PREPARING FOR BIDEN: Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Meet To Plan Next Moves

The news is awash with rumors of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s face to face meeting with Muhamed bin Salman, the Saudi Crown Prince, also known as MBS. Now confirmed, the meeting took place on Sunday in the desert city of Neom.

Under construction as a $500 billion showcase of technological innovation, the Israeli leader spent nearly five hours with MBS, Saudi Arabia’s heir to the throne. The Prime Minister was joined by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Mossad Director Yossi Cohen.

While the setting of Neom was a fitting place for this groundbreaking meeting, it was not the technology or environmental aspects of Neom the two leaders were discussing. More than likely, they were discussing the incoming Biden administration and the dangers it brings to the region.

It is also true that with less than two months left to President Trump’s term full normalization may be on the table. Such a move is necessary in order to block the potential return of the JCPOA (Iranian nuclear deal), which threatens the safety of both the Sunni Arab Gulf States and Israel.

However, the JCPOA is only one worry. The immediate change in status for Iran in dealing with the White House is what scares Israel and its new Arab allies. Iran, backed by China and a compliant America will be able to demonize the Persian Gulf and beyond.

Biden’s incoming administration is more like a third term for Obama and it is this third term, which seeks to truly transform the world. From faux climate change to reengaging China and Iran, the Deep State and globalists who now find themselves moments away from active control of the USA are salivating for the opportunity to push back on Israel and the Saudi-UAE-Bahrain alliance.

Remember, it was the Obama administration who enabled ISIS and thus created a vacuum of power in Iraq that allowed Iran to march into.

Antony Blinken is Only Tip Of The Iceberg

Antony Blinken the incoming Secretary of State was one of the backers and architects of the JCPOA. He will have full control of America’s foreign policy and appears ready to reengage with Iran. With Biden, largely expected to take a back seat to decision making, Blinken’s role will be magnified.

Another Obama-Clinton retread is Jack Sullivan, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Biden has appointed him as incoming Director of the National Security Advisor (NSA).

Finally (at least for now), Avril Haines who worked at the White House starting in 2010 as a national security lawyer and then in 2013, then CIA Director John Brennan appointed her deputy director for the CIA. Brennan was the one who brought us drone assassinations, an expanded Iran, and a decimated Libya among other things.

The above appointments and more show which direction the Biden team plans on heading on Jan. 20th.

Bibi and MBS Building An Alliance

The 1 hour trip to Neom was in essence a path forward for both Israel and Saudi Arabia. The ascendancy of Biden to President means a possible reversal of the gains the Trump Administration accomplished. This is why Israel and Saudi Arabia may have no choice but to forge a path together and build a new Middle East with or without America. By doing so, they will have the ability to hold back the Mullahs and in many ways the coming Biden Administration.

Igbo Independence and Biafran Identity

In this essay we will take time to clarify some areas that seem to confuse some people in the on-going Biafra separatist movement in Nigeria. Over the years, as will be expected, the move for the independence of Biafra has undergone some transformations. These changes seem to have created a sort of mixed messages in the minds of both observers and participants. So, at this point it is really important that we try to clarify some of the seemingly ambiguous aspects of the movement. It is a fact that for some of the participants, those involved in the struggle, many are finding it difficult to come to terms and accept the obvious realities of these changes when they seem to go against some of their assumed or preconceived notions of what the struggle should be about. This is understandable. But in spite of the genuine appreciation of the position of these colleagues it will be foolish if we should ignore the prevailing obvious new realities and facts as they concern the movement. We can only ask that such individuals will be humble enough to find the sincerity and courage to acknowledge these truths and incontestable facts when they are revealed to them. 

Right from the onset we take it for granted that all of us who are involved in this Igbo independence project are concerned with the noble idea and task of establishing a functional and viable society or country. With that in mind we will take it that none of us in this movement is in it for the vain pursuit of an imaginary kingdom based on the fancies of some unrealistic “united states” dreams. Such figments of unreflective imaginations are nothing different from the nightmarish one Nigerian concept which we are saddled with now. Such unreflective idiocies must be avoided by all means if our aim is to succeed and not just thrive but prosper as a new country. 

Igbo is a distinctive language, an ethnic nationality of 50 million, a people with definitive unique identities; a linguistic, cultural and worldview that cannot be confused or mistaken for something else by anyone. This exclusive way of life makes them who they are: Igbo. 

In this regard therefore, it is necessary to state plainly that the current non-violent move (starting from the later part of the 1990s to the present, 2018) to separate Biafra from Nigeria as an independent state is exclusively an Igbo project. It is an effort by the Igbo collective to establish a new country exclusively for and by themselves. And we must quickly add that this desire is just, legitimate and altogether wholesome. 

