The United Kingdom's Bitter Pill To Biafrans, Too Hard for Ukrainians to Accept From Russia

 The United Kingdom's Bitter Pill To Biafrans, Too Hard for Ukrainians to Accept From Russia

The invasion of Ukraine by Russia has provided an opportunity for debating the invasion of Biafra by the Nigeria state, which has lasted since 1967 till date. This is especially as the same actors are involved and invested in both crises. The United Kingdom(UK) and her allies, including the United States are against Russia, but shockingly "supportive of", or at least "silent at" Nigeria for invading Biafra.

From February 24, Russian cruise and hypersonic missiles have destroyed many civilian targets, leaving behind many deaths. The initial window of opportunity for preventing the war was squandered by special interest groups profiteering from conflicts resident in Pentagon, Brussels and Moscow. While there is no way of determining when the war will end, several attempts at negotiating a settlement have produced disagreements from Russia and Ukraine. The most flabbergasting thing is the condition put forward by Russia for ending the war.

Initially, Russia demanded that Ukraine accept Crimea, a part they seized under lethargic Obama administration as a part of Russia, confer statehood on Donetsk and Lohansk(collectively called Donbas region or industrial area), the parts they proclaimed independent under grovelling Biden administration. Finally, to change their constitution to emphasize “neutrality” in both joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) and in the possession of nuclear weapons and, I dare say biolab research facilities. Although in recent days, the demand has been modified to “neutrality” in the fashion of Sweden, a non-NATO European Union member. That is, in addition to every other demand being constant. These demands have been totally rejected by Ukraine as a nonstarter. Ukrainian leaders think it will obviously be a new precedent and unbelievable one at such, to allow Russia what she demands, just because they are more powerful. They think it is a dangerous precedent with unfathomable consequences.

The whole scenario does seem like the word "precedent" is overrated, or perhaps even mocked, considering that the United Kingdom forced this bitter pill down the throat of Biafrans for over five decades now, through their proxy – the Fulani. Now, Biafrans can argue with justification that United Kingdom set that precedent when they shamefully used Russia and Egypt to invade Biafra. However, that would be diversionary and distracting. We would rather focus on the demands United Kingdom imposed willy-nilly.

It is interesting to note that Eastern Nigeria (Biafra) economy was a world class economy under Michael Okpara, the premier. But United Kingdom created a humanitarian disaster by imposing land, sea and air blockade. UK intensified shelling and bombing of markets, schools, hospitals and refugee settlements. To shorten a long story, as soon as the war ended with the death of over 3.5 million Biafrans, the real economic, social and political strangulation began through deliberate anti Biafran people policies.

It has now been over 50 years since the after war ‘no victor, no vanquished’ declaration, yet Biafrans have still continued to face the war of poor infrastructure and absence of industry to engage the teeming graduates. This has led to mass migration of Biafra youths to Europe and other world destinations. Most times leading to desert deaths. It is heartbreaking that a region with most traveling record, has no functional seaports or international airports. By the time the ship passes Igweocha (Portharcourt) and docks in Lagos, it will take twice the amount from China to move it down to Biafraland. No embassy or consulate. University admission scores are outrageously high for Biafrans who must show gratitude, even as they are made to work under an underperforming and quota system senior colleagues. The imposition of Fulani commissioners of police on the entire Biafraland has led to avoidable gross violation of human rights and a plethora of deaths – both young and old. United Kingdom refused to allow Biafrans integrate into Nigeria, and at same time rejected their desire to be Biafrans. Therefore, no Biafran can be president of Nigeria or be allowed to control their oil and gas.

Time and space will not allow a proper articulation of all the bitter pill demands forced on Biafrans by the United Kingdom. A pill of similitude to what Russia has offered Ukraine, which Ukraine is resisting vehemently at a heavy cost, same cost Biafrans have continued to endure.

The question now is: since sovereignty or self-determination is not a crime, why did United Kingdom invade Biafra by force and why did the world community not take action? Perhaps, since Russia refers to the West as an empire of lies, now is the time to ask them whether they helped United Kingdom invade Biafra because they were deceived or because they believe that Africa should be at the bottom of the ladder? If it is the former, they should tender an apology to Biafra. But should it be the latter, then we should thank them for being honest.

To be honest is to admit that the Russia-Ukraine war is a tug-of-war between United States and Russia. To be honest is to admit that no one has consoled Biafrans or has justice being done to them.

Biafra demands justice, justice for all!

#JusticeforBiafra

#FreeMaziNnamdiKanuNow

Written by Chibueze Daniel

Edited by Ogah C S Maduabuchi

For Family Writers Press International.