Why The Captivity of Three Jewish Filmmakers In Nigeria Maybe Connected To The Redemption

A few years ago I attended a high level meeting of pro Igbo Jewish activists, Rabbinic leaders, and political connectors in Jerusalem to discuss how real the Igbo claim of Israelite heritage and if so what was there to do about it.

No real press was allowed at the meeting and in many ways, although we reached some fascinating conclusions and a desire to help – nothing came of it.

There are approximately 30 million Igbo in southeastern Nigeria. Most identify with some sort of Hebraic connection, however those who follow mainstream halachic Judaism are few yet growing. A larger percentage – perhaps the majority, follow a Seventh Day Adventist approach to Christianity, which leans far more to a Hebrew Roots style of worship that appears on the outside to be very Jewish, despite a clinging to a different “messiah.”

The real connection the Igbo have to Israel is not with modern Judaism, but rather a form of actualized Israelite customs that our own sojourning relegated to memory. The bandwidth of laws that are similar to what we see in the Bible as well as familiar ones like Brit Milah, basic Kashrut, and Shabbat is astounding. Whether these came out from a need to connect to the Judaism they saw in the Bible centuries ago, or are an accurate expression of Israelite connection doesn’t matter – the Igbo not only believe, but have a deep culture of practice of the traditions called Omenana – “What you do in the Land.”

With this backdrop, Rudy Rochman, a pro Israel and indigenous rights activist as well as two others went to Africa to film emerging African Jewish communities, eventually finding themselves in Nigeria with the Igbo. Unfortunately for them, the Nigerian DSS associated their work with the free Biafra movement (a loose confederation of pro Biafran separatists sometimes connected to the Igbo).

Despite differences, Nigeria increasingly sees the Igbo movement for greater Hebraic awareness and the Biafran independence movement as growing more and more interconnected. Nigerian President Buhari, is a known radical Muslim who hates the Igbo. Unknown to them, the three Jewish filmmakers essentially walked into a far more complicated and dangerous situation than they assumed existed. Unfortunately they are still being held weeks later.

Despite the frustration and the danger Rudy, David, and Noam are in, their captivity may be part of something larger, a trigger for a wider redemptive awareness. While it is true, we as Israel don’t have the vessels or ability to sift through the myriad claims of connection from around the world, our awareness of a far larger purpose to our homecoming is necessary.

The Jewish return to the Land of Israel is a mere first step to a global redemption. It is not surprising since we liberated the Biblical Heartland and Jerusalem in 1967 that a tremendous awakening is now underway around the world. This awakening may not mesh with our assumption of what the Lost Tribes or the next stage of Redemption would be like, but that is only because our awakening is one of acceptance to something far greater than our exilic imagination permitted.

From the Pashtun in Afghanistan to the Igbo in Nigeria or the individual Christians who for whatever reason desire to return to the path of the Torah to the Bnei Menashe of East India, there is a sense that something profound is unfolding. Our assumption has been that in order to reach Redemption we in Israel only need to strengthen in following G-D’s will as found in the Torah and conquer the Land of Israel. What happens if the there is a another layer?

We know that the Redemption at the End of Days will be global – like a pebble dropped into a pond, the resulting splash has a center point, but radiates outward. This is what we are seeing now amongst the Igbo, the Abudaya in Uganda, and the Lemba in Zimbabwe. Are they Israelites? Not clear and nor does it matter – their attachment to the One G-D of Israel is what may tip the balance between darkness and light.

Perhaps Rudy and his friends are just some naive Jewish filmmakers or perhaps their captivity is a message for all of us that we have a responsibility to not only set them free, but to actually take the Igbo far more seriously than we currently do thus helping to release them from captivity as well. The Redemption just might depend on it.

Learn about Rudy’s Film here.

Ethiopian Troops Fire On UN Staffers In Tigray After Defying Checkpoints

In the scramble to try to find out whats going in the Tigray province of Ethiopia, UN staffers were fired upon because they defied the Ethiopian army checkpoints.

Redwan Hussein, spokesman for the Ethiopian government’s task force for Tigray, explained to reporters that the U.N. team passed through two checkpoints without stopping. The continued further hastily driving into an unauthorized area.

“When they were about to break the third one they were shot at and detained,” he said.

The weeks old conflict has seen the federal Ethiopian government under PM Abi Ahmed crush the TPLF resistance in Tigray after they defied the central government. Ahmed has been focused on centralizing Ethiopia and breaking down the stranglehold over the Ethiopian economy that the TPLF has had over the last 20 years.

The UN staffers were told not to go into certain areas and they defied orders. Some were arrested and others shot at.

The international community has become worried about the Ethiopian conflict spiraling out of control and splintering the country along ethnic lines. Ethiopia is seen as a regional powerhouse, which is why China is hoping for a quick end to the conflict and a consolidation under Abi Ahmed’s moves. This is why Eritrea, who was once at war with Ethiopia has been interested in helping Addis Ababa put down the insurgency in the North. Both need stability in order to lock further Chinese investment across the Horn of Africa.

The UN’s defiance of Ethiopian orders in Tigray is more than just a mistake. There are those within the agency who seek a balance to Beijing’s expansion across the strategic Horn of Africa and may be willing to use Tigray to get it.

While there is a clear humanitarian crisis forming, the international community mostly European led appear to be exacerbating Ethiopian tensions with the outside world.

Jan Egeland, head of the internationalist Norwegian Refugee Council has jumped in, exhorting Addis Ababa to allow unfettered aid.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations chimed in as well:

Tigray may be a looming disaster, but it is unclear why the UN sees fit to focus outsized energy on it as opposed to the crisis between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh or even elsewhere on the African continent like Buhari’s ethnic cleansing of the Igbo.

This sort of over focus by Western international organizations unintentionally pushes countries like Ethiopia further into the pocket of China who asks no questions, except for demanding total obedience.

China Looms Large Behind The Ethiopian-Tigray Conflict

The current conflict between Federal Ethiopian forces and the TPLF of the northern-most province of Tigray appears to be another sectarian conflict on a continent that has seen endless chaos. Yet, like anything else on the African continent these days, China has become the real puppet master.

The Derg, (a communist dictatorship from 1977 to 1991) fell due to a combined effort of multi-ethnic alliances led by the Tigray leadership still known today as the TPLF. Only 6% of the country’s population, Tigray is historically important and also boasts the most battle hardened troops. Yet, the Prime Minister saw fit in 2018 to reorganize Ethiopian politics under a unitary party, essentially ending his party’s relationship with the TPLF and pushing them out of power.

The current conflict is far less about Tigray secession, (although the TPLF may decide to do that as a reaction to Federal troops decimating their cities in the North) and far more to do with breaking down the federalized system that has been in place since the fall of the Derge in 1991.

Of all the Ethiopian regions, Tigray has had the most autonomous past and even claim to the throne when a part of the royal family broke off and resided in Tigray. Some would point to the seeds of the present conflict dating back to 1889, when imperial rule returned to Ethiopia, marginalizing the Tigray leadership.

Where Is China In All Of This?

When it comes to Africa, China has directly exploited local conflicts to spur external solutions that bring it more control and power and thus monopolizing Africa’s rich natural resources. The Horn of Africa, made up of Ethiopia, Djibouti, Eritrea, and Somalia is one of the most important geographic locations in the world. It is a choke point along the traditional oil route that Sunni Gulf countries use.

This is why China has made Eritrea, who broke off of Ethiopia, gaining independence in 1991, the main “beachhead” for CCP activities in the Horn of Africa.

In 2019, Eritrean officials met in Beijing with the CCP and agreed to strengthen ties between the two countries. “Eritrea and China stand ready to build a healthy and strong partnership for the benefit of their two peoples,” a statement made by Eritrean Foreign Minister Osman Saleh when he met with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi.

Many observers believe that the 2019 meeting set the stage for Eritrea to be China’s centerpiece for the Belt and Road Initiative in the Horn of Africa.

