The Road To Self-Determination

Femi Obayori
The Road
To
Self-determination
The Road to Self-determination Femi Obayori
© Femi Obayori 2003
N o part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise without the prior permission of the copyright
owner.
First published 2003
By OBABOOKS
e-mail: ifafemi2001@yahoo.com
2
Contents Page
1. Lost souls and illusions: By way of
introduction………………………………………...5
2. Self-determination struggle……….……………….6
3. Yoruba self-determination struggle………………...8
4. Cadres of self-determination struggle………… 13
5. Self-determination cadres are revolutionaries……14
6. Self-determination struggle is a popular struggle…16
7. Cultural content of self-determination struggle… 19
8. Self-determination struggle as armed struggle……23
9. Self-determination struggle and Sovereign National
Conference……………………………………….26
10. Self-determination struggle and “politicians”
…….28
11. Self-determination struggle and the international
community………………………………………...30
12. Conclusion………………………………………...32
3
Dedication:
The Boys
who never had the opportunity
to learn the tricks of the process
4
The Road to Self-Determination.

1. Lost Souls and Illusions: By Way of Introduction
Reality is truth. Truth is the most enduring thing. Whether we
like it or not, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, it is
there, its dynamics haunts us and changes our reality, impact on
our fate to the extent and in the direction to which we give
cognisance to it or derecognise it. But truth is bitter. Where
knowledge is lacking truth becomes the casualty. Where
mediocrity and mundane-mindedness reign, truth is staked, as at
Inquisition, where the worldly overclouds the minds and beings
of men. Truth is nailed to the cross. Nailed, but only to like Jesus
come round to posses the minds and beings of men, men of
another generation, men of the future.
The Yoruba self-determination struggle is in the dark forest
of untruth, of lack of knowledge, where the liquor of sentiments
and illusions presents to the lost souls a luminescent picture of a
sweet paradise. It is important that we begin to clear this pall of
unreason with the bitter pills of truth. The wheat must be
separated from the chaff. We must come out clearly to define the
road to our self-determination. We must come out to make a
distinction between self-determination politics and playing
politics with self-determination. We need to make a distinction
between radicalism in struggle and rascality in struggle. The
years of rummaging in the dark must be left behind. Thuggery as
tactics must be distinguished from the strategy of thuggery and
intensification of terror in the name of the people. What is the
road to Yoruba self-determination? How does the Yoruba self-
determination struggle, its content, its real meaning and its place
in the struggle determine the method best suited to the struggle?
5
2. Self-determination Struggle.
To define the road to self-determination correctly, self-
determination itself must be correctly defined. Self-
determination is the control by a people over their economic,
political, social and cultural life. The recognition that a people
deserve this is their right to self-determination. That it is a right
means that it is inalienable, it is part and parcel of what makes
such a people complete as a people, that there is no hindrance to
their development. When a people enjoy the right to self-
determination, the basis for full realisation of their humanity is
guaranteed. When people fight for self-determination, when
people struggle for self-determination, it means that they do not
enjoy this right at all or that they do not enjoy it to the fullest.
Thus the people of Puerto Rico, a colony of the United States of
America, have been fighting for self-determination since the US
annexed that country in 1898, the Kurds have been struggling for
self-determination [in a new phase] since the treaty of Sevres
which would have granted their separate state was betrayed by
the European powers in 1920 leading to the balkanisation of the
Kurds in several countries, mainly Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria.
The people of Quebec, Tibet, Basque in Spain, Palestine,
Xinxiang in China, Chechnya, Omorro in Ethiopia, the Saharawi
people, the people of southern Sudan, all are fighting for self-
determination, part of the approximately 150 self-determination
movements in the world. In most if not all these cases the
struggle has been bloody or rather violent, bordering on war and
terrorism. But experience also has shown that in all these cases,
at one time or the other they return to the negotiating table. In all
these cases also not only do they have charters or bills stating
clearly what they want as a people, the focus of their struggle,
6
they have these documents before international organisations
such as the United Nations, OAU/ African Union, Organisation
of American States [OAS] and the likes and maintain diplomatic
missions abroad, lobby groups and other networks. They have
recognition among other peoples. Their positions are not
conjectured by the international media and observers on the
bases of their actions or perceived intentions but first and
foremost on the basis of their mission statements and
coordinated responses to unfolding reality.
These peoples fight consciously recognising that they are part
of a humanity that has codified standards of self-determination,
certain rights which all civilised nations of the world agree to
and must be made to abide by.
But in our own case the world has had access to our mission
statements only haphazardly. When it is convenient for us we
speak to the world. We have not succeeded in impacting it on the
global psyche that some 45 million people in Nigeria called
Yoruba think they are repressed and deserve to be allowed to
exercise their right of self-determination. But this is also a
reflection of the local conduct of the struggle for self-
determination.
Many people have not realised that the struggle is not just a
struggle for secession or a separate republic. It could be as mild
as mere granting of linguistic and cultural rights as some of the
tendencies and parties in the Kurdish struggle in Turkey have
argued. It could be a struggle for autonomy or true federalism.
This is important because unless we recognise clearly all the
options and only consciously arrive at the most correct option,
even if it is the most extreme, most unpalatable and one
requiring the most arduous task, if we arrive at a correct decision
through an erroneous appreciation of reality, definitely we are
7
going to commit fundamental errors in the execution of this
decision.
It also has implication for a correct definition of our goals.
Ultimately, the goal is the good life for our people. Good life in
all its ramifications. The structural redefinition, the changes in
political structure, is to create the enabling environment for the
blossoming of the good life. The attainment of the status of a
Republic does not automatically guarantee this. The type of
republic, how the republic is arrived, will go a long way in
determining what it will be: a republic of the people or a republic
of the oppressing class?
3. Yoruba Self-determination Struggle