Igbo people in Nigeria have specific autochthonous lands which they have always occupied from antiquity. In these lands, from primordial time the Igbo have always existed there and passed them on from one generation to the next until this present time. It is the Igbo in these lands so described that want to separate their lands from Nigeria into a new modern country with a sovereign independent status. 

It is in this fundamental fact that the key to an unclouded understanding of the scope or dimensions and the identities of the new Biafra and its people lies. This fact clearly defines the contrast that exists between the 1967 Biafran struggle for independence and the current Biafran independence movement. The two may sound alike but there is an unmistakable difference between them. In the 1967 Biafra, the lands and peoples of other ethnic nationalities other than the Igbo were included in the physical geographical map of the Biafran country. Indeed some Igbo lands were excluded in the map of the old Biafra. But in this new Biafra it is only the Igbo ethnic nationality and their lands everywhere that make up the new country. As we go on with this discussion, this position of an Igbo-only Biafra will be further explained. 

Relevant changes are often necessitated by prevailing circumstances, new knowledge and newly emerging truths. For the benefit of some of our colleagues in this liberation movement we understand that sometimes it is difficult to embrace necessary changes. Most often it is time that is the primary agent of these changes. In Stephen Hawkins’s A Brief History of Time he talks about how difficult it was for him at the initial stage to convince the scientific world to believe in his Big Bang Theory and how even more difficult it has been for him to dissuade the same group of scientists from believing in many aspects of the same theory. But the truth is that new knowledge and truths will sometimes emerge to supplant former truths or ideas. It is therefore, not a sign of inferior intelligence or inferior moral standards to review or change one’s positions based new knowledge and truths. Time and the people themselves must always continually determine and create their own realities based on their prevailing circumstances. And it will always take the painstaking reflective patience of the sincere and honest individual to find enough courage and boldness to accept new truths and new realities as they present themselves. 

Alternatively, putting it more bluntly, we must say that it will be a fatal mistake when anyone especially those in the center of the Biafran movement try to ignore or pretend that nothing changes with the passage of time or that such a fundamental reality on which hinges the total essence of the independence movement will be sorted out later on.

The circumstances that produced the two Biafras are not the same 

We need to make it clear that though this generation of Igbo people take a part of their inspiration from the just and courageous actions of their forebears who rightly fought to be free as Biafrans, but the truth is that the Igbo of the on-going Biafra or Igbo independence movement also have their own unique reasons for embarking on this new project of freedom. Therefore this new business of Biafra or Igbo independence movement is exclusively the project of the present generation of Igbo people and will be fought and won on this generation’s terms and conditions. The old truism that says that every new generation must fight their own battles and win or lose their own victories could not be truer elsewhere than in this instance. 

Briefly, we must mention here, by way of explaining some of those reasons that differentiate the old Biafra from the new: In the past during the 1966 Pogrom the Igbo were not the exclusive victims of the Nigerian government-sponsored killing of unarmed citizens. The other neighboring ethnic peoples or most of the other people from what was then known as Eastern Region of Nigeria were also among the casualties in the killings. And mostly it was the Pogrom that led to the declaration of an independent state of Biafra from Nigeria with the geographical map of the old Eastern Region serving as the new country’s physical boundaries in 1967. That country of Biafra existed from mid-1967 to the second week of January 1970. Another important point to note here is that the old Biafra was declared along the then existing Eastern Region administrative territory as established by the British colonial administrators. The boundaries and identities of the people of this new country of Biafra will be determined by the indigenous people, the Igbo by themselves and for themselves. 

Just like the presently contested one Nigeria, the old Eastern Region of Nigeria was an arbitrary creation of a foreign colonial power without any due consultation with the natives or consideration of the differences that existed among the native peoples who would be compelled to deal with the consequences of the actions. As it is in Nigeria, the old Eastern Region was made up of peoples with incongruent and irreconcilable worldviews and national aspirations who were forced by the force of colonialism to mix together their fortunes and destinies in one political and administrative structure without the benefit of a commonality of cultural and historical antecedent or heritage which serves to bind a people together and enable them to live in harmony and a progress-promoting environment.

The new Biafra  

Due to the continued mistreatment of the Igbo in Nigeria starting from 1970 when the Biafran-Nigerian War ended; the well-documented and publicized marginalization, persecution and complete exclusion of the Igbo from Nigerian commonwealth and all the affairs of the Nigerian state, a group of Igbo people (known as Ekwenche Research Organization in the United States) decided in 1996/1997 to revive the quest for the independence of Igbo people from the Nigerian state. Over the years this quest has evolved but its core agenda remains the same – the determined separation of the Igbo nation and land from Nigeria. 

It is important that no one should miss or mix up this fundamental agenda because that is what gives the movement its nature, structure and dimensions. Except the Igbo, this new Biafra has nothing to do with any other ethnic groups in Nigeria, for obvious reasons. 

