How Nigeria’s Maps Reveal The Battle Over Anioma: A Journey Through Regions, States & Geopolitics

        

By ENUENWOSU KESTER EMEKE

NIGERIA’S political geography has never been static. It has been reshaped repeatedly — from the old regional system to today’s 36-state structure — each shift exposing competing identities, power interests, and the deep quest for equity. As the debate over the creation and zonal placement of a proposed Anioma State intensifies, a closer look at Nigeria’s historical maps offers critical insight into how the country arrived here and why the debate remains fiercely contested.

From Four Regions to Twelve States: The First Major Break (1963–1976)

At independence and through the First Republic, Nigeria existed as four powerful regions:

1. Northern Region

2. Western Region

3. Midwestern Region

4. Eastern Region

Each region wielded immense autonomy, influenced by ethnic majorities and political blocs. This structure shaped early identity politics, including agitation from minorities who felt overshadowed within the large regions.

Then came the 1967 restructuring — a decisive turning point triggered by deepening political tension and civil war fears. The four regions were broken into 12 states, redistributing power and redefining boundaries:

Northern Region → 6 States:

Kwara, Northwestern, Kaduna, Kano, Benue-Plateau, Northeastern

Western Region → 2 States:

Western State, Lagos State

Midwestern Region → 1 State:

Bendel State

Eastern Region → 3 States:

East Central State, Cross River State, Rivers State

This was the first time the Eastern minority groups (notably in Rivers and Cross River) were separated administratively from the Igbo heartland — a historical detail now resurfacing in current debates.

1998–2025: The Era of 36 States and Six Geopolitical Zones

By the late 1990s, state creation had ballooned Nigeria into a federation of 36 states, ultimately grouped into six geopolitical zones — an informal but politically powerful framework.

Northern Nigeria → 3 Zones (19 states + FCT):

North-West: Kebbi, Sokoto, Zamfara, Katsina, Kaduna, Kano, Jigawa
North-Central: Kwara, Niger, Kogi, Nasarawa, Plateau, Benue
North-East: Bauchi, Yobe, Borno, Gombe, Adamawa, Taraba

Southern Nigeria → 3 Zones (17 states):

The South emerged from the old Western, Midwestern, and Eastern Regions.

South-West (Old Western Region):

Ondo, Oyo, Lagos, Ogun, Osun, Ekiti

South-South (Old Midwest + parts of Old Eastern Region):

Edo, Delta, Rivers, Cross River, Bayelsa, Akwa Ibom

South-East (Old East Central State):

Anambra, Imo, Abia, Enugu, Ebonyi

This historical evolution explains why today’s Niger Delta — including Delta and Edo — contains areas that once shared administrative lines with the Eastern Region.

It also reveals why geopolitical zoning is a product of political design, not ancient boundaries etched in stone.

The Equity Question: Why Anioma Has Re-entered the National Discourse

A core argument driving renewed advocacy is numerical imbalance:

• South-East: 5 states

• Every other zone: 6 or 7

This shortfall affects representation in the Senate, federal boards, revenue distribution, civil service recruitment, and political bargaining power.

The widely floated solution?
A sixth state — often proposed as Anioma.

Advocates argue that Anioma, carved from the Igbo-speaking communities of Delta’s nine local governments, fits naturally into the South-East’s cultural and linguistic landscape.

Opposition and the Zonal Identity Clash

But the proposal is contentious. Critics — particularly from Delta North — reject any shift away from the South-South, insisting that Anioma people are historically tied to the Niger Delta, not the South-East.

Supporters counter with an argument rooted in Nigeria’s map history:

• Delta and Edo joined former Eastern minorities to form the modern South-South.

• If these historical mergers happened before, a state carved from Delta can similarly align with the South-East.

To them, it is not a distortion but a continuation of Nigeria’s long tradition of administrative reshuffling based on political necessity.

A Debate Bigger Than Anioma

The Anioma question reopens broader national issues:

• Should geopolitical zones be balanced numerically?

• Who determines identity — history, culture, or administrative convenience?

• Can people be reassigned to new zones without their consent?

• How much of nation-building is negotiation rather than permanence?

Nigeria’s map — across its three major eras — shows one constant truth:
Boundaries shift when political pressures peak.

Anioma sits at the crossroads of that pressure today.

Conclusion: The Map Is More Than Geography — It’s Power

Nigeria’s evolving boundaries tell a story of identity struggles, minority agitation, wartime decisions, military restructuring, and democratic bargaining.

The current push for Anioma State, and the heated disagreements surrounding its zonal placement, are simply the latest chapter in this long national evolution.

Whether Anioma becomes the South-East’s long-awaited sixth state or remains an integral part of the South-South, the debate forces Nigerians to confront the deeper question of how a diverse federation balances justice, equity, and identity in its political architecture.