The Yoruba Charter of Self-Determination, first published by the
Oodua Youth Movement [OYM] in December 1994 and
reviewed on June 12, 1998 clearly sets out the goal of Yoruba
self-determination on the basis of a systematic analysis of the
history of the Yoruba in the Nigerian enclave. The minimum
condition acceptable to the Yoruba, according to the Charter is
the convocation of a Sovereign National Conference [SNC]
where the nations and nationalities in Nigeria would have the
opportunity to jointly determine the basis of their existence as
part of the union. In the alternative the Yoruba have the right to
secede from Nigeria using all legitimate and universally
acceptable means. This Charter remains the most well thought
out document on Yoruba self-determination. All other
documents on Yoruba self-determination have either been a
build-up on the Charter’s foundation or in some cases attempts
to be more original, exotic and novel, leading to the watering
down of the dialectically carved logic of the Charter. But
unfortunately, in spite of the effort to popularise the Charter,
which due to no fault of its materially ill-equipped initiators,
8
have been epileptic, many people who today claim to be gurus of
Yoruba Self-determination, Leaders, Coordinators, Presidents
and Commandants or whatever they may call themselves have
not read a line of this great pamphlet or have read but not
understood it.
At the risk of sounding patronising, I would recommend that
anyone who wants to take Yoruba self-determination struggle
seriously must first read the Charter. Without the Charter it is
difficult to appreciate the ABC of Yoruba self-determination
struggle. Its logic is unbeatable, the vision that informed it sharp
and the mission of the Yoruba clearly defined.
If at that time the champions of the Yoruba Self-
determination struggle were not clear as to the strategy and
tactics for achieving Yoruba self-determination, they were able
to define principles which would guide anyone with inner eyes
away from the roads that could not lead to Yoruba self-
determination.
Thus the Yoruba self-determination struggle was consciously
seen as a political struggle from the onset. The publication of the
Charter was followed by conscientious pursuit of the task of its
popularisation. Consultation with various strata of the Yoruba
nation commenced in earnest. The elite, the studentry, the
traditional institutions and working people were targeted, as well
as the Yoruba in Diaspora. The OYM was conscious of the need
to politicise the Yoruba populace. This because at the end of the
day, even in its ethnic nature, the struggle is political because it
is a tussle for control of product of social production – whether
material or intellectual – and the people are the creators of
wealth.
Sentimentalisation of the struggle, chauvinism, ethnic
bigotry, super race mentality, the chosen ones, ethnic cleansing,
the dressing of dictatorship and fascism in ethnic icings were
9
latter inventions imposed on the self-determination movement by
better resourced opportunists, political jobbers and agents
provocateur masquerading as champions of the popular cause. In
step with the blossoming of self-determination groups,
commencing with the COVENANT GROUP in October 1995
and the Oodua Peoples Congress [OPC] in December the same
year was the watering down of the ideology of the struggle. But
for sometime sincerity was still able to bear the leadership along.
The swamping of the movement by negative tendencies created
the imbalance from which we are yet to recover. This was further
worsened by the conscious attempts of the ruling class to ethicise
the struggle – the oppressors as usual are the first to ethnicise the
struggle, to devoid it of its political content. They pretend to be
above tribe, above nationalities but prostitute the ethnic
sentiment of the poor masses.
Thus the raising of charm to the top of the agenda,
absolutisation of armed struggle, unscientific appreciation of
communal conflict as part of the contradictions of colonialism,
blind support for and defence of the Yoruba bourgeois
misadventure at the centre, the diversion to vigilante activities as
a strategic activity of the self-determinationists, the inability to
make a distinction between the State and an individual public
servant [police, SSS e.t.c.] and later inordinate and tactless
involvement of self-determination groups in partisan politics and
many more were part of the process and consequences of
depoliticisation of the Yoruba self-determination struggle.
Thus the struggle became more attractive to lumpen elements
in their material and intellectual instability and less attractive to
the intellectual and the working class elements. It generated the
raw materials for its own self-destruction. It is like a man who
has chosen the fuel his kerosene stove with gasoline. It will burn
all right but the conflagration would definitely be uncontrollable.
10
Hence, whereas at the basis of the conflict within the OPC
and the ones between it and its splinter groups in the years 1998,
1999 and 2000 were class contradictions, de-ideologisation of
the struggle, de-politicisation, ethnicisation and opportunism
were the immediate instruments that uprooted the tracks and
derailed the train of the struggle. Instead of the struggle
generating cadres, it needed strongmen and mercenaries to
prosecute the internecine wars. Instead of radicals, it called forth
rascals. Instead of transforming radicals to revolutionaries, it
reduced them to rascals. Instead of radicalising rascals it
ritualises and criminalised them. In short, the struggle ended up
dehumanising rather than re-humanising our people. Instead of
hope for the masses and love of the movement, fear and hatred
of the movement ensued. The damage is enormous.
The mismanagement of the prospect opened up by the
brokering of peace and bringing of the major self-determination
groups except the Gani Adams-led OPC under the umbrella of
COSEG is a reflection of lack of understanding of the theory of
struggle as much as of opportunism – left opportunism to be
precise. The refusal to admit that unity must be forged on the
basis of practice, of joint programme, rather than on the basis of
some grand design, the lack of understanding that structure must
match functions and that nothing could be as damaging to a mass
movement as inventing big titles for lumpen proletariats and
fashioning undue status and privileges. The role played by loans
and donations, which Karl Marx refers to in the Eighteenth
Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte as the financial science of the
lumpen proletariat, we shall save for another medium.
The mismanagement of the relationship within politicians and
the unprincipled support for Obasanjo on the ground that he is
using the slot of the Yoruba is also part of this lack of
appreciation. Sentiment beclouded everything. The sheer weight
11
of material acquisition beat the hell out of the force of good
logic. Those who challenged this process of de-ideologisation of
a struggle, that was in the first place ideologically a toddler, were
ignored to wallow in their material poverty, their protestations
reduced to the whining of a motherless child in the market place.
The years 2001 – 2003 were really the years that most
consummately revealed the stuff of which we were made. The
movement was rich in material but poor in spirit. There was
relative peace among the groups but distrust among individuals
increased. Indeed, if there were no such bloody clashes as there
were in 1999 and 2000, it was only because the wolves had a
whole herd of sheep to devour rather than a single carcass. I
would call these two years our years of death and at the same
time of rebirth. Those who want to chart a course to the future
must take a look at the last two years and note to what extent
material and human resources were squandered, to no purpose.
The years showed us clearly that material resources were not the
problem of the movement; infrastructural build up would amount
to nothing without the human resources. The movement lacked
cadres. These two years have further demonstrated to us that the
development of our cadres would in the final analysis determine
the direction and pace of development of our struggle for self-
determination. It is not enough to broaden the base of the
struggle, it is not enough to “Pero S’oko, “we must be interested
in the drivers of those vehicles and who the conductors are.
*****
So far we have attempted to briefly define what self-
determination struggle is in general, what the Yoruba self-
determination struggle means and highlighted some of the
problems of our struggle in the last half a decade or so, next we
shall look at what road is most likely to lead us out of the woods
12
to the fount of our desire. What is the road to Yoruba self-
determination? What are its landmarks, its guideposts?
4. Cadres of Self-determination Struggle.