Border Dispute With Eritrea Triggered The Tigray Violence

Interestingly enough, as early as 2017, China offered to send troops to the disputed border region between Ethiopia and Eritrea. In fact, it is through Chinese mediation that Ethiopia agreed to hand Eritrea the coveted border area. The area in question was part of Tigray.

It was this acquiesce by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in handing Tigray’s land over to Eritrea that began to spark the unrest.

While China has picked no side in the current conflict, Tigray has accused the Ethiopian government of working with Eritrea to defeat the TPLF. The working relationship is so strong that some of the members of the Ethiopian army have been staying in Eritrea’s border region.

This relationship could have only come about through Chinese contacts. Ethiopia’s decision to begin centralizing power and shuddering the federalized system, is rooted in its relationship with the Chinese; who are encroaching more and more on the Horn. After all, China requires stable and centralized systems of government to guarantee the Belt and Road Initiative’s success.

Besides this, Ethiopia has been one of the most heavily invested African countries by China over the past 50 years.

Unfortunately for China, the unintended consequence of spurring the centralization of Ethiopia to the detriment of various ethnicities, is a further decoupling and talks of other minorities attempting to pull out of the federation.

Dangerous Developments For Israel

While there has been accusations of Ethiopian Federal troops using Israeli UAVs on Tigray, Israel has pretty much stayed quiet on the conflict. On the face of it, Israel would be more in line with Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government than Tigray, which is dominated by the Marxist/Left leaning TPLF. However, Chinese encroachment and coopting moves in terms of utilizing the current government in Ethiopia is not something Israel should ignore.

By shoring up its control over the Horn of Africa, China is essentially in control of the Western side of the Red Sea. This means that Iran will have complete access to the Horn, placing shipping routes in danger as well as increasing arms smuggling to Gaza and Hezbollah.

In the great game of redrawn Middle Eastern Alliances, China and its Iranian Allies will be sitting on one of the most important pressure points for the region. Saudi Arabia will be in direct line of fire, but more importantly, as China strengthens its grip on the Horn the world’s oil will be up for grabs. Essentially, between the South China Sea and the Red Sea, the CCP will be in near control of the most important shipping lanes in the world.

Israel may be unable to influence Beijing’s policy in Eritrea, but it has excellent relations with the Prime Minister of Ethiopia. It must press upon Addis Ababa the importance of not letting China utilize Ethiopia’s sovereign territory for further control over international oil routes and passageways and ultimately not allowing the Horn of Africa to once again be transformed into a hub of Iranian terrorist activity.

Why An Independent Igbo-Israelite State Is Necessary In West Africa

The Igbo nation has a vibrant and resourceful population of 50 million. Within this teeming population there is a sufficiently developed bank of human resources capital living in a physical geographical space known as Igbo land. Igbo people have an unmistakable unique identity, a well-developed set of national cultural values and clearly defined and distinct world views. On the whole the Igbo nation has everything it takes to exist and manage their affairs independently of other people. So, the Igbo are prepared to take their own fate in their hands and will not for any reason continue to play any second fiddle or remain subservient to any other group of people. Therefore, Igbo people are out to do everything in their power to achieve Igbo self-determination and political independence from Nigeria.

On the 29th of May 1966 the Igbo renounced their Nigerian citizenship forever. Starting from that fateful day the Igbo determined to reclaim and reassume their national sovereignty and political independence outside Nigeria. That day marked the beginning of the Nigerian state’s pogrom of the Igbo and other ethnic nationalities from the former Eastern Region. The aim and scope of the pogrom was the total extermination of all Igbo from Nigeria. This made the Igbo along with these other affected peoples and Igbo neighbors to secede from Nigeria as the Republic of Biafra. On the 30th of May 1967 the Biafrans unilaterally declared the independence of their region from Nigeria. After the declaration of independence the Nigerian state declared war on the new country on 6th July 1967. The war between the two states lasted till the 15th of January 1970. In the end Biafra was defeated. The Igbo got reabsorbed into Nigeria. But many systemic policies were put in place by the Nigerian state to marginalize and further punish the Igbo for attempting to secede.

After the war in spite of the many oppressive state policies, threats, intimidations and actual killings of the Igbo, they still refused to be deterred and continued clandestinely the struggle for a total and absolute secession and independence of Igbo land from Nigeria. But unlike the 1967 to 1970 struggle for Biafra independence, the new and ongoing struggle to free Igbo from Nigeria is exclusively an Igbo initiative and project which does not involve any of their neighboring ethnic nationalities or their lands. The extent of this Igbo state covers all and only Igbo lands as they were before the advent of the European colonialists who amalgamated the different ethnic nationalities with divergent and irreconcilable cultures, worldviews and lands into a dysfunctional unitary Nigerian country. In this new struggle for Igbo independence, the special circumstances that necessitated the joint multi ethnic independent project in the past are not present. Therefore, this new Igbo state is not Biafra and cannot justifiably be called Biafra because it has no resemblance to the former joint multi-ethnic struggle for an independent state in the 1960s.   

This new agitation for Igbo independence that began in 1970 soon after the Biafra War is fundamentally different from the 1967 to 1970 Biafra war for independence. The 1960s struggle is what I generally refer to as Ojukwu’s Biafra. In this new struggle it is simply and unambiguously the struggle for the creation of a modern and exclusive Igbo-only independent state. This fundamental difference between the old and the new struggles cannot be overemphasized and no one needs to misunderstand it.

This difference should be understood in the light that it is typically said that every generation fights their own battle in their own unique way based on their unique circumstances. What drove the former and what is driving the present movements are basically different. In the 1960s starting from May 29, 1966 the systemic countrywide mass killing of the Igbo and the destruction of their properties began and it was geared towards cleansing out the ethnic Igbo from the Nigerian space. This was what produced the declaration of Biafra independence.

Starting from 29th May 1966 these government backed killings of the Igbo continued throughout Nigeria for one year despite all efforts by the Igbo to reconcile and make peace with Nigeria. After one year of unabated killings and destruction of Igbo properties and, with the death toll of over 100,000 Igbo and the other Easterners who were the victims jointly decided to secede from Nigeria. So, they unilaterally declared independence from Nigeria as the Republic of Biafra. For them Biafra was their best move to protect and preserve the lives and properties of all those within the boundaries of the new state. To prove their determined resolve to defend themselves and their land they fought a bitter war for about three years which ended up costing the Igbo a total of 3.1 million lives in addition to the 400,000 deaths of the other Biafrans.

Contrasting the 1960s Secession Effort with 2020 Effort

The 1960s effort to free Igbo from Nigeria was mostly necessitated by Nigeria’s pogrom against the Igbo and the other easterners. This is not exactly the same with today’s Igbo’s decision to leave Nigeria. In this 2020 and as it has been since the end of the war in 1970 Igbo are not fighting to free themselves from Nigeria entirely because of the ongoing injustices and killings against them. Since the end of the war the Igbo have endured in Nigeria many oppressive marginalizing polices and systemic denial of opportunities and without doubt, these unjust and wicked treatments have been bad enough. But today’s Igbo decision to leave Nigeria is based on the simple reason that they do not wish to remain Nigerians anymore. They would instead be Igbo. As a people they would rather exist and live under their own Igbo identity and manage their own affairs within an independent Igbo nation state outside Nigeria.

As we already noted, Ojukwu’s Biafra was created along the boundary lines of the defunct Eastern Region which he presided over as the governor prior to Biafra declaration of independence. The irony of it is that Eastern Region of Nigeria split up Igbo population in two with one on the east and the other half on west banks of the Niger River. This split the Igbo resulted in the Western not being included in Ojukwu’s Biafra map. That exclusion of course is unacceptable to the Igbo. The Eastern Region was created that way by the British colonialists. They were obviously insensitive to the ugly divisive consequences of splitting up brothers so long as it suited their business convenience and interests. The boundaries of the Eastern Region were established to serve the business and economic interests of the foreign colonialists rather than to work in the political and economic interests of the indigenous peoples.

