My role in Nigeria-Biafra war —Gowon

RAYMOND GUKAS, Jos

Former military Head of State, Gen. Yakubu Gowon (rtd) has explained why he had to use military force to bring the Nigerian civil war of 1967 to an end.

He spoke yesterday in Jos the Plateau State capital while addressing the inaugural meeting of the peace building conference, put in place by the Institute of Governance and Peace.

He said: "Those who know me know that I have always been on the side of peaceful resolution of all conflicts. If you will recall as Head of State, I did all that was possible to secure a peaceful resolution of the Nigeria crises in the 2nd half of 1960. Unfortunately because of circumstances beyond my control, I had to use force to preserve the unity of our nation.

"I hereby declare my support for all peaceful means of resolving conflicts at all levels in the federation. I also support all peaceful means targeted at achieving peace in Jos and else where in the federation."

He added that he was delighted to be the chairman of the peace building conference and to be among eminent Nigerians assembled to find ways to arrest the cycle of violence in Jos Niger-Delta and Nigeria as a whole.

The conference which came a day after about 500 people lost their lives in an attack on Dogo Nahawa village by suspected Fulani herdsmen was attended by two other former President of Nigeria including Shehu Shagari and Chief Ernest Shonekan.

It was organised by the chief executive, Institute for Good Governance and Social Research (IGSR) Prof. Isawa Elaigu in collaboration with the United States Department for International Development (DFID) and supported by the Plateau State government.

Gowon said: "We are here basically to discuss the imperative of peace in Jos, the importance of peace in Nigeria as a whole, Jos and other trouble spots in Nigeria, the Niger Delta and eastern parts of Nigeria.

"The question is how did we get to where we are. There is too much insecurity of lives and properties in this country. We need to stop, analyze where we have come from, asses our strategies of moving forward and summon the political will to deal with it and forge ahead."

He said Plateau State is a microcosm of Nigeria and Jos has always been a metropolitan city with amiable weather and serene environment to calm ones nerve. This is why people of all ethnic, racial, religious and other divides have been leaving there in peace.

He pointed out that violence has now become a preferred technique of solving conflicts of inter-personal and inter-group relations.

"The serenity of Jos has evaporated while the cosmopolitan qualities stand threatened."

Shagari in his remarks said present leaders of this nation have failed to maintain the unity of the country fought for by past leaders.

Others who attended the conference include Senate President, David Mark, Chief Solomon Lar, Deputy Governor of Nassarawa, Bauchi State, representative of Sultan of Sokoto and Hon. Bistrus Kaze who represent the speaker of House of Representatives, Demaji Bankole and host of others.
Source: Daily Champion, 9^th March 2010.

31 civil war EXPLOSIVES EXCAVATED IN A'IBOM

By Agency Reporter, Published: Tuesday, 9 Mar 2010

VOLUNTARY deminers claimed on Tuesday that they have excavated 31 live bombs in a primary school in Eket Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State.

While 15 81mm mortar bombs were excavated in Ikot Ebiyan, 16 of the same type of bombs were dug out in a primary school in Ikot Okudomo Okon in Eket.

The Eket Local Government Chairman, Mr. Emmanuel Udoh was said to have directed the humanitarian de-miners to scan the Government Primary School in Ikot Ebiyan for explosives.

A statement signed by the chief media officer of the Humanitarian Demining Team, Mr. Emeka Uhuegbu revealed that the demining equipment indicated the presence of explosives at the primary school's premises.

It pointed out that the headmistress of the school was immediately directed to evacuate the pupils to enable the deminers to detonate the bombs.

Some of the schools, where explosives were found since the de-miners came into the state, were said to have been used by the federal government troops and Biafran soldiers during the civil war that ended in 1970.
Source: Punch, 9^th March 2010.

Agency Begins Destruction of Civil War Landmines

By Iniobong Ekponta

The Federal Government has contracted an agency to clear landmines left during the Civil War.

The agency, Inter-ministerial Committee on Humanitarian De-mining (ICHD), led by Dr. Bala Yakubu has assisted the Rivers State Government to rid the site of the ongoing construction of the ultra modern games village of the explosives.

The de-mining team has so far recovered 3,563 landmines and other explosive in Igwurrita Ale in Etche Local Government Area.

Governor Rotimi Amaechi appealed to them to rid the state of all explosive.

He said that would enable him take development to all nooks and crannies.

