Blog

•Warns against fake news
By Dapo Akinrefon

The media team of the Sultan of Sokoto, yesterday, debunked a misleading post circulating on social media platforms linking the Sultan to the crisis in Benue State.

The team in a statement by Prince Bashir Adefaka, titled ‘Re: False and misleading claims circulating on social media,’’ said the misleading content attempted to introduce a divisive religious and ethnic narrative.

It stated that the Sultan had consistently promoted peace, interfaith harmony and national cohesion, noting that efforts to tarnish his legacy through fabricated content must be rejected.

The statement read: “The Media Team of the Sultan of Sokoto has been alerted to a misleading post circulating across WhatsApp groups and other social media platforms, titled ‘leaked photo of Governor Hyacinth Alia worshipping the Sultan of Sokoto.’

‘’The content attempts to introduce a divisive religious and ethnic narrative into the ongoing security challenges in Benue State.

“We wish to categorically state that the image in question is fake, likely AI-generated, and deliberately crafted to misinform the public. It is also a mischievous and dangerous attempt to associate the revered leadership of Muslims in Nigeria, particularly the Sultan of Sokoto, with issues unrelated to his office or person.

“The accompanying commentary falsely alleges religious bias and attempts to inflame tensions by linking the Sultan to the crisis in Benue State. Such claims are not only baseless but also constitute a serious threat to national unity and security.

‘’These actions reflect a pattern of disinformation designed to incite division and undermine peaceful coexistence among Nigerians.

“As custodians of the image and public communication of the Sultan of Sokoto, who also serves as President-General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, NSCIA, Chairman of the National Traditional Rulers Council of Nigeria, Co-Chairman of the Nigerian Inter-Religious Council and Co-President of the World Religions for Peace, New York, we condemn these acts in the strongest terms.

‘’For nearly two decades, the Sultan has consistently promoted peace, interfaith harmony, and national cohesion. Efforts to tarnish this legacy through fabricated content must be rejected by all well-meaning Nigerians.

“We also note with concern that similar false narratives have been propagated over time by identifiable individuals on social media. Such activities risk exacerbating existing tensions and destabilising the fragile security environment in parts of the country.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the Sultan of Sokoto does not appear in the manner depicted in the circulated image whatsoever. Furthermore, Islamic teachings clearly establish that prostration is an act of worship reserved solely for Almighty Allah, making the claims in the post not only false but also fundamentally inconsistent with the Sultan’s faith and principles.

“We call on the federal government and relevant security agencies to take decisive action against the spread of disinformation and those responsible for inciting division through such harmful content, some of whom we shall start profiling for actions any time soon.

“We also urge religious and community leaders across all faiths to promote responsible communication among their followers, particularly on social media platforms. ‘’Safeguarding Nigeria’s unity and stability is a shared responsibility that transcends religious and ethnic boundaries.”

The post Sultan of Sokoto debunks AI image on Benue crisis appeared first on Vanguard News.

By Luminous Jannamike

ABUJA—Former presidential candidate, Dr Gbenga Hashim, has raised fresh alarm over the wave of killings spreading across parts of Nigeria, warning that many of the deaths were not being fully reported and that the country’s security crisis was worsening.
According to him, attacks are spreading across more states, happening more frequently, and barely making it beyond local headlines, leaving victims unseen and the scale of the violence poorly understood.
In a statement issued yesterday, Hashim said more than 40 people were reportedly killed in the past week in Shanga Local Government Area, with homes destroyed and the death toll still rising as new casualties were recorded.
Recall that the same community had earlier suffered another attack that left seven people dead, amid repeated assaults by terrorists without any meaningful security response.
He also pointed to Kwara State where coordinated attacks in Kaiama, Baruten and Ifelodun had left between 20 and 50 people dead in recent weeks, including five forest guards.
According to him, many of these incidents received little attention beyond local reports.
He said across the north central region, the pattern appeared even more severe, noting that in Benue State, between 50 and over 100 people were reportedly killed within weeks.
Hashim also noted that in Plateau State, coordinated night attacks left 30 to 80 people dead, while Niger State recorded 20 to 50 deaths, with Nasarawa State seeing between 10 and 20 people killed in related violence.
“Taken together, these reports suggest that between 130 and 300 people may have been killed within weeks across a single region, a scale of mass casualty that is being met with selective attention and dangerous silence,” he said.
Beyond the figures, he warned that the real danger was how quickly the killings were becoming routine, absorbed into daily news cycles with little, sustained outrage or action.
He also highlighted the continued presence of armed groups, such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province, ISWAP, as well as expanding bandit networks taking advantage of weak security presence, difficult terrain and slow response times.
According to him, the repeated attacks across multiple states point to a deeper problem in how security is being coordinated at the national level.
“The true scale of killings is being dangerously under-reported and increasingly normalised,” Hashim said.
He also criticised what he described as a subdued reaction from global bodies, saying both the United Nations and African Union had not matched their response to the scale of the violence.
He added that, apart from Donald Trump, who he said had shown consistent concern, most countries appeared to have grown indifferent, despite Nigeria’s long-standing role in international peacekeeping.
He expressed particular concern about the silence of African countries that had benefited from Nigeria’s support in the past.
“There is now a growing perception that Nigerian lives have been so devalued in global consciousness that even routine expressions of condolence are no longer made.
“Why has the world become de-sensitised to mass killings in Nigeria? Why do Nigerian deaths no longer trigger sustained global outrage or urgency? And how many more must die before silence itself is treated as complicity?
“These questions are no longer rhetorical, but reflect what appears to be a global system increasingly selective in its moral attention,” Gbenga Hashim said.
He warned that the trend risked normalising mass death, with urgency fading, even as lives continue to be lost.
“For now, the reality remains unchanged: the killings continue, the numbers rise, and too many victims remain unseen and uncounted,” Hashim said.