After considering the circumstances surrounding the creation of the former Eastern Region along whose boundaries were based Ojukwu’s Biafra, the Igbo totally rejected to adopt the defunct Biafra’s map for the new Igbo country. Among the obvious reasons the Igbo give for rejecting the old Biafra map is that the borders were established by the same foreigners who created Nigeria. Over the years most analysts of the reasons for Nigeria’s failure as a nation have come to the consensus that the Nigerian experiment failed principally because the foreigners who created the Nigerian state failed to take into consideration the irreconcilable differences that exist among the various ethnic peoples and cultures who were forced to live together as citizens of the same country. Unfortunately it is very clear that the same factors that orchestrated Nigeria’s failure are present within the borders of the defunct Biafra. Ojukwu’s Biafra boundaries split Igbo people and their land and this is unacceptable and will not apply to the new Igbo state.

Igbo and Biafra are not One and the Same

Prior to 1967 Igbo people were never known as Biafrans. At no other time in history except for the brief period of two and half years (May 30, 1967 to January 15, 1970) were Igbo people ever identified as Biafrans. Yet, since the past five decades after the war there has been this prevalent misconception which has left some people confused. Since after the war, some people have tended to use Igbo and Biafra identities interchangeably when referencing the Igbo. This is wrong. The truth is that Igbo people along with other ethnic nationalities used the name Biafra and its identity to fight a war known as Biafra War from 1967 to 1970. Biafra War was fought by the Igbo and others from the former Eastern Region as a joint effort to free their people and lands and gain independence from Nigeria. Unfortunately, the Biafran project failed as the war ended in the defeat of Biafra.

At the war’s end Igbo people then reverted to their original Igbo national identity and ceased being Biafrans. But out of ignorance despite the passage of many years some people continue to send out mixed messages to observers about who the Igbo are and what their collective national goal is. For the sake of clarity it is important that we emphasis here that Igbo people are no longer Biafrans but Igbo and their goal is to establish an independent modern Igbo nation state outside Nigeria.

Frustratingly however, one can still find a pocket of ignorant individuals who in spite of this clear and unclouded known difference between Igbo and Biafran identities still use the words Igbo and Biafra as if they were interchangeable or are one and the same thing. They are not. Igbo is a nation or the national identity of the ethnic Igbo people. The land they occupy is called Igbo land, the people are known and called Igbo, the culture they practice is Igbo culture and their language is Igbo.

The Igbo are a national people that fit perfectly the current United Nations categorization and definition of who national peoples are. And it is based on that definition that they declared in their charter that any such group of people are legitimately and legally entitled to actively seek for their self-determination and can aspire to be independent of all others and exist and thrive on their own terms as a unique cultural and national group or state.

Most importantly, we need to state here that since the end of the war no one has been given any Igbo mandate to re-impose the Biafran identity on the Igbo nation; the people and their land. In 1967 the Igbo and their neighbors adopted Biafra as a collective identity on an ad hoc and temporary basis. They adopted the Biafran banner and identity to defend themselves against a common enemy. Beyond 1970 no one is authorized to continue to refer to Igbo as Biafrans or their land as Biafra land. It is important to clearly state that Igbo’s abandonment of the Biafran identity after 1970 does not mean that the Igbo at any time abandoned their quest for self-determination and independence from Nigeria. The Igbo are still seeking to restore and reestablish their sovereign and political independence under Igbo banner and identity instead of under the Biafran banner and identity.

Biafra is also a Foreign Nomenclature

One significant reason that some people who support the dissolution of the Nigerian union give is that the name Nigeria is foreign to the local people. They assert that Nigeria as a country was put together and christened Nigeria by foreigners. Yet these same people who oppose the use of Nigeria’s nomenclature are still infatuated and hooked on Biafra as the name for their proposed fantasy country. Such people overlook the fact that Biafra too is as foreign as any foreign names can be. Some of them have argued and defended the name Biafra by imputing strange and ridiculous local or Igbo meanings to the word in order to convince people that it is indigenous. Some of the people can speculate and argue as much as they like but that does not change the fact that the name Biafra has a European origin. The bight was christened so by the Portuguese pioneer explorers who were the first to visit the West African coastal waters before the other Europeans.

The first Europeans who came in contact with the coast dwellers of the Atlantic in West Africa were from Portugal in the 15th and 16th centuries. Initially the interactions between the Europeans and the natives were solely commercial. So, to aid them in their navigation and trade routes the Europeans made the map of the territory for their convenience and gave it the name Biafra that it bore except that the Nigerian government changed it to Bight of Benin after the war in their bid to spite the former Biafrans.

Justifying the Igbo Independence Project

Igbo as a people are unique and clearly identifiable with their own unique set of culture, language, a set of unified customs and norms and a specific physical geographical space. They therefore, can justifiably seek to determine themselves or who they are. They do not need to offer any other qualifications or reasons as basis for them to seek to be independent and autonomously manage their own affairs without any input or interference from any other people. But because it is true, the Igbo can still make references to the issues of unjust systemic mistreatments, marginalization, killings and other such injustices to which they are subjected in Nigeria. But those do not form the most important argument that the Igbo present for their independence. Those unjust conditions and mistreatments can change but the Igbo persona and identity does not change. So, the Igbo are campaigning for their self-determination and independence based on who they are and not based on the adverse things that are happening to them in Nigeria. The Igbo project to free themselves from Nigeria and become independent is grounded on the people’s collective wish to be free and live autonomously based on who they are. It is the people’s deliberate conscious effort that does not depend on the vagaries of fortune or the flimsy and fleeting circumstances of human whims or even the caprices of nature. The decision is immutable and continues to endure until the goal is achieved.

Easily and without doubt the singular most important argument that any group of people can present for wanting to be free and independent from others is their desire to preserve their identity and their way of life as a people. And this is what the Igbo are working to achieve. We are well aware that it may be harder to sustain for a long time when arguing for freedom merely based on temporary unjust and unfavorable conditions the people are subjected to. Such argument might be countered easily by some clever and cunny individuals who deal well in sophistry, half-truths and less than honest rhetoric. Such individuals might come up with the insincere argument that others within the same space are going through the same pain and injustice and as such the Igbo have no sufficient excuse to opt out. Additionally, if Igbo’s argument is based mainly or solely on such ephemeral issues a day might come when any astute politician could emerge in Nigeria and decide to take on those challenges and injustices that Igbo are complaining about. Such effort maybe pretentious or genuine, it doesn’t matter but it might help to weaken Igbo argument and make it harder to win the argument for Igbo separation and independence. On the contrary, the Igbo will always have a valid argument if their need for independence is always based on the idea of their desire to preserve their Igbo unique and separate identity. Fundamentally the Igbo can and do have the right to seek independence and self-determination just for the sake of it and without giving any other reason other than that they are Igbo and a part of humanity.

Igbo Nation State is not Biafra State

For those who are clamoring for a new fantastic state of Biafra on the basis that Nigeria is a foreign creation and therefore a fictitiously forced-on identity should also not overlook the fact that the same applies to Biafra. Some people argue, and rightly so that Nigeria was created for the natives, without their consent, by the British colonialists and, for this reason it is unacceptable to the people who are going through the pain of the consequences of that miscreation. Others also believe that Nigeria failed mostly because different peoples with different and conflicting cultures, languages and world views were forced to share the same Nigerian citizenship. They assert that ever from inception these incongruent ethnic and national interests have continued to clash against each other. Undoubtedly, it is true because these factors are responsible for the dysfunctional state of things in Nigeria and its ultimate failure. Yet it boggles the imagination to see some of these same people fail to understand that in the Biafra they are fighting to reestablish lies the same Nigerian failure-factors. Such individuals continue to ignore the fact that the so-called defunct Eastern Region on whose map the old Biafra was based was also the creation of the same British colonialists. If they have rejected Nigeria as they rightly should then they should also reject the old Eastern Region. It was created by the same British colonialists. What is more is that the same factors of diversities of peoples, cultures,  languages and interests that brought about Nigeria’s failure, are clearly present in the so-called old and proposed new Biafra. If Nigeria failed on the basis of the enumerated reasons what then is the guarantee that this new utopian Biafra will not fail.