In Akwa Ibom, the team has recovered seven RPG 75mm bombs, 36 British made hand grenades and one locally made Ogbunigwe propellant device.

Besides, the team recovered 81mm mortar bombs in Enugu recently.

Other war relics recovered include a crashed jet fighter in Nsit Ubium Local Government Area .

Yakubu thanked Governor Godswill Akpabio for cooperating with the team and appealed to the people to report any area suspected to contain some explosive remnants of war.
Source: The Nation, 28^th Feb 2010.

Civil war not against Ndigbo — Gowon

ATIM IKPEME

FORTY years after the Nigerian Civil War former Head of State, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, has said the war was not  against  Ndigbo but against those that wanted to destroy the country.

Gowon made the claim on Tuesday at the special presentation of the TV series entitled,  "Nigeria: The Series" held at Terra Kulture, Victoria Island, Lagos.

He said, since the series is about telling the Nigerian story as it should be told it was pertinent to clear the air concerning the Nigerian civil war.

Gowon said the  war was not to fight Ndigbo but to find a better way to settle the rift in the country then.

"Nigeria as a country would have been a failure if the Igbo race had been allowed to leave the country Nigeria because they have contributed immensely to the growth and development of this country," he said.

Gowon said it was high time Nigerians believed in their country and supported its project.    

Also speaking at the event, former Vice-President, Alex Ekwueme described "Nigeria: The Series as an attempt by the producers to look at Nigeria from inside out.

He urged all to support and sponsor the project as it was telling the Nigerian story by Nigerians and with Nigerians in full participation.

Obi Asika, CEO Storm 360, executive producers of the series, said it would be tracking the development of Nigeria from 1860-1960, a time in the life of this country that many do not know about.

The series, when on air, will be run on the local television stations, international stations in America, Europe and Africa as the Nigerian story is a global one that connects a lot of people, places and continent.

Lloyd Weaver,  TV series producer from Serengeti Network said that, the series is essentially the victorious struggle for independence and how Nigerians found a singular unity of purpose to be where we are today as a country."

The 13-episode series will take viewers on a journey through the lives, events, stories ad controversies that shaped the birth of Nigeria and enlighten, inform, uplift and entertain Nigerians both at home and in diaspora.

Representing the Minister of Information and Communication, Prof Dora Akunyili, CEO Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON), Alhaji Garba Bello said the project was timely especially as the ministry is leading the rebrand Nigeria project.

She said for too long Nigerians have left others to tell our stories and that it is time to tell our story ourselves while commending Storm 360 and Serengeti Network for taking the lead in that area.
Source: Daily Champion, 12^th Feb 2010.

40 years after
• Igbo, Non-Igbo Relive Civil War Experiences

By IKENNA EMEWU (sunnewsonline.com)

How minutes fly into hours and days and later years is amazing. Many who saw and took part in the internecine and sanguinary war that tore the nation in shreds and still leaves its scars in the minds of a particular part of the country feel amazed that it is already 40 years since it wound to close.
Children born immediately after the war are already parents and have advanced into great minds and characters. But as the years add, the pains of the war fade because time is a healing balm.

Saturday Sun reasoned that 40 years is like a landmark on the war taking cognizance of the impacts it made in the history of the nation. From our interview sources, the history of Nigeria so far is one pivoted on that war of 30 months that cost the nation about two million lives and inflicted on its psyche an enduring gorge that has remained a borderline of disintegration of forces that should have united into a strong nation.

A participant on the Biafran side said: "A sharp knife was put at the middle of the nation's heart. The wound remains unhealed, but it has been covered by flesh over time giving the impression that it is no longer there. Every now and then, the sharp pains still remind the owner of the heart that the wound is still open and hurting. I feel for myself that I might not see the healing of the wound, which I witnessed its infliction. I participated in it. We saw extermination gazing us in the face and as human beings all we had left was to fight as means of survival. That we did and gallantly. I still remain proud that it was better and wiser we fought than fold our arms and watch the unrelenting mad crowd of killers reduce our number everyday because they were unrepentant."
There are thousands of the accounts of the war in every research step one takes. The books on our shelves, the sites on the World Wide Web (www) all narrate the war – causes, course and end. Regarding the prosecution and the methods applied, there could be variants according to the angle the narrator is coming from. But on the cause, the accounts agree that the January 15, 1966 coup brewed bad blood. That the July 1966 counter coup was worse and fallout of the earlier disturbances.

