Every powerful country on earth is based on strong ideals and a culture, this is what brings the people together to work towards a mutual cause. When large parts of a country do no work together, then you cannot say that there is one nation, a nation is a family, a nation is the understanding that everyone either came from the same source and/or have come together to reach the same goal. IPOB is obviously the spearhead of the revitalised neo-Biafra movement and are at the forefront of shaping the proposed Biafra and presenting this proposal to the world. There are many things they've gotten wrong, and many people in the core areas of what would be Biafra (the SE) have doubts on the ability of IPOB to lead such a movement, one of the main things they haven't got right is maintaining a clear message as to what Biafra actually is. Nobody knows where Biafra starts or ends, there are a myriad of maps and state and town lists of the proposed Biafra that say different things regarding where Biafra actually is, the most ridiculous maps, spurred on by Nnamdi Kanu's equally ridiculous proclamation that Biafra consists of all the southern Nigerian ethnic groups whose names begin with 'I' and who tie double wrapper, has included areas as far north as Kogi and Benue and as far west as Itsekiriland and Warri. To make this short, Biafra is primarily an Igbo agitation, the main hotspots for the agitation are all Igbo, the main people you see online are all Igbo, but the IPOB-led movement in their quest to follow a fantasy of recreating the old East with random surrounding groups, completely reject to acknowledge that this is in fact an Igbo agitation. The anti-Igbo or even anti-East sentiments they complain about even can be found among other groups of the old East. This just makes it look like Biafra is an Igbo land and resource grab which just legitimises the idea of the threat of Igbo domination. There are several independence movements across the world, none of them are ambiguous like this IPOB-led Biafra movement, they are mainly centred on a nationality or a cultural group who already live in a distinct region of the country, for example Catalonia is inhabited by the Catalans and Catalonia is already an autonomous region of Spain whose borders are formed already. Tibet is also an autonomous region of China, the countries broken from Yugoslavia were federal units and for the most part have held their borders from then. On the other hand, look at a country Broken up by broad parameters, South Sudan. Ignoring the fact that the Igbo are on their own is silly. With an Igbo country you do not have to step on anyones toes, you already have a nation, Nigeria is already split by LGA which are roughly ethnic units, so the SE plus Igbo LGA's outside of the SE are easily distinguished. All the energy invested in pretending Warri is part of Biafra could have been put into unifying Igbo land or even Igbo-speaking people (which includes those at the coast), because Igbo as a nation isn't even solidly together outside of the SE, let alone a fantasy Biafra, you could even completely have one language and national holidays, festivals, etc, without stepping on other toes. There is also the power of clearly stating that the secession is for a distinct people, this is why the world understood Biafra as Igbo then and now even though there are several other ethnic groups back then and proposed now in Biafra, it is because the world understands the need for a distinct nation to have its own autonomy, not for a distinct nation to be begging other distinct nations to play baby sitter.