Every human endeavour has its art and science. Those who want
to fashion something new out of the old must learn the method
for doing this. Knowledge is not given; it is acquired. Cadres of a
movement are those who have knowledge of how to attain the
objective of the movement. A cadre is an individual who
understands clearly the principles, perspectives and programmes
of his organisation, has internalised it and is able to on the basis
of this analyse and correctly respond to unfolding reality. A
cadre not only toes the strategic line of the organisation but is
also a good tactician. He is a bundle of initiatives. No political
movement can cope and cope well with challenges without
cadres. The cadre is a product of the struggle; he is also one of
the driving forces of the struggle. Cadres must be able to hold
their heads high where strong but unorganised fighters collapse.
The cadre gives inspiration to the masses. Our greatest concern
therefore should be the build up of cadres. The Yoruba say A ni
omo go e ni ki o ma ku; kini tete pani bi ago. Any movement that
lacks cadres is doomed. It will die of infantile errors, if not in its
infancy, then in its old age. Cadres are the ones that must clear
the road of self-determination. They are the road makers,
whether the road of self-determination is filled with stumbling
boulders ands precipitous gullies or it is smooth would depend
on the education and development of the cadres. Whereas there
are no cadres the political movement would be nothing better
than a horde of early men without a headman.
Such cadres must be consciously built. They must be
consciously educated in the ways of the struggle. The education
13
of the cadres cannot be left to haphazard, epileptic, didactic
newspaper features.
5. Self-determination Cadres Are Revolutionaries

We are revolutionaries. The struggle for Yoruba self-
determination is a revolutionary struggle. This does not in
anyway imply that it is a war or violent struggle. What this
implies is that it is a struggle meant to fundamentally turn things
around. It is a struggle geared towards a radical departure from
the past. It is not a struggle that begs its way for reform. It is a
struggle that must build unlimited capacity to unleash a social
force that cannot be resisted by the opposing political interests.
As Yoruba self-determinationists we contend that Nigeria is a
fraudulent contraption. It was a British colonial creation meant to
satisfy the exploitative economic aim of the imperialist powers.
In the creation of Nigeria, the peoples’ opinion did not matter.
The various nationalities in Nigeria never came together on the
basis of any mutual agreement and the contraption has developed
on the basis of deceit and fraud. There had never been any
serious attempt to forge a nation out of this contraption. Flag
independence and expression of unity through sorry cultural
shows and football match fevers have been the highest cultural
expressions of the nation. No national culture, no sense of
nationalism and no national conscience. The bureaucracy is not
only corrupt and inept but has also become a burden to the nation
rather than its rotor. Educational institutions have not only fallen
in standard but the educational system itself seems not to have a
definitive goal that tallies with the developmental needs of the
people as Africans and Third World people.
In consonance with this are a cultural level, ethical necrosis
and mass psychosis, which swamp everyone and has become a
condition of survival. We are part of the countrywide madness.
14
But to make a change those who themselves want to change
reality cannot afford to be swamped by this reality. The flood of
decay must not be allowed to sweep those who want to make
change away. Those who want to make change must find some
root, reed or climbers on the banks of the water of corruption and
decay to cling on to. We cannot afford to succumb to the very
values we want to change. Tactical retreats must never be
allowed to assume strategic importance.
A cadre who mismanages the meagre resources of the local
branch of his group or who enjoys being treated with reverence
and awe by ordinary members of the organisation is no better
than the Capone of a cult or the corrupt Nigerian government
official. This is the bitter truth.
In the final analysis, the aim is man as Che Guevara said. In
a revolutionary process you not only want to reorganise the
society, you not only want to do away with the old and replace it
with something new, but you are also interested in changing the
outlook of the human beings that would be in this new society.
They have to be born again to be able to live in the new society.
It is not good enough to have a new wine skin; the wine itself
must be new. The cadres must be the first to be washed.
Changes are impossible without sacrifices, without self-
denial. This is a fact. It is the reality. Self-denial, not in the sense
of that radical who wants to join a conservative on the car
racetrack riding a Keke NAPEP, not in the sense of the
unwashed, unkempt radical who wants to go and preach self-
determination to the well-educated young man. I mean self-
denial in the course of the struggle.
****
Double the zeal the revolutionary puts into destroying the old
order must be put into building the new one. But as this is a
15
dialectical process of destruction and building going on
simultaneously, the revolutionary is a builder, never a destroyer.
Hence he is not a revolutionary whose main pre-occupation is
fashioning destructive schemes but administratively is a dunce.
The movement could do better without such element. This is the
bitter truth.
6. Self-determination Struggle is a Popular Struggle