The earlier coup received ethnic coloration because of the pattern of killing. Most of the victims came from a part of the nation, while a part had no major victims. That the reprisal attack and decimation of soldiers of eastern Nigeria extraction by northern soldiers which started in Abeokuta on July 28, 1966 and culminated in another mass killing in Ikeja and later Kaduna the following day made the January coup a mere appetizer. While 15 persons were killed in January including the Prime Minister, Tafawa Balewa and Premier of Northern Region, Sir Ahmade Bello, 214 soldiers of South Eastern Nigeria fell to the firepower of the northern soldiers between July 28 and 29 in Abeokuta, Ikeja, Ibadan and Kaduna.

Of much interest in the January 15 coup is the role of Major Chukwuma Patrick Kaduna Nzeogwu who was reputed to be the leader of the five or nine majors that played the central role. The interest in Nzeogwu is the fact that he was an Igbo like most of the other majors. An account to disabuse the mind of history on the ethnic bias and dominance of the Igbo in the team said: "Igbo were the majority in the top ranks of the army then. So, it was not abnormal that the coupists were mainly Igbo soldiers."

Although Nzeogwu was of Igbo parents, he was born and bred in Kaduna and hence his name 'Kaduna'.
Max Siollun account from www.kwenu.com partly drawn from Frederick Forsyth book noted: "Some claim that Nzeogwu's participation in the January 1966 coup was part of a grand Igbo agenda to "dominate" the country. This argument overlooks the fact that Nzeogwu was an Igbo in name only. Nzeogwu was born in the Northern Region's capital of Kaduna to Igbo immigrant parents from the Mid-West Region. Such was his family's affinity to the city of Nzeogwu's birth that they and his military colleagues called him "Kaduna." When not in his army uniform he wore northern mufti and frequently referred to himself as "a northerner. Nzeogwu spoke fluent Hausa "like a native". In fact, his command of Hausa was better than his command of Igbo."

It was just two months after that raid in the army that led to the death of the Head of State Maj. Gen. JTU Aguiyi-Ironsi and the military governor of Western Nigeria, Col. Adekunle Fajuyi that the North staged the main blood cuddling massacre. If they felt pained about the assassination of their two prominent leaders in January, which was understandable, they also felt the killing of Ironsi, also a big shot from the East and over 200 others were not enough to assuage the feelings of revenge. They capped their vengeance with the mass genocide of close to 50,000 eastern civilians in the North between September and October 1966.
The killing, according to accounts, made over two million easterners residents in the North refugees. It was horrible reading historians who documented how headless bodies kept flowing down South from the North.

A wikipedia record noted that after the success of the counter coup that had 214 South East victims, the North had scored a vital point and had the feeling that they could go on with more killings at a time a man form their region was in charge, Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon. The resultant effect was the massacre of the Igbo in two months. The casualty list is put between 30,000 and 50,000.

"In the aftermath of the counter coup, there were pogroms in the North where soldiers, officers and civilians were killed. It was estimated that more than 30,000 out of the 13 million people of Igbo ethnic origin lost their lives. This led to a large influx of refugees from the North, about 1.8 million heading to the south east.
Several peace accords especially the one held at Aburi, Ghana (the Aburi Accord) collapsed and the shooting war followed. When attempts like the Aburi Accord failed, Ojukwu regarded it as both a failure by Gowon to keep to the spirit of the agreement, and lack of integrity on the side of Nigeria military government in the negotiations toward a united Nigeria."

The book by Ambassador Raph Uwechue on the war recounted that the real reason Biafra through Ojukwu felt it should act to protect itself was Gowon's indifference and silence in the face of the killing of tens of thousands of easterners. While the eastern Nigeria government doled out £1m for the rehabilitation of the army of about two million refugees flowing down from the North after the pogrom Gowon dropped mere paltry £300,000 pounds which he said meant about two shillings and some few pens for each refugee. "At a time the council of Obas of the West were sympathetic of the carnage, Gowon in his silence endorsed the act. Self -defence was the only thing left for the East, and therefore the declaration of a state where its people would be safe since the federal government approved of their massacre."

On July 6, 1967, the war proper started. It commenced with what Gowon had called police action. But it later took a serious dimension when blockades were introduced and full military troops moved into the East from the North. "Biafra had no alternative but to find a way to defend itself from the advancing federal troops. That involved setting up an army in a hurry", as another account, recalled which went to war to defend the territory. "By the time the Biafran troops pushed far into the West region few months into hostilities, Gowon realized that he had to do something pretty fast. At this time, he employed full and brute force of indiscriminate blockade and bombing of civilian territories after the consent of Russia and Britain supplied it airplanes to bomb Biafran territories".
What happened in the 30 months of the war is not a story for a volume of a book.

