In my column of 14 July 2017 titled: “Biafra. From Monologue To Dialogue” I had a tinge of optimism that the incarceration of Nnamdi Kanu, lPOB leader facing sedition charges from the Federal Government of Nigeria, was about to end.

The optimism was informed by the fact that the national assembly and presidency had waded into the matter especially when Arewa youths issued Igbos a so-called quit notice from the north and all other members of the Nigerian union started threatening to expel members of other ethnic groups in their domain.

In that 2017 media intervention, which is seven years ago, l made the case below:

“As the cry for Partitioning of Nigeria along ethnic, cultural and religious lines, which mimics the Partitioning of Africa amongst European countries during the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, grows louder, it is pertinent to note that the conflict is being fueled by policies steeped in politics, as opposed to equity and justice.

“This is why allowing the Igbo agitation in particular and similar self-determination struggles amongst the multifarious ethnic nationalities in Nigeria to remain a monologue rather than a dialogue, has been dangerous, if not reckless.

“And it is therefore very heartening that both the presidency and the National Assembly, NASS are now weighing in to resolve the conflict as evidenced by recent consultations and media comments from both acting president, Yemi Osinbajo, and senate president, Bukola Saraki.

“I’m pretty convinced that like the duo, it has dawned on most Nigerians that disputes related to ethnic nationalism can no longer be attended to via the surfeit of window dressing measures that have been the attitude of authorities in Nigeria.”

My prognosis in 2017 which is seven years ago was wrong as evidenced by the fact that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB was re-arrested in 2021 and has remained under detention.

So, my optimism that the presidency and national assembly had finally found the courage and formula to heal the old wounds in the ‘easterners’ and ‘northerners’ relationship which has been fractured since the unfortunate civil war ended some 54 years ago, was a misjudgment.

Perhaps that is principally because it was not an idea whose time had come. But today it appears to me as it is an idea whose time has come.

The quote “Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come” is often attributed to Victor Hugo, a renowned French writer.

It encapsulates the notion that when the conditions are ripe and the world is ready for a particular concept or change, the impact of that idea can be immense and transformative. According to the proponents of the thought process, the power of an idea lies not just in its intrinsic qualities but also in the context in which it emerges.

They argue further that a groundbreaking idea that resonates with the needs, values, and aspirations of a society can spark significant change and progress. And conclude that when an idea aligns with the prevailing sentiments, challenges, or opportunities of a given time, it can gain momentum and catalyze action on a large scale.

The current efforts and activities surrounding the renewed call to free Nnamdi Kanu tick all the boxes highlighted above.

In fact, for the devotees of the concept of an idea whose time has come, the imminent release of IPOB leader Kanu is an example of a zeitgeist or a time spirit. One would argue that it is a historical moment, where the idea or concept (a “spirit” if you will) is perfectly received by a cultural movement that surrenders to its utility as dictated by historical necessity.

In fact, the scenario described above aligns with the current dynamics of political change in our country which has brought a progressive president,Bola Tinubu to be at the helm of affairs at the Aso Rock Villa presidential seat of power. Thus it can be said that he has become the one put in a position to resolve the over half a century-old agitation by the Igbos in a manner that would be most beneficial by integrating them into one united Nigeria which they have been craving.

That is because being a neo-liberal free market economy adherent, president Tinubu understands the economics of scale and appreciates the benefits of a large population being enjoyed by the likes of China and India which have the largest and second largest populations in the world and have leveraged the population advantage to also be the first and second fastest growing economies worldwide.

So, the president recognizing that we are stronger together as a huge market would be keen to do all he could to heal the old wounds by addressing the reasonable grievances of the aggrieved parties and helping the lgbos blend with society as opposed to nursing grudges and expressing animosity.

Hopefully, if President Tinubu decides to play the political card and helps to build the bridge by allowing a political solution that would enable Kanu to regain his freedom, peace would return to the otherwise very industrially productive region currently rendered comatose due to insecurity challenges such as the Seat-At-Home order on a certain day imposed by IPOB in protest of Igbo’s exclusion from mainstream Nigerian politics after the Biafran war ended in 1970.

By last month June, it had been three years since Nnamdi  Kanu has been and continues to be the ‘guest’ of the federal government of Nigeria, FGN which has applied all manners of legal weapons to abridge his freedom following a charge of treasonable felony against him.

Remarkably, multiple Nigerian and even ECOWAS courts had ruled that he should be freed from detention until the supreme court of Nigeria, on appeal from the FGN lawyers overruled the decision of the lower courts in December of 2023.