Generally speaking, though the Igbo are adventurous and outgoing but they are not known to be imperialistic or to covet the fortunes, stations or places of other people. It is this national trait of the Igbo, which informs the continued survival of the Igbo practice and reverence for Ikenga Igbo – a belief in the supreme importance of individuals’ personal achievement. The Igbo thrives better when they have the exclusive control of their own space and destiny. 

Just as we the Igbo are not interested in the possession or in the sharing of our neighbors’ good fortunes as a result of common citizenship of the same country, we are not pretending to being the redeemers or saviors of these our neighbors either. The Igbo believe that each of their neighbors is capable in their own rights to save, determine and pilot the ship of their own state and destiny by themselves and for themselves. 

In Nigeria the only group of people who is resented, despised, hated, persecuted, and generally considered as the pariah of the state is the Igbo. Just one recent example will suffice here. On June 6, 2017 a group that goes by the name Northern Youth Coalition held a press conference in Kaduna and issued a three-month quit notice to all Igbo people living in what is traditionally known as the northern region. This area covers about 70% of the physical map of what is known as Nigeria. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/239119-quit-notice-igbos-stands-northern-youth-coalition.html

The quit notice which was backed by the government and people of the north is quite explicit and specifically issued to the Igbo people. In the document that the group read at the press conference it explained clearly why the quit notice was exclusively for the Igbo and not inclusive of other ethnic members of the Nigerian union. 

For the sake of emphasis it needs to be repeated here that over the years that the non-acceptance of Igbo people in Nigeria have remained a consistent systemic and systematic program of both the government and the private citizens of Nigeria. This program is not lost on Igbo people therefore, the people have made an immutable resolve to move out from Nigeria and form their own separate sovereign independent state. This resolve is also based on the universally accepted principle of Self Determination as the right of all peoples everywhere. 

We need to remind our readers that we believe in the unity of all human peoples everywhere but we are aware of the fact that not all forms of unity are good for all peoples everywhere. Without looking far to illustrate this point we can only invite our readers to take a quick look at the disastrous unity of one Nigeria. From the Nigerian example it is very clear that the only unity that succeed are those that are based on the understanding that such a people that are being united have a unified sense of purpose, that such a people are united in the common pursuit of unified national aspirations, and yoked together in their common cultural ways and worldviews. With this conviction that not all forms of unity promote strength, harmony and progress, Igbo people categorically reject any unity that is just for the sake of it. In our opinion, nothing can be weaker than all forms of unity that lark the basic ingredients that foster harmony and progress but instead promote resentment, hatred, death and intolerance.

It is for this reason that we know that any new Biafra that will not take these historical facts and realities into consideration is equally doomed from the start just like the one Nigeria which we are fighting to be extricated from.

At this juncture we need to reassure all Igbo neighbors who are living in the contiguous lands around the Igbo, that we recognize the fact that they too may have their own issues or misgivings about the Nigerian union but we also know that just as it is in the real world, each group has their own unique challenges which is peculiar to them. We also know that just as it is only the one who wears the shoe understands where it pinches, the Igbo do not pretend to know or have the answers to their neighbors’ challenges as it applies to them. As good neighbors, the Igbo are always willing to work in partnership with their neighbors to achieve certain goals such as working jointly together to collectively extricate themselves from Nigeria. Working together in projects of this nature does not mean that other ethnic nations should subsume their unique national identities in the Igbo identity. Should the need arise where the Igbo neighbors will fight alongside the Igbo to win freedom from Nigeria, it will never result in what some misguided individuals erroneously refer to as the “United States of Biafra.” The present Igbo independence movement is not pursuing any such thing. Despite its faults this present generation of Igbo cherishes with pride their unique Igbo identity which they are prepared to own and preserve while working on continually improving and modernizing this their collective heritage to remain relevant and to continuously conform with the universal global standards.

It is in this light that we want to state plainly that this new Igbo-only Biafra will not be a closed society. Although the country will be an exclusive Igbo society and a sovereign country but it will also be an open society that welcomes all-comers from everywhere, without discrimination. For the purpose of emphasis we need to state that this Igbo country will especially be more open and welcoming of those who are mistreated, persecuted or pursued from anywhere. So long as all intending immigrants are willing to come in and be assimilated and ultimately become Igbo by practice and identity, they will always have a home in the Igbo country.     