Our struggle for self-determination is a popular struggle. It is not
a struggle championed by a chosen few, experts or eggheads. As
much as possible we must draw every strata of the Yoruba
populace into it, particularly members of the oppressed and less
privileged classes. The working class, the peasantry, market
women, the petty traders, youths and students must be
consciously drawn into the mainstream of the struggle. It is a
people’s struggle not only in the sense of it being that which
would ultimately benefit the masses, but also in the sense that the
masses are the main actors in the theatre of the struggle.
The involvement of the masses is best measured by their
involvement in the mass popular actions of the self-
determination movement. The relationship between the masses
and the cadres in such popular struggle is like a large army
division on campaign in which the cadres occupy the vanguard,
the rear guard and the flanks and the masses occupy the centre.
The cadres are the guardians of the struggle – Eso in Yoruba.
Our popular struggle cannot afford to belittle mass actions
such as demonstrations, picketing, mass meetings and
pamphleteering campaigns. Propaganda work among the masses
in the neighbourhoods and in the work places is very important.
Agitators need to go out and do some work among the masses.
Such works are legitimate and part of the exercise of the
democratic rights and we must do it. There are no two ways
16
about it. Self-determination cannot be the result of the handiwork
of a benevolent few that have carried out a coup d’état and
declared a Yoruba Republic or the result of the intrigues of a
Yoruba president of Nigeria. Our own duty is to lead the masses.
As ideologues and cadres we are to show them the way. We
cannot and must not attempt to dash them self-determination.
The masses must be drawn through the fire and the brimstone of
the struggle in order to steel and temper them for the task of
building a Nation. We cannot afford to turn ourselves into literal
sacrificial lambs on the altars of a nation that is not yet prepared
to take offerings. We cannot afford to be fatalistic about the
struggle.
Except there is such an effort to politicise the mass of our
people along the line of our principles and programmes, there is
the tendency to get alienated from the masses. There is also the
tendency to reduce the struggle to mere ethnic protestation by a
disgruntled few. Without the involvement of the masses there is
no way there can be justification for our actions and, of course,
we are even likely to become a bunch of self-opinionated bigots,
some eccentrics who more and more are driven to mad actions
and get angry at the masses for not supporting such actions.
There is the tendency on the part of the cadres, cocooned in their
small world in the midst of fellow cadres and cut off from the
masses, to become nihilistic. They begin to think that the masses
cannot be moved to carry out changes; that the people cannot be
moved from within, but rather need some liberator from without
to do this, or some intensification of terror for them to be jolted
out of their slumber.
A couple of examples would suffice to illustrate the point
being made. The demand that the masses should be drawn into
the struggle does not exclude extreme, at times violent or armed,
actions. The demand is that the masses must feel they are part of
17
the activities led by the vanguard. They must be made to think
and act as part of the movement, part of the current. Take for
instance the Palestinian Struggle. The Hamas and the parent
Palestinian Liberation Organisation, PLO, are no doubt well
entrenched among the masses. The people have never regretted
or dissociated themselves from any actions of the organisation.
The Intifida is not the handiwork of a clique. Parents not only
justify the actions of the stone-throwing children and youths but
form part of the networks that have facilitated suicide missions.
When the people mourn at the funeral of loved ones, of martyrs,
they do not mourn or regret the role of the martyr in the struggle
but only mourn the loss of a great fighter. The struggle for an
independent Palestine State is visible in the neighbourhoods in
the West Bank, in Gaza and even among refugees in camps
across the border and in the shanties of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan
and other Mid-Eastern State. The struggle is a popular struggle.
It is a struggle of the people directed by their organisation. Every
action, even so-called terrorism, has enjoyed the popular
acclaim. The Palestinian organisations cannot be afraid of
referendum because they carry the people along.
The same thing could not be said of the Basque separatists in
Spain, the ETA whose main strategy has been political
assassinations and bombing. In the regional elections in the
Basque country on May 13, 2001 the people gave their votes
overwhelmingly to moderate, liberal nationalists. The Euskal
Herritarrok [EH] lost more than half of its seats no thanks to its
relationship with ETA. The people were getting tired of
assassinations and “terrorist actions.” But the ETA is not more
violent than some of the Palestinian groups; its struggle,
however, is not as popular.
****
18
Involvement of cadres in activities that touch the life of our
people would go some length in entrenching the self-
determination groups among the people and broadening the base
of the struggle. Crisis management, disaster management, relief
operations and the like would also go a long way in disciplining
the cadres of the movement and bringing them to the fore as
natural leaders of the people. It gives the opportunity to the cadre
to test his ability as an organiser, not only within the movement,
but also of the broad masses, even those of opposing interests at
moments when what is at stake is unmistakably humanity as a
whole.
7. The Cultural Content of Self-determination Struggle.

