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

*THE RETURN OF NIGERIA’S ABSENTEE PRESIDENT FROM FRANCE TO ORCHESTRATE THE DECAMPING OF 5 PDP GOVERNORS TO APC IN FURTHERANCE OF THE ONE-PARTY AGENDA* : A Manifest Threat To Nigeria’s Democracy

By George Omagbemi Sylvester

While the Nigerian people groan under the crushing weight of insecurity, hunger, and deepening poverty, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was reportedly on a “working visit” to France. But the truth is now widely known: the President took a French leave not to review policy or chart a new course for the country—as the Presidency would have Nigerians believe—but for personal medical reasons, specifically a stem cell treatment. In addition, he allegedly met with lobbyists in the United States to forestall the impending release of FBI files concerning his alleged past involvement in drug trafficking.

This deceitful detour to Europe and the United States occurred at a time when Nigeria desperately needed leadership. Inflation had soared to 33.69% by March 2025, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. Even more alarming, food inflation was nearing an unbearable 42%. Meanwhile, the World Bank recently reported that over 104 million Nigerians now live below the poverty line. In short, Nigeria is a nation in distress, but its president chose medical tourism and image laundering over urgent governance.

President Tinubu’s clandestine return to Nigeria, shrouded in secrecy and executed under the cover of darkness, has only added fuel to the fire. Sources suggest his return was hastened by his failure to convince U.S. authorities to delay or suppress the May 2nd, 2025 release of potentially damning documents. Rather than address the nation’s economic meltdown and worsening insecurity, the President appears singularly focused on deflecting attention from his past.

To this end, two diversionary tactics have been activated:

The orchestration of mass defections of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors to the All Progressives Congress (APC);

A suspicious state creation agenda designed to stoke ethnic sentiments and dominate national discourse.

These maneuvers are not just political gimmicks they are strategic tools in a calculated plan to entrench a one-party state in Nigeria. The objective is clear: cripple the opposition, capture the entire political landscape, and monopolize democratic power.

The plan to coerce and induce PDP governors to defect to APC is deeply alarming and unambiguously undemocratic. It threatens the very foundation of Nigeria’s multi-party democracy. If allowed to stand, this maneuver would diminish the integrity of the electoral system and reduce political pluralism to a mere illusion.

This is not the first time Tinubu’s APC has sought to manipulate Nigeria’s democracy to serve its hegemonic interests. In recent months, the 10th National Assembly, led by Senate President Godswill Akpabio, has increasingly functioned as a rubber stamp to the Executive, passing questionable bills with little to no debate. Likewise, the Judiciary, now under the watch of Chief Justice Kekere-Ekun, has often appeared compromised or politically docile.

In this context, the push for PDP governors to cross over to the APC should be seen for what it truly is: a political power grab. These governors were not elected under the APC’s manifesto or ideology. Their defection, under coercion or inducement, would be a betrayal of the mandate given to them by their constituents and a fundamental violation of democratic norms.

Democracy thrives on opposition, debate, and diversity of thought. When a ruling party seeks to eliminate all dissent, it crosses the threshold into authoritarianism. Nigeria has been here before. Under General Sani Abacha, political repression and suppression of opposition voices led to a climate of fear and stagnation. We must never return to that dark chapter in our history.

Ruth Youngland Nelson once warned, _“The slow erosion of democracy does not always come from a bomb or a bullet, but from the steady betrayal of trust, from those who should guard it the most.”_ That is precisely what is at stake today in Nigeria.

*The threat of a one-party state is not theoretical. It has tangible and far-reaching consequences:*

*Loss of Checks and Balances:* In the absence of a viable opposition, power becomes centralized and unaccountable. The executive begins to act with impunity, and the institutions that should hold it in check become ineffective or co-opted.

*Suppression of Dissent:* A one-party state breeds fear. Citizens and civil society groups lose their voice. Media outlets are intimidated into silence. Human rights abuses increase as the state operates unchecked.

*Erosion of Civil Liberties:* Freedoms of speech, assembly, and association are often the first casualties in such a system. With no opposition to challenge draconian policies, citizens are left vulnerable to arbitrary arrests and legal persecution.

*Economic Stagnation:* Political monopolies often result in policy complacency. Innovation is stifled, merit is replaced with cronyism, and critical reforms are shelved in favor of patronage politics. With youth unemployment already above 53%, this spells disaster for national development.

*Let it be clearly stated:* the idea of state creation at this critical juncture is a red herring. It is a deliberate attempt to ignite ethnic and regional sentiments to distract the public from the administration’s catastrophic failures. Nigeria’s problem is not the number of states, it is the absence of visionary leadership, sound economic policy, and adherence to democratic principles.

Moreover, a political culture where politicians are more loyal to the ruling party than to their constituents is dangerous. It creates an elite cartel of power brokers disconnected from the people. As history has shown, when democracy is hollowed out in this manner, what follows is a government by coercion and fear rather than by consent and justice.

Joseph Chilton Pearce encapsulated the peril succinctly: _“To live a creative life, we must lose our fear of being wrong. But when leadership criminalizes dissent, creativity dies, and conformity becomes the law.”_ This is the warning Nigeria must heed today.

In light of these developments, it is imperative that every Nigerian rise up to defend our democracy. The media, civil society, religious and traditional institutions, and the international community must shine a light on these schemes and demand accountability. Silence is complicity.

We must resist this descent into a political monoculture. The defection of PDP governors under duress is not just an internal party matter; it is a national crisis. The Tinubu administration must be reminded that Nigeria is a democracy, not a personal estate. The future of our children depends on the choices we make today.

Nigeria needs reform, not regression. It needs unity, not uniformity. The people deserve a government that works for them, not one that works solely to protect the interests of a single individual or political party.

If this descent into a one-party dictatorship continues, Nigeria’s democracy, hard-earned and deeply cherished, may become a relic of the past. It is time to speak out. It is time to act.

Sylvester is a political analyst, he writes from South Africa

Apostle Suleman Blesses 85 Year-Old Church Member With New Car Valued at N8m

Apostle Johnson Suleman is one of the prominent religious leaders recognized for their significant charitable efforts and commitment to helping others. Thus far, the Auchi, Edo State born clergy has made extensive outreach efforts and charitable initiatives, and is known for his commitment to sharing the gospel and promoting good works across the world.

During one of the 2025 Easter special programmes at the church’s headquarters, the ‘Restoration Apostle’ as the General Overseer of the Omega Fire Ministries (OFM) is fondly addressed, did it again. He blessed an 85 years old man with a brand new Toyota Camry car valued at eight million naira.

Apostle Suleman’s ‘Touch of Love’ charitable outreach is focused on providing aid and support to those in need, bringing joy and transformation to assist the poor, care for the sick including providing services to communities around the world. “We won’t change our focus, we shall continue to restore lives through giving, although money is not the focus of our life. It never has been,” Apostle Suleman posits, adding that, “everyone who follows God can be blessed, and in many different ways”.

Presenting the car to the elated man in the presence of his wife and other family members, Suleman declared that blessing people, especially members of the OFM ministry, is “demonstrating appreciation for a dedicated service, recognizing God’s blessings, and as a form of spiritual encouragement. Blessing our members is a manifestation of God’s grace and a way to bless those who have served and still serving God faithfully, and to support their day-to-day affairs”.

Praying with the family after the presentation, Apostle Suleman, who affirmed that when God loves a person, it comes with blessings, said, Easter, like other festive periods, is a time to show love as Christ is love.