With this understanding it becomes clear that the kind of an Igbo-only state that we are talking about here does not mean a closeted extremist or intolerant state. No, it means a state where an oppressed and persecuted people can be and have their lives and properties and rights protected by a sovereign national power. In this Igbo state all people from anywhere in the world who are escaping oppression, persecution or any such thing can come there and find a home and refuge without discrimination. In this state – an Igbo state, people of all colors and persuasion can come to this state to dream, achieve and prosper without any hindrances so long as they keep the laws of the land and respect the rights of fellow citizens. It will be a state administered under a continually updated set of predictable rules, regulations, laws and order. It will be far removed from any state where the whims and fancies of one person or a few clique of individuals prevail.

There will never be a reason to exclude anyone who comes into the Igbo state who will be willing to live and abide by the norms of their host society.  Igbo ways and ideas are in full conformity with the universal standards and practice and all Igbo everywhere own and identify with them with pride and are ever willing to work hard at the protection, preservation and advancement of this their Igboness as a collective bequeathal to subsequent Igbo generations.

Lastly, we want to reassure all people everywhere that this pursuit to establish a safe haven (a sovereign state) for the Igbo who have always suffered resentment, persecution, discrimination and hatred in the hands of their neighbors is a just and legitimate venture and should be supported by all well-meaning individuals, governments and groups everywhere.

 

Six winning Israeli startups will take part in the “Israel-India Bridge to Innovation”

Six winning Israeli startups will take part in the “Israel-India Bridge to Innovation” program and will soon launch pilot programs in India. The program was initiated in meetings between the prime ministers of India and Israel.

Tel Aviv, June 27th, 2018 – Six Israeli startups with innovative technologies in the fields of healthcare, agriculture and water management have made it to the final stage of the Israel Innovation Authority’s “Israel-India Bridge to Innovation” program, launched over the past year during bilateral meetings between the prime ministers of both countries. The 18 companies that were initially selected to participate in this program presented their technologies to CEOs and investors from Israel and India in a Demo Day held last week at the Urban Place complex in Tel Aviv. Six companies were chosen to continue to the final stage where they will pilot their solutions in India.

Among the notable participants taking part at the Demo Day were representatives of India’s Invest India agency. The keynote speaker was Rohtash Mal, Chairman of EM3 Agriservices, renowned in India as the “Uber of farmers.” The company rents out equipment to farmers based on time or acres farmed, doing away with the need for farmers to purchase expensive equipment and giving them access to advanced technology at low costs.

The six winning companies selected to continue to the pilot stage of the program are:

In Agriculture:

Amaizz, a company that has developed a portable drying device enabling dry storage of agricultural produce – of immense significance in the Indian market, where it is difficult to ship fresh produce.

Biofeed, a company that has developed a device to combat fruit flies, a pest destructive to the India’s yield of mango and other fruit. India is one of the world’s key mango exporters.

In Healthcare:

Zebra Medical, a company developing medical imaging technologies.

MobileODT, a company that has developed devices to diagnose cervical cancer.

In Water Management:

Aquallence, a company that has developed a device to treat water with Ozone.

AMS Technologies, a company that has developed a system to filter industrial water.

The 18 companies initially selected were reviewed by a panel of judges from Israel and India who looked at over 150 applications. The companies took part in a six-month process that included training and workshops, including information regarding Indian markets, together with professional visits, networking events, mentoring and meetings with senior executives and officials, including investors, senior management and experts and entrepreneurs in the fields of water management, agriculture and healthcare.

The Demo Day judges included members of Indian and Israeli companies, including entrepreneur Ofir Shalvi; Adi Vagman, Managing Partner of the AgriNation venture capital fund; Sigalit Berenson, Sales and Service Manager of the Indian-owned Decco SafePack company; Deeksha Vats, Joint President of Sustainability at the Indian corporation, Aditya Birla Group; Rajit Mehta, CEO of the Max Healthcare Institute; and Avi Luvton, Executive Director of the Asia Pacific and Latin America desk at the Israel Innovation Authority.

Eli Cohen, Israeli Minister of Economy and Industry, said: “Following the government decision a year ago to invest 240 million shekels by the year 2020 to promote relations with India in the fields of innovation and technology, the “Israel-India Bridge to Innovation” program is a golden opportunity for Israeli companies in the fields of healthcare, water management and agritech to achieve prominence and to enter such a significant and developing global market – India.”

Dr. Ami Appelbaum, Chief Scientist at the Israeli Ministry of Economy and Industry and Chairman of the Israel Innovation Authority, said: “The Israel-India Bridge to Innovation is a springboard for cooperation between Israeli innovators and Indian corporations. The collaboration between India, a massive economy with the largest growth rate in the world, and Israel, the “Startup Nation,” to develop technological solutions to various challenges, is synergistic and unique. There is a real mutual desire, backed by substantial investment, to pilot these cooperative ventures in India in order to solve pressing global challenges specifically in India but all over the world as well.”