Every political struggle has its cultural content. If culture is a
reflection of the totality of material and intellectual production of
a society, if it reflects the way of life of a society, its dynamics
and transformation of reality, then social changes necessarily
bring about cultural changes.
But then we must make a distinction between the cultural
transformation of the society occasioned by revolutionary
changes and the use of cultural weapon in making social
changes. Self-determination struggle by its very nature has a
heavier cultural hue than any other form of struggle because the
elements united in other forms of political struggles – class
struggle, struggle for democratic and fundamental rights, gender
and so on - need not necessarily share common history, ancestry
and cultural homogeneity, but the definition of people in self-
determination struggle [UNESCO, 1990] emphasises common
historical tradition, racial or ethnic identity, cultural
homogeneity, linguistic unity, religious or ideological affinity.
The people have more commonality than in other forms of
struggle.
19
Again the struggle for self-determination is a struggle for
identity, for self-actualisation. Wherever a people become
dominated as a people assault on the cultural expression has
always been one of the greatest weapons for making their
conquest permanent. The oppressor tries to impose his own way
of life, make the oppressed lose confidence in himself. To regain
his identity, therefore, the dominated person must recover his
lost tradition, must go through a process of historical rediscovery
and cultural rebirth. The costumes, food, traditional dances,
artistic expressions and language [which is the vehicle of
culture] become weapons in the hands of those poised to change
society. Every oppressor no doubt also quickly recognised this.
Thus in India during the struggle for independence Mahatma
Ghandi was disparaged in the British press as a Naked Kafir; not
that he was naked but what assaulted the British psyche was his
homespun cotton and sandals and the regenerative effect this
cultural rebellion would have on the mass of struggling Indian
people. In Turkey the Kurds are not allowed to use their
language in official circles. In Nigeria during the colonial period
[and up till now in some places] Africans dressed in traditional
attires were looked at a gargoyles and disallowed use of hotels
and European restaurants.
In situation where they could not totally obliterate everything
they raised a few, compromised these, and use them as weapons
for the obliteration of others. Hence in Nigeria with over 300
ethnic groups and more than 100,000 autonomous communities,
for several years, kids in school were taught that there were only
three “tribes” in Nigeria, namely Hausa, Ibo and Yoruba and that
in any case the languages of these ethnic groups were
vernaculars not good enough for impacting knowledge on the
youth. Examples abound in Tibet, East Timor, among the Iri
Jayans [also in Indonesia], the Chiapas in Mexico, everywhere
20
the culture is suppressed and self-determination struggle aims at
cultural rebirth and uses the cultural weapon to challenge the
authorities, to challenge the oppressor, to conscientise the
masses, to propagandise, to agitate and even organise the people.
We must here recall the works of the African National Congress
[ANC] cultural troupe, the AMANDLA, in South Africa during
the struggle against Apartheid. We must also recall the Mau Mau
in Kenya in the 50s, the Nyanbingi. Then we must look at the
works of Hubert Ogunde during the struggle for independence –
Worse Than Crime, Tigers Empire, Strike and Hunger, Bread
and Bullet and so on were all plays that struck at the heart of the
colonial system. Then his Yoruba Ronu, which is a classic of use
of cultural weapon in politics.
But then we must make a distinction between culture as a
weapon of struggle, cultural re-awakening and outright atavistic
exhumation of antiquated way of life and pseudo-religious
practices. The appropriation and wielding of the cultural weapon
by the ANC, for instance, was more progressive than the
Buthelezi-led Zulu Nkatha Movement with its animal skin clad,
hatchet brandishing, howling human horde.
It is wrong to think that fluency in the Yoruba language is a
pre-condition for participation in the Yoruba self-determination
struggle. Being clad in agbada, gbariye or dandogo is not an
evidence of commitment to the struggle; it could be an
expression but it is not necessarily an expression. This is
important because the most important thing is the understanding
of the dynamics of the struggle and such dynamics are language
and culture blind in their inner content.
But while consciously working against reducing the struggle
to a mere pin-up struggle, we must work assiduously to impress
the symbols and totems of our people on everything and
anything that comes into the life of our people. Nothing must be
21
appropriated in its de-culturised, universalised, unAfricanise, nay
unYorubised form. Everything must bear our mark. This is how
to begin to win the battle of consciousness, the greatest battle of
humanity, because consciousness separates man from the beast.
We must also make a distinction between religious practices
and expressions and the inner content of our struggle. The
cultural in struggle is not an attempt to return to the past; we
only take a cue from the past. A Yoruba self-determinationist
does not have to be a traditional religionist. They are two
different things. In the olden days we would need to consult Ifa
to know the mission of a strange presence – say an iron horse or
a white woman – but no one needs to consult any Ifa if he
suddenly beholds an American warship off our coast -there must
be danger. Thus, it is completely wrong to think every Yoruba
self-determinationist must have Ojubo Esu or Ogun in his
compound.
If we want to return strictly to tradition the way certain
elements in the self-determination struggle express it, then we
definitely must abandon modern democracy or federalism and
reinvent the Oyo Empire and Oyomesis, have an Oba, a Kabiyesi
[ka bi o ko si], abasewaa! To complete it we must also reinvent
all the immolations accompanying coronation, and funeral
ceremonies, war expeditions and cultist practices, now on a
grand scale! And what is more, some of us must be ready to
surrender our children as Eunuchs for the royalty!
Ditto for the use of charms. It is a cultural weapon like any
other weapon and not a pre-condition for participating in the
Yoruba self-determination struggle. He is a lazy self-
determinationist who relies solely on charms. His heart and feet
are bound to fail him before the charms fail him.
The point being made is that there must be a scientific
definition of the relationship between cultural expression in
22
struggle and the inner content of the struggle, which is
revolutionary, a social overhaul, a social turning of things
around, not to return to the past, but to re-link with the past on a
higher plain, making the past part of the ingredients of the future
and de-linking the present from the shackling elements of the
past.
****
It is therefore wrong for such self-determination group as the
Oodua Peoples Congress to call itself a socio-cultural movement.
It is a political organisation. Its works definitely have some
cultural content but it is a political organisation and part of the
Oodua movement. Even the Afenifere got it wrong when it called
itself a Yoruba socio-cultural association. It is political. You may
not be partisan, you may hide your partisan inclination, but all
your activities are essentially political. Socio-cultural groups
cannot be at the head of the Oodua movement. Everything is
decided at the level of politics, that is where those who want to
reorganise the society must go. Others contribute all right but
they do not chart the course. Thus Mariam Makeba in South
African struggle could have gingered the people, caused
agitation with her songs, and even mobilised, but Winnie
Mandela was where decisions were being taken. The difference
is between the Agbero and the Awako. The former may even be
more popular and richer than the latter, but the fate of the
passengers is in the hands of the Awako and he needs to be more
cautious.
8. Self-determination Struggle as Armed Struggle