As part of a more recent effort to help Kanu regain freedom through a political rather than legal process, 50 members of the House of Representatives from different parts of Nigeria and political parties, which branded themselves Concerned Federal Lawmakers For Peace and Security in the South East, had written to President Tinubu to activate Section 174 of the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and Section 107(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 for the release of the detained IPOB leader.

One thing that is significant to note with the initiative is that never in the past had a coalition of lawmakers that are not of Igbo stock formed a bipartisan force to solicit for the release of the IPOB leader from detention. That it just happened is a pointer to the expectation that it is truly an idea whose time has come.

So, given the current renewed and broad efforts involving non-Igbos, it seems to me now that it is a question of when, not if Kanu will be released from detention which willy-nilly will be sooner than later.

The assertion above is underscored by the fact that it has become clear to all involved that diplomacy rather than the nzogbu nzogbu (forceful) approach hitherto adopted by the hard-liners in lPOB leadership would be the key to Kanu’s freedom.

When that happens it would be a classic case of the triumph of diplomacy over the nzogbu-nzogbu (forceful) approach to conflict resolution.

As at the last count, the former democratically elected president of Nigeria/former military head of state of our country, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, and Chief Emeka Anyaoku, former secretary general of the Commonwealth of Nations covering all the countries formerly under the British Empire including Canada, Australia and India to mention a few had just finished rubbing minds with the governors of the five(5) eastern states on the need to and how to secure Nnamdi Kanu’s release from detention.

It was initially hoped that the involvement of eminent personalities such as the pair of Obasanjo and Anyaoku, who are juggernauts in the art of diplomacy and leadership not only in Nigeria (Anyaoku was also minister of foreign affairs in the 2nd republic)but the world (Obasanjo was a member of Eminent Persons Group with ex-prime ministers of Uk and Australia amongst others) Mazi Kanu was on track to be liberated from the jail for lack of a better terminology to describe his incarceration since June 2021 when he was allegedly renditioned from Kenya to answer to treasonable felony charges brought against him by the federal government of Nigeria.

But the optimism about Kanu’s immediate freedom through the efforts of the former president and former commonwealth secretary general was dampened by the subsequent rebuttal of the news that the elder statesmen would be leading the delegation of eastern states governors to plead with President Tinubu.

But hope is not entirely lost because although the corrigendum by former president Obasanjo that his meeting with the governors from the five southeast states in Enugu on the 3rd of July did not have the freedom for Kanu on the agenda looks like a setback, my hunch is that it is a tactical move by former president Obasanjo.

After all, negotiations for political settlements of matters of that nature are not supposed to be made public until it is done and dusted.

In other words, there may still be some ongoing backroom negotiations which makes it premature to go public with the freedom for Kanu initiative.

Whatever the case may be, while the lPOB members see Kanu as a leader of the struggle to emancipate Igbo people through secession, some sons and daughters of Igbo land at home and in the diaspora consider him their kit and kin who are fighting for the common good of the Igbos, but perhaps in a nasty and abhorrent way which they detest and have denounced.

Without a doubt, it is the rhetorics of defining Nigeria as a zoo and using expletives that do not bear repeating in this space to characterize leaders of Nigeria during feats of anger by Kanu that has, to put it mildly, bruised the egos of those he has been mocking as his vituperations bordered not just on disagreements with government apparachik but treating with disrespect other tribes.

That is a major factor that has made the struggle to free him after he was renditioned into Nigeria three years ago, a very daunting process.

According to John Maxwell, the renowned leadership expert, there is a difference between disagreement & disrespect. Apparently, the problem is not just a disagreement between the lPOB leader and the Nigerian nation.

But it appears to be a disrespect problem because he tended to be disrespecting other tribes. The point being made is that, when one disagrees with another, both can talk it out. They will just sit there and probably agree to disagree,  by never agreeing on anything, but they will keep talking. So when we disagree, we’ll talk it out.

But if one disrespects another, it puts a wall between them. This may result in what can be identified as a confirmation bias. In other words, people seek to listen to only people they agree with. Instead of confirmation bias, what is needed is a collaboration bias. Based on Maxwell’s philosophy, Igbos need to seek out people who are different from them to build relationships with in other to achieve full integration.

Before Obasanjo and Anyaoku’s visit in the company of the Obi of Onitsha, Igwe Nnaemeka Achebe to confer with the five governors of eastern Nigeria in Enugu on Tuesday 3rd July, in November of 2021, Chief Mbazulike Amaechi, led a delegation of Igbo leaders to visit then president Muhamadu Buhari to appeal to him for the unconditional release of Nnamdi Kanu.