Avi Luvton, Executive Director of the Asia Pacific Desk at the Israel Innovation Authority, emphasized that the “Bridge to Innovation” program comes at a peak in Israeli-Indian relations that began more than a year ago and which has been strengthened by bilateral visits by both prime ministers, reflecting an era in which many new opportunities are opening up within the Indian economy.

Bibi Netanyahu: “We Believe in this Alliance Between Israel and India.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, today (Thursday, 28 June 2018), at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem, met with the Chief Minister of the Indian State of Gujarat, Vijay Rupani, and welcomed him to Israel, his first visit outside India since taking up office. The Prime Minister conveyed greetings to his friend, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The two discussed the continued strengthening of relations between the two countries. Gujarat Chief Minister Rupani expressed great interest in Israeli water, agriculture and cyber technologies.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said: “We believe in this alliance between Israel and India, and it was tremendously enhanced by Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Israel. I was pleased to be in Gujarat, and now I’m pleased that Gujarat is in Israel.”

 

Biafra Freedom and the Quest for Igbo Independence

Since the last nineteen years there has been a revival of the quest for the reestablishment of the defunct Republic of Biafra. Between 1967 and 1970 Biafra existed as an independent state apart from Nigeria. The boundaries of the new country were based on the colonially created former Eastern Region of Nigeria. Igbo national people were the dominant ethnic group in the region. But there were many other non-Igbo ethnic or national peoples in the new country. Because of the circumstances that necessitated the independence declaration of the country it was natural for this Biafra of 1967 to include the dominant Igbo nationals and others who are Igbo neighbors living in the contiguous surrounding lands.

Just like they did in the dysfunctional greater Nigerian country, the European colonialists who created the former Eastern Region had insensitively mixed up all the different national ethnic groups in the region for their governing convenience. Because this hotchpotch arrangement helped to minimize the running cost of the colonial outposts by cutting down on the number of staff and other incidentals it made a sound commercial sense for the non-indigenous Europeans. So, the Europeans maximized profit from their colonial venture while the indigenous peoples suffered from avoidable endemic interethnic internecine conflicts that would frustrate and stunt any form of progress.

As soon as the colonial Europeans left when they granted independence to the natives, the hitherto simmering dormant crisis busted out into uncontrollable flames. Up till now, as I write this piece, since the departure of the Europeans, interethnic and interreligious killings have constantly erupted among the native peoples who were forced by the exigencies of colonialism to exist as citizens of the same country. This is what led to the declaration of Biafran independence from Nigeria in 1967. Islamic dominated Nigeria had embarked on the mission to wipe out the Christian dominant Igbo people from the Earth. Igbo people resisted the genocidal move by declaring an independent state of Biafra from Nigeria.



This is 2018 more than half a century after, the various peoples are still engulfed in an unnecessary progress-arresting and human-lives destroying crisis because the lazy inheritors of this unviable European creation have continued to avoid facing the realities of their so-called Nigerian country. The only sensible solution to the seemingly unending Nigerian crisis is to divide the country along the existing ethnic and religious divides.

However as we stated earlier, there has been a renewed interest in carving out of Nigeria a new independent Biafra. With the new agitation came the controversy surrounding the authentic identities, territorial boundaries and social and political structures of this new quest. As all will agree, both those involved in the struggle to free Biafra from Nigeria and those watching the developments from any angle, there is no way the Biafra of 2018 will look anything like the Biafra of 1967. Nothing in this world remains static and time, it is said changes everything. Fifty years have passed since 1967 and the truth is that the conditions and circumstances that produced the first Biafra and this new Biafra are not the same.

Therefore the human identities, national boundaries and political and social structures of this new Biafra cannot be the same as those of 1967. Every new generation must fight their own wars and win or lose their own battles on their own terms. Agitating for a new Biafra based on the 1967 identities, boundaries and structures will amount to an intellectual laziness on the part of the agitators and spell the doom of the proposed new country. A new Biafra as agitated for by the Igbo does not and cannot include any non-Igbo ethnic nationals. This position cannot be overemphasized because going against it will be nothing different from the extant Nigerian disaster – the mixing of different incongruent peoples in a country that cannot work. That mistake was made by foreign powers and we rightly blame them for it. But we cannot afford to make the same mistake in the new Biafra. Doing so will be like creating a new Nigeria by another name, Biafra. The same crises that have bedeviled the present Nigeria will also dog such Biafra and destroy it.

Such a disaster can easily be avoided by creating a brand new country by Africans and for Africans based on their own native experiences and anticipations. It will be a country for the first time created by Africans and for their people on their own terms. When this is done, if the new country fails or succeeds, it will be the shame or pride of the creators – Igbo people. There will be none else to blame but the indigenous people themselves. There will not be any foreign input by sheepishly following the moribund foreign concept boundaries of the former Eastern Region of Nigeria. The absurdity of adopting the map of the old Eastern Region as the boundaries of the new Biafra is the fact that almost half of Igbo population and land on the west bank of the Niger were not included in the 1967 Biafra. There are also several Igbo populations and lands that extend beyond what many people today know as traditional Igbo land. No Igbo anywhere should or will be left behind in this new quest to reestablish an independent Igbo state.

