society
1914 Amalgamation: The Unseen Hand That Scripted Nigeria’s Identity Crisis
1914 Amalgamation: The Unseen Hand That Scripted Nigeria’s Identity Crisis
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
In the beginning, there was no “Nigeria.” There was no shared anthem, no common tongue, no unified sense of nationhood. Instead, there were sovereign ethnic nations; the Yoruba in the West, the Igbo in the East, the Hausa-Fulani in the North and over 250 other distinct ethnicities scattered across the landmass now known as Nigeria. Each group had its own system of governance, religion, language and worldview. What tied them together was not history or consent; but a single act of colonial convenience on January 1, 1914: the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates by the British colonial administration.
This unification, executed under the imperial direction of Lord Frederick Lugard and endorsed by the British Crown, was not an act of benevolence or foresight. It was an economic and administrative maneuver to cut costs and consolidate power. And in doing so, it laid the groundwork for over a century of conflict, suspicion and structural imbalance. The consequences of this act continue to haunt Nigeria like a recurring nightmare.
Over 110 years later, the fundamental question remains: Who signed the amalgamation on behalf of the Nigerian people?
The answer, quite disturbingly, is no one.
Let us look at the historical timeline.
Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, later the first President of Nigeria, was born in 1904. He was only 10 years old in 1914.
Chief Obafemi Awolowo, premier of the Western Region, was born in 1909; just 5 years old.
Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto and Premier of the Northern Region, was born in 1910; only 4 years old.
Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, was born in 1912; a mere toddler of 2 years.
Michael Okpara, premier of the Eastern Region, hadn’t even been born yet; he came into the world in 1920.
These men, hailed as Nigeria’s founding fathers, had no hand in the creation of Nigeria. The 1914 amalgamation was not a pact between equal peoples or a dialogue of nations. It was a colonial decree; signed in London, drawn on British maps, and executed on African soil without consent, consultation or compassion.
Herbert Macaulay, born in 1864 and often revered as the father of Nigerian nationalism, was alive at the time but held no official power or authority to challenge the imperial decree. His protests, although prescient, were brushed aside. The amalgamation, thus, was no democratic creation. It was not a union forged by love, common purpose or mutual benefit; but by British imperial fiat.
As Nobel Laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka aptly put it, “There was no basis for Nigeria’s amalgamation other than administrative convenience. The failure to revisit the terms of that amalgamation is what has fueled most of the crises we face today.”
You cannot mix red oil and engine oil and expect a stable solution. Similarly, you cannot merge ethnic nations with separate histories, economies, cultures and religions and expect unity without negotiation. This is the tragedy of Nigeria: a forced marriage in which no vows were exchanged and no love was pledged.
From that fateful moment in 1914, Nigeria became an experiment in nation-building without the essential ingredients of trust and consensus. The British justified the amalgamation on grounds of administrative efficiency; the North was financially unviable, while the South was economically productive. By merging the regions, the British were able to use the surplus from the South to fund the North; a model of exploitation that persists to this day through lopsided federal allocations and centralized revenue control.
As historian Dr. Usman Bugaje observed, “There was never any document signed by Nigerian representatives to validate the amalgamation. It remains one of the most arbitrary acts in our history; and it set us up for division, not unity.”
Despite more than a century of cohabitation, Nigeria remains a house divided. The fault lines of 1914 have deepened into canyons; tribalism, nepotism, ethnic militancy and religious extremism dominate the political landscape. Unity, where it exists, is often cosmetic and brittle, breaking under the slightest pressure. Mutual distrust has become national currency.
Why?
Because Nigeria was not born in the delivery room of dialogue, but in the operating theatre of imperial surgery. There was no referendum, no negotiation, no cultural reconciliation. There was only the sound of British pens on paper and silence from the people whose lives would be altered forever.
Even our revered leaders admitted the shallowness of this unity.
Chief Awolowo once declared that “Nigeria is not a nation. It is a mere geographical expression.”
Dr. Azikiwe called Nigeria “a political experiment.”
Tafawa Balewa, in a rare moment of candor, confessed: “Since the amalgamation of 1914, Nigeria has existed as one country only on paper.”
Political economist Prof. Pat Utomi underscores this truth: “You cannot build a nation on injustice and expect peace. The failure to renegotiate the Nigerian federation is why we are constantly at war with ourselves.”
Today, Nigeria struggles with poverty in the midst of wealth, hunger amid arable land and darkness despite abundant natural gas. We import toothpicks, fuel and even the pencils used in our classrooms. Our hospitals are death traps, our schools are underfunded, our security forces are underpaid and our brightest minds are fleeing the country. The Nigerian space agency cannot locate missing schoolgirls in Sambisa Forest, yet it claims to monitor satellites orbiting thousands of kilometers above Earth.
What has this forced union achieved?
Rather than build a federal system that respects diversity and autonomy, we cling to a centralized structure that mimics colonial rule. Our so-called federalism is a fraud; a unitary government masquerading as federalism. States go cap in hand to Abuja every month, begging for a share of oil revenues they do not control. Resource control remains a taboo topic, even though it is the bedrock of true federalism.
