Why the Nigerian State, Not IPOB, Made Political Solution to Nnamdi Kanu's Case Impossible

Why the Nigerian State, Not IPOB, Made Political Solution to Nnamdi Kanu's Case Impossible The recent statement by the Foundation for Pe...

Why the Nigerian State, Not IPOB, Made Political Solution to Nnamdi Kanu's Case Impossible

The recent statement by the Foundation for Peace Professionals (PeacePro), which accuses the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) of making any political solution to the prolonged detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu impossible, is not only misguided but intellectually dishonest. It conveniently ignores the structural violence, state-sponsored suppression, and historical injustice meted out to the Igbo people and others in the old Eastern Region, while placing blame solely on the victims of state brutality.

Let us begin by asking a fundamental question: Who abducted Nnamdi Kanu from Kenya in clear violation of international law and due process? Was it IPOB? Certainly not. It was the Nigerian government, which carried out an extraordinary rendition an illegal act that even the United Nations has condemned. How then can the same government be presented as an agent of peace and lawfulness, while IPOB, the aggrieved party, is expected to bear the moral burden of restraint?

PeacePro’s assertion that “militant rhetoric and misinformation” from IPOB have made political resolution impossible is a classic case of blaming the oppressed for their resistance. Every people pushed to the wall will react. The South-East has suffered systematic marginalization for decades from lopsided federal appointments and exclusion from strategic national projects to military occupation of its cities and the massacre of peaceful protesters. IPOB emerged as a response to this existential threat not the cause.

If PeacePro claims to be a peacebuilding organization, then it must recognize that peace is not the absence of tension, but the presence of justice. What justice has Nnamdi Kanu received? What justice have the families of slain IPOB members received? What justice has the Igbo nation received since the civil war ended in 1970? Has the Nigerian government ever offered truth, reconciliation, or even an apology for the genocidal campaign waged against Biafra?

PeacePro boldly states that “IPOB must surrender their militant campaign.” But the real question is: when will the Nigerian state surrender its militarized approach to civic dissent? When will it stop invading towns in the East, burning down homes, and killing young people under the guise of maintaining order? Who shall be held responsible for the mass graves in Orlu, the bloody operations in Obigbo, and the continuous harassment of Easterners at military checkpoints?

Let us not forget that it was not IPOB that shut down the South-East with tanks and guns. It was the fear imposed by the Nigerian military and the climate of insecurity bred by government negligence that forced people indoors. Sit-at-home orders were not enforced with official IPOB brigades; rather, the government's inaction and lack of political will to engage the region meaningfully created a vacuum that opportunists exploited. Yet, IPOB is painted as the sole villain in this complex equation.

PeacePro also claims that “true power is not in secessionist flags or the sound of gunfire.” Indeed, true power lies in dialogue, truth-telling, and justice. But where is the Nigerian state’s willingness to engage honestly? Has President Tinubu or any key leader visited the South-East to hold open town halls or initiate genuine dialogue? Where is the political courage to call a spade a spade to say that Nnamdi Kanu's detention, following an illegal rendition, is an affront to both Nigerian and international law?

If a political solution is now said to be impossible, it is because the Nigerian government has refused to listen, refused to acknowledge historical grievances, and refused to embrace restorative justice. PeacePro, if truly professional in its peace advocacy, should not serve as a public relations arm of the state by echoing propaganda that absolves the real culprits.

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is not on trial merely for his words; he is on trial because he dared to challenge a system built on injustice. His calls for self-determination reflect the aspirations of millions who have lost faith in the failed promises of “One Nigeria.” If Nigeria is truly one, then why must only one region carry the scars of unity?

PeacePro ends its statement with the words, “Peace is not surrender. Peace is the most courageous decision any movement can make.” On this, we agree. But peace must be just, honest, and mutual. You cannot ask a bleeding man to put away his bandages while his wounds are still open.

If there is any group that must take responsibility for the impossibility of a political solution, it is the Nigerian state its arrogance, its brutality, and its refusal to confront the truths that history has written in the blood of Biafrans.

Family Writers Press International