Just as it is wrong to reduce the struggle to mere violence and
armed conflict, so is it wrong for self-determinationists to deny
23
the necessity of the struggle assuming armed dimension at a
particular stage in its development, more so when it becomes
clear that contradictions have grown to a stage that cannot be
resolved by any other political means. Self-determinationists are
not duty bound to preach peace. The very oppressive and
exploitative condition that necessitated the struggle in the first
place is a breach of peace. The relationship between the
oppressor and the oppressed is a violent one. Domination of one
people by the other is violence. The process of redefinition of the
relation is also bound to be violent in a way; it is a process of
social tug of war, social cataclysm. It is not to be expected to be
like the parting of ways after a wedding engagement or naming
ceremony. Only socials justice, in this case a situation where the
rights of the dominated people to self-determination is
guaranteed, can assure peace.
However, armed struggle is only justifiable when all other
political means have been exhausted. It must also be
foundationed on a high level of politicisation of the populace.
Methods that have the potential of alienating the movement from
the masses must be avoided. A movement of nihilists whose sole
method is that of intensification of terror is surely not going to
win power. If it does it would only be for a while. Thus the
Khmer Rouge in Cambodia [1977-78] vandalised and reduced
the Cambodian society and also destroyed itself through the
misapplication of the weapon of a politico-military organisation.
Armed struggle is not also about a blind assault on persons of the
enemy race or ethnic group. The objective must be clearly
defined and strictly political. Self-determination struggle derives
its legitimacy from the recognition that all peoples have the
rights to self-determination and other fundamental human rights
including the right to life, even the peoples of the oppressing
nations and nationalities. Hence what is at issue in the final
24
analysis is humanity. Ethnic cleansing is antithetical to the
philosophy behind self-determination struggle. The cleansings in
Bosnia-Herzegovina in the early 1990s and the 1994 massacre in
Rwanda in which over one million people were killed in one
week derived from unprincipled, sentimental approach to the
struggle. Self-determination struggle is a struggle for the re-
humanisation of a dehumanised people, a people whose self-
esteem is eroded, whose humanity is being degraded and stolen.
To regain their humanity, they must not resort to the
dehumanisation of other peoples, because those who dehumanise
others also necessarily get dehumanised in the process and create
the condition for further dehumanisation – a concentric circle of
dehumanisation leading to point zero of humanity – beastly
existence.
****
Armed struggle must grow out of the popular struggle. It must
not be imposed on it. It must never be allowed to overgrow it.
The armed wing of a self-determination struggle must at all
times be subjected to the political leadership of the movement
and entrenched among the people. Self-determinationists who
create jitters among the masses any time they rampage through
the slum with their Dane guns and shotguns need to think twice.
Self-determinationists whose leaders attain position of leadership
as a result of ability to physically manhandle and outshoot rivals
and contenders for position of leadership rather than canvassing
correct political line and if necessary defending same with force
of arms need to re-examine themselves. Self-determination
groups in which the armed wings are not only organised
according to the structures of the oppressing army but in which
the commanders also enjoy the same undue privileges as are
enjoyed by the officers of neo-colonial armies like the Nigerian
Army are surely not on the road to self-determination. Those
25
who set out to build careers as self-determination soldiers would
either eventually veer off the road of self-determination or
overshoot the destination point of the struggle. After the
objective of the struggle has been attained they would surely
invent new objectives – clearly their own. The self-determination
struggle must avoid the engagement of mercenaries. This does
not exclude the participation of persons of other ethnic groups
who feel convinced and committed enough to contribute to the
struggle.
****
It is wrong to conceive of armed struggle only in terms of war of
independence. It could also serve the purpose of armed defence
of exercise of democratic rights, armed defence of the struggle.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
9. Self-Determination Struggle and Sovereign National

