ESN 5th Anniversary (Part 4): “We Must Go Our Separate Ways, Hopefully In Peace, To Live And Develop In Our Respective Ways And Pace” – Mazi Chinasa Nworu

Bremen, Germany – December 18, 2025

On the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the Eastern Security Network (ESN) on December 12, 2025, Mazi Chinasa Nworu delivered an expansive and uncompromising intervention, blending geopolitical critique, internal movement discipline, historical clarification, and a renewed call for self-determination grounded in popular consent.

Nworu situated Nigeria’s current crises as a result of the moral collapse of leadership. Referencing reports surrounding a Nigerian Air Force aircraft seized in Burkina Faso, he raised questions that, in his words, Nigeria’s political class has failed to answer.

“The Nigerian Air Force craft seized by Burkina Faso may be carrying drugs in it or France using the aircraft to deliver arms and ammunition to terrorists in Burkina Faso,” he said, adding pointedly that, “if they use French aircraft the AES will shoot it down.”

For Nworu, this incident was not isolated. He linked it to a pattern of international embarrassment and suspicion that, he argued, flows directly from leadership he characterised as criminal.

“When you have a drug baron as a president and governors that are criminals, what do you expect to happen in the country?” he asked. “The way this country is run, it is obvious that the supertanker and the air force plane seized within one week are involved in illicit drug movement.”

He underscored the anomaly that troubled him most: “The C-130 aircraft which was seized by Burkina Faso is an aircraft that can carry 128 crew members but it had only 11.”

For Nworu, this raised grave concerns about whether the aircraft was allegedly being used to “supply arms to the terrorists at the behest of France.”

“In one hand, the USA siezes their Navy vessels for oil theft and possible drug traffickings and on the other hand the AES seized a Nigerian military aircraft for a yet to be revealed reason.”

In his telling, Nigeria’s international standing has eroded because impunity at home has become normalised. “Nigerians think that because they allow criminals to go without being held accountable, that other countries will tolerate that,” he said. “They will not.”

From external critique, Nworu turned inward, delivering a strong internal admonitions to IPOB discourse. He was unambiguous about leadership responsibility and the limits of loyalty.

“It is my responsibility and that of every member of this movement to defend this struggle as far as that is just and right for the sake of keeping this family alive,” he said. But he was equally clear that IPOB would not shield criminal behaviour.

“People go and commit crimes, defraud people and when they come for them, these people will come and be looking for who will defend them.”

He rejected attempts at emotional blackmail outright. “Some want Chinasa Nworu to go and attack someone on their behalf or they will claim he is disloyal to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. What a joke they are,” he said. “This leadership will not allow any of you that see IPOB as a cash cow to mis-direct this movement.”

Drawing lessons from past setbacks, Nworu warned against performative activism and social media theatrics. “Terrible humans that are always doing social media showmanship,” he said, recalling how pressure to “show us this, show us that” once forced premature disclosures that harmed the struggle.

His conclusion was firm, a clear declaration that discipline trumps sentiment. “Everything must pass through the leadership. Nothing will go through a third party anymore.”

Nworu repeatedly emphasised that IPOB must be approached as an institution. Requests for information, consultation, or engagement, he said, must follow formal channels.

“For clarity sake… this IPOB leadership is an institution and must be approached as such,” he stated. “Anyone trying to apply through individual relationships… to seek classified documents should be advised that such cannot be allowed or tolerated.”

This institutional posture, he argued, is essential in a climate where misinformation campaigns are deliberately weaponised against the movement.

Returning to Nigeria’s internal security crisis, Nworu accused authorities of manufacturing false narratives to discredit IPOB, particularly following international advocacy around Christian persecution.

“Since the Christian Genocide campaign began, the Nigerian government and especially Hope Uzodimma have prepared reports against IPOB. One of them is that article titled: blood flowing in Southeast,” he said, referencing alleged attempts to indict the movement abroad.

According to Nworu, these efforts collapsed once it became clear that “America wasn’t looking at them.”

