If Massob leadership is decentralized at home and abroad, I would think that it will give room for a better appraisal of the activities of the various units. It will also make accountability easier. Also, the funding sources can be decentralized. All the decentralized units can then report to a central coordinating body with a Chair person (leader). This is the way many big international NGOs are organized.
In this kind of model, Ijaw people will have their Massob leader, the Efiks will have their own, the Ibibios their own, the Ogonis their own, the various Igbos enclaves their own, etc. The central working group will be constituted by the various leaders who will appoint a leader amongst themselves. This central leader may have a fixed time.
In the same manner, Biafrans in USA should have Massob movement and a leader, Biafrans in UK should have their own, Biafrans in Australia should have their own, Biafrans in South Africa should have their own, Biafrans in Israel their own, etc. Funds can then be raised by these units in Diaspora and used to support Massob units back in Biafra. Units at home with prudent accountability and result acheiving (activites or projects with result towards Biafra actualization) will definitly attract more funding.
Funds can also be sort locally by the home units from Biafrans who are willing to donate directly and such funds should be accounted for also.
This way Massob units can then be evaluated for their role and contribution towards the struggle as well as the results acheived. That way every people group in Biafra can now appraise their actions towards Biafra actualization.
Brothers and sisters correct me if I am derailing!
posted
I agree with you igbonndeewo, this would be a wise startegy which would make Massob impervious to assasination attempts, in effect, so many heads that it would be impossible to destroy the movement by any one act, or also to create checks and balances within the organisation, so that should anyone be found corrupt there would be umpteen people to replace him. Moreover, the new president of Biafra, will be decided by consensus from these multitude of leaders, and not be a matter of fact uwazuruike. in other words, nothing should prevent Uwazuruike from vying for this position, but it should not be a foredrawn conclusion that he will be the leader of the new biafra, unless he deserves it.
Furthermore, the organisation needs chapters world wide who will have a multitude of goals of which fund drives is only one: the other is for international press releases and human rights activities and forming liaisons with local groups in our neck of the wood, all in the furtherance of Biafra, and seeking for international publicity.
Posts: 236 | From: California | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
Thank you my bredren. I am glad you could see the point and your expanciations are very much in order. I also think that, in addition to the points raised earlier, Ekwe-Nche or BF or BAF should only serve as a final coordination center which would be supported by the different units who may seek to have representatives in it.
This way Biafra Actualization drive will become a global phenomenon, and thus, will become indestructible by proganda and by actions of single individuals.
Forumites: If we agree with this, I would like to use this opportunity to call on all Biafrans in diaspora and at home (in Biafra) into action in this line.
Anyone who does not agree, should give his own suggestion on the way forward and we can compare and go for the best option that will ensure preservation of Biafra.
Ndeewoo!
[ December 26, 2001: Message edited by: igbondeewo ]
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