An Igbo State by the Igbo and for the Igbo

There is nothing that is stopping the present generation of Igbo from founding a new modern Igbo nation (country or state) for the Igbo and by the Igbo without any foreign input. We believe that there is no excuse for this generation of Igbo to lazily choose to fashion this new country along the lines of an existing foreign concept and cartography. This generation of Igbo must reject the temptation of choosing the easy way out or traveling the path of least resistance all because they don’t want to put in some extra work and “think outside the box” of an existing foreign concept. In this new independence project all things must be made new. The Igbo must draw a fresh new map of Igbo country by Igbo and for the Igbo. They should roll up their sleeves and actually go to work to produce an authentic Igbo map that will serve this generation and many more to come.

In some quarters some presumptuous and misguided Igbo nurse the ridiculous dream of one day inventing what they refer to as a “United States of Biafra.” They believe that the Igbo will sometime in the future after independence go into a confederating alliance with the other neighboring ethnic nationalities through some kind of a memorandum of understanding. It is as clear as daylight and, no one needs any soothsayer to see that this is presumptuously reckless as it will only become a hopeless “Disunited States of Biafra,” an epitome of a house of cards. Except by name such creation will not be anything quite different from the extant Nigeria. What is amazing though is that one would have thought that after the disastrous experience of the united Nigerian nightmare that some advocates for this new Biafra would have learned some lessons. It is expected that by now a long time has passed, enough for such reckless dreamers to reflect and avoid everything with the shape and appearances of Nigeria in Igbo quest for independence.

The Igbo do not have to copy what other people have done elsewhere in order to be accepted in the comity of nations. Therefore, it’s not going to be because there is the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain so, the Igbo must create a “United States of Biafra” just to prove anything. U. K.’s lesson should be enough to warn those who harbor such impractical fantasy to desist from committing such foolish and sentimental mistakes. In case of Britain, after 300 years of being together the union is crumbling, as everyone can see. The various components of the realm are opting out. Igbo therefore at this point must not fall into a similar mistake. In their effort to found a new modern Igbo state they can take a lesson from the British experience and choose to get it right from the beginning. Every Igbo everywhere can and must choose to reject the fictitious Biafran identity in favor of their Igbo identity.

Sentiments and Compromises do not build great and lasting structures

There is no any successful and progressive state that is founded and built up on sentiments. A successful Igbo state is only that which is founded and built on Igbo ideas, cultural values and worldviews and not that which is sustained by borrowed or compromised ideas and cultural values. Igbo’s collective goal at this point should be to found a functional and successful society rather than trying too hard to appear “woke” and look pretty as a fanciful “multicultural” borderless and dysfunctional society.

In the many years of my search I am yet to come across any convincing argument on how the Igbo persona will diminish if they choose to found and run an exclusive Igbo-only country. Of course such Igbo-ideology or Igbo-worldview-based country will not in any way be closed to other people who are willing to come and get assimilated and become Igbo citizens through a standard formal procedure. In the meanwhile some of us have wondered without end what it is that drives some Igbo to sometimes readily and willingly jettison their Igboness or at best compromise and dilute it at the drop of a hat. The question is; what is there for anyone to be ashamed of in a unique Igbo identity. Why should anyone have to compromise their Igboness in order to prove to others that the Igbo are also a part of this universe and should rightfully hold their own uniqueness in it. At this point, the importance of self-acceptance and pride in who the Igbo are cannot be over emphasized. There can never come a time when it will become a virtue to debase oneself in order to prove to the other people any point.

It will be an unforgivable collective amnesia if Igbo people can find it easy to forget the fact which is still very fresh in the people’s mind how self-hurting compromises contributed so much in causing the failure of Azikiwe’s Nigeria. Someone had once said that compromises make for good umbrellas but not good as roofs. In the light of this discussion, nothing can be truer. The Igbo should learn to always think in long terms when Igbo national interests are the concern. An Igbo should always ask how will the decision I make or the thing that I do affect Igbo individuals or Igbo collective in the next twenty or fifty years.

Attaching Igbo’s destiny to those of others will always spell disaster. The Igbo must learn how to believe in themselves and find peace in themselves, enough to always rely in their collective inner strength. When entering into any alliance either as individuals or as Igbo collective all Igbo persons must always consider what will be the effects of those agreements in the lives of the living and unborn generations of Igbo. No Igbo should ever decide or act in a way that will knowingly hurt Igbo interests or individuals. Every Igbo is his brother’s keeper, onye ahana nwanne ya. The Igbo do not have to sell themselves cheap, throw away their identity and tell the others that there is nothing else to the Igbo. No, there is. There is “this” Igbo uniqueness. This Igbo uniqueness is not in any way better than those of others. But it is theirs; and all Igbo must endeavor to cherish and guard this Igboness from dishonor either from within or from without.

Some of us may have come across those who argue for a compromised Igbo state on the premise that the Igbo and some of their neighboring ethnic nationalities are closely connected because they have lived in close proximity for so long and for that reason they have a few things in common. They talk about intermarriages and even in some cases they cite instances of common ancestral connections. That point of course is an emotional argument suffused with sentiments. Remember we had argued earlier that sentiments are not sufficient when the goal is to accomplish any meaningful thing in real life social engineering. In real life situations, no matter how closely related we are, a time will come when for the sake of adventure and expansion of human horizon, all responsible parents must cut loose the tie and free their lovely children to go their separate ways. It is nothing different from the birthing process of a child. No mother leaves the umbilical cord attached to the child after birthing in order to prove that the child was born by them. Unfortunately this appears to be what the purveyors of the neighbor-connectedness argument are trying to do. They pretend to forget that even children who were born by the same parents eventually move away to found their unique, independent and separate family staid (obi.) And once these separations and independence begin to take place, it is only a matter of time that all the traces of close consanguinity begin to fade away and prove harder to establish. Yet, and very fortunately so, no matter how faded this relatedness becomes there will never come a time when that inter connectedness of all humanity will be lost entirely. The true story of our collective humanity has always shown that no matter how long or how far apart we drift from each other that unbreakable brotherly link that connects humans in one big family of our common humanity and brotherhood will still endure. Yet, in spite of this human connectedness and, for the sake of variety and the constant need to continually open up new frontiers for humanity, we cannot stop this inevitable human separating experience.

From Wakanda to Israel: a Zionist Pan-Africanist’s takeaway from “Black Panther”

Marvel’s newest superhero flick, “Black Panther” is breaking box office records, and for good reason. The revolutionary production of this movie aside, the film is an archetypal goldmine (or should I say “Vibranium mine”), chock full of explicit and implicit messages and symbolism that speak to the historical and lived experiences of, not only African peoples, but all persecuted and/or post-colonial nations pursuing auto-emancipation.

As an Israeli of a Caribbean background, an unapologetic Zionist and Pan-Africanist, I couldn’t help but appreciate this meaningful cinematic expression of internal conflicts that appear to be unique and highly relevant to the Jewish and African Diasporic experiences. A unique likeness, that both Binyamin Ze’ev Herzl (the father of modern Zionism) and Edward Wilmot Blyden (the father of Pan-Africanism) identified as sources for mutual inspiration in what may be the first and best case of meaningful intersectionality, which lead to revolutionary social movements. There are many aspects of this film that warrant in depth analysis and articulation, but four main points (detailed below) stood out to me as particularly relating to the shared African and Jewish experience with colonialism and slavery (at the hands of both European supremacists and Arab supremacists).

Early map of Wakanda (in blue) from the Marvel Comics Atlas Volume 1

First things first, however, much respect to the creators of the Black Panther character and universe, Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. Two Jews who utilized their artistic talent to express a quintessentially Jewish response to a world full of pain, oppression, and tyranny; to highlight the clash between good and evil, and give us heroes to inspire us in our individual and collective struggles. In the era of the civil rights movement, when Africa and African life was popularly viewed as inferior, they dared create a fictional African country untainted by colonialism, rich in super-natural resources (Vibranium), and a technological/military/political powerhouse. A narrative, that in the age of sh*thole gate, BLM, and the Libyan slave trade couldn’t be more relevant. A story, Director Ryan Coogler, was able to adapt to cinema with ease.