It would come in volumes. And about over 50 accounts in books and on the internet contacted have varying details of callous and savage butchering of civilians, the seizure and freezing of accounts, raiding of towns to massacre civilians, assembling of natives for random shooting, starving of children to death and many other gory details. In piecemeal, Nigeria kept dropping and shrinking the expanse of Biafra until about Christmas of 1969 when it became so glaring that Biafra had lost the struggle. On January 10, 1970, Ojukwu, the Biafran leader escaped with his family members to Ivory Coast while three days after, the war was declared ended. It was on January 15 that Maj. Gen, Phillip Effiong handed over the documents of surrender to Nigeria.

On October 7, 1967, the federal troops had captured the heart of the Biafra territory through Murtala Mohammed, the same man who headed the cleansing of the Nigeria Army of Igbo officers three months earlier in Abeokuta and Lagos. He saw himself in Asaba, an Igbo territory across the Niger. There he committed what chroniclers called "class atrocity against mankind." His acts there would only equal the bestial horror Pol Pot of Cambodia staged against his people as head of government. All the reports of the Asaba genocide say Mohammed had summoned Asaba natives to the town square by threat and hook and separated the women from men.

While one account say Mohammed lowered his target to boys of six years, another said it was 10 years age limit. But the agreement in all accounts was that in a swift, he had ordered his soldiers to shoot and kill 500 Asaba natives in less than one hour. As if that was not enough, he proceeded to Onitsha with the same men and killed 300 worshippers in an Apostolic Church.

During the sitting of the Justice Chukwudifu Oputa Commission of Human Rights Violations in 2001, it was reported that in Abuja, the then head of State Gen. Gowon apologized for the atrocities committed during the war, including the Asaba Massacre.

But in the same commission, General Officer Commanding (GOC) Two Division of the Army during the civil war, Maj. Gen. Ibrahim Haruna said that he had no regret for the Asaba massacre in which over 500 Igbo men were killed by his troops. Haruna's statement was on October 10.
Wikipedia documents also noted that whereas the Nigeria side suffered a casualty of 200,000 soldiers and civilians, Biafra lost one million lives (among whom are civilians mostly and soldiers) But there are other sources that hold the Biafran territory lost not less than 2.5m lives in all.

After the war
When the war was called off, the Federal Government of Nigeria declared that there was no victor and no vanquished. The statement was meant to persuade the parties to come together back as a nation and forge ahead.
According to Mr. Ernie Onwumere who Saturday Sun spoke with, the statement was more of rhetoric than any meaningful pronouncement from a government meant to re-unite a war torn nation and bandage the wounds. "After the statement, I don't think any Nigerian that values the truth can say for certain that there were decisive steps to go beyond the words in mending fences.

"What brought Nigeria into coup and counter coup was the gross abuse of office by public office holders. We fought a bloody war, returned to sanity, yet the evil that drove us into killing each other has worsened. The government gets worse everyday and provocations still abound that may still lead to war but for caution and the lingering bad memory of the events of 44 to 40 years ago. I don't think Nigeria gained from that war otherwise we would have been a different nation that respects the rights and dignity of citizens and value our unity. So, I can say the 40 years post-civil war are years of provocation and reminders that the nation has no plans to move forward to development."
Source: Sun, 30^{th January 2010.}

Nigerian Civil War: 40 Years After

By Sun News Publishing

It is forty years after the end of the Nigerian Civil War. The war, fought from 1967-1970,was between the breakaway Eastern Region (Biafra) and Nigeria. Millions of people perished in the conflict which was the most traumatic and devastating experience of the nation since regaining its independence from Britain in 1960.

At the end of hostilities on January 12, 1970, the then Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon, declared that there was no victor and no vanquished. But events immediately after the war, and later, have consistently proved beyond doubt that there was, indeed, a victor and a vanquished.

The way and manner the Gowon administration and subsequent administrations in Nigeria, whether military or civilian, have treated the Igbos in the Nigerian federation suggests that the claim that there was no vanquished in the war was mere lip service.
Gowon's post-war programme of 'Reconcilia- tion, Reconstruction and Rehabilitation' (3R's) was mere palliative.