The post Killings under-reported, security crisis deepening —Gbenga Hashim appeared first on Vanguard News.

On May 29, 2023, there was a change of guard in Abuja as Bola Ahmed Tinubu took over from Muhammadu Buhari, now late. After the latter completed the constitutionally approved two terms of eight years. Tinubu has been managing the economy for about three years now. His economic policies are a mixture of love and […]

By NICK DAZANG 

On Sunday, April 5, 2026, the Special Adviser on Information, Bayo Onanuga, said, through a statement, that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, had approved a payment plan to settle N3.3 trillion outstanding debt in the power sector under the presidential power sector financial reforms programme.

Mr. Onanuga further said: ”The long-standing debts accumulated between February 2015 and March 2025. Following verification, N3.3 trillion has been agreed as a full and final settlement, ensuring a fair and transparent resolution”.

To reinforce and shed more light on Mr. Onanuga’s statement, the Special Adviser to the President on Energy, Olu Arowolo-Verheijen, said the programme would go beyond settling legacy debts to restoring confidence in the power sector.

The announcement was a huge relief to Nigerians. Before then the power sector was in comatose mode. For more than six months, the country, from one expanse to the other, was in pitch darkness. Big and small businesses ground to a halt. Coinciding with the heat that ushers in the rainy season, Nigerians were thrown into untold misery.

The Minister of Power, Chief Adebayo Adelabu, who ought to be, front and centre, addressing the challenges of this crucially important sector, was simply overwhelmed. His incompetence and helplessness were defined by an in-eloquence only reminiscent of the incoherent Oracle at Delphi. A picture, which trended on social media, showed the Minister speaking on a handset which was connected to a power bank.

If the N3.3 trillion settlement is viewed as a victory of sorts, and one that is fair, available data not only knock the bottom out of this early triumph, they render it Phyrric and transient. This is because as at 2026, the debt owed Generating Companies, GenCos, which stemmed from unpaid invoices by the Nigerian Bulk Electricity Trading Company, NBET, had stood at N6.8 trillion.

And contrary to the government’s claim that the payment of the N3.3 trillion debt followed “verification” and that the figure was “agreed as a full and final settlement”, the last reconciliation between government and key stakeholders in the power sector agreed at N4 trillion.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Association Power Generation Companies, APGC, Joy Ogaji, not only attests to this, she disclaims the latest figure(of N3.3 trillion) being bandied in these clear and unmistakable terms: ”We are not aware of any such verification outside the last reconciliation concluded in March 2025”.

Government has also not been forthcoming as to how the N3.3 trillion will be disbursed to the GenCos. Neither has it issued any timelines to undergird payment.

Even though government had earlier issued bonds to the tune of N501 billion to the GenCos, the payment is insignificant when viewed against the debts they owe gas suppliers. Besides, the conditions of disbursements are said to be stringent. These have failed to impress or incentivise gas suppliers to increase their supplies to thermal plants being run by the GenCos.

The payment of N3.3 trillion thus comes short of addressing the challenges of the power sector which cuts across generation, transmission and distribution. It also fails woefully to address concerns being voiced on the privatisation process that had informed the atomisation of the sector.

Like the privatisation exercise that took place on the watch of former Military President Ibrahim Babangida, best practices were observed only in the breach. Patronage, rather than technical expertise and capacity to deliver, governed and suffused the process.

Until now, and due to the huge debts owed GenCos, they faced severe liquidity challenges. They also suffered from acute operational and maintenance difficulties.

The transmission companies are equally hamstrung. They have difficulty transmitting the paltry electricity being generated by thermal and hydroelectric plants. Grid collapse has since become a monthly affair.