Wakanda’s internal ideological debate: isolationism vs interventionism. Upon the main character T’Challa’s coronation as the Black Panther (the title and superpower endowedon Wakanda’s hereditary monarchs), T’Challa is faced with the dilemma of defining Wakanda’s relationship with the international community. He inherited a Wakanda that managed to become a technological powerhouse and socially stable/thriving state on account of its isolationist policies; yet segments of the leadership (including T’Challa himself) feel morally obligated to share their success/freedom with the rest of Africa and the world. Being a tiny country with a bustling economy and high tech resources, yet paranoid from existential threats, the parallels with the reborn Jewish state are obvious.

Killmonger vs T’Challa’s vision for Tikkun Olam (repairing the world). A product of the African Diasporic experience, T’Challa’s Oakland born and raised principal nemesis in the movie, Erik Killmonger, is a Pan-African reflection of the European colonialism that oppresses his community. Like the European supremacists, Killmonger sees all Africans as defined (and united) by their appearance. Blaming Wakanda for not saving his community, Killmonger wants to use Wakanda’s resources to colonize the world, but this time for the benefit of indigenous Africans and other traditionally oppressed peoples. Conversely, T’Challa is fundamentally committed to his tribe (to his nation-state), yet he has universal aspirations to help solve the ills of the humanity. Not by force, but through leading by example. Rome vs Jerusalem. Uniformity vs Unity.




The complimentary relationship between spirituality and technology. Wakandan society is a powerful expression of progress guided (not stunted) by tradition. The responsibility to one’s ancestral culture and the ability to change reality with spiritual experience and/or technological advancement is an inspiring vision for all post-colonial indigenous societies and is fundamental to Torah Judaism’s prescription for a healthy Hebrew nation. Both Africans and Jews (African Jews included) have been historically denied their right to practice their indigenous faith and culture, which throughout their respective histories in the diaspora were generally depicted as primitive and even barbaric.

Wakanda: the Pan-African Zion, aligns with Achad Ha’Am and Rav Kook‘s vision for a spiritual revival that both provides former exiles with a life of substantive meaning while propelling us forward.

The temptation of radicalism. As demonstrated by the reaction of many of the characters in the film, it’s hard not to sympathize with and/or be drawn to Killmonger’s emotional rhetoric. It’s always easier to paint our complex reality in black and white. To prescribe simple solutions to complex problems. On the level of first or formative principles (good and evil, right and wrong), simplification is vital, but when it’s dogmatically applied to all contexts void of nuance it becomes dangerous. T’Challa identifies the destructive ends this approach would produce, and like Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Malcolm X (post Nation of Islam), in the movie he seeks to bring about a revolution for his people in a way that emphasizes the value of all of humanity.

By the same token, there have been times when both the Pan-Africanist and Zionist movements have ethically faltered in pursuing their goals (a topic for another piece), but none of this changes the fact that if the arc of the moral universe bends towards justice (as MLK famously said), the story of kidnapped and exiled Africans and Jews (African Jews included) must not end in tragedy, but triumph. That each of us can be a superhero in realizing the dreams of our ancestors and right the wrongs of history. To be free peoples, in our indigenous homelands.

As Malcolm X once put it, “Pan Africanism will do for the people of African descent all over the world, the same that Zionism has done for Jews all over the world.” The Zionist movement has revolutionized Jewish existence. It successfully restored some of history’s first victims of European colonialism and enslavement (at the hands of the Romans) to sovereignty in their indigenous homeland, revived the dying language of a dying people, helped bring the British Empire to its knees, and returned millions of exiles to their ancestral lands. Most importantly it restored Jewish pride in Jewishness. That for the first time in 2000 years a generation of Hebrews will be raised to know they have a home, that they are active participants in the world. As the father of Pan-Africanism, Edward Wilmot Blyden insightfully highlighted in his essay, “The Jewish Question,” Zionism successfully awakened the Jewish people from indifference to their persecution to an active sense of national responsibility, and this was precisely the effect he sought for Pan-Africanism to have on the African Diaspora. Likewise, Wakanda, as depicted in the “Black Panther” film, embodies the vision of Blyden and his Pan-Africanist descendants; a symbol from which Africans throughout the world can derive pride and strength.

The moral and physical struggle between T’Challa and Killmonger certainly exemplifies many of the similarities between Zionism and Pan-Africanism as indigenous rights’ movements; as does this quote from Killmonger during the movie that immediately brought to my mind images from both Masada and Igbo Landing:

Bury me in the ocean with my ancestors who jumped from ships, cause they knew death was better than bondage.”

Looking forward to Black Panther round two!

African American members of the “Black Panther Party” (coincidentally founded a few months after Stan Lee created the superhero) lining up to defend their community (top photo).
Hebrew soldiers of the IDF lining up to defend the Jewish State (bottom photo).

Published first in the Times of Israel.

Cape Verde, Togo, and the Continued Rectification of the Israel-Africa Relationship

Cape Verde, an island nation of half a million people off the coast of Western Africa who has traditionally voted against Israel at the UN announced a few days ago that they were “no longer going to vote against Israel at the UN.” Coupled with this, they announced separately that Jewish cemeteries and synagogues in the country would be considered national heritage sites and protected against any changes.

The intiative to push the Jewish aspect of Cape Verde’s history was spearheaded by the Cape Verde Jewish Heritage Project (CVJHP). The CVJHP  has been active since 2008 and together with donations from the King of Morocco, has identified and helped restore and protect Jewish sites throughout Cape Verde.

Cape Verde was the destination for thousands of hidden Jews, fleeing persecution in Portugal in the 1500’s. Many of the citizens of Cape Verde are actually aware of their hidden ancestry. Later the Jewish population increased due to immigration by Jews from Morocco and Gibraltar.

Cape Verde’s switch from antagonistic to Israel is part of a process that has seen many sub-Sahara African countries open their doors to Israel.  This movement has increased growth between the African continent and Israel in many sectors such as agritech, medtech, security, and more.

Last night’s visit and dinner hosted at the Prime Minister’s residence between the Togalese President and the Netanyahu’s is an example of the growing closeness between the Jewish State and Africa.

Togolese President Faure Gnassingbe, wrote in the guestbook:  “I dream of Israel’s return to Africa and Africa’s return to Israel.”

This return has been a product of not only politics, but an awareness that both the Jewish people and many countries in Africa have much in common.

I wrote the following last year:

The war against Judah morphed into a religious struggle as the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, a small Jewish sect and warped it, cutting it off from its root. The Jewish exile swung into full force and oppression as the Jews that had now been scattered became second class citizens under both Christian Europe and the Islamic Middle East.

Within a short time these two colonial forces borrowing religious motifs from the crushed Judean culture undertook a continuance of their expansion past Israel into the heartland of Africa itself. It is not surprising that expulsions and forced slavery ensued over the centuries in Africa much the same way it began in Israel since the latter was seemingly an extension of the former.

The clear connection between Israel’s suffering and African suffering at the hands of European Christians and Arab Muslims is made that much more powerful by the fact that Israel is actually part of the African continent.  The African plate’s Northernmost part ends in Northern Israel and runs along the Jordan River to the South.  Looking at Israel in this light makes the Judean expulsion the beginning of Africa’s colonial period.

The shift in mindset across Africa  towards Israel is a realization that the colonialism forced on the African continent was designed to not only exploit the natural resources of the colony, but to essentially subvert the indigenous culture that had grown within the continent itself.   Israel had not only suffered from the same sort of persecution, but remained away from the exploitation itself.

Israel’s return to Africa and many Africa’s embrace of Israel is the beginning of a rectification process that can and will reverse the millenia of colonization, exploitation, and neo-colonialism that has been carried out both in Africa and throughout the Middle East as well as the Indian sub-continent by Western imperialists and radical islamists.

