For years, the relationship between the Nigerian state and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has been defined not only by confrontation...
For years, the relationship between the Nigerian state and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has been defined not only by confrontation on the ground but by a relentless war of narratives. Supporters of IPOB argue that successive Nigerian administrations, working through security agencies and what they describe as a sympathetic media establishment, have consistently sought to portray the movement as violent, fractured, and criminal. Yet, despite repeated attempts to associate IPOB with unrest in the South-East, the formidable IPOB Media Warriors insist that such efforts have failed to achieve their intended objective.
One of the most notable elements in this conflict has been the digital battleground. IPOB's strong presence across social media platforms earned its adherents the label "media warriors," a phrase publicly used by former Minister of Information Lai Mohammed. Whether intended as criticism or acknowledgement, the phrase captured a critical reality: information warfare now rivals physical confrontation in shaping public perception. At the centre of the controversy are allegations of "false flag" operations.
IPOB supporters contend that groups bearing similar names, N-IPOB, Re-IPOB, Y-IPOB, T-IPOB, and Auto-pilot IPOB, among others, were created by Nigeria's DSS to simulate internal fractures within the movement. These so-called splinter factions are subsequently linked to violent incidents ranging from kidnappings and targeted attacks, including the killing of security operatives, to the enforcement of unauthorized sit-at-home orders.
What raises eyebrows, according to observers who understand the non-violent principles of IPOB, is the speed with which certain criminal acts are attributed to the group, sometimes before investigations are even commenced. This clearly confirms premeditation in narrative framing, rather than objective fact-finding. The recent remarks by Nigeria's Chief of Defence Staff, Christopher Musa, claiming that IPOB has been successfully fragmented into factions, have further highlighted how petty and vain the Nigerian establishment is.
Of course, IPOB and the world know that these claims are outrightly false, as the alleged divisions are constructed illusions meant to weaken morale and credibility. From their perspective, the portrayal of IPOB leadership as self-serving or financially motivated is part of a broader strategy to delegitimize the group's advocacy. The world knows that the movement remains unified and ideologically consistent in its demands. Beyond domestic rhetoric, the controversy has spilt into international arenas.
Questions surrounding Nigeria's reported multi-million-dollar foreign lobbying engagements, judicial proceedings under Justice James Omotosho, and growing global scrutiny of security operations in the South-East have all fed into the larger discourse. At its core, this conflict is no longer solely about territorial agitation or security enforcement.
It is about narrative dominance. It is about who defines legitimacy, who assigns culpability, and who shapes international perception. In deeply polarized environments, truth is often the first casualty. When every violent incident is immediately attributed to IPOB, and every state action is geared towards demonizing and blackmailing self-determinationists, the space for objective dialogue narrows dangerously.
Even though Nigeria has classified IPOB as a terrorist group, as opposed to a non-violent self-determination group that they profess, one undeniable fact remains. The fact is, the battle for public perception has become as consequential as events on the ground.
Until transparency, independent investigations, and credible institutional accountability are prioritized, accusations and counter-accusations will continue to define the discourse. And in that vacuum, mistrust will only deepen. However, with the preponderance of Biafrans on the net, every fabrication of the British and Nigerian establishments is dissected, highlighted, and mortified, even at birth.
The demand of Biafrans remains the same, and that demand is a # UN-supervised #REFERENDUM.
Written by
Mmadụ Awụchukwu
Edited by
Onyekachi Mboma
No comments