It was not meant to relieve the Igbos of the hostilities and destruction occasioned by the most atrocious but avoidable human carnage in Africa. In the creation of states in Nigeria, the Igbos have been marginalized. Up till today, the South East geo-political zone is the only one with five states while others have six a piece and one zone, the North West, has seven states. Igbos are also short-changed in the distribution of Local Government Areas. Yet, nothing is being done by the Nigerian state to redress these anomalies. The property of Igbos confiscated under the guise of abandoned property, especially in Port Harcourt, was one of the haunting, unresolved issues of the Biafran war.

Forty years after the war, there has not been any concerted effort by the federal government to integrate the Igbos into the political, economic and social fabric of Nigeria. Politically and economically, the Igbos have been emasculated and rendered irrelevant in the nation's socio-economic power structure. A census of Nigerian heads of government illustrates this obvious historical fact.The indigenization programme that was executed after the war when Igbos had no financial muscle is a case in point. The policy to pay every Igbo twenty pounds irrespective of the amount he had in the bank before the war was a further demonstration of a policy to impoverish them.

Since the end of the war, there has been deliberate effort to exclude the Igbos from the commanding heights of the military, police, other para-military outfits, politics and the economy. Because of the war, there has been a conspiracy to deny the Igbos the presidency of Nigeria.

The Nigerian nation, which won the war, has not amply demonstrated equity and fairness in dealing with the various components that make up Nigeria, including those of the breakaway Biafra. Though, Nigeria won the battle, but the situation on the ground shows that it has not won the peace. The ghost of Biafra is still hovering over Nigeria. Forty long years after the war, the problems that led to the war are still extant and even multiplying with each passing day. Non-resolution of these problems have led to tension, militancy and restiveness in the polity. The frequent ethno-religious crises in Northern Nigeria and the militancy in the Niger Delta are veritable signposts and signals that all is not well with the entity called Nigeria. The existence of more separatist agitations are indications that our nationhood is daily being questioned.

It is now clear that the 1914 Lugardian experiment of founding a nation from many diverse and unwilling tribes has not been very successful. Its first baptism of fire was the Biafran war, which came barely six years after independence. So far, the nation has been faltering from one drift to another as exemplified by its absurdist power and revenue sharing formulae.
We cannot continue in this drift. The Nigerian nation should be conscious of the fact that no nation ever survives two civil wars. It is high time it started addressing all the issues that led to the Biafran war. The issues should never be overlooked. These include domination, marginalization, state and local government creation, religious fundamentalism, citizenship question, power sharing, resource control and true federalism. Glossing over them is like postponing the doomsday.

It is lamentable that Nigeria has not learnt any lessons from the war. We have not learnt enough lessons from the horrors of war and human losses. We lack fellow feeling and a sense of nationhood, and still operate from ethnic and religious prisms. It seems that our government does not value human lives, hence, frequent killings of Nigerians by fellow Nigerians in certain parts of Northern Nigeria under the guise of religion. Protection of lives has not become a priority. Our humanity is still under siege as lives and property remain insecure. Nigeria is behaving as if Biafra never existed. Continued silence on Biafra by subsequent Nigerian regimes does not help matters. The existence of the Movement for the Actualization of Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) indicates that there are still hangovers of the war. Nigerian children should be taught about the war. They need to know what caused it and what the government is doing to prevent another one.

It is unfortunate that Nigeria failed to tap the Biafran technological ingenuity that helped its resistance for three gruesome years of fratricidal war without external assistance. At the heat of the war, Biafrans invented weapons of mass destruction like Ogbunigwe and refined their own petroleum in make-shift refineries, among other innovative achievements. They built their own airport and radio communication systems.

No doubt, the remote cause of the war was economic. Without the prospect of oil in commercial quantity, the war would not have assumed the horrendous dimension it did. Forty years after the war, the oil bearing region is restive with militant agitations that border on resource control and self-determination. The oil factor is still a source of friction and doom to the nation. The way the Nigerian government prosecuted the war is part of our problem today as more power and resources are controlled by the highly unitarized federal government. The revenue sharing formula concentrates much revenue in the federal purse. All regimes since Gowon followed that pattern. It is still the same divide and rule tactics of yore that is in vogue. Yesterday, it was the Igbo; today it is the Niger Delta. Tomorrow, it might be another zone.

