my opinion, the Northerners are perfectly entitled to consider whether or not they should secede from the indissoluble union which nature has formed between it and the South, but it would be calamitous to the corporate existence of the North should the clamour for secession prevail. I, therefore, counsel Northern leaders to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of secession before embarking upon this dangerous course.

As one who was born in the North, I have a deep spiritual attachment to that part of the country, but it would be a capital political blunder if the North should break away from the South. The latter is in a better position to make rapid constitutional advance, so that if the North should become truncated from the South, it would benefit both Southerners and Northerners who are domiciled in the South more than their kith and kin who are domiciled in the North.

There are seven reasons for my holding to this view. Secession by the North may lead to internal political convulsion there when it is realized that militant nationalists and their organizations, like the NLPU, the Askianist Movement, and the Middle Zone League, have aspirations for self-government in 1956 identical with those of their Southern compatriots. It may lead to justifiable demands for the right of self-determination by non-Muslims, who form the majority of the population in the so-called ‘Pagan’ provinces, like Benue, Ilorin, Kabba, Niger and Plateau, not to mention the claims of non-Muslims who are domiciled in Adamawa and Bauchi Provinces.

It may lead to economic nationalism in the Eastern Region, which can pursue a policy of blockade of the North, by refusing it access to the sea, over and under the River Niger, except upon payment of tolls. It may lead to economic warfare between the North on the one hand, and the Eastern or Western regions on the other, should they decide to fix protective tariffs which will make the use of the ports of the Last and West uneconomic for the North.

The North may be rich in mineral resources and certain cash crops, but that is no guarantee that it would be capable of growing sufficient food crops to enable it to feed its teeming millions, unlike the East and the West. Secession may create hardship for Easterners and Westerners who are domiciled in the North, since the price of food crops to be imported into the North from the South is bound to be very high and to cause an increase in the cost of living. Lastly, it will endanger the relations with their neighbours of millions of Northerners who are domiciled in the East and West and Easterners and Westerners who reside in the North.

You may ask me whether there would be a prospect of civil war, if the North decided to secede? My answer would be that it is a hypothetical question which only time can answer. In any case, the plausible cause of a civil war might be a dispute as to the right of passage on the River Niger, or the right of flight over the territory of the Eastern or Western Region; but such disputes can be settled diplomatically, instead of by force.

Nevertheless, if civil war should become inevitable at this stage of our progress as a nation, then security considerations must be borne in mind by those who are charged with the responsibility of government of the North and the South. Military forces and installations are fairly distributed in all the three regions; if that is not the case, any of the regions can obtain military aid from certain interested Powers. It means that we cannot preclude the possibility of alliance with certain countries.

You may ask me to agree that if the British left Nigeria to its fate, the Northerners would continue their uninterrupted march to the sea, as was prophesied six years ago? My reply is that such an empty threat is devoid of historical substance and that so far as I know, the Eastern Region has never been subjugated by any indigenous African invader. At the price of being accused of overconfidence, I will risk a prophecy and say that, other things being equal, the Easterners will defend themselves gallantly, if and when they are invaded.

Let me take this opportunity to warn those who are making a mountain out of the molehill of the constitutional crisis to be more restrained and constructive. The dissemination of lies abroad; the publishing of flamboyant headlines about secessionist plans, and the goading of empty-headed careerists with gaseous ideas about their own importance in tile scheme of things in the North is being overdone in certain quarters. I feel that these quarters must be held responsible for any breach between the North and South, which nature had indissolubly united in a political, social and economic marriage of convenience. In my personal opinion, there is no sense in the North breaking away or the East or the West breaking away; it would be better if all the regions would address themselves to the task of crystallizing common nationality, irrespective of the extraneous influences at work. What history has joined together let no man put asunder. But history is a strange mistress which can cause strange things to happen!

Sources:

Nnamdi Azikiwe, Zik: A Selection from the Speeches of Nnamdi Azikiwe, Governor-General of the Federation of Nigeria formerly President of the Nigerian Senate formerly Premier of the Eastern Region of Nigeria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961).

If North disagree to call for dissolution you will cry, if they agree you still whine.

Stop analysing 1953, face 2017 forward.

Analyse the points Ango made as far a meeting to review the legal attachments and begin to dismantle them for each to go its own way.