As at 2020, electricity distribution companies, DisCos, owed the Federal Government N2.6 trillion. The debt was due to unpaid remittances to NBET. The DisCos have had other issues spanning foreign exchange and operational inefficiency. For instance, in spite of a 76.34 per cent collection efficiency in January 2026, they nonetheless, suffered a revenue shortfall of N63.46 billion.

Several of the DisCos are under receivership either of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, AMCON, or the banks. This is on account of debt-related insolvencies. Key DisCos reportedly under management receivership include those of Ibadan, Kano, Kaduna, and Port Harcourt. Due to their massive debts and insolvencies, DisCos have been subjected to legislative summonses.

To put the power sector in good stead, the government must adopt a holistic and comprehensive approach. Generation, transmission and distribution must work optimally and in sync. Government must engage and agree with critical stakeholders in the generating sector as to what it owes and how it intends to pay. It cannot foist a figure on them by presidential fiat.

Additionally, alternative forms of power generation, other than thermal and hydro-electricity, should be aggressively invested in. Solar power, which is clean, cheap and available, should be harnessed. It should then be put on a separate grid to power homes and offices. Thermal and hydro power should thereafter be dedicated to manufacturing, the Organized Private Sector, hospitals and schools.

The N3.3 trillion payment, no doubt, is a shot in the arm. But it is a short term measure and it is not all-encompassing. It is probably calibrated to save face, especially for a president who once vowed that Nigerians should not re-elect him if he did not provide electricity.

We must go the whole hog. We must address the challenges that ail all facets of the power sector. As it is, it is not yet Uhuru for the power sector.

•Dazang, a public affairs analyst, wrote from Abuja. 

The post Power sector: Not yet Uhuru appeared first on Vanguard News.

Nigeria’s governance suffers from a profound defect: the absence of accountability. Leaders announce multi-trillion-naira budgets with great ceremony, governors flag-off infrastructure projects amid public acclaim, and grandiloquent policies are initiated. Yet, when delivery fails—as it routinely does—no real consequences follow.

This gap between authority and responsibility has persisted since independence in 1960, undermining 66 years of nation-building efforts. The issue originates in a system where public office is treated as personal entitlement rather than public trust. The 2023 report of the Auditor-General documented N12 trillion in unaccounted public funds, including budgeted roads that never materialised and schools left in disrepair.

Oversight institutions falter. The National Assembly, with its N200 billion annual budget for members’ perks, conducts investigations selectively to protect one another and allies. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission, ICPC, have been compromised by executive interference and internal corruption. They prosecute minor offenders while major culprits evade justice.

Citizens endure the direct impact. In Lagos State, despite trillions of naira in allocations and internal revenues, about 70 per cent of residents lack access to potable water, according to BudgIT data. Northern states proclaim free education, yet UNICEF reports 70 per cent of Nigeria’s out-of-school children are from there. These shortcomings reflect systemic opacity. The Freedom of Information Act of 2011 is largely ignored, with only 12 per cent of ministries disclosing records, per YIAGA Africa. Without transparency, misconduct proliferates.

Corruption represents one facet; the broader malaise is the erosion of institutional legitimacy. This is against a backdrop of gradually lowering but still moderately high inflation rate of about 15 per cent and 50 million unemployed youths, according to National Bureau of Statistics, NBS, 2026.

Progress is possible. Organisations like BudgIT, through initiatives such as #FollowTheMoney, expose contract inflation. SERAP’s litigations have compelled some asset declarations. Digital platforms like Tracka enable public monitoring. Judicial interventions offer glimmers of hope.

Structural reforms are essential. First, the relevant laws should be amended to grant anti-corruption agencies independent funding, fixed tenures, and prosecutorial autonomy. There should be mandatory, real-time implementation of budget portals with AI-driven procurement audits. The National Assembly’s emoluments should be reduced by up to 50 per cent, with pay linked to measurable oversight performance.

Performance bonds should also be introduced for elected officials, requiring verifiable deliverables with financial penalties for non-compliance, enforced by an independent tribunal. Citizen-led audit programmes, incentivised by tax credits, should verify projects at the community level. Nigerians must demand these changes through sustained civic actions—petitions, litigations, and voter accountability. The #EndSARS movement demonstrated the power of collective resolve.

Governance without accountability lacks legitimacy. It breeds distrust, entrenches inequality, and stalls development. Nigeria cannot advance until leaders are held to account—consistently and without exception.

The responsibility rests with the people.

The post Making governance more accountable appeared first on Vanguard News.

IRAN’s threat to cut undersea cables is a serious concern, as these cables carry around 95-99 per cent of global internet traffic, including critical financial transactions. The Strait of Hormuz, where many of these cables are located, is a key chokepoint, handling around 30 per cent of the world’s internet traffic. Iran-backed Houthi rebels in […]

Why civilizations reproduce war despite knowledge

The persistence of war in the modern world, despite an unprecedented accumulation of historical knowledge, reveals a fundamental contradiction within human civilization. This article advances the thesis that contemporary conflicts are not primarily the result of ignorance, but of a deeper systemic failure: the collapse of historical intelligence.