Since revenue sharing formula is at the root of our problem, it is high time this core issue was addressed. One way to do this is to go back to true federalism. We must free our federal system from unitary contagion inflicted upon it by the military. All indices point out that ours is not yet a nation. As we lament our failed hopes and squandered opportunities, we can still overcome these problems if we operate a truly federal system and allow each federating unit to control its resources and develop at its own pace. The new Nigeria of our dream must be built on justice and equity. Let us strive to do those things that can make us a real nation where patriotism reigns.
Source: Sun, 25th January 2010.

39-year secret: Untold story of Biafran chief pilot

BY LEO ALIGWO

Capt. August Okpe (rtd) is the ex-Biafran Chief Pilot. He also served the liquidated Nigeria Airways as Chief Pilot and later retired from active service as director Air Accident Investigation, Federal Ministry of Aviation. In this interview with Assistant Business Editor, LEO ALIGWO, Capt. Okpe takes a hard look at the events of the Nigeria/Biafra civil war. This is even as he prepares to launch his graphically illustrated 600-page book titled: The Last Flight My name is Captain August Okpe (rtd). I was born in Port Harcourt, I am from Imo State and I schooled at the Government College, Umuahia and several other institutions overseas, professional and academic. I am a widower and I have four grown-up children.

A Pilot Remembers the Air Force and the Biafran Air Attacks" thus focusing on the Nigeria/Biafra war. Please could you tell us what informed your decision to write this book at this particular time?

 and some other contributions by very able writers, but the Nigeria/Biafra air war has not been covered and of course people like me that were involved in military aviation have to do something; and I finally wrote it.

How many pages does the book consist of and how long did it take you to write this?

It is difficult to give you an exact period as to how long it took me to write this 600-page book, but the important thing is that it is necessary to get it written. It is for posterity; what happened in the air war aspect of the conflict must not be forgotten, from the historical perspective and every other thing considered. People are still writing about the Second World War uptil now. At times people just wake up and remember some controversial aspects of the Second World War. That is over 60 years after the war, people are still writing about it. How about the Nigeria/Biafra war? Never mind it was a sub-regional war, but it was quite intensive, and devastating; even it affected every part of the world. The whole world was somehow directly or indirectly involved in the war. The freedom fighters, the fortune seekers, those who have political interest, countries that wanted to get Nigeria to involve them in fighting for them or supply of weapons, materials and ordinance. So, it is important to put it in historical perspective, eventually posterity will want to know or hear about what happened in the air, how the airplanes were sourced, who were the end users, traditional and of course the pilots how they flew the aircraft and the maintenance, the Nigerian indigenous. Some of them were mercenaries amongst other things. Most of these were covered in this book.

What motivated you into joining the Nigerian Airforce as a pilot?

It was just interest. I like the military and I like flying, so why not the two of them for the price of one? When we were in Government College, Umuahia, we also had a cadet corps, we trained as cadets. Of course that gives you the best idea of the military as a strong force. A lot of my colleagues from Government College Umuahia ended up in the army. I was the only one in the Air Force. So, it was out of military and aviation professional interest.

Do you think the decision of the Biafran soldiers to confront the Federal troops in gun battle was justified?

It is difficult to talk about justification or no justification. The situation at that material time required certain response from either of the sides, and what took place probably was the answer, but I still believe what Wiston Churchill said that there is no such thing as inevitable war and if war comes, it is only as a failure of human judgement.

How did you feel following the devastating effect after each air battle by pilots on both Nigerian and Biafran sides?

s aggression in the air was quite minimal but we did our best. At least, it was kind of defensive in nature, there was a lot of devastation when you consider market places that were bombed and destroyed. Somehow it was felt that everywhere was a military target. So, there were no boundaries. The Biafran Air Force, as limited as it was in material things did its best, but it was still not enough. So, whenever I came back from each operation, normally I was always grateful, every soldier is always grateful to God because I have to be alive to be able to fly again the next day. Every soldier, after a battle, knows that he is safe and ready for another battle.

Did you at any point in time feel like withdrawing from the battle and quitting the Airforce because of the limited resources at the disposal of the Biafran troops and shedding of innocent blood?

s speech; stating in part that in the name of humanity Gowon should urge his troops to halt because everybody was worried that if we were surrendering, we were going to usher in large scale bloodletting. Most of the times, most of us were not thinking of giving up because doing so would mean total annihilation. Not that we were fighting just to wear Nigeria down but we were only hoping that some day somehow some body would say enough is enough. For some reason, that was what really happened after three years, we then gave up because there was no point continuing. By that time Nigeria itself was really happy that we gave up.Their happiness was not room had been created for them to come and overrun us and kill us, but they were happy that we had more or less given a reasonable account of ourselves in our struggle. We must consider that the federal troops were good sportsmen to recognize that we had given a good account of ourselves as good fighters. The least they could do is to let us be.