During that meeting Chief Amaechi was in the company of Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, former Governor of Anambra State, Bishop Sunday Onuoha of the Methodist Church, Chief Barrister Goddy Uwazurike, former President of Igbo socio-cultural group, Aka Ikenga, and Mr. Tagbo Mbazulike Amaechi, the nonagenarian 2nd republic minister of transport (all who have now passed away along with Dr. Ezeife) had described the situation in the Southeast as “painful and pathetic,” lamenting that “businesses have collapsed, education is crumbling, and there is fear everywhere.”

He then committed to then-president Buhari that if Kanu was released to him as the only First Republic Minister still alive, “he would no longer say the things he had been saying,” stressing that he could control him, “not because I have anything to do with them (IPOB), but I am highly respected in Igbo land today.”

Then he concluded by making a solemn wish: “I don’t want to leave this planet without peace returning to my country. I believe in one big, united Nigeria, a force in Africa. Mr President, I want you to be remembered as a person who saw Nigeria burning, and you quenched the fire.”

Unfortunately, that wish never came to pass, before the 93-year-old Amaechi and 86-year-old Ezeife joined their ancestors in 2022 and 2023 respectively.

Fortuitously, although the late Mbazukike Amaechi had offered himself to then President Buhari as a guarantor of Kanu’s good behavior if released to him, a deal which the former president declined, reportedly Nnamdi Kanu himself and lPOB leadership have now undertaken to abide by whatever rules that are given as precondition for his freedom currently being negotiated.

So an out-of-court settlement is on track even as a few days after the eastern states’ governors resolved to take their plea to President Tinubu, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe of Abia state has led his colleagues from the southeast to meet with the Attorney General of the Federation, AGF and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi to negotiate the release of Kanu so that peace would reign in the eastern region like it used to before the agitation for a sovereign nation of Biafra raised the tension that has made the region a boiling couldrom of sorts.

It is such a paradox that only in 2016 the eastern region merited being granted  by the United Nations Development Program, UNDO the status of the safest region in terms of human security in Nigeria.

Today that geographical location has become so blighted that it is a shadow of its old self as the agitation to separate the Igbos from the rest of Nigeria has taken a very violent and bloody turn with thousands of the youths going to their graves prematurely.

That high level of violence had made Igbo land a no-go area for people who cherish peace and tranquillity as the space that was in no  distant past a bastion of commerce and industry has become a cauldron of sorts.

Before proceeding further a bit of historical background of the three figures who have influenced lgbo nation the most and have  been the major drivers of the Igbo struggle would be in order.

The three notable leaders in the annals of the modern Igbo nation are Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, Chief Odimegwu Ojukwu and Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

It is striking that have passed away at ripe age and one is incarcerated.

Azikiwe’s passion for the freedom of the oppressed people transcends Igbo land extending to his fight for independence of Nigeria and indeed the entire African continent. That is because he was one of the purveyors of Africa’s independence from colonial rule which is a mission he embarked on upon his return from acquiring education from Lincoln University, Connecticut, USA.

The second is Chief Odimegwu Ojukwu who in a bid to separate Igbos from Nigeria, as a colonel in the Nigerian army serving as the military administrator of the then eastern region declared it as the nation of Biafra on the 30th May 1967.

The third is Nnamdi Kanu who was driven by the zeal to conclude the liberation of Igbos from the injustice. He zealously continued with the struggle that  was started peacefully by Azikiwe before and continued after 1960 when Nigeria became an independent country and which Ojukwu pursued violently via a secession attempt in 1967 that degenerated into an unfortunate civil war that raged on for three years and left in its trail the loss of estimated three million souls and massive destruction of infrastructure in Igboland.

The lPOB leader who had relied on fiery anti-Nigeria speeches which authorities regarded as hateful and seditious and was thus apprehended by law enforcement agencies has been fighting for his freedom through the judiciary for over three years period.

The Igbos in pursuit of their quest to become more active participants in the mainstream political leadership of our country or be allowed to go their separate way have been “shaking the table”, be it via the civil war or the socioeconomically strangulating activities of IPOB in a bid to attract the attention of the FGN and the world.

It is remarkable that only one of the three (3) Igbo leaders highlighted earlier pursued the goal of liberating Igbos peacefully and that personality is Dr.Nnamdi Azikiwe. Notably, he was an intellectual and preferred a non-violent approach to conflict resolution.