Historical intelligence is defined as the institutional and cognitive capacity of societies to retain, interpret, and apply lessons from past conflicts to present decision-making. Drawing on the classical insights of Plato and Aristotle, alongside the empirical realism of Thucydides and the strategic framework of Carl von Clausewitz, this study demonstrates that the causes of war are historically stable and analytically well understood. However, the repeated failure to institutionalise these insights results in cyclical patterns of conflict. Modern wars are not anomalies, but predictable outcomes of systemic historical neglect.

Introduction

Human civilization possesses an extensive archive of historical experience on war—its causes, dynamics, and consequences. From ancient chronicles to modern strategic theory, the lessons of conflict are neither obscure nor inaccessible. Yet, wars continue to emerge with striking regularity, often reproducing patterns long documented and widely understood.

This paradox suggests that the problem is not a lack of knowledge, but a failure in its application. This article introduces the concept of historical intelligence to explain this failure. It argues that when societies lose the capacity to systematically integrate historical insight into governance and decision-making, they become structurally predisposed to repeat past conflicts. War, therefore, is not merely a political or economic event, but an epistemic failure rooted in the collapse of civilizational memory.

Classical Foundations: Knowledge Without Application

The roots of this problem are evident in classical political philosophy. In The Republic, Plato identifies the expansion of unnecessary desires and the ignorance of rulers as primary causes of war. For Plato, knowledge of justice and the good exists in principle, yet its absence in governance leads to disorder and conflict. This distinction between knowledge and applied knowledge is central: societies may possess insight, yet fail to operationalise it.

Similarly, Aristotle, in Politics, links war to inequality, injustice, and the pursuit of domination. He argues that internal instability often manifests externally, making war an extension of unresolved domestic tensions. Like Plato, Aristotle does not attribute conflict to ignorance alone, but to failures in implementation and governance.

Together, these thinkers establish a foundational principle: the causes of war are known, but not consistently acted upon.

Historical Continuity and the Logic of Repetition

The recurrence of war across time is empirically demonstrated by Thucydides in his analysis of the Peloponnesian War. His identification of fear, honour and interest as enduring drivers of conflict reveals a stable structure of human motivation. These forces continue to shape modern geopolitics, underscoring the continuity of conflict dynamics.

In the modern era, Carl von Clausewitz reinforces this continuity by defining war as “the continuation of politics by other means”. War, in this formulation, is not an anomaly but a systemic outcome when political processes fail.

Despite these enduring insights, societies repeatedly engage in conflicts that replicate patterns observed in past historical conflicts. This repetition cannot be attributed to ignorance; rather, it indicates a breakdown in the mechanisms that translate knowledge into action. Historical intelligence, therefore, is not cumulative but fragile, subject to erosion and collapse across generations.

The Collapse of Historical Intelligence

The collapse of historical intelligence occurs when the connection between past experience and present decision-making is weakened or severed. This collapse manifests through several mechanisms.

First, selective interpretation of history allows political actors to construct narratives that justify present actions while disregarding contradictory lessons. Second, institutional fragmentation prevents the systematic integration of historical analysis into governance structures. Third, short-term political incentives prioritise immediate gains over long-term stability, discouraging historically informed decision-making.

Additionally, the instrumentalisation of history, its use as a tool for ideological or strategic purposes, distorts understanding and undermines objective analysis. In such conditions, history ceases to function as a guide and becomes a resource for manipulation.

This results in a condition of functional historical amnesia, where knowledge exists but is not meaningfully applied. As George Santayana famously observed: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. The issue, however, is not merely forgetting, but the systemic inability to operationalise memory.

Contemporary Implications

The consequences of this collapse are evident in the persistence of conflict patterns in the contemporary world. Miscalculation, overconfidence, escalation dynamics and failure of diplomacy, features present in ancient wars, continue to characterise modern conflicts.

This continuity suggests that technological advancement and institutional development have not been matched by progress in historical reasoning. Global governance systems often lack structured mechanisms for integrating historical insight into policy formulation. As a result, responses to conflict remain reactive rather than preventive.

Without the institutionalisation of historical intelligence, societies remain vulnerable to repeating the same strategic and moral errors. War, in this context, becomes not an exception, but an expected outcome of systemic neglect.

Conclusion

My argument is that the persistence of war is best understood not as a failure of knowledge, but as a failure of its application. The insights of Plato and Aristotle demonstrate that the structural causes of conflict: excessive desire, injustice and governance failure, have long been identified. The analyses of Thucydides and Carl von Clausewitz further confirm the continuity of these dynamics.