Considering the lean resources at the disposal of the Biafran troops, was there any external assistance or donation in terms of equipment that enabled you and your colleagues sustain the fighting for the three years the war lasted?

I am restricting myself to the air aspect of it, in terms of procurement, from the source to the end users, amongst other things. Definitely, the French Government helped in procuring things in a covert manner. There were also some well wishers and organizations, not necessarily countries, the Portuguese helped. The Portuguese enhanced and facilitated assistance to the Biafran side in this direction. A lot of this is covered in the book. So when you read the book, you find it. There is a chapter on the Portuguese influence, the other one about the procurement of the mini-guns from Sweden and others.

at the end of the war? Did you feel like going back to the aircraft cock pit?

But Biafra capitulated. The issue of continuing the war was out of the question. Gowon made that statement when he was addressing Nigerians and ex-Biafrans; that nobody should go bluffing and beating his chest to the effect that he has defeated the other person and that no person must not go with head bowed in shame that he lost the war. The important thing is that brothers were fighting brothers, and when they ended their conflict, they are friends and get back home as siblings as one should normally do. That is it.

was a message, clear-cut, unambiguous to all and sundry that nobody went taking advantage of the other party.

s decision to fly out of the country to Ivory Coast at the end of war as an act of cowardice?

t know. But his decision to leave the country was in the best interest of the people. I think so.

Generally, Ojukwu is a man you know very well. How would you describe him as a person and a soldier?

Well, he was my former Commander-in-Chief and he persevered in the war. He did his best. Every good leader has his good deeds and misdeeds. Some of them, it is only left for posterity to judge, some of his actions helped. He was quite tenacious. He had warned right from the beginning that it was not going to be easy.

t the case. The council of the elders, women societies, the whole lot of them, all moved in favour of secession and Ojukwu warned that the consequences were going to be dire.

t getting any cooperation from Lagos and they (Lagos) were reneging on all agreements.)

I am surprised that people said that Ojukwu talked us into the war. He was reluctant to set up Biafra the way he was directed, and he persevered even on personal issues and other things. He denied all sorts of stories and gossip about any Head of State, but we are not here to talk about that. You must also consider that at times, some of his town people tried to take advantage of him,some of which he resisted and some of which he unfortunately conceded to.

Do you think that the major purpose of the war was achieved, because Gowon said the war was fought to keep the nation one, but the prevailing peace and unity is still debatable?

t it? Nigeria is one. That was the purpose. It has been achieved.

But certain factors such as politics, ethnicity and religion have continued to divide us, hence people seem to have lost faith in the federal character. In other words, people are still saying we are not united.

t even believe that it is happening in your own country. Right now, I cannot tell you what will be the end result, but I think these things can be procedurally sorted out by the Federal Government in good time. It should try to sort out the differences so that people might not turn around and say I told you so, now look at what is happening.

As an experienced aircraft pilot and a veteran air accident investigator, do you think the problems posed by the agitations of the various ethnic militias could be solved through the use of arms?

t want breakfast last night, not several hours ago.

s problems and forget their own individual returns. They should not think of how it affects their own region but how it affects Nigeria. Just like late U.S. President John F. Kennedy who said "it is not what the country can do for you but what you can do for the country."

The Federal Government had in a bid to save lives and reward excellence and meritorious service, granted amnesty to ex-Biafran soldiers. Are you among the lucky beneficiaries?

After the war, the former armed forces personnel who participated in the war were incarcerated and then they had to get processed. There was a military tribunal after which some of us got various terms of imprisonment, some were recalled, some were either discharged or dismissed outright. So, virtually everybody has now received presidential pardon and were given a back pay i.e. right from 1970, and we are back on pension.

Presently, I hold a Nigerian Airforce identity card as a pensioner. I now receive monthly pension stipend from the Nigerian Airforce. So, we are happy about it.

What would you regard as your saddest period during the civil war?

t remember; every time it was sad anyway. There is no war that is a happy war.

What would you like to be remembered for, having served Nigeria in various capacities and retired from active service?

I would like to be remembered as a good officer of the Airforce, good pilot from both the Air Force, civil aviation point of view and a very good accident investigator, who investigated accidents for the Nigeria Airforce and the civil aviation during my tenure.