These truths and facts serve as fundamentals that need to be clearly defined for all who care to join this Igbo liberation business so that from the onset they will have a clear picture of what they are getting into, what they should and what they should not do. With that said it does not mean that in the process of doing that that we should produce a document that is perfect and immutable. We should aim for a living document that is dynamic and in tandem with the times, events and current circumstances. Since events, circumstances and experiences seem to change very rapidly these days we can keep up by constantly reviewing and updating the contents of the working document to always reflect in real time the prevailing realities which we encounter along the way.




At this moment all those who are involved in this business need to recognize that we are at the cusp of bringing into being a brand new society, country or nation. As such we seem to have been involuntarily positioned by providence to play a special role in the history of Igbo people. We can voluntarily choose to reenact the convoluted grandiose “Zik of Africa” pipe dream by pursuing to build another clay-footed giant in the new Biafra of 2018 and jumble up a mixed bag of incongruent peoples in the name of inclusiveness. If we did this we would have fallen into the same sin we accuse Lugard, Zik and others of. Or we can choose to unashamedly reinvent our ancestral Igbo nation and proudly turn it into a viable, progressive, peaceful, prosperous and manageable modern country that is successful and serve as an inspiration to the rest of the world. Such a modern and ideal Igbo country will attract other people from around the world who would come and proudly take up citizenship in this Igbo country and will be self-propelled to honestly pay patriotic allegiance to their newly adopted country and Igboness.

It will be foolhardy of us who have the luxury of time (relative to the 1967 Biafrans) as it is, to carelessly, even naively adopt the same unworkable one-Nigerian pattern to which we are all witnesses of as a woeful epitome of a futile doomed enterprise.

At this stage (maybe at no time at all) we cannot afford to have anything to be written in stone – unchangeable and final. In the popular saying it is said that only God and fools do not change their minds. 1967 Biafra was the concept and dream of our fathers but the 2018 Biafra must be the concept and dream of the present generation of Igbo people. I personally was a firm believer in one-Biafra that would be made up of both Igbo and their neighbors (an all-inclusive Biafra.) In my simplistic thinking I believed that the so-called south-south or Niger Delta political zone should naturally be a part of the new Biafra because 1967 boundaries included those places. I wrote passionately in favor of such political arrangement in the new Biafra we are founding. I had even used such fanciful phrases like “United States of Biafra” to describe the envisaged new creation of another one-Nigeria only with a different name “Biafra.” But such phrases are thoughtless and full of “beautiful nonsense” as my friend Festus Afamefule would put it. In the last few years after some time of impassioned personal interrogation and honest empirical contemplation I concluded that in the interest of the future generations of our people that we cannot afford to construct a new country for our people whose foundation and modus vivendi is not firmly anchored in our Igboness (in who we are.) For a society to work, the people are expected to have common historical experiences, common cultural practices, common linguistic history and some other things that help to hold a people together. The saying in Igbo is that na izu ka nma na nne ji.  

Some people have come up with the question about what happens to the rest peoples some of whom also fought and died in the effort to free the first Biafra from Nigeria. Such people will need to be reminded that these other nations of indigenous peoples are capable of forming their own independent countries without Igbo as a part in their destiny. The populations of most of these ethnic nations run in several millions with so much natural and human resources that can easily sustain and make them successful. It will be stupid for any Igbo to think that they have been placed in the position of the “redemptive saviors” over these peoples who have their own innate redeemers. Everyone or ethnic people that fought under the banner and name of Biafra in 1967 and onwards are also equally entitled to adopt the name as their redemptive symbol of resistance, freedom and independence. Today that is what that name has come to represent for all peoples and persons – a universal symbol of resistance against genocide, injustice, oppression, persecution and domination. Any people or person anywhere in the world can adopt that name as their symbolic avatar in their quest for redemption, liberation, freedom and independence from anything, person or institution.

Perhaps the reason why this confusion has festered is that this movement for a new Biafra has remained like a moving train which stops to pick up all willing passengers without discrimination. Of course there should be no discrimination against all those who want to get in but the danger we have faced is that most of those who are joining the train (the Biafran train) come with so many wild, dangerous and hideous (sometimes fraudulent) notions. All come with preconceived parochial opinions on what Biafra is or what it should be. And all claim to be the final authorities in the subject. But unfortunately many of these individualized ideas about Biafra are flawed. Yet this has not stopped these misled individuals from holding very tight to their version of personalized wishful and impractical opinionated Biafranism. Having observed this dangerous trend it has become necessary that the Igbo must get together to reinvent and refocus their own standardized unique and workable Biafranism and anticipated Biafran or Igbo country. It doesn’t matter, when independence is won the new state can stick with Biafra or change its name. The other emerging new countries can also adopt the Biafran name or something else as it suits them. More than one country can go by Biafra just like Sudan and South Sudan.

