Southern and Middle Belt leaders have firmly rejected a proposal by Arewa leaders to incorporate the Middle Belt region into the broader Northern geopolitical framework during recent commemorative events in Kaduna.
This stance underscores longstanding tensions over colonial-era administrative divisions and their lingering impacts on ethnic representation, political inclusion, and cultural identity in Nigeria.
Background on the Dispute
The controversy erupted amid the 25th anniversary celebrations of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), a prominent Northern socio-political group, held in Kaduna. Arewa leaders, in their statements, reaffirmed a vision of the North that encompasses the 19 northern states, including the Middle Belt—geographically the North-Central zone comprising states like Benue, Kogi, Nasarawa, Plateau, Niger, Kwara, and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
This inclusion traces back to British colonial policies that grouped diverse ethnic minorities in the Middle Belt under the Northern Protectorate, despite their closer cultural, linguistic, and genetic ties to Southern indigenous groups. 
Critics argue this historical bundling has perpetuated marginalization, political exclusion, and even ethnic violence, including what some describe as “genocidal ethnic cleansing” of indigenous Middle Belt populations by dominant Northern interests.
The Middle Belt is not a monolithic “Northern” entity but a distinct region of over 300 ethnic groups, including the Tiv, Idoma, and Berom, who emphasize their autonomy and shared heritage with the South.
Key Rejections and Statements
• South and Middlebelt Leadership Forum (SMBLF): Chaired by HRH Oba Oladipo Olaitan, leader of the Yoruba socio-cultural group Afenifere, the SMBLF boycotted the Arewa anniversary entirely. In a statement, they decried the event as a perpetuation of “colonial administrative injustice” that forces Middle Belt peoples into an alien Northern identity.
The forum highlighted that true Afenifere representatives—rooted in the legacy of Chief Obafemi Awolowo—did not attend, dismissing any purported “Afenifere” delegates as “Arewa renegades” aligned with historical Northern alliances like the Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP). 
• African Sociocultural Harmony and Enlightenment (ASHE) Foundation: This think tank issued a scathing rebuke, calling the Arewa proposal a “continued acceptance” of divisive legacies. ASHE’s Director, Dr. Wale Faloye, emphasized that acknowledging an expansive “Arewa” ignores the Middle Belt’s rightful place alongside Southern protectorates, urging a reevaluation of Nigeria’s geopolitical zoning to reflect ethnic realities rather than colonial artifacts. 
This rejection echoes prior Middle Belt assertions of independence, such as the 2024 denunciation of an informal “Arewa Republic” proposal by the Middle Belt Youth Forum (MBYF).
They explicitly stated: “We the people of this entire region therefore do not identify with the ideological and political framework of any ‘Republic of Arewa’ so-called and as such we are vehemently opposed to any attempt to forcibly include us in such a union.” 
The MBYF, youth wing of the Middle Belt Forum (MBF), defined the region as encompassing southern parts of states like Bauchi, Borno, Kaduna, Kebbi, and Yobe, rejecting any monolithic Northern narrative.
Broader Context and Implications
Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones—North-West, North-East, North-Central (Middle Belt), South-West, South-East, and South-South—were formalized in 1995 under General Sani Abacha’s regime but remain informal, lacking constitutional backing. 
Groups like Afenifere have long advocated for their entrenchment as federating units to promote equity and devolution of powers.  However, Northern groups like the ACF view zones as potential “fourth-tier” governance layers, while Middle Belt advocates push for recognition as a separate entity to address grievances over resource control and security.
This flare-up ties into recurring debates on power rotation and zoning, seen in 2022-2023 calls by the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum for Southern presidential tickets, which drew Northern pushback.   
As Nigeria grapples with insecurity and calls for restructuring, the Middle Belt’s exclusion from “Arewa” narratives highlights demands for inclusive federalism.
Leaders warn that ignoring these voices risks deepening divisions, urging dialogue to redefine zones democratically.
For ongoing developments, monitoring statements from SMBLF, MBF, and ACF will be key, as this could influence future constitutional amendments or electoral zoning discussions.