He pointed at the recent clean-up exercise in Imo State as acts of fear rather than reform.

“Hope Uzodimma knew his time in office is coming to an end, and so he has began to clean up all his evil crimes. He is rushing to clean up his mess knowing that anything can happen to him as soon as he leaves office, he can be picked up for all his atrocities in Imo State,” Nworu said. “But he cannot run away from karma.”

Nworu dismissed as cynical and legally incoherent the opinion that IPOB should “pursue Biafra self-determination through constitutional provisions in Nigeria by electing legislators to push IPOB’s cause.”

Speaking pointedly, he questioned whether advocates of this route understand that public officials, before being sworn into office, take an oath that expressly forbids them from promoting the secession of Nigeria.

“Before a public servant is sworn into office it is against their oath of office to advocate for secession of Nigeria,” he explained. Nworu argued that urging Biafrans to elect legislators to push a self-determination agenda within such constraints is misleading, as the oath of office itself criminalises that advocacy.

For IPOB, he said, the legitimate path remains clear: a referendum grounded in international law.

“As far as the Nigerian government has ratified the people’s rights to self-determination under Article 1 and 20 of the African Charter, then it is more than justified to pursue Biafra self-determination through a referendum.”

“Now, what we are asking for is a referendum, for the people to make their choice of political determination.”

Crucially, Nworu dismantled the persistent framing of Biafra as an “Igbo project. That idea of Igbo this and that is dead on arrival,” he said flatly. He argued that such idea “is being projected to distract our focus.”

“We have other nations in Biafra and we must never leave our kits and kins gerrymandered into various states outside the 5 Southeast states. For record purposes, Biafra nation comprises of the 13 states where we have our people in. A cultural marker to find our people has been revealed by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu; which is that anywhere our women tie 2 wrappers, they are Biafrans.”

IPOB, he stressed, is for all peoples of the former Eastern Region and beyond, defined by shared history and consent, not tribalism.

In one of the most consequential passages of the speech, he added that “The Biafra we are seeking for is a nation of like minded, and historical entwined people and even is amenable to adapt to contemporary realities.”

“For instance if during a referendum the Middle Belt decides to be part of the Biafra confederacy through a popular vote due to the threat of genocide and political emasculation in the north, then they are more than welcome to do so.”

He further stated that “the territory for Biafra has been defined and will be ratified by the unanimous decision of the respective ethnic groups in our beautiful nation.”

The speech’s moral centre lay in Nworu’s call for peaceful separation as a pathway to survival and development rather than a costly and unnecessary war.

“We must intensify and pressurise Nigeria on the need for us to go our separate ways, preferably in peace,” he said. “We cannot accept Sharia rule, it is incompatible with our faith, spirituality, and value system.”

He dismissed what he described as sudden gestures of tolerance from northern religious leaders such as the Sultan of Sokoto as insufficient. “We are not moved by the lip services,” he said. “We must go our separate ways to live and develop in our respective ways and pace.”

Closing the address, Nworu urged supporters not to succumb to despair following the conviction of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Instead, he framed it as a challenge to be converted into momentum.

“I want to encourage all of us to not allow the intended psychological weapon targeted at us to weaken us,” he said, calling on “lovers of freedom all over the world” to join what he described as a “divine march towards national salvation and self-preservation.”

On the sensitive issue of Sit-at-Home, he reminded listeners that discipline remains central to legitimacy, acknowledging that “the enemies” hijacked and committed crimes in the name of Sit-At-Home.

“Yet with all the crimes they have committed with SIT-AT-HOME, people are still sitting at home. Biafrans know the people with mandate to order the SIT-AT-HOME,” he said. “Not everyone can issue it and Biafrans will obey.”

Yet he left no doubt about the latent power of popular consent. “Imagine if the leadership after wide consultation decide to make just one broadcast ordering a SIT-AT-HOME for the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” Nworu concluded. “We all know what will happen.”