Igbo question: Beyond grievance, towards political reckoning
By Ogechi Okoro
Nigeria cannot keep singing the anthem of national unity while sidestepping the unresolved issue of equal political opportunity. The debate over Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu’s objection to a proposed single four-year Igbo presidency, reportedly linked to Peter Obi, is not just about individual ambitions. It exposes Nigeria’s unfinished reckoning with reconciliation, inclusion, and a democracy that fulfils its promise.
It is deeply unsettling when a nation devotes more energy to dissecting the ethnic roots of its next president than to weighing the competence needed to lead. At an academic conference at Carleton University in Ottawa, I joined a spirited debate about Africa’s development hurdles. A Canadian academic remarked that societies fixated on ethnic identity often fail to recognise and elevate their most capable leaders. Nigeria stands as a vivid illustration of this paradox. Still, denouncing ethnic politics should never serve as a smokescreen for overlooking the scars of historical exclusion. The Igbo are key architects of the Nigerian federation. Their quest for the presidency is not a plea for tribal privilege, but a demand for democratic inclusion.
Regarding Peter Obi’s reported four-year commitment, an important question lingers. Nigeria’s challenges run deep, and real reform demands patience, persistence, and unwavering institutional support. The Constitution allows every president two four-year terms. Why, then, should an Igbo presidential bid start with a handicap that others are spared? Benjamin Kalu’s intervention sharpens this fairness issue.
Nigeria’s history offers important lessons. Olusegun Obasanjo’s emergence in 1999 was partly a response to the political wounds left by the annulment of the June 12, 1993, election. The informal North-South power-sharing arrangement that followed reflected an understanding that national stability sometimes requires political accommodation. The Yar’Adua-Jonathan succession further demonstrated the tensions between constitutional provisions, political agreements and competing regional expectations.
Yet the Igbo question is rooted in an even deeper history. The Civil War’s end in 1970 brought the solemn promise of ‘no victor, no vanquished.’ That was a powerful gesture toward healing, but words alone cannot hold a nation together. True reconciliation demands trust, fairness, and a real sense of belonging. Over fifty years later, the debate over whether an Igbo can ascend to the presidency shows how incomplete that healing remains.
But the South-East must also face its own political responsibilities. No matter how justified, historical grievances cannot replace strategic political organisation. The region needs stronger alliances, deeper engagement across Nigeria, and a clear, unified strategy. Its aspirations must be framed not only as an Igbo plea, but as a vision that resonates with the entire nation.
This is the moment when negotiation becomes indispensable. Nigerian politics thrives on interests, alliances, and the give-and-take of commitments. Engaging with President Tinubu and other power brokers should never become blind loyalty. Instead, it should secure real promises on inclusion, infrastructure, security, and economic progress. Political support must always be met with genuine reciprocity.
At the same time, the broader political establishment must realise that national unity cannot rest forever on asking one region to wait its turn. A federation that demands loyalty from every citizen must also prove its fairness to every community within its borders.
It is also crucial to distinguish economic achievement from political entitlement. The Igbo spirit of enterprise, resilience, and commercial success is a national treasure. Yet Nigeria does not need an Igbo president simply because of business acumen. What the country needs is a political culture where an Igbo candidate can stand shoulder to shoulder with Yoruba, Hausa, Fulani, Ijaw, or Tiv contenders on a level playing field.
In the end, competence and inclusion are not rivals but partners. Nigeria must strive for both. The goal is not only to see a president from the South-East, but to build a nation where the finest candidates can rise from any corner, free from ethnic suspicion or political bias.
Perhaps the most important question is not whether the Civil War has formally ended. It is whether Nigeria has done enough to heal the divisions that produced it.
The guns may have fallen silent in 1970, but true unity will only dawn when every Nigerian, no matter their ethnic background, feels fully entitled to the nation’s opportunities, leadership, and future. That question links the past to the present, and the present to the future.
- Dr Ogechi Okoro, a political and social analyst, writes from Hamilton, New Zealand.
