FINLAND’S SELECTIVE SUPPORT FOR SELF-DETERMINATION: A QUESTION OF MORAL CONSISTENCY

Finland’s support for Ukraine’s freedom while simultaneously opposing the self-determination of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) raises serious questions about the consistency and morality of its foreign policy.

President Alexander Stubb, what justifies Finland’s strong endorsement of Ukrainian freedom while seemingly dismissing the Biafran struggle for the same?

The core issue here is the apparent disparity in the treatment of these two movements for self-determination. The Biafran people have endured over five decades of what many describe as state-sponsored genocide by the Nigerian government, particularly through its military HQ Nigerian Army. This includes severe human rights violations, arguably far surpassing those experienced by Ukraine at the hands of Russia.

Why does Finland throw its weight behind Ukraine’s fight for independence but not extend the same support to Biafrans? The Nigerian government’s role in the region’s insecurity is well-documented, with actions like granting pardons and rewards to members of terrorist groups like Boko Haram and Fulani herdsmen, as recognized by international terrorism indices. Such policies contrast sharply with the harsh treatment of unarmed Biafran advocates for independence, who are met with lethal force rather than dialogue or justice.

Is it because we’re Africans?

Biafrans are merely exercising their rights to self-determination as outlined in the United Nations Charter, to which Finland is a signatory. So, why is Simon Ekpa, the Prime Minister of the Biafra Republic Government in Exile, detained for advocating for these rights?

It is imperative for Finland to adhere to international law and cease this collaboration with Nigeria, which seeks to suppress peaceful calls for a referendum. Detaining and potentially extraditing Ekpa to Nigeria, where he faces persecution, not only undermines European values of freedom and justice but also exposes a glaring hypocrisy in Finland’s stance on self-determination rights.

The question remains: Why support Ukrainian self-determination while actively working against Biafran freedom through the detention of their advocate, Simon Ekpa?

This selective application of support for self-determination not only undermines justice but also questions Finland’s commitment to the universal principles of freedom and human rights.

Free Simon Ekpa now!