AFRICA RISING: Rwandan President Kagame Meets with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Jerusalem

Rwandan President Paul Kagame arrived in Jerusalem, Israel today for a three day working visit.  The Rwandan President was greeted warmly both by President Rivlin and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu.

The Prime Minister said the following to Kagame:

“You are coming back here; this is not the first time. But I can say that in one of our earlier meetings, I voiced the hope that Israel could come back to Africa in a big way, and that Africa could come back to Israel in a big way. We discussed this for some time. And you said, well, I think I can help. And in fact, you did help. I would say you were the indispensable bridge on which we marched to make our return to Africa, step by step, with very sound advice, very, very wise counsel. And together we chartered this course, coming first to East Africa, where we visited among other things your beautiful country, which is making impressive progress under your leadership, and then other countries as well; and then West Africa; and we’ll be making a third trip very soon, in one year. But I have to say that it began with my conversations with President Paul Kagame. So I want to thank you, Paul, for helping Israel, helping Israel and Africa, helping Israel in general. Thank you Mr. President.”

Israel has been a big supporter of Rwanda for over a decade, supplying solar energy, agricultural know-how, and even helping to jumpstart the landlocked country’s own set of startup hubs. Rwanda in turn has been clear that it views Israel in an inspirational light and wants to see itself as the Israel of Africa.  Kagame has been credited in stopping the genocide Rwanda experienced in the early 1990’s and took over  a divided country only to unite and cause it to thrive in a near miraculous turnaround.

The Prime Minister himself touched on this as he spoke further with President Kagame to his side.

“President Rivlin has already mentioned the fact that both of our peoples have a tragic legacy. Ours in the Holocaust, yours in the great genocide that befell your people. I’m not sure how many of my Israeli compatriots know that President Kagame personally led the military effort that put a stop to this carnage after more than a million people were butchered, a million children, women, defenseless men. And, with your courage, you put an end to this and began rebuilding this torn nation. We can see the impressive gains that you are making. In fact, it is one of our deepest pleasures to be able to cooperate with you in rebuilding your state, rebuilding it in agriculture and water and so many other areas, and security as well.
 
“We have pledged, I think both our peoples, one simple pledge: ‘Never again.’ Never again – we, who witnessed the greatest holocaust in history, you who witnessed perhaps one of the most recent ones – never again. That’s another great bond between us. You have been a consistent friend to us. First in our bilateral relations. We don’t forget that your foreign minister visited us during our travails in Gaza. You sent her as a show of friendship and solidarity.” 

From 42Kura to Energyia Global, Rwanda is seen as one of the top destinations for Israeli technology as Kagame has opened up the country’s doors to Israeli tech and innovation.

Rwanda and much of East Africa have grown in trade relations with Israel.  The power of these partnerships are far bigger than just financial or even geo-political.  Africa and Israel are both former colonies.  Just like India, Israel and much of Africa were controlled by one or more European countries.

By partnering together decades after independence, they have been capable of reversing the European backed Islamic erasure of indigenous history in many of these areas.  Israel has become a symbol and a beacon for many of these former colonies who have risen and conquered the neo-colonialist attitudes of the once strong European continent.

 

Igbo Position on Nigerian Restructuring

The need to restructure the Nigerian state has gained a populist currency in the past few years. Especially, since the beginning of this year, 2017 it has become a consensus call coming from almost all the ethnic, political and geographical sections that make up the corporate Nigerian state. Recently the champions of this call for a new and different Nigeria have gained an overwhelming numerical strength. Therefore their voices are increasingly getting stronger, louder and urgent. The fear and seemingly mysterious fog that earlier surrounded this now deafening call for change and the enthronement of a new order seems to have suddenly cleared up. And now with a clearer picture the argument to restructure Nigeria becomes more compelling and can simply not be ignored or wished away any longer by those who traditionally oppose it.

As the days go by the rank of those in opposition of a restructured Nigeria continues to decline and pale in the face of so many incontestable and overpowering evidences in support. It has now become clear that the current Nigerian state does not and cannot work as it is presently structured. Therefore, the majority of the country’s stakeholders have finally accepted that the existing Nigerian state structure is not viable and cannot be sustained any much longer. Many genuine patriotic Nigerians are seeking for real solutions and a considerable majority tends to believe that what is needed is a Nigerian country that works on a structure where the diverse ethnical, political, religious and social units are forming a confederating union.

Nigeria currently exists on a structure that is centrally controlled or administered – a federal government. It has been like this since the military intervention in the government of the country in January, 1966. In order to effectively control the political turmoil and mayhem taking place in the Western Region of the country and forestall the unconscionable corruptive and overarching manipulations of the federal power by the politicians who wielded its reigns, the army which took power through a military coup d’état adopted the federal government structure effective immediately. During the past 50 years, practical experiences and ensuing events have shown clearly that this centralized control of natural resources and political power is not working for the country: Hence the need for something new, something different.

That something new is the now much talked about restructured Nigeria. An important highlight of this now popular and highly recommended restructuring is the fact that the advocates want much of the powers for the day to day running of the grassroots components of Nigeria to be vested in the local governments of the different contiguous regions. Restructure advocates want the federal government to be stripped of the control of much of the powers which it hitherto has. Some of those powers which are presently exclusively and entirely reposed on the federal government are natural resources control, education, law enforcement, etc. The advocates of restructure contend that they want especially the control of natural resources, law enforcement and education to be decentralized and devolved to the regional centers. Most importantly, the advocates argue that this envisaged new arrangement will enable the different regional power centers to develop and grow each at their own pace, without unduly interfering with or holding up their neighbors. It is expected that with this new arrangement the central government can exclusively control the collective national military, external affairs, some aspects of the judiciary and other matters as are determined to represent a federal Nigerian image and interests.

Basically, what most of the advocates of restructure have in mind is that they still want to preserve Nigeria as a unit – one Nigeria must exist no matter what. Perhaps, they are convinced that because the different incongruous ethnical, cultural and religious groups of peoples within the fictitious geographical enclave have stayed together long enough and successfully established amongst themselves some inseparable familial bonds. As a result, the love of country and fellow citizens has become deeply ingrained in the peoples. In their mind; by some magic the forced Nigerian marriage has finally turned into love and bliss affair and, no one should put asunder the sacred bond of one Nigeria which was joined together by foreigners – the officiating colonial British priests.

It is not difficult to see that the advocates for this new structure believe fervently that the fire of Nigeria’s national brotherly love now burns so wonderfully bright. That the peoples of this dreamed of nirvana new one Nigeria can actually build a communal fire in a faraway imaginary center and still get warmed up in their various separate semi-autonomous regions so long as they all go by the name “Nigeria.” These Nigerian patriots like some sinister manipulative spouse abusers are trying hard to impress on the different ethnical, religious and cultural Nigerian partners that they will be nothing and cannot exist without attaching themselves to the “one Nigerian” fiction. In this way the manipulating restructure advocates believe they have sufficiently convinced the irreconcilable peoples and that they now believe that they cannot exist on their own if they did not append themselves to the one Nigerian elixir.

The ethnic Igbo people of eastern Nigeria are a part of this present Nigerian union. When the time comes, Igbo people are also expected to form a part of this proposed restructured one Nigeria. But for some obvious and fundamental reasons the Igbo cannot possibly be a part of this planned new Nigeria, no matter how attractive. On the 29th of May 1966 the Igbo renounced forever their Nigerian citizenship. On that date Nigeria as a state and its other citizens began to ethnically cleanse Nigeria of its Igbo inhabitants. Subsequently, the outrageous hate induced Nigerian mass murder and expulsion of the Igbo from the country was advanced further. After the Igbo had been successfully expelled from Nigeria, the Nigerian state and all its citizens embarked on a premeditated genocidal war campaign against the escaped Igbo nation. Nigeria’s declared intention at the outset of the war was to wipe out the Igbo as a people from the Earth. Nigeria actively pursued that goal by mustering a viscous merciless host of men and machines and attacked the Igbo in their ancestral homeland where they ran to take refuge. Consequently, a quarter of Igbo population was murdered by the Nigerian state. Of the 3.5 million easterners or former Biafrans murdered by Nigeria, 3.1 of them were Igbo people.

