Just the same way ethnic and religious differences would not let Nigerians pursue any objective cause without these natural features of the country setting in, the compulsory conditions of the unity of Nigeria seem to impair Nigeria from or adopting policies that would make for a sound country.
Unfortunately, rather than recognise these as the very nature of the country, many intellectuals–old and young–think that the ethnic and religious divides are inventions of politicians. Again, whereas the very reasons Nigeria is unworkable, heavily corrupt and poorly governed flows from the very compromises enshrined in the Constitition and other laws for the governance of Nigeria, Nigerian Intellectuals again, ascribe the issues arising from the resulting systemic failure to bad politicians. In the same vein, you hear them use this expression, “Enemies of Nigeria” whereas in the strict sense of it, the very concept of Nigeria is the very enemy of the African peoples locked in it.
I define political governance as the means by which peoples seek to work out their collective propserity–subject to their worldviews, orientations, cultures, religions, etc. Where this is the case, it follows that it is only natural that Nigerians seek to subject their governance to their ethnic and religious ideals–and so long as the country remains, no other objectives of governance could take preeminence over such ideals.
Nigeria was a British property which was unitarily managed by them for obvious reasons. It was subsequently handed over to its of diverse indigenous peoples for common governance and so the natural consideration of governance, since governance is first local, became how to apply the country to sectional advantages.
Only the right narratives will save us in Nigeria. We may be ready to fight, we may be passionate for change, but what would we be fighting about: to save Nigeria or to save ourselves from Nigeria?