 In the end a more sensible and ideal new Biafra or Igbo state should be aimed toward success. It should be one that while being careful to preserve all the great conservative aspects of Igbo cultural heritage and traditions, is also dynamic – readily embracing change and willingly directing the society to seamlessly transit into newly discovered lights with little or no frictions. If this generation followed their hearts and are willing to do the right things, this new society can work if it is founded on a non-sentimental and well-considered uncompromised realism.

 On the contrary if we want to follow the fad and adopt the “pretty boy” posture of the current wave of indiscriminate and unrealistic world dream then we will be headed for trouble. Sadly, it is this prevailing unregulated sentimental liberal ideology that has created the greatest danger that is facing our world today. It is the indiscriminate senseless implementation of this innocent-sounding idea that is threatening to revert all the progress, prosperity and freedoms which the world has thus far enjoyed to the level of the dark ages. This sentimental liberalism if left unchecked will send the world to the darkest abyss, the type that it has never seen before.

To prove the danger inherent in this psychedelic self-defeating indiscriminate all-inclusiveness; apart from the perfect example of the one-Nigerian disaster, the reader can take one hard look at Europe in its current compromised state. With the trend and rate at which Europe is traveling along this uncensored inclusiveness, Europe will be doomed. The only hope that is still open to Europe is that the current generation of Europeans must stand their ground and push back the coming darkness of Islamism. Otherwise, if nothing is done to stave off this wave of absolute evil, in the next few years Europe as we know it will be completely engulfed in a total hopeless darkness of the worst kind.

Netanyahu Meets With Yahya Cholil Staquf, Indonesian Islamic Leader

Yahya Cholil Staquf, Top Indonesian Cleric with 60 Million Followers says to Lead with Mercy when visitin Prime Minister Netanyahu

Leading Muslim cleric Yahya Cholil Staquf, the General Secretary of the global Islamic organization Nahdlatul Ulama took time to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu during the cleric’s visit to Israel.



Prime Minister Netanyahu said the following on meeting Yahya Cholil Staquf:

“Israel is the innovation nation, and I’m very happy to see that the Arab countries and many Muslim countries getting closer to Israel. I hope that we have some movement with Indonesia.”

In response, Deputy Speaker of the Indonesian House of Representatives Fahri Hamzah proposed to the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) to issue a fatwa banning Muslims, especially Muslims in Indonesia, from coming to the territory occupied by Israel.

“In order to avoid the same incident, then MUI needs to issue a fatwa banning a visit to Israel. Because, it violates our national commitment to liberate Palestine.”

“In fact, every day they commit crimes and conduct colonialism and oppression,” he said.

While this reaction is not surprising, there is an opposite trend as more and more Sunni states are opening up to dealing with Israel.

Germany Approves €1 Billion Deal to Lease Israeli Drones

Despite small protests outside Germany’s Bundestag, the German parliament approved a €1 billion deal for leasing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). These UAVs  are capable of carrying payloads of weapons. For Germany, this is important  and carrying out attack missions in the German army’s theaters of operation in Mali and Afghanistan.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said the following concerning the deal:

“I am very pleased by the decision of the German parliament yesterday to approve the giant deal to lease Israeli UAVs. This is an incredible deal that has implications, first of all, for our security industries and for the Israeli economy, but also for the continued strengthening of security relations between Israel and Germany. Germany helps Israel with security, and Israel also helps Germany. This is a very important development and I would like to personally thank Chancellor Merkel. I spoke with her about this ten days ago. She told me that she would pass it through the parliament and she did so.”

Why is this deal important?

Simply put, it cements Israel as the preeminent military drone developer.  Not only that, it provides Israel with a huge win in a country that originally saw this deal nearly torpedoed by the German Social Democratic Party (SDP). While Western Europe has increasingly been confrontational with Israel at the UN, its continuous diplomatic antagonism appears empty as countries like Germany realize that only Israel can provide the type of technology it needs.

According to Globes the deal includes:  €720 million payment to the Airbus Defense and Space company, which will lease seven UAVs from IAI (five regular UAVs and two for training) and €177 million to the Israeli government for use of airports, command and control facilities, and support and maintenance services.

Essentially Germany will have its first permanent presence in Israel.