Fifty years since this grievous atrocity, the Nigerian state and all its other citizens have consistently refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing. Instead Nigeria and Nigerians have remorselessly maintained that the heinous genocide of the Igbo should not be counted as crime. Thus emboldened, since the past fifty years Nigeria has pursued systematic state policies that are geared toward the persecution, the marginalization and exclusion of the ethnic Igbo from the Nigerian social, political and economic affairs. The ultimate aim of everything of course is to finally exterminate the Igbo. Truly, the unrepentant Nigerian program of the genocide of the Igbo remains an enduring project.

For these and other reasons, the Igbo have resolved that they will not have any part in the proposed restructured new country of Nigeria. The Igbo have unambiguously stated that they are not interested in going into any union with any other national group in Nigeria. Therefore, while the Igbo wish Nigeria and Nigerians well in their quest to finding a workable solution to their national problem, the Igbo have unequivocally opted for a separate Igbo identity and the separation of their territory from the Nigerian state.

ISRAELITES IN AFRICA: All Hail Biafra

The above heading is also the title of a song originally composed by Charles O. Okereke. The lyrics of this song which quickly turned into a classic in a few short years were originally conceived in 1970. Okereke 14 at the time was just a child – a Biafran child, that is. As Biafra’s defeat was announced over the radio waves, the words of the song tumbled into his young mind. Ironically, the prophetic declarations started with insistent urgency in Okereke’s head on the very day that Biafra’s recapitulation was announced; January 12, 1970.
 
Nearly fifty years after, Okereke still remembers the place and moment when the words started rushing through his mind in quick succession. He was lying down with his face on the ground, taking cover from the persistent shelling and bombardment of Biafra interiors by Nigerian government forces. Then the voice of the Biafran General Philip Effiong came on the radio telling Biafrans to cease fire and suspend the battle of resistance which began in May, 1967. Biafra was now defeated on the battlefield. But in the people Biafra lives on, undefeated.
[the_ad id=”4744″]
 
Biafra War was an unjust genocidal war executed by the government and people of Nigeria against Igbo people in particular who later became known as Biafrans along with some other non-Igbo southeasterners. In total, 3.5 million Biafrans were killed by Nigerian state and its other citizens. Of this figure 3.1 million were Igbo. The number of the murdered Igbo represents a quarter of Igbo population at the time. Ever since, there has been a consensus by all experts that the Biafran War was genocidal because the original intention of the Nigerian government and its people was to wipe out the entire Igbo population from the Earth.
 
The Igbo resisted the attempt and successfully averted that sinister plan. But that the Igbo successfully prevented the total annihilation of their population does not change the fact that a genocidal plan was made and an actual attempt was carried out to execute that plan in reality. That in the end only a partial percentage of the people’s population was exterminated does not vitiate the genocidal fact of the Biafran War. The standard definition of genocide acknowledges that an act qualifies as genocide if elements of planning and an actual attempt to execute the plan are present in the circumstances that lead to the death of a large number of one or more of the 4 recognized genocide groups. Such groups can be ethnical, national, religious or racial. Going by this, there is genocide if there is a deliberate intention and act to systematically wipe out either in whole or in part a targeted group.
 
Nigerian state planned and physically carried out an actual act aimed at exterminating the Igbo nation in its entirety from the Earth. However in the end, Nigeria succeeded in exterminating a quarter of Igbo population. Nevertheless, there was genocide in Biafra.
 
In Biafra Igbo people were nearly exterminated. That was the dark, ugly part of the Igbo Genocide. But Igbo story did not end there. In the midst of death and decay; a new life form that cannot easily be killed sprouted; love and creativity blossomed abundantly among Igbo survivors. Misery, suffering, starvation and the searing heat of hatred and war produced in the young and old of Igbo Genocide survivors the genius fecund which often is brought out from the inner recesses of an endangered people through such extreme hardship. The multitude of prodigious artistic creations (literary and visual) that followed the Biafran War was undoubtedly the silver lining in the horizon of this Igbo’s darkest hour.
 
Charles O. Okereke’s All Hail Biafra and several others came out of this crucible of death and darkness blazing forth with shining hope and futuristic certitude. Especially, when one listens to the marching or martial version of the song, the mood and lyrics contradict the anticipation. As the song begins to play, the invincible and unyielding spirit of the Igbo, the Biafrans comes out clear. The song is triumphal, full of hope and belief. This distinctive feature of All Hail Biafra: Cry of a Biafran Childis in direct contrast to the mood and circumstance in which the song was born. As a song written on the day that Biafran defeat was announced it would have fittingly reflected the mournful mood which the defeat brought on the people who gave the Biafran fight the best that they got.
[the_ad id=”4690″]
 
In reality, All Hail Biafra should have been a dirge lamenting a people’s lost paradise, defeated dream and dashed hope of a people who had struggled so hard to secure a future where their generations would live in unfettered liberty and life in its fullness. No, instead it is a song of triumph, even celebratory: “We have vanquished our enemies . . . We have emerged triumphant, from all our enemies/Through the crucible unscathed, we passed victorious/Our trumpets pealing . . .”
 
All Hail Biafra
               1.
All hail Biafra
Land of the rising sun, we love and cherish
We have vanquished our enemies, all hail Biafra
God Bless Biafra, in Him we trust
Shout it sing it, all hail Biafra                                    
                    2.
God bless Biafra
We have emerged triumphant, from all our foes
Through the crucible unscathed, we passed victorious
Our trumpets pealing, the glorious song
Play it, sing it, all hail Biafra  
                3.
Oh hail Biafra
We shall always remember, all that perished,
In the struggle for our freedom, all hail our heroes
Our prayers shall bemoan, both day and night
Say them always, all hail Biafra
 
(This reproduction is with the express permission of the original author Charles O. Okereke who is also the copyright owner of the song.)
 
Harcourt Whyte still occupies the very prestigious and enviable position of being the greatest modern Igbo music composer of all genres. Most of his compositions are in Igbo and they are in major part church hymnals. Harcourt was an Igbo Methodist spiritual who like Charles Wesley, the cofounder of the Methodist faith, wrote most of the hymns of that Church in English. Harcourt’s liturgical compositions are deeply philosophical and admonitory. On Igbo cosmological music firmament, whether sacred or mundane, Harcourt Whyte’s star still shines the brightest. His physical body was afflicted with the scourge of leprosy but his mind soared and excelled in the purest of spheres. He worked from the famous Leprosy Colony in Uzuakoli. But by the beginning of the genocidal Biafran War, Whyte had already established his yet unchallenged place in history.
 
It is true that before the war there were scattered bright twinkling stars on Igbo creative firmament. But the war would release a burst of multiple inventive and ingenious stars blazing with dazzling colors eclipsing the hate and blood the enemy unleashed across the canvass of the Igbo world. So, the periods during and after the war were particularly good for the creative Igbo cultural milieu. They are periods that especially enriched the Igbo cultural, social and scientific life like no other periods. Charles Okereke and many others like him are the products of these eras.
 
Geniuses often run in pairs or multiples and they have a way of finding each other. Soon after the war Harcourt Whyte and Nnamdi Olebara would find each other. Olebara as well as being a music composer is clearly the greatest Igbo poet, both of the Biafran War era or of any other time. (Some of his poems have been translated into English for the benefit of non-Igbo speakers by Chinweizu.) After the war, Whyte with Olebara popularized a unique and attention-demanding musical genre. This duo’s musicology would soon become accepted and has since been adopted and expanded by many others, notably by musicians like Patty Obasi. (Obasi would later do some collaborative works with Olebara along this line.) This particular musical devise is both entertaining and didactic. It tends to criticize social vices and pass commentary on burning social and political issues. Sometimes the criticisms and commentaries work. When the production is successful the songs help to influence and revolutionalize people’s attitude and social behavior. In this area Patty Obasi remains unequalled. His Nwa Mami Iwota phenomenal production remains evergreen and continues to reverberate down through time.
 