Yet, the recurrence of war reveals a deeper systemic issue: the collapse of historical intelligence. When societies fail to retain and apply the lessons of the past, history loses its function as a guide and becomes a passive archive. Under such conditions, conflict is not only possible but predictable.

The implication is both clear and profound: peace is not merely a political objective, but an intellectual achievement. It depends on the capacity of civilizations to transform historical knowledge into operational wisdom. Until this capacity is restored and institutionalised, humanity will remain trapped in a cycle where each generation confronts crises that previous generations had already understood, but failed to prevent.

•Dr Dada, FRSA, Nigerian Systems Thinker,

CEO, DESI Consultants Ltd, wrote via: desicoin@gmail.com

The post Why civilizations reproduce war despite knowledge appeared first on Vanguard News.

By Ernest Ofoye

Nigeria is no longer merely battling insecurity—it is confronting a full-scale erosion of state authority across multiple regions. What was once described as isolated insurgency has now evolved into a widespread national crisis involving terrorism, banditry and organised criminality.

Recent events across the country have brought this reality into sharper focus. From renewed attacks in Plateau State to the growing wave of violence in Kwara State, the pattern is clear and deeply troubling. Most alarming is the reported killing of a Brigadier General of the Nigerian Army in active service—a painful reminder that even those tasked with defending the nation are increasingly vulnerable.

The truth must be told plainly: insurgents are gaining ground, while our soldiers are being lost in disturbing numbers.

At the centre of this crisis is a security system under severe strain. The Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria—comprising the Nigerian Army, the Nigerian Navy, and the Nigerian Air Force—have continued to demonstrate courage and commitment under extremely difficult conditions. Their sacrifices remain undeniable. However, beyond their bravery lies a deeper systemic challenge that must be addressed.

For too long, Nigeria’s response to insecurity has remained largely reactive rather than preventive. Security forces are frequently deployed after attacks have occurred, rather than positioned to neutralise threats before they materialise. Intelligence, where available, is often not translated into timely action. This gap between information and response has proven costly.

Equally concerning is the fragmentation within the broader security architecture. The Armed Forces, alongside other agencies such as the Police and intelligence services, do not always operate within a fully integrated, real-time command structure. Meanwhile, those perpetrating violence move with coordination, speed, and adaptability.

There is also the uncomfortable reality that certain areas within the country are gradually slipping beyond effective state control. In these locations, criminal elements operate with alarming boldness, sometimes imposing their will on local populations. This is not merely a security lapse; it is a challenge to national sovereignty.

The issue of intelligence at the community level further compounds the problem. In many instances, local populations possess early knowledge of suspicious movements and emerging threats. Yet, the absence of structured, secure and trusted channels for reporting has created a disconnect between the people and security institutions.

In addition, the demands placed on security personnel have become overwhelming. Prolonged deployments, operational fatigue, and gaps in equipment and welfare support have placed immense pressure on those at the front lines. When soldiers fall repeatedly in ambushes and attacks, it raises fundamental questions—not about their bravery—but about the adequacy of the system supporting them.

Perhaps most worrying is the geographical spread of insecurity. What began predominantly in the North-East has extended into the North-West and is now increasingly evident in the North-Central. This pattern suggests not random violence, but a gradual and strategic expansion that, if unchecked, could create ungoverned corridors across the country.

At this point, Nigerians must confront a difficult but necessary question: are these outcomes merely the result of systemic inefficiencies, or is there a deeper undertone that has yet to be fully addressed? When warnings are not acted upon, when attacks are repeated, and when perpetrators grow increasingly emboldened, such questions naturally arise.

What is clear, however, is that the time for incremental responses has passed. Nigeria requires a decisive and comprehensive reset of its security strategy.

A formal declaration of a national security emergency would signal urgency and enable stronger coordination across all levels of government. Beyond this, there must be a deliberate integration of the Nigerian Army, Navy, and Air Force into a unified, technology-driven operational framework where intelligence is shared in real time and joint missions are executed seamlessly.

The deployment of modern surveillance systems is no longer optional. Drone technology, satellite intelligence, digital tracking systems, and advanced monitoring infrastructure must become central to Nigeria’s security operations. The nature of the threat has changed; the tools used to confront it must also evolve.

Furthermore, the approach to territorial control must shift from temporary clearance operations to sustained presence and governance. It is not enough to dislodge criminal elements; the state must immediately establish authority, restore civil administration, and maintain a visible presence in reclaimed areas.

Equally important is the need to build a structured community intelligence network. Citizens must be empowered, protected, and encouraged to contribute to security efforts through reliable and confidential reporting mechanisms.

The welfare and operational support of security personnel must also be treated as a priority. A nation that depends on its soldiers for survival must, in turn, ensure that they are properly equipped, adequately supported, and duly honoured.

Security, however, cannot be left to the Federal Government alone. State governments must take greater responsibility in supporting localised security initiatives. Traditional institutions must strengthen grassroots vigilance, and citizens must remain alert and cooperative with lawful authorities. This is a collective responsibility.