Legal scholar Prof. Itse Sagay lays it bare: “Nigeria’s constitutional order is a farce. True federalism was abandoned. What we now have is a unitary system dressed up in federal garb and it is unsustainable.”
We must ask uncomfortable questions:
Where is the amalgamation document?
Who signed it?
Why should a forced union be treated as divine revelation?
In a true democracy, unity is not forced, it is negotiated. Identity is not imposed, it is chosen. Nigeria must now revisit its foundations. If the original union was imposed without consent, then today’s citizens must have the right to renegotiate that union.
Let it be clear: this is not a call for secession. It is a call for truth, for justice and for constitutional clarity. If the foundation is cracked, then the building must be reinforced or rebuilt. We must return to the table; not as tribes seeking supremacy, but as peoples seeking coexistence.
As Prof. Jibrin Ibrahim explains, “The Nigerian state was constructed as an extractive colonial machine. Post-independence leaders merely inherited the apparatus and they never deconstructed it.”
The solution lies in genuine restructuring; a return to regional autonomy, fiscal federalism and constitutional renegotiation. Let each region manage its resources, govern its people and contribute to the national purse fairly. Let unity be rooted in equity, not in exploitation.
The British may have scripted Nigeria’s beginning, but we must now take charge of its future. The time has come to reclaim the pen, rewrite the narrative and correct the errors of 1914. As the saying goes, “When the foundation is destroyed, what can the righteous do?” The righteous must rebuild.
Let us remember: empires fall, nations rise, but only truth endures. Nigeria must confront its past to shape its destiny. Until then, we remain a country in search of itself, a union in search of meaning, an identity still unsigned.
Sylvester is a political analyst, he writes from South Africa
Banwo Questions Bwala’s Credibility After Al Jazeera Interview
Public commentator, Dr. Ope Banwo, has criticised Daniel Bwala, the Presidential Spokesperson on Policy Communication for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, following a contentious interview on Al Jazeera, describing the appearance as damaging to the credibility of Nigeria’s public communication.
Bwala had appeared on a programme hosted by journalist Mehdi Hasan, where he faced a series of questions about past statements attributed to him. During the exchange, Hasan presented video clips of previous remarks by the government spokesman and asked him to reconcile them with his responses during the interview.
The exchange, which has since circulated widely online, drew attention after Bwala appeared to dispute statements that were subsequently played back during the programme.
Reacting to the development, Banwo said the episode reflected poorly on Nigeria’s representation on international media platforms.
According to him, the availability of digital records and online archives means public officials must be prepared to defend their past statements whenever they appear on global television.
“In the era of instant fact-checking, any public figure going on international television must assume that every previous statement can be easily retrieved,” Banwo said.
He added that the controversy surrounding the interview was particularly troubling because the contradictions presented during the programme were supported with video evidence.
Banwo noted that while political interviews can be confrontational, government representatives should expect tough questioning when appearing before international audiences.
The founder of Naija Lives Matters also expressed concern over Bwala’s reaction during the interview, especially his claim that he was not informed he would be required to defend his personal record.
“A government spokesman should never be surprised by questions about his own public statements,” Banwo said.
During the programme, Bwala also responded to criticism of Nigeria’s governance challenges by arguing that similar problems exist in other parts of the world.
However, Banwo argued that such comparisons do not address the specific issues raised about Nigeria.
According to him, the episode should serve as a reminder of the importance of preparation and credibility when Nigerian officials appear before international media platforms.
The interview has continued to generate reactions across social media and political commentary circles, with observers debating both the conduct of the interview and the implications for Nigeria’s global image.
society
THE IMPERIAL GOLD COIN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF ATLANTIS UNVEILED AS SYMBOL OF SOVEREIGNTY AND HERITAGE
THE IMPERIAL GOLD COIN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF ATLANTIS UNVEILED AS SYMBOL OF SOVEREIGNTY AND HERITAGE
_[Atlantis City, United Kingdom of Atlantis – March 2026]_ – The United Kingdom of Atlantis proudly announces the introduction of its *Imperial Gold Coin*, a magnificent emblem of sovereignty, authority, and imperial heritage. The exquisite gold coin has been crafted to represent the nation’s regal tradition, economic strength, and the visionary leadership of its monarch.
The centerpiece of the coin features the dignified portrait of *His Imperial Majesty, Professor Solomon Wining*, depicted in full royal regalia. Crowned with a majestic golden crown and adorned with intricately crafted ornaments, the portrait embodies honor, wisdom, and noble leadership befitting a sovereign ruler. The depiction celebrates the monarch’s reign, which is associated with wisdom, development, and the pursuit of justice.
The golden coin itself signifies *prosperity, stability, and the enduring legacy* of the Atlantis Kingdom. Gold, historically a universal symbol of power, wealth, and permanence, reflects the strength and vision of the kingdom’s leadership and its aspirations for lasting greatness.
Encircling the royal portrait is the carefully engraved inscription *“United Kingdom of Atlantis”*, reinforcing the state’s identity any the authority of its sovereign ruler. The lower rim of the coin prominently displays the name *Solomon Wining*, commemorating the monarch whose leadership is linked to noble governance and national advancement.