Israel and Latin America: Continuing Their Growing Partnership

Prime Minister Netanyahu met with a delegation of chairpersons of foreign affairs committees of Latin American parliaments and noted he is due to fly to Guatemala this November for a regional meeting. This meeting continues the growing partnerships Israel has in Latin America.  Evidence of this was on full display as Guatemala and Paraguay both moved their embassies to Jerusalem after the USA became the first country to move its embassy to Jerusalem.

Will Latin America Be Israel’s New Africa?

With the large amount of believing Christians in Latin America, most being pro-Israel, there is clear evidence that the same sort of synergy that catipulted Israel and Sub-Saharan African relationships exists in there as well.  Israel’s growing partnerships with a variety of countries in Latin America provide it with new markets and partners who are hungry for Israeli know-how and technological innovation.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said the following to the delegation:

“You’re very welcome here. Our relations with the countries of Latin America are obviously changing very rapidly for the better. I’m very proud of the fact that I was the first Israeli prime minister to visit any country south of Texas.

I had an opportunity to go first to Argentina, then to Colombia, then to Mexico. And I intend to have another meeting in November, September. We’re going to Guatemala for a regional meeting, so I’ll have the opportunity to meet the leaders of all your countries.

You’re all parliamentarians, and as far as I’m concerned, you’re all ambassadors. Now you’re ambassadors of Israel and of the truth. Please convey to your fellow citizens, this is very important, for us and people who know Israel as it is.

Here’s something about Israel. You’re sitting now in the seat of the Israeli government. It’s here in Jerusalem. Right next to us, is the Knesset, our parliament. It’s in Jerusalem. Right next to that is the Supreme Court. It’s in Jerusalem. The President’s house is in Jerusalem.

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. We are very …And it will always be the capital of Israel. It’s been the capital of Israel for three thousand years. This is a description of our government under King Solomon, the son of King David, three thousand years ago. Jerusalem has been our capital for three thousand years and it will be our capital.

I’m very glad that Guatemala has moved its embassy. I’m very glad that Paraguay has moved its embassy. And I ask you, as well as being Israel’s ambassadors, to ask your governments to move their embassies to Jerusalem. So we can say, ‘Next year in Jerusalem’.”



Israel and Italy: 15 Million Shekel Cooperation in Innovation

The Israel-Italy Joint Innovation Council for Industrial, Scientific, and Technological Cooperation in R&D, in which both the Israel Innovation Authority and Israeli Ministry of Science, Technology and Space participate, has decided to promote eight academic and six industrial cooperative projects, funded by both governments at a sum of 15 million shekels per year, over the course of two years.

“Investment in joint research leads to a threefold return on investment.”

Israeli Minister of Science, Technology, and Space Ofir Akunis said: “Investment in joint research leads to a threefold return on investment. Italy understands the value of investing together with Israel, and is indeed seeking to expand this cooperation. Like many other countries around the world, Italy is interested in joint ventures and has tightened its science and technology ties to Israel.”

Israeli Minister of Economy and Industry Eli Cohen said: “The bilateral Israeli-Italian cooperation is among our most fruitful. Throughout 17 years of cooperation, some 100 projects have been funded in the industrial sphere, and dozens more in the scientific arena. A large portion of these projects have reached commercialization, and cooperation between the two sides has proven to be quite beneficial to participating companies. In light of this, both governments are highly committed to continuing this level of cooperation.”

Within this framework of scientific cooperation, universities and research institutes from both countries have been working together on research in selected fields. The eight approved scientific projects will be published by the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Space for researchers in the fields of marine biology and marine agriculture and the physics of complex systems.  In addition, the Israeli Ministry of Science, Technology, and Space will help fund the establishment of joint bio-robotics laboratories in its first phases at a cost of 8 million shekels.

In the field of industrial cooperation, approved projects are in such areas as: innovative manufacturing processes, pharmaceutical development, cybersecurity and transportation. The Israel-Europe R&D Directorate (ISERD), under the auspices of the Israel Innovation Authority, is responsible for coordinating cooperation on the Israeli side.

Calls for proposals for next year’s industrial and scientific R&D cooperation will be published in June 2018, and requests for funding can be submitted until the end of October 2018.

Both parties agreed to expand joint activities including workshops, seminars and other events in order to deepen cooperation between companies, universities, and research institutions from both countries. The council has also decided to once again award the Rita Levi-Montalcini Prize, which will enable outstanding scientists from both Italy and Israel to benefit from scholarships from one another’s country.

Israel and Italy will also expand their collaboration as part of the Horizon 2020 program, with the two countries increasing cooperation to promote startups from both countries. Horizon 2020 is the pan-European program for cooperation in research, development, and innovation, and is considered the largest R&D program in the world. Some €80 billion are being invested in research from 2014-2020 as part of Horizon 2020.