The loss of senior military officers and countless other brave personnel is a solemn reminder of the urgency of this moment. Nigeria stands at a crossroads.

We can choose to act decisively—firmly, intelligently, and collectively—or continue along a path where responses lag behind realities.

History will judge the choices made at this time.

Nigeria must rise—not in rhetoric, but in action.

And the time to act is now.

•Ofoye, a Public Affairs Commentator, wrote from Lagos.

The post A nation under siege: Why Nigeria’s security architecture is failing appeared first on Vanguard News.

By EMMANUEL ONWUBIKO

A psychologist whose publication on will power and psychological science of self-control I came across on the internet affirmed that with more self-control we would all eat right, exercise regularly, avoid drugs and alcohol, save for retirement, stop procrastinating and achieve all sorts of noble goals.

Determined to provide charity, this our beloved scientist said: “Take, for example, the results of the American Psychological Association’s annual Stress in America Survey. The survey asks, among other things, about participants’ abilities to make healthy lifestyle changes. Survey participants regularly cite lack of willpower as the number one reason for not following through with such changes.”

Lack of willpower isn’t the only reason you might fail to reach your goals. Willpower researcher and psychologist at Florida State University, Dr Roy Baumeister, describes three necessary components for achieving objectives: First, he says, you need to establish the motivation for change and set a clear goal. Second, you need to monitor your behaviour toward that goal. The third component is willpower. Whether your goal is to lose weight, kick a smoking habit, study more, or spend less time on Facebook, willpower is a critical step to achieving that outcome”.

There are moments in the life of a nation when a single political pronouncement carries the weight of history, justice and long-suppressed identity. The recent remark by the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, during a public function in Asaba, that the long-awaited creation of a new state for the South-East will culminate in Anioma State (with Asaba as its capital) represents one of such defining moments. It is not merely a political development, it is a profound statement of recognition, restitution and national recalibration.

For decades, the agitation for Anioma State has endured as one of Nigeria’s most consistent yet under-appreciated demands for state creation. Now, with the indication that deliberations have reached a conclusive stage and only await formal proclamation, the agitation has received its most significant boost yet. It signals not just administrative restructuring but a moral response to history and a strategic rebalancing of Nigeria’s federal character.

At the heart of this development lies the relentless advocacy of Ned Nwoko, whose persistence, clarity of thought and principled engagement have elevated the Anioma question from regional agitation to national discourse. While it is historically accurate to state that the demand for Anioma State did not begin with him, it is equally undeniable that he has emerged as the most coherent and influential contemporary voice driving its realisation. His ability to align historical justice with political pragmatism has proven decisive.

To fully appreciate the significance of this moment, one must return to the deep historical roots of the Anioma identity and the painful episodes that have shaped it. The Anioma people, largely of Igbo extraction, occupy a unique geographical and political space within Delta State. Despite their linguistic, cultural, and historical affinity with the South-East, they have remained administratively located in the South-South geopolitical zone, a situation that has, over time, fostered a lingering identity dilemma.

This identity crisis is not a trivial matter of nomenclature or regional alignment; it is a profound question of belonging. For a people whose historical experience is intertwined with that of the broader Igbo nation, the absence of formal recognition within the South-East framework has created a sense of political and cultural displacement. The creation of Anioma State, therefore, is not merely about drawing new boundaries; it is about restoring coherence to a people’s identity.

The urgency of this restoration is underscored by one of the darkest chapters in Nigeria’s history: the Asaba Massacre during the Nigerian Civil War. In October 1967, in the early phase of the war, federal troops entered Asaba and carried out a brutal massacre of unarmed civilians. Eyewitness accounts and historical records recount how young men and boys were assembled and systematically executed in what remains one of the most harrowing instances of mass killing in Nigeria’s history.

This atrocity was not only a loss of lives but a deep psychological scar that has endured across generations. It symbolised the vulnerability of a people caught in the cross-currents of war, their identity both a marker of belonging and a trigger for victimisation. Yet, decades after the war, the wounds of that tragedy remain insufficiently acknowledged within Nigeria’s national narrative. 

It is within this context that the call for Anioma State acquires a deeper moral dimension. The creation of the state becomes an act of historical recognition; a way of affirming that the lives lost were not forgotten and that the survivors and their descendants are not condemned to perpetual marginality. It is a means of giving back a sense of belonging to a people whose history has been marked by both resilience and neglect.

The argument for Anioma State is further strengthened by considerations of equity within Nigeria’s federal structure. The South-East geopolitical zone currently comprises five states, unlike other zones that have six or more. This imbalance has long been a source of political disadvantage, particularly in the distribution of federal resources and representation. By integrating Anioma State into the South-East, Nigeria would be taking a concrete step toward correcting this structural inequity.