Conference
It is wrong to posit that the struggle for Oodua Republic
excludes the call for a Sovereign National Conference [SNC].
The SNC is about the highest form of political programme that
could be used to challenge the basis of existence of the Nigerian
contraption. Calling for National Conference instead of
Constitutional Conference connotes that the matter goes beyond
mere constitutional reforms. The question of nationhood comes
to the fore; the principle on the basis of which the various ethnic
groups and nationalities were brought together is being called in
question. SNC also poises to transfer sovereignty that has been
stolen from the people back to them. This can only be achieved
by making the SNC a popular process. SNC provides a veritable
platform to popularly and legitimately canvass our position. It is
a platform for galvanising the masses, conscientising them and
26
drawing them into the mainstream of self-determination struggle.
The process leading to the Conference or the process leading to
its abortion is more important than the Conference itself. Will
they allow the Conference to hold? That is the question from
someone who does not understand the content of the Conference.
Go out to the masses; go to the neighbourhoods, insist that a
conference is necessary, let people mock at you, let people
oppose you, let the government ban public meetings, let the
federal government deny the peoplehood of the Yoruba, let
arrests be made – that is political struggle. That is self-
determination struggle per excellence.
Let them attempt to call a caricature conference, a mere
constitutional conference, a conference of elders or leaders of
thought. Then you have a new job. – that of convincing the
masses that they are about to be robbed, that they are about to be
419ied. Then you are fighting for self –determination. Let you
sons among them come out to say Oodua Republic is impossible,
let them not have room to manoeuvre, to pretend, let them come
all out against a popular idea, against what would benefit the
Yoruba, then we are winning. Let them by their aggression and
repressive measures call the people to arms. When we get to the
river we shall know how to cross it. The thing we must not be
guilty of is lack of preparedness.
Even if they try to carry out mere constitutional amendments
we must be interested, because every step in the direction of
weakening the shackling hold of the centre on the region is of
advantage to us. All illusions must be dispelled. But we must let
the masses know the limit of this.
****
The Yoruba Constituent Assembly [YCA] is a conference to
agree on Yoruba position. This is the way the Yoruba can begin
27
to force the implementation of the SNC. The YCA is the praxis
of SNC in Yorubaland. It shows the readiness of the Yoruba to
go to SNC or to walk away if others refuse to talk and work a
way out of the present quagmire. YCA effort initiated by Alajobi
in 2000 must be revisited and given a popular expression.
The YCA is a way of testing the willingness of the Yoruba
people to be identified as a people, their consciousness of
peoplehood. It is also a way of creating institutions and
structures of the Yoruba Nation outside the Nigerian State. It is
the road to parallel power. It will strengthen our hands in calls
for referendum if we want to, it legitimises all our actions, even
going to war for a republic. Ejo la nko ro ka to ko’ja. Ti eniyan o
ba si joko ko gbodo na’se. Eni owo re o te’ku da to nbere iku to
pa baba re oun na fe ku niyen. Abo oro la nso fun omoluwabi to
ba denu re a d’odindi.
10. Self-determination Struggle and “Politicians”

Yoruba self-determination struggle has higher objectives than
any party contesting elections in the Nigerian polity as
constituted could aspire to. But “politicians” and self-
determinationists could have certain thins in common, and the
objective basis for joint work on concrete programme exist. Part
of the minimum demands of the self-determinationists, viz., true
federalism, restructuring, respect for fundamental rights of the
individual and peoples and so on are such as could be canvassed
on the political platform. The national and state assemblies could
also become veritable platforms of struggle. But from all points
of view, practical political, intellectual and ideological, the self-
determinationists must strive to play the leading role. Self-
determination struggle is bound to die a natural death the
moment the relationship between the self-determinationists and
politicians who sympathise with the cause is left to the control of
28
the politician. At all times the self-determinationist must retain
the initiative.
Those self-determinationists who try to erect a brick wall
between “political parties” and self-determination groups are
getting the issue wrong. Not only is it tolerable to maintain links
with progressive parties, it is politically wrong to severe
relationship with progressive parties. Even as minority and
opposition the progressive parties have an important role to play
in creating the enabling environment for the broadening of the
base of the self-determination struggle. The self-determination
struggle is bound to excite the enactment of draconian laws by
the ruling elite; the progressive parties have a crucial role to play
in checking some of the excesses and fascistic tendencies of the
ruling elite from the constitutional point of view.
Thus there is nothing wrong in self-determinationists
themselves going into some of these parties to contest or raising
parties of their own on which platform they could contest
elections provided such is subjected to the overall strategic aim
of the movement and estimated to advance rather than fetter the
cause.
Such parties and politicians with whom we cooperate need
not be from our nationality. Cooperating with a Hausa, Fulani of
Chiawa assemblyman championing the cause of SNC at the
national assembly is politically more correct than romancing
with an abetiaja-capped, gbariye-clad, citraxed Oyo
assemblyman whose sole concern in Abuja is chasing contracts
and women.
Yoruba self-determination groups have no moral justification
for defending the oppressive political programme of a Yoruba at
the helm of affairs at the centre. All such clichés as “He is using
our ticket, “He is our son”, “We have the responsibility of
defending all Yoruba sons and daughters are balderdash, which
29
can only be expected from political infants or opportunists. The
only Yoruba at the centre worth defending is that who uses his
position to advance the Yoruba, Africa and the rest of humanity,
not one who makes war of genocide on ethnic minorities at home
[in Nigeria] and who abroad blindly clutches to the shoelace of
Bush the Son. This is the road to self-determination. The
opposite road leads to Fascism – to Hell on Earth. This is how
things stand.
11. Self-determination Struggle and the International

