The ongoing debate over state creation in Nigeria—both at the governmental and agitation levels—has remained largely anchored in traditional considerations of geography, history, culture, and ancestry. While these factors are important, they no longer sufficiently address the contemporary socio-economic and political realities confronting communities in a rapidly changing world.
This position paper argues that the discourse on Anioma State creation, particularly as it concerns the Ndokwa Nation, must move beyond a fixation on identity and historical origins and align instead with modern imperatives of socio-economic integration, political equity, and development within the context of a global information- and technology-driven era.
The paper reflects the collective views of Ndokwa stakeholders and seeks to provide a clear, reasoned, and forward-looking framework for engaging the Anioma State question.
Paradigm shift
Global history—from the Industrial Revolution in Europe to contemporary globalisation and geopolitics—demonstrates that societies that prosper adapt to structural change. Today, that change is increasingly shaped by the Information and Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution, which prioritises scale, integration, infrastructure, and institutional capacity over narrow identity politics.
Nigeria’s continued reliance on pre-independence and pre-civil-war identity frameworks has constrained development and deepened political fragmentation. The current moment, therefore, calls for a paradigm shift:
From ancestry-driven politics to socio-economic and political integration;
From elite preservation to collective advancement, and
From historical anxieties to future-oriented governance.
This shift does not erase history or heritage; rather, it situates them appropriately within a modern developmental context.
Hybrid identity & regional alignment
Ndokwa and other Anioma groups are part of the broader Igbo-speaking populations historically associated with the Old Eastern Region. While post–civil war developments introduced identity tensions and political realignments, language, culture, and lived social realities continue to demonstrate deep affinities.
The question before the Ndokwa Nation is therefore not one of denying origin, but of choosing the political and economic framework that best advances the welfare of its people in the present and future.
Membership in a reconfigured Southeast Region—should Anioma State be created therein—does not preclude the preservation of local identity, heritage, or autonomy. On the contrary, it offers an opportunity for structured integration with safeguards, guarantees, and negotiated outcomes that protect minority interests within a broader union.
Historical context of the identity crisis
The rejection or ambivalence toward Igbo identity among some Igbo-speaking groups outside the present Southeast Region emerged largely in the aftermath of the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970). Before the war, Igbo-speaking peoples of the Old Eastern Region—including Ndokwa/Anioma communities—were broadly recognised and self-identified as Igbo.
Post-war policies and experiences—including the Asaba massacre, abandoned property policies, and financial disenfranchisement—created deep psychological and political scars. In an attempt to escape stigma and marginalisation, some communities distanced themselves from Igbo identity.
Ironically, historical records show that in the 1930s–1960s, western Igbo communities, led by traditional rulers and political leaders, actively sought integration with the Eastern Region. This historical complexity underscores that current identity debates are neither fixed nor immutable, but shaped by political circumstances.
Traditional authority & historical affirmation
Recent statements by respected traditional rulers, including HRM Professor Louis Nwaoboshi, the Obuzor of Ibusa, reaffirm long-standing historical accounts linking Anioma communities—particularly Asaba—to Igbo origins, notably Nteje.
These accounts, corroborated by other traditional authorities and institutions such as the Ndígbo Traditional Rulers Forum, do not seek to impose identity but to clarify historical narratives that have become politicised and contested.
The Asagba of Asaba’s acceptance of patronage and allegiance to Igbo traditional forums further illustrates the complex and sometimes contradictory positions that now characterise Anioma discourse.
Contradictions in contemporary positions
A central concern of Ndokwa stakeholders is the inconsistency in the positions taken by some Anioma leaders and representatives. These include:
Opposition to Anioma State being located in the Southeast Region
Simultaneous demands for inclusion and benefits from the Southeast Development Commission (SEDC);
Absence of alternative legislative bills proposing Anioma State in another region
Such contradictions weaken collective bargaining power and raise legitimate questions about strategic intent and political coherence.
It is not legally or politically sustainable to reject regional affiliation while seeking benefits explicitly designed for that region.
Legislative reality & political strategy
The legislative record shows that formal proposals for Anioma State—alongside Warri and Toru-Ebi States—were submitted to the National Assembly and recognised in the September 2025 Compendium of Bills on Constitutional Review.
In contrast, opponents of Anioma State in the Southeast Region have not presented any formal legislative alternative. Effective political engagement requires institutional action, not media statements alone.
Identity in a modern context
In today’s AI-driven, globally integrated economy, rigid adherence to identity politics yields diminishing returns. Global examples—from the United States to Singapore, Europe, and Asia—demonstrate that diversity, inclusion, and institutional strength, rather than ancestral origin, determine developmental success.
For the Ndokwa Nation, the critical question is not where ancestors came from, but where future opportunities lie—in terms of infrastructure, energy, ports, political representation, and economic scale.
Igboid vs. Southeast Igbos: a strategic choice
The distinction between “Igboid” peoples and “Southeast Igbos” is acknowledged. However, political and economic relevance in Nigeria increasingly depends on regional cohesion and institutional presence rather than linguistic dispersion.
The creation of Anioma State in the Southeast Region presents a strategic opportunity for the Ndokwa Nation to reposition itself within a regionally coherent and economically viable framework, while insisting on protections against domination and cultural erasure.
Ndokwa’s conditions
Ndokwa Nation’s support for any new union or state configuration is contingent upon the following clearly articulated and documented guarantees:
Transparency in oil production data: We request that DPR and DESOPADEC immediately release verified production figures attributable to Ndokwa communities.
Recognition as oil-producing communities: We also call for the full implementation of legal criteria qualifying Ndokwa communities for 13 per cent derivation benefits.
Equitable share of derivation funds: There should also be a clear articulation of Ndokwa’s entitlement based on production data.
Power infrastructure:
We also request a step-down from the Okpai IPP to ensure comprehensive electrification of the Ndokwa Nation.
Local government restructuring: We demand the creation of additional local governments, particularly to address the size, population, and terrain challenges of Ndokwa East, and to correct long-standing imbalances with the former Asaba Division.
State capital location
We also call for the designation of Aboh, Kwale, or Obiaruku as the capital of the proposed Anioma State.
Maritime Infrastructure: Establishment of a world-class seaport in suitable Ndokwa East riverine locations.
Political representation: Zoning of the governorship to the Ndokwa Nation. It also wants the creation of an Ndokwa Senatorial District, allocation of two Federal House of Representatives seats, and the first opportunity for ministerial and senior NDDC appointments.
Conclusion
Ndokwa Nation’s experience within the Midwestern Region, Bendel State, and Delta State has not produced commensurate socio-economic outcomes, particularly for Ndokwa East.
Should the Anioma State option fail to accommodate these legitimate demands, the Ndokwa Nation reserves the constitutional right to pursue an alternative pathway: the creation of a Ndokwa State, with Ndokwa East as its capital, open to all like-minded communities.
This position is not adversarial but pragmatic—anchored in equity, development, and the collective future of the Ndokwa people.
•Dr Imegwu is a former Speaker of the Delta State House of Assembly.