What makes this approach particularly compelling is that it does not involve fragmenting existing South-Eastern states, which could trigger fresh tensions and rivalries. Instead, it represents an additive solution; expanding the region in a manner that strengthens its collective voice without undermining internal cohesion. It is, in essence, a win-win proposition that enhances both regional balance and national stability.

This strategic clarity has been a hallmark of Ned Nwoko’s advocacy. His articulation of the Anioma cause has consistently emphasized that the creation of the state is not a parochial demand but a national imperative. By framing Anioma as both a historical necessity and a pragmatic solution to existing imbalances, he has succeeded in building a broad coalition of support that transcends ethnic and regional divides.

Moreover, his political positioning within the ruling establishment has provided the advocacy with a level of access and influence that previous efforts lacked. In Nigeria’s complex political landscape, where state creation is as much a matter of negotiation as it is of principle, such proximity to the levers of power has proven invaluable. It has enabled the Anioma question to move from the margins of policy discussions to the centre of legislative consideration.

Yet, it would be reductive to attribute the current momentum solely to individual effort. The Anioma movement is the culmination of decades of collective struggle by community leaders, intellectuals, and grassroots organisations who have kept the vision alive through successive administrations. From early memoranda to constitutional conferences, the demand for Anioma State has been consistently articulated, even when it seemed politically unattainable.

This historical continuity is important because it underscores the legitimacy of the demand. Anioma State is not a sudden invention or a politically expedient idea; it is the product of sustained advocacy rooted in a clear understanding of identity, history, and governance. What has changed is not the validity of the argument but the political will to act on it.

An often-overlooked dimension of the Anioma project is its potential to unify Igbo communities beyond the current boundaries of the South-East. Notably, Igbo-speaking populations in Edo State have also expressed interest in being part of the proposed Anioma State. During public hearings in places such as Enugu and Akwa Ibom, representatives from these communities presented memoranda advocating their inclusion, citing shared cultural heritage and historical ties.

The communities, which are Igbanke, Iru, Ogbagie, Igbo-Giri, Owa Ri Uzo, Otobaye, Oghada, Ute-Oha-Eze, Ekpon and other neighbouring Ika Igbo aboriginal communities within Edo State, said their position reflects years of accumulated frustration, neglect and marginalisation they experienced.

Speaking on the platform of The Voice of the Indigenous Ika Igbo Initiative in Edo State, the people lamented that despite their cultural, linguistic and historical affinity with Anioma communities in Delta State and the wider Igbo nation in the South-East, they have remained politically stranded and administratively neglected within Edo State.

This broader vision transforms Anioma from a state creation exercise into a unifying project for dispersed Igbo populations. It offers a platform for reintegration, enabling communities that have long existed on the periphery of regional politics to find a common administrative and cultural home. In doing so, it strengthens the fabric of Igbo identity while contributing to Nigeria’s diversity.

The significance of the Senate President’s statement, therefore, cannot be overstated. As the third-ranking official in the country, his words carry both symbolic and practical weight. They signal that the Anioma proposal has moved beyond speculation into the realm of actionable policy. For advocates who have long battled skepticism and political inertia, this is a moment of validation.

It is also a moment that calls for unity and strategic engagement. The realisation of Anioma State will require not only formal proclamation but also careful implementation, including boundary delineation, resource allocation, and administrative setup. Stakeholders must therefore approach this phase with the same clarity and commitment that have characterized the advocacy thus far.

For the broader Igbo nation, this development represents a significant gain. It is an expansion of political space, an enhancement of representation and a reaffirmation of identity. It demonstrates that constructive engagement within the Nigerian framework can yield tangible results, even for demands that have long been considered difficult.

At a time when national cohesion is often tested by competing interests and historical grievances, the Anioma initiative offers a model of how such challenges can be addressed. It shows that recognition, fairness and inclusion are not abstract ideals but practical tools for building a more stable and equitable federation.

Ultimately, the creation of Anioma State is about more than geography. It is about dignity, memory, and belonging. It is about acknowledging the past while shaping a more inclusive future. It is about ensuring that people who have long stood at the crossroads of identity can finally find clarity and recognition within the Nigerian union.

As the nation awaits the formal pronouncement, one thing is clear: the journey of Anioma State has entered its decisive phase. And in that journey, the convergence of historical justice, political will, and principled advocacy has created a moment that may well redefine the contours of Nigeria’s federal landscape.

*Onwubiko is the founder of Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeri, HURIWA, and was National Commissioner of the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria

The post The big boost for Anioma State appeared first on Vanguard News.

In as much as many have undertaken to speak on the ongoing political crises in the country centering on the future of electoral politics, I have decided to make basic clarifications. My preferred surgical tools are the Antecedent, Behaviour and Consequence, ABC,  of what might, on the long run, endanger us all and, of course, condemn some to the dust bin of history.