This music genre is noted by the way some lines of poetry are interjected at the end of a song’s stanza. The poignant poetry lines serve to further expound and underscore some points in the just performed stanza. The effect is something like highlighting notable lines or passages in a book which one is reading. This musical method works as bold scores, projecting and emphasizing in bright colors in the listener’s mind some pertinent areas of the song.    
 
Golden yellow make up one of the dominant colors on the front jacket of All Hail Biafra CD. The hazy gold, the dark earth and silhouetted vegetation in the background give the CD its somber dusky hue and mood. An evening? Yes. But it is an evening with its yellow-white sun still dominating the horizon, pouring into the distant foreground its molten liquid of mellow light and warmth. A white bird (a dove?) is in flight across the face of the luminous setting sun. The front jacket also has the torso pictures of Charles Okereke the Biafran child as well as Charles Okereke, the Nigerian man. The child except for the chalky facial shades; is rendered in black silhouette. The man’s picture is in colors. He is dressed in printed and embroidered wide turtle neck kaftan with a matching short-round hat.
 
On the reverse side of the CD is a yellow background enclosed in squared gold edges. Map of Africa fills up the middle with the list of the CD songs superimposed across the map. There are eleven songs, including Charles Okereke’s award winning composition: God Bless Africa. This flip side contains the musician’s name and information on how to obtain copies of the CD. It says that the CD is available both in Nigeria and the United States. It is actually available anywhere else through Amazon or the reader can google the title to get more information on how to order.
 
The popularity of All Hail Biafra is enduring and is such that many people mistake it to be the Biafran National Anthem. Some people can swear that All Hail Biafra is the Biafran Anthem but it is not. The Biafran National Anthem; Land of the Rising Sunwas originally written by Nnamdi Azikiwe and set into music in the pattern of Sibelius’s Finlandia. Okereke wrote and produced his All Hail Biafra entirely on a different unique tune. The music and its rendition are well-produced.
 
A few people have sometimes speculated on the possibility of a new independent Biafra adopting the song as its new national anthem. This writer sees that happening as a remote necessity. When a new Biafra or Igbo state becomes free from the Nigerian bondage, the old anthem may still remain valid. Or if there should arise a need for a new anthem for the new republic, the government and people may have to compose a new and different national song. The new national song will be composed to reflect the up-to-date history of the people, the prevailing realities as well as anticipate the individual and collective hope of the then free people.
 
In the end however, it will not matter what the new free Igbo country will decide to do about its national anthem. All Hail Biafra will still remain an important Biafran national patriotic song. Okereke’s All Hail Biafra has carved out an enviable place for itself in the pantheon of notable Biafran artistic creations. All Hail Biafra is a great music. An important feature that distinguishes great music from the mediocre is that great music has clear philosophical theme or themes. The listening audience should be able to either relate with the themes in their individual or collective experience. Or at least the audience should be able conceive in their mind a comprehensive picture of the idea the artist is trying to convey as the storyline musically unfolds. Additionally, it is expected that whatever theme a good song is pursuing should be well-developed and stretched beyond the single-phrase or single-stanza excited children’s sing song. Sadly, up till now the Igbo music horizon has been dominated by such folksy lackluster cacophonous noise where the music makers monotonously repeat over and over an emotive one-line wonder.
 
As a result, over so many years the Igbo music scene has remained famished. Except for the few greats whom we have already mentioned, modern Igbo music arena has been barren of real good music and dedicated musicians. Even more troubling is the fact that some of the few well-made music are not easily accepted into the mainstream. So, in the absence of the Igbo projecting and promoting its bests, modern Igbo music scene remains saturated with the second rate and the absurd. The ear of Igbo listening audience is assaulted with the thematically barren or poorly developed themed songs. Take for example the so-called highlife music genre. Highlife as championed by such musicians like Osita Osadebe are disappointing and less satisfying because what would otherwise have been, with a little more work, excellent music, is turned into mere improvised excitement and almost no music.  

Are the British Trying to Assassinate Biafra’s Hebrew-Israelite Leader?

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) can authouritatively state that the British Government has revised its original plan of using non-traceable poison to assassinate Nnamdi Kanu, to a new plan of direct assassination using Boko Haram terrorists who are in custody in Kuje prison. The assassination will be carried out in the form of a stage-managed prison escape of detained Boko Haram terrorists. The new plan is to bring other members of Boko Haram living in Northern Nigeria to storm the Kuje prison and instigate a prison jailbreak which will result in the exchange of gunfire between them and security agencies during which Nnamdi Kanu will be purportedly caught in the crossfire. We repeat with all finality that the British Government is the mastermind of this plan.

Our highly reliable and impeccable intelligence source revealed that the British Government was rattled by the revelations we made through our press release of January 6, 2017, where we exposed their original plan to stealthily administer a non-traceable poison on Nnamdi Kanu and this was supposed to happen before the swearing-in of President Donald Trump of USA. Our embedded intelligence source tipped off the leadership hierarchy of IPOB of this new plan and the tip-off was corroborated by the smokescreen terrorist attack alert announced by Muhammadu Buhari’s information minister, Mr. Lai Mohammed.

On the 10th of February 2017, an online newspaper, Saharareporters, quoted Lai Mohammed as saying that ”the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group and an affiliate of BokoHaram, is planning to attack banks, arms depot and prisons across the country with bombs and high-calibre weapons.“ Mr. Lai also stated that ”further intelligence monitoring has revealed that members of the Muslim Brotherhood are planning to forcefully free their members who are in detention in Kogi, Abuja and Kaduna, including one Bilyaminu, an IED expert for the group who is now at Kuje prison.”

From this “tongue-in-cheek“ revelations coming out of the lying mouth of Lai Mohammed, it is obvious that this is a well-choreographed plan to assassinate the leader of IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, and pass it on to the jail-break attempts of detained Boko Haram terrorists. This heinous crime of trying to snuff the life out of the IPOB leader is because Muhammadu Buhari, his murderous State Security Services (SSS), and the incompetent Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako have all realized that they shall lose the court case they initiated against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

Buhari and crew have tried every trick in their empty brains but have continuously met with total failure because the hands of Nnamdi Kanu are clean. We must remind the world that at every stage of their actions, Buhari and crew have always consulted with and taken counsel, strategies, and advice from the British Government. Having failed on all counts especially with the exposure from our press statement of January 6, 2017, the British Government has now advised Buhari to activate this latest plan of using Boko Haram terrorists to do the dirty job for them. But the interesting thing here is that this same Nnamdi Kanu is a British citizen and is supposed to be protected by the British Government.

Then why does the British Government want their citizen dead? Has it got to do with the stealing of Biafran resources by the Hausa-Fulani oligarchy and stashing away the money in British banks which Nnamdi Kanu has mentioned severally on Radio Biafra? Or is it the fear of revelations of atrocities committed by the British Government between 1967 and 1970 which Nnamdi promised to do? Perhaps it may be that with Nnamdi Kanu still alive and eventually released by his kidnapper, Muhammadu Buhari, he will campaign for the stoppage of stolen money from Biafraland which flows daily into British economy and which sustains their NHS and other government agencies.

Once again, we alert the world that the British Government is doing everything and anything to kill Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. With this latest plan, we are putting it on record that the life of Nnamdi Kanu is on a cliffhanger and the British Government is behind every move to assassinate him. We call upon conscientious people and leaders all over the world to advise the British Government to withdraw from their evil plan of trying to kill Nnamdi Kanu.

Finally, we affirm our determination to restore the nation of Biafra. Therefore, the British Government and their Nigerian collaborators will never stop us. The nation of Biafra is our God-given inheritance, and nobody or government will stop us from taking back our nation, not even the British Government and their continuous attempts to assassinate Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.