Let them go joor

LionDeLeo:


For now you've read what the prof said. The North is not stopping any region who wants to separate and "move forward". I sincerely hope this is given due and speedy unconditional consideration to allow the other regions "move forward". We are tired of all these noise, abeg.
Obasanjo (Southerner) was there for 8 yrs, GEJ (Southerner) was there for another 6 yrs, nobody made noise about separation but few months after the coming of a Northerner, separation! Separation!! everywhere just to create impression that the North is stopping you? Now, Prof has spoken for the north again, and if you sincerely want to separate, you know exactly how to go about it rather than carrying placards and taking to streets, no, that is public disturbance pls.

their had always been noise made about separation. it started during the era of obasanjo till the era of jonathan. but only got louder during the era of buhari. remember that a station was taken over by a group of people called BZM if i am correct. at least that was one of the highlights or things done that would buttress my point. i think the mistake the Nigerian Nation would make is to conduct a referendum because the SE and SS would vote out of this union. either the IGBOS in the SE and SS would vote to leave or it would be a combination of non igbos in the SS and the igbos in general. the truth is i discuss these things with non igbos on the streets of lagos and rivers. they might not be so popular with the biafra talk,but MAJORITY want out. what many people dont realise is that these igbos they always castigate or ridicule that they want the backing of the SS because of their oil have many billionaires who never went into oil business until recently. Nigeria has a date with history. its either we sit down and talk about how we move the country forward in a restructured setting or we go our separate ways. there is still time for discussion. this present generation of igbos are become very conscious and its a matter of time before they start becoming rebellious .

InvestinOwerri:
Dont mind those confused parasites and their slaves in the South West. The mention of Biafra alone gives them nightmares yet he is talking rubbish!

I never take them serious at all because, they always talk about separation but never advocates it. Isn't it obvious

AsiwajuNdigbo:



If North disagree to call for dissolution you will cry, if they agree you still whine.

Stop analysing 1953, face 2017 forward.

Analyse the points Ango made as far a meeting to review the legal attachments and begin to dismantle them for each to go its own way.

Bro, u don't get my point. Read through the thread, u will find out why I had to provide this report.

The highlighted is actually my point against the poster I had quoted.

meccuno:
their had always been noise made about separation. it started during the era of obasanjo till the era of jonathan. but only got louder during the era of buhari. remember that a station was taken over by a group of people called BZM if i am correct. at least that was one of the highlights or things done that would buttress my point. i think the mistake the Nigerian Nation would make is to conduct a referendum because the SE and SS would vote out of this union. either the IGBOS in the SE and SS would vote to leave or it would be a combination of non igbos in the SS and the igbos in general. the truth is i discuss these things with non igbos on the streets of lagos and rivers. they might not be so popular with the biafra talk,but MAJORITY want out. what many people dont realise is that these igbos they always castigate or ridicule that they want the backing of the SS because of their oil have many billionaires who never went into oil business until recently. Nigeria has a date with history. its either we sit down and talk about how we move the country forward in a restructured setting or we go our separate ways. there is still time for discussion. this present generation of igbos are become very conscious and its a matter of time before they start becoming rebellious .

who and what is stopping ibos in the NA to push for a referendum bill?

meccuno:
their had always been noise made about separation. it started during the era of obasanjo till the era of jonathan. but only got louder during the era of buhari. remember that a station was taken over by a group of people called BZM if i am correct. at least that was one of the highlights or things done that would buttress my point. i think the mistake the Nigerian Nation would make is to conduct a referendum because the SE and SS would vote out of this union. either the IGBOS in the SE and SS would vote to leave or it would be a combination of non igbos in the SS and the igbos in general. the truth is i discuss these things with non igbos on the streets of lagos and rivers. they might not be so popular with the biafra talk,but MAJORITY want out. what many people dont realise is that these igbos they always castigate or ridicule that they want the backing of the SS because of their oil have many billionaires who never went into oil business until recently. Nigeria has a date with history. its either we sit down and talk about how we move the country forward in a restructured setting or we go our separate ways. there is still time for discussion. this present generation of igbos are become very conscious and its a matter of time before they start becoming rebellious .

The idea of taking over a station by any group or any act of civil disobedience in the name of secession is an act that can never be condoned by any govt. If really, the east want to separate, I repeat there are appropriate channels through which it can be achieved without necessarily generating noise.

For instance, can you name any prominent individual(s) from the east in leadership position (present and past, state governor inclusive) who have shown passionate concern to this separation agenda? Have the representatives from the east in NASS made any such move and they were shouted down? Taking to the street is an act of public disturbance.

walemoney007:
who and what is stopping ibos in the NA to push for a referendum bill?

Exactly my point.

AlPeter:
so did the west but the East forced this on us now they want to abandon ship mbanu we cannot take it. Amarabae, and biafranbushboy and any one shouting biafra and insulting others take note. The Iboz owe every Nigerian an apology. The Civil war happened people died, hey its war! Every strategy that reduce casualty on your side is welcomed. The East involved the midwest even after they declared their neutrality. The East tooktde war to their doors they lost loved ones but never blamed the east they moved on... Same with SS

See as this one dey pour spit upandan because he wan do 'one nigeria' with Biafra.

Ask him who fired the first shot during war? he go dey mope like mupepe scarecrow.