Community.
There is no international community anywhere. The imperialist
powers are the international community. They colonised us,
granted us flag independence and are presently at the helm of
affairs in a Unipolar World. The United States of America and
its partners in international petty craft holds sway everywhere
anywhere – recall Panama December 1989, Haiti 1992,
Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003. Their power cannot be doubted.
The advance countries of the world would not want any new
nation to emerge because this would increase the number of
nations they would have to deal with, increase the number of
seas in the United Nations and weaken their power to hold down
the world, or at least make it more expensive for them to run the
world.
The developed countries of the world also feel duty bound to
maintain peace in the world at all costs. To them self-
determination struggles would lead to a breach of peace. They
could not see that self-determination for all peoples is actually
the road to peace for humanity. To them bottled anger, pyrrhic
peace is better for globalisation than revolutionary upheavals and
turning of things around. They could not admit that self-
30
determination struggle would not at on time or the other lead to
bloodletting, ethnic cleansing and reign of terror.
Also, it is a challenge to the former colonial masters for
anyone to want to put asunder what the put together. The call for
an Oodua Republic challenges the wisdom behind the creation of
the Nigerian contraption by the British. It is an ego thing. The
amalgamation of 1914 is queried just as the independence of
1960 and th4e various conferences that led to it.
In this circumstance, what then do we do? What should be
our method of relationship with them?
Good, we should popularise our struggle, we should
internationalise, we should maintain relationship with other self-
determination groups, not only in Nigeria but all over the world,
we should be on the Internet, we should take our case to the
United Nations – fine. But all this must be predicated on
concrete work at home. We must avoid the kind of misfortune
that has befallen some movements in Asia which only exist on
the Internet and in exile.
We should open offices abroad and even maintain branches
of our organisation in selected countries for strategic reasons.
But we must not attempt to call for referendum for instance
simply because our case is before the Un or because our people
have been able to carry out demonstrations in countries where
the laws are relaxed and such demonstrations won’t heat up their
system. Call for referendum to be presided over by the United
Nations must be preceded by work of agitation and mobilisation
among the masses. Calling for a referendum for which we are
not prepared is like giving the hangman the noose with which to
hang you. In fact, we must avoid the imposition of referendum
on us.
Call for sanctions and the like are some of the avenues open
to exploitation. But we must recognise the weaknesses of this.
31
We must recall the role of Britain and America in breaking the
sanctions on South African in the days of Apartheid. We must
also bear in mind that sanction is a double-edged sword. If in the
estimation of the imperialists a Yoruba Republic would be a
thorn in their flesh, who says they can’t manoeuvre to get a
sanction imposed on us by the UN? Who says they can’t frame
the leaders of the movement and drag them before war crime
tribunal or label them terrorists, pin terrorist actions on them and
hunt them down, even when clearly they have not carried out any
terrorist acts or forged relationship with terrorists?
12. Conclusion
The Yoruba self-determination struggle, like every other self-
determination struggle that wants to succeed, is therefore one
that requires the most conscientious, most rigorous application of
political theory. It must draw from the experiences of other
peoples. It must proceed from the point that human societies are
in constant state of development, nevertheless at different stages,
but in which no race, nationality or nation is superior to the
other. We must admit that the aim is not achieving permanent
antagonism between the oppressing nations and the oppressed,
but rather driving humanity towards harmony of races, nations
and nationalities through mutual respect emanation from the
bitter experience of struggle.
Once the objective is understood this way, then the methods
we adopt would definitely not be those that would create
conditions for future upheavals or vengeance, a situation in
which there is constantly a struggle for race superiority and
which every new dominant nation wields its power most
mercilessly on it adversary, only to in the future find itself in the
same helpless position, a kind of vicious circle.
32
****
The road of Yoruba self-determination struggle is a rough and
tortuous road all right; the process of the struggle is a violent
tearing away, dissociation from the past, but violent not in the
raw sense. The boulders to be cleared on this road, the
precipitous bends to be negotiated and the potholes to
manoeuvre through are exactly the very undisciplined approach
to struggle and lack of study in which many a self-determination
strugglers are steeped today. Without discipline, without
education, without the humility needed to come down from the
high throne of the Great Leader, Commandant, President,
Chairman, Organising Secretary or Coordinator, divesting
ourselves of all kinds of undue privileges to the position of a
selfless cadre and modest leader [Asiwaju ti n se bi omo ehin, ti
ohun aye ko joloju rara], we cannot travel the roads that leads to
Yoruba self-determination without fatal accidents. We must be
humble enough to always ask questions the moment we see
ourselves in the dark wood where the right road is lost and gone
ala Dante. Rather than being sunk in the dark waters of our
native pride. This exactly is the way things stand.
-Eko Akete
May –June, 2003
33

The Road To Self-Determination

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Road To Self-Determination

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Femi Obayori

© Femi Obayori 2003

N o part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

First published 2003

who never had the opportunity

to learn the tricks of the process

The Road to Self-Determination.

3. Yoruba Self-determination Struggle

4. Cadres of Self-determination Struggle.

5. Self-determination Cadres Are Revolutionaries

6. Self-determination Struggle is a Popular Struggle

7. The Cultural Content of Self-determination Struggle.

8. Self-determination Struggle as Armed Struggle

9. Self-Determination Struggle and Sovereign National

10. Self-determination Struggle and “Politicians”

11. Self-determination Struggle and the International

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen