Banner Online News

(In Defence of Dr. Pogu Bitrus and the Truth About the Middle Belt)

By Abraham Maina Joda

By any honest historical, political, or comparative African standard, the claim that the Middle Belt is a “manufactured identity” collapses under scrutiny. What is being manufactured today is not the Middle Belt, but a narrative of denial—designed to suppress legitimate agitations for justice, recognition, and equality.
The recent attempt to delegitimize Middle Belt consciousness through revisionist rhetoric is neither original nor scholarly. It belongs to a long tradition in Africa where dominant blocs, faced with the decline of inherited privilege, respond by questioning the very existence of those demanding equity. That tactic has failed elsewhere on the continent. It will fail here too.
Dr. Pogu Bitrus, President of the Middle Belt Forum, speaks from a position no pamphleteer can undermine: lived experience, institutional memory, and a deep command of history. To dismiss his position—or that of the Middle Belt—as “manufactured” is not debate; it is intellectual dishonesty.

THE MIDDLE BELT IN HISTORY, NOT MYTH

The Middle Belt did not emerge from NGO workshops, missionary conferences, or foreign conspiracies. It is a historical reality rooted in pre-colonial Africa.
Long before British conquest, the peoples of the Middle Belt existed as sovereign societies outside the authority of the Sokoto Caliphate and Kanem-Borno Empire. From the Kwararafa Confederacy to the Igala, Jukun, Nupe, Tiv, Idoma, Birom, Angas, Gbagyi, Eggon and countless others, these societies governed themselves, defended their territories, and resisted external domination—often at enormous cost.
If the Middle Belt were fictional, it would not have required decades of British punitive expeditions to conquer. It would not have produced some of the fiercest resistance to colonial rule in Northern Nigeria. The irony is striking: those now claiming the Middle Belt never existed rely heavily on colonial structures that were imposed precisely to suppress these very peoples.

COLONIALISM CREATED THE PROBLEM — NOT THE IDENTITY

The real historical rupture was not the emergence of Middle Belt consciousness; it was the forced subordination of Middle Belt societies under emirate systems they neither chose nor recognized.
British Indirect Rule did not reflect indigenous political reality. It distorted it—handing administrative authority to Fulani and Kanuri emirs over communities that had historically resisted caliphate expansion. That injustice, not foreign manipulation, is the foundation of Middle Belt political awareness.
Across Africa, similar arrangements produced identical outcomes:
Southern Sudan under Arab-Islamic domination,
Southern Ethiopia under Abyssinian imperial rule,
Casamance under Dakar’s centralized control.
In every case, denial preceded crisis. Recognition came late—or not at all.

THE “MANUFACTURED IDENTITY” TROPE: AN AFRICAN PATTERN

Labeling minority identities as “manufactured” is a well-worn hegemonic strategy. It has been used to:
Dismiss Southern Sudanese grievances,
Criminalize Tuareg demands,
Undermine Casamance autonomy movements,
Silence Ethiopia’s southern nationalities.
History has judged these denials harshly.
The Middle Belt stands at a different, more constructive point. Its leaders—including Dr. Bitrus—have consistently rejected violence and separatism. What they seek is fairness within Nigeria, not its dissolution. To frame this as subversion is to confuse justice with rebellion.

RELIGION AS A DISTRACTION

Equally dishonest is the attempt to reduce the Middle Belt struggle to religion. The Middle Belt is not a “Bible Belt.” It is religiously plural, historically tolerant, and institutionally inclusive. Muslims occupy key positions within the Middle Belt Forum, reflecting the region’s diversity.
The struggle is not about faith—it is about land, power, dignity, and historical truth. Those who insist otherwise do so to avoid confronting uncomfortable political realities.

THE REAL FEAR: A SHIFTING POLITICAL BALANCE

The panic behind the revisionism is transparent. The era of a “monolithic North” is over. Demographics, education, political awareness, and historical clarity have shattered that illusion. The Middle Belt has emerged—not as a threat—but as a decisive voice in Nigeria’s democratic future. This is what unsettles those who benefitted from an old order sustained by silence and misrepresentation.

DR. POGU BITRUS AND THE AUTHORITY OF HISTORY

Dr. Bitrus is not inventing history; he is articulating what has long been suppressed. His leadership of the Middle Belt Forum is grounded in scholarship, activism, and continuity with earlier generations who resisted marginalization through petitions, political parties, and constitutional engagement. Revisionists may write anonymously. Dr. Bitrus stands openly, accountable to his people and to history.

CONCLUSION: NIGERIA MUST CHOOSE HONESTY

Nigeria has a choice. It can continue the African tradition of denial—mocking identity until conflict erupts—or it can learn from history and choose recognition, inclusion, and equity.
The Middle Belt is not asking for supremacy. It is demanding dignity. To call that “manufactured” is not analysis. It is fear masquerading as scholarship. History will not be rewritten to comfort declining hegemonies. The Middle Belt exists. It has always existed. And it will no longer be silent.

* Abraham Maina Joda, of the Wurkum ethnic nationality from Taraba State, is the founder and convener of the Middle Belt Awareness Forum. He can be reached at 0703 854 3606.