The phrase *“Gold Coin”* highlights not only the currency’s intrinsic value but also its symbolic significance as a representation of the kingdom’s economic structure and royal treasury. Beyond its aesthetic elegance, the coin serves as a *mark of sovereignty*, a seal of authority, and a reminder of the royal institution governing the United Kingdom of Atlantis.
The Imperial Gold Coin represents:
– *Unity* among citizens,
– *Loyalty* to the crown,
– A vision of a kingdom built upon *justice, prosperity, and noble leadership*.
Every detail—from the engraved crown to the polished golden surface—makes the coin a timeless emblem of imperial prestige and national pride. It stands as both a symbol of wealth and a monument to the legacy of royal leadership, reminding all who behold it of the enduring power and majesty of the United Kingdom of Atlantis.
The United Kingdom of Atlantis is a sovereign nation dedicated to upholding traditions of regal governance, cultural heritage, and economic prosperity, guided by the wisdom of its imperial leadership.
_Notes to Editors_:
The Imperial Gold Coin is intended for commemorative and symbolic purposes, representing the nation’s imperial heritage and royal authority.
Ajadi Visits Ibadan Chief Imam, Receives Blessings
The leading gubernatorial aspirant in Oyo State on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Ambassador Olufemi Ajadi Oguntoyinbo, on Wednesday paid a courtesy visit to the Grand Chief Imam of Ibadanland, Sheikh Imam Abdul Ganiy Abubakir Agbotomokekere, at his Oja’ba residence in Ibadan, where discussions centred on leadership, integrity, and the role of prayers in governance.
Ajadi, who described the revered Islamic cleric as a spiritual pillar in Oyo State, said his visit was to seek prayers and wise counsel as he continues consultations ahead of the 2027 governorship race.
While addressing the Chief Imam, Ajadi commended his consistent prayers for Ibadanland, Oyo State and Nigeria, noting that religious leaders remain critical stakeholders in nation building.
“I have come to seek your prayers and spiritual blessings because of your important role in promoting peace, unity and moral guidance in our society,” Ajadi said.
“I also want to appreciate your continuous prayers for the progress of Ibadanland, Oyo State and Nigeria as a whole. My prayer is that Almighty Allah will continue to grant you sound health and long life to witness many more Ramadan seasons on earth.”
Speaking further, the PDP gubernatorial aspirant emphasised the need for leadership driven by compassion, fairness and accountability, stressing that his political aspiration is rooted in service to the people.
“My ambition is not just about occupying an office but about serving the people with sincerity and fear of God. We must continue to encourage politics that will bring development and improve the welfare of our people,” he added.
While speaking with journalists after the visit, Ajadi also assured the people of Oyo State and Nigerians at large that the internal crisis and political tensions within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have been brought under control by the grace of God. He expressed optimism that the party would emerge victorious in all elective positions in the 2027 general elections.
In his response, Sheikh Agbotomokekere advised the governorship hopeful to remain focused on the principles of good governance, warning against corrupt practices often associated with politics.
The respected Islamic scholar noted that while politics is practised differently by individuals, only leaders with integrity and fear of God can truly deliver the dividends of democracy.
“Politics is practised by different kinds of people. Some play politics in a corrupt way, while others practise it with sincerity. My prayer is that you will be among those who will practise democracy in the right way if you become governor,” the Chief Imam said.
He reminded the aspirant that human ambition can only be fulfilled by divine approval, stressing that ultimate power belongs to God.
“Whoever is seeking a position should know that only Allah can make such an ambition come true. Whether a person becomes famous or remains unknown is also by the will of Allah,” he said.
Offering prayers for the politician, the cleric added: “Many people may be struggling for a position meant for one person, and it is only God who knows the rightful person. I pray that Almighty Allah will make you the chosen one among all the contenders.”
Using a football analogy to further illustrate his point, the cleric advised Ajadi to be wary of political distractions and misleading influences.
“On the football field, sometimes spectators believe they understand the game more than the players themselves. I pray that you will not be misled by so-called political gurus and that God will guide your steps aright,” he said.
Sheikh Agbotomokekere, the 18th Chief Imam of Ibadanland, is widely respected across South-Western Nigeria for his scholarship, spiritual leadership and advocacy for peaceful coexistence among religious and political groups.
Observers say the visit forms part of Ajadi’s ongoing consultations with key stakeholders, traditional rulers and religious leaders as political activities gradually gather momentum ahead of the next electoral cycle in Oyo State.
The cleric offered special prayers for peace in Oyo State, successful leadership, and continued unity among the people despite political and religious differences.
-
society6 months agoReligion: Africa’s Oldest Weapon of Enslavement and the Forgotten Truth
-
news3 months agoWHO REALLY OWNS MONIEPOINT? The $290 Million Deal That Sold Nigeria’s Top Fintech to Foreign Interests
-
society6 months ago“You Are Never Without Help” – Pastor Gebhardt Berndt Inspires Hope Through Empower Church (Video)
-
Business7 months agoGTCO increases GTBank’s Paid-Up Capital to ₦504 Billion