Regrettably, some of those who have written on the issue, trying to mislead the populace, are my friends with whom we set out as young people to build a new country and world order based on peace, progress, development and social justice. These are otherwise intelligent people educated with the resources of the country but have for what appears to me as pecuniary reasons, decided to side with backwardness and retrogression. But I digress. Let me address the Nigerian populace, laying down basic facts so that their choices can be made in the collective interests of our country and the African people.

At the centre of the current political crisis is the African Democratic Congress, ADC, whose leadership was delisted in an April Fool move by the ‘Independent’ National Electoral Commission, INEC. The Commission, which was established as a non-partisan body, was not expected to be a tragi-comic organisation guilty of acts of commission and omission by an otherwise knowledgeable bunch of directors, parading an assortment of degrees, including PhD in Law.

Some have blamed the ADC leaders for not registering an entirely new political party rather than adopting an existing one. My simple answer is: you do not admonish a hunch back to straighten up; if he could, he would have done so before you encounter him. The leaders of what turned out to be the ADC coalition tried to register a brand new party but were denied. So, adopting the ADC was a fallback position. In doing so, as we now know, they were meticulous. They obeyed all the constitutional rules of the party and those of INEC, including inviting the latter to observe the processes which INEC fully endorsed.

The basic summary of the processes was that the ADC National Working Committee, NWC, had series of meetings, ending with a trinity of proposals to its National Executive Council, NEC. The first was to accept a wider coalition in which new members would be infused and the ADC would become the central opposition party. Secondly, that the NWC be dissolved and a new Caretaker Committee established to run the party. Thirdly, that the NEC, using its constitutional powers, should waive the provision that the new entrants should spend two years as members before being eligible to be officers of the party. All three proposals were put without any counter motion, and adopted by the party NEC meeting of July 29, 2025 at the New Chelsea Hotel, Abuja. The INEC, which was procedurally invited to the NEC meeting, attended, was satisfied that all known constitutional and electoral rules were complied with. On that basis, INEC granted institutional recognition to the new ADC leadership which comprised Senator David Mark as Chairman, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary and a fusion of the old leadership and new leaders as the NWC Caretaker Committee.

So, when a former official of the party later claimed he did not resign his position and that since other officials, including the former Chairman Ralph Okey Nwosu had resigned, he should be recognised as the authentic Chairman of the party, any educated person, least of all, a law Professor like Joash Amupitan who heads the INEC, should, but for mischief, know that the character is delusional. The process the INEC observed and endorsed was not that of individual resignations, but the constitutional dissolution of the entire ADC leadership and its replacement. So, except for non-legal or mischievous reasons, no member of a constitutionally dissolved executive can later claim he remains an officer of the party and should be the new leader. A court in response to this individual’s case, directed that the status quo should be maintained. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence should know that the status quo is as at the time the court case was initiated or at worse, before the dissolution of the old executive. But the Amupitan INEC intentionally misinterpreted this to mean the removal of the ADC leadership, leaving an organisation without any leadership. Even amongst anarchists, there must be leaders.

The obvious beneficiary of this conscious illogicality is the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC. I have read praises of the APC leaders as “political strategists” for trying to destroy the opposition before the January 2027 general elections.

But I think such people are not well informed because, the ultimate “political strategist’ in our history, the tyrant, General Sani Abacha, ended up in the dustbin of history. He had deceived the political class that his November 17, 1993 coup was to merely restore the June 12, 1993 presidential victory of Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola. Rather than do so, Abacha imprisoned Abiola. He promised that with his coup, civilian adminstrators would be appointed to run the states. Instead, he appointed military administrators. Then he said the Deputy State Administrators would be civilians. He never appointed a single one. He then promised a democratic transition and established five political parties. He ended up being the sole candidate of all the parties. But his coronation never took place; he died unsung.

The lesson for us all is to allow political plurality and freedom of choice. For our collective good and the future of our country, we must preserve and make institutions functional. These should include the legislature, judiciary and electoral commission.

There must be functional opposition. When the United Kingdom provides public funding, called “Short Money” for opposition parties to take care of their administrative and research costs, it is not because it is insane. When that country pays opposition parties 22,853 pounds for each seat they occupy and additional funds per 200 votes, it is conscious that without strong opposition, its democracy is doomed.

If the ADC is endangered just because it is an opposition party, our democracy is endangered. Our fundamental right to freedom of association will be endangered.

As a former labour leader both in Nigeria and Africa, I am painfully aware that the establishment of trade unions and workers organisations and their well-being is based on the right to associate. Section 40 of the Nigeria Constitution states explicitly: “Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests”.  If this is compromised, we are all compromised.

The post The ABC, ADC and APC of Nigerian politics, by Owei Lakemfa appeared first on Vanguard News.