By Ebiowei Tare-ebi, Esq
Bayelsa State was conceived and carved out as the homogenous heartland of the Ijaw nation—a cultural sanctuary where the language, heritage, and identity of the Ijaw people could flourish without dilution or political overshadowing. For many Ijaws, the creation of Bayelsa in 1996 answered a historic longing: a homeland where minority anxieties would give way to unity, cultural safety, and self-determination. This was albeit a product of agitations for which some of our forebears even paid the supreme price.
It is in this context that contemporary political developments have raised deep concern across Ijaw communities, particularly regarding issues of identity, representation, and the preservation of the state’s founding essence.
Recent political decisions—especially the choice of leaders whose names or perceived lineage appear to fall outside the traditional Ijaw identity matrix—have sparked intense debates that cannot simply be dismissed as emotional reactions. They border on the heart of who we are as Ijaw people, how we define ourselves, and how political actors should safeguard the cultural integrity entrusted to them.
Identity and the Stakes of Misrepresentation
Among the most critical and fundamental issues of discourse is the argument that presenting individuals with non-Ijaw names, identities, or ancestral ties as indigenes of strictly Ijaw clans opens a door that history warns us not to overlook. Communities such as Ofoni and the wider Tarakiri Clan are undoubtedly part of the Ijaw nation.
However, when claims of belonging are stretched—or appear to be stretched—beyond established genealogies and historical realities, suspicion and resistance are bond to naturally arise.
The anxiety is not necessarily about the individual personalities involved.
Rather, it is about the precedent.
Once a political pathway is established through which non-Ijaw identities can be legitimised as indigenes of Ijaw land, the gates are opened. The demographic, cultural, and political safeguards that defined Bayelsa’s creation can begin to erode gradually, quietly, and irreversibly. A clear example can be seen in the Ministry of Education where the lingua franca is the Urhobo language and the subtle establishment of settlements at the Elemebiri axis of Sagbama Local Government Area of the state.
Lessons From Elsewhere: A Warning From History
Those who raise alarm as part of the discourse often point to Warri and Ilorin in Delta and Kwara States respectively, where identity disputes, migrations, and political manoeuvring over decades reshaped the area’s original ethnic equations. They also reference international examples—such as Lebanon, where demographic shifts and political concessions permanently altered the balance of power, with deep, long-term consequences.
In both cases, early signs were dismissed, only for communities to later discover that once demographic and identity boundaries are blurred, they are exceedingly difficult to restore.
The Bayelsa Question: Is the Ijaw Homeland at Risk?
The central fear is simple:
If non-Ijaw identities can be politically “naturalised” as Ijaw for convenience, then Bayelsa may gradually lose the unique homogeneity that makes it the cultural headquarters of the Ijaw nation.
Political ambition—no matter the claim of sincerity—must never override the collective identity of an entire nationality. Leadership in Ijaw land which is under attack at different fronts by our neighbours from Akwa Ibom to Ondo not to mention Rivers and Delta States, requires restraint, wisdom, and fidelity to the founding principles of the state. Decisions made today, especially regarding identity and representation, will echo far beyond present political cycles especially now that such characters have been emboldened beyond ways and means of challenging Ijaws and acting with impunity in many ways.
A Call for Responsible Leadership
What Bayelsans are demanding is not xenophobia, but clarity and integrity:
• Clear genealogical transparency from those seeking political office in Ijaw homeland.
• Respect for traditional authority and historical lineage structures.
• A firm commitment from political leaders to uphold Bayelsa’s status as the cultural and political anchor of the Ijaw nation.
• Mechanisms to ensure that political expediency does not override ethnic and cultural realities.
Conclusion: The Homeland Must Be Protected.
The Ijaw nation has endured centuries of marginalisation, displacement, and cultural pressure. Bayelsa is more than just a state; it is the symbolic and practical refuge of the Ijaw identity.
Any action—political or otherwise—that threatens this foundation must be examined with seriousness and confronted with courage.
The conversation unfolding today is not only about any individual.
It is about the future of the Ijaw people.
Bayelsa must remain Bayelsa—Ijaw, undiluted, unambiguous, and uncompromised. Let us not give out what we cannot get from others. Let us not allow a seed to geminate for our children to have to fight in the near future. E gberi faa ooo
Ebiowei is a Member, Bayelsa Action Watch
No comments