To underscore his preference for dialogue over violence, it is worth recollecting a narrative in an interview he had in 1995 at at the age of 90 and in which he revealed how he admonished his protege in Ghana late Kwame Nkrumah, (who later became the prime minister of Ghana) to eschew violence in seeking change.

As a direct opposite of Azikiwe’s approach, Chief Ojukwu who was an army colonel adopted the use of force which is why he attempted to secede relying on the instrumentality of guns and war.

Likewise, Mazi Kanu’s modus operandi is the resort to fiery and incendiary speeches that fired up the youths of Igbo land who as a result felt obliged to pursue their freedom from the marginalization or ostracization by the Nigerian government as it were through confrontation of the nation’s security forces.

My guess is that each of them leveraged their skills based on their areas of expertise, which is okay.

Perhaps due to the notion of the average Igbo person influenced by the experience of the civil war and non-implementation of the end-of-war remedies promised which are: Reconciliation Reconstruction, and Rehabilitation – the so-called three Rs that were supposed to help re-absorb the Igbos back into the system, they have somehow become isolated in the scheme of things in our country.

Worse of all even they too have been affirming that inequity by also increasingly distancing themselves or drifting away instead of building friendship bridges across the river Niger to other like or unlike-minded Nigerians.

The above view is my assessment and a lot of hardliners have been debating that point of view with me over the years, l have been making the case that the imminent release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu from detention and subsequent readmission of the Igbo nation into the mainstream of Nigerian leadership can only be attained through intensive and continuous negotiations which diplomacy is all about and not the nzogbu nzogbu (forceful) approach which has been the approach in the past decade or thereabouts.

The truth is that we can not continue to allow our unarmed youths to confront security forces that are fully armed in the manner Palestinians confront Israeli Security Forces, and IDF with bare hands and stones.

It is unwise that they would continue to throw states at security forces hoping that when they are mowed down and prematurely sent to their graves for a cause that can be negotiated, the powerful countries of theb would come to their rescue.

Based on experience, diplomacy preferred by Nnamdi Azikiwe has always proven to be the best way of resolving conflicts no matter how complex.

Nigeria attained independence without firing a shot against Britain. Similarly, India secured independence not through the barrels of the gun nor did apartheid end in South Africa via a war,but through a negotiated agreement which democracy is all about.

It is only through diplomacy that the raging Israeli-Hamas conflict and the Russian-Ukraine war could have been avoided and would eventually end.

That is a clear affirmation of the fact that diplomacy is the best solution for conflict resolution no matter how complex.

 So, it is a matter of when, not if peace returns to Igbo land, sooner than later through diplomacy it will be a tribute to the memory of my senior friend, the late Prof. George Obiozor who was the immediate past president General of Ohaneze Ndigbo who tried very hard to infuse the conversation on lgbo exclusion and the need to bring the ethic group into the mainstream with the fervor of diplomacy.

I can recall his passion for reconciling the Igbo nation with the rest of Nigeria with nostalgia. As far back as the mid-1980s, Prof. Obiozor alongside Prof. Ukandi Damachi, Dr. Stanley Macebuh, and Mr. Tom Fabian ( all of them now of blessed memory) used to converge in my apartment at 1004 Estate in Victoria Island, Lagos.

They used to do so even if l was much younger than them in age, academics, and every material aspect of life. But l felt honored to enjoy the privilege of sharing space and rubbing minds with some of the best brains in Nigeria as they were products of some of the best universities in the United States of America, USA from MIT, Princeton, and Harvard. They often engaged themselves in discussions that dug deep into the essence of our country from both theoretical and practical perspectives.

Having operated at very high levels in both the academia and top echelons of government and the private sector they had highly valuable insights which l was happy to absorb from them.

Restoring the southeast into the bastion of industrial development that it used to be was an overarching desire of Prof. Obiozor who had been Director Director General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Nigerian Ambassador to Israel and Cyprus, and lastly Nigeria’s ambassador to the United Nations before his retirement after which he took over the reins of leadership of Ohaneze Ndi Igbo, the apex Igbo socio-cultural group.

It’s trite to state that Prof.Obiozor would be rejoicing in the other world on the day that Kanu is set free and his beloved Igbo land once again, regains its privileged status of being UNDP’s most secure geographical region in Nigeria.

So, it is very likely in my estimation that all men and women of goodwill who have been craving peace in Igbo land can not wait to exhale and exclaim ‘victory at last’ when President Tinubu greenlights the freedom for Kanu initiative and welcomes the Lgbos into mainstream Nigeria.

•Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in Delta state government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.