In your view as a veteran safety personnel and experienced air accident investigator, do you think that some of the accidents or air mishaps that occurred in the past in which you were involved in the investigation could have been prevented?

Most accidents are preventable. When you go through the accident investigation reports, you find that either it is human factor, environmental factor or the equipment factor that was responsible for the accident. These three headings are normally responsible for the accident. Quite a lot of them including the type of environment or a combination of a lot of them gave rise to most of the accidents. Environment, i.e. the type of communications equipment that are ground-based and also the human factor, i.e. where the pilot decides against all odds to press on with the flight when he should not do. These are some of the reasons. But we should be more cautious. It is not a very good thing for us to have so many accidents before we become more careful.

Do you think that Nigerian is now better positioned in the area of installation of flight safety equipment in her operational airports?

s airports to secure lives and property and the results are evident.

t turn your back on a course because, when something goes wrong, it could be your father or your uncle that may be badly affected. When an accident happens in a community like ours, Nigeria is just one little community, everybody is affected. So why can we not worry about it?

As a professional who has seen it all, how would you compare the military and Civil aviation?

t see how you can compare the military aviation complex with a civil aviation organization. So, there is no comparison.

Why do you say there is no comparison, having retired from the Airforce and crossed over to Nigeria Airways to pilot civil airplanes?

The commonality is that both the military passenger, troop carriers, jets, helicopters and other equipment available, where do you compare a fighter jet with a civil aircraft? There is no basis at all. But the important thing there is the need for safety. Since both use the airspace on a joint user programme. Most of our airports are joint user like Markurdi and, joint user airplanes and so, both parties must relate to each other in manner to ensure the safe and expeditious flow of air traffic and safety most importantly. We are not comparing them because they function differently. The airforce is for the military while the civil aviation is for passenger load carrying, hiring and reward and other things in contrast to military aviation. You have fighter jets and bombers and other aircraft types in the Airforce fleet of aircraft. They carry bombs, and other weapons. But in terms of administration both sides are corporate, whether it is uniformed organization or the other. They are run in the same manner except with different methodology and philosophy.

Considering your experience in Nigeria Airways, do you think the government has any business running an airline?

t really do too well because of the bureaucracy and many other things involved. It is just that government does not bribe; it does not give incentives, and it does not give bonus. Government is immovable. It has no face. It is just a system. Nigeria Airways cannot give unnecessary bonus to Travel Agents like the privately owned airlines. It is not a good thing because government cannot perform market economy.

In fact, government does not necessarily make profit, or must not be seen trying to do every thing it can to make profit, but it regulates things and gets the system working. It is the industrial complex in its system that feeds the government. You run an airline, you are busy making money and some permanent secretaries in the ministries are calling for that aircraft to be used for some thing else, and then you abandon the passengers. Do you think you want to go back to that airline at the end of the day? So there are so many reasons why government cannot easily run an airline. It is not easy, it is not fluent. Airlines now are so competitive, the worst is that the September 11, 2001 disaster in the U.S. had made things so expensive. For example, look at British Airways, the airline is doing remarkably well since it went private, it started to make profit, and I believe most of these private airlines make profit as well.

But Nigeria Airways was all the time going down. May be it was justified. Government can only create avenues and enhanced resources for the airlines to grow so that it will at the end benefit from it, just like government keeps the roads going. If government does not maintain the roads, the private vehicles will be spoilt and it goes back to the government because individuals are spending more money to import spare parts and other items. So the very thing government is avoiding is what it gains in not spending money to build the roads is more than lost in the revenue that comes from users. This is what we must look at.

Nigeria is 49. Do you think that in the area of aviation the government has done well?

s necessary because of the spate of accidents that were happening. It was so embarrassing and aviation accidents are so painful and expensive in human resources and material. The sooner we stopped it, the better for us. It even does damage to visitors, tourists and our travelers.

Even if they come in and the big jets are flying, they would rather prefer to go by road to the provinces. I am glad that it is now something of the past. So, on the safety aspect so far, I am happy because I am a safety expert.
Source: Daily Champion, 3^rd October 2009.

NIGERIA'S POST-CIVIL WAR RECONCILIATION

Imagine if the Israeli Prime Minister hired a former PLO fighter as his personal pilot.  Or if the president of the United States allowed a Russian to be his personal chauffeur at the height of the Cold War.  Sounds surreal?  Yet that is precisely what happened in Nigeria several decades ago when then head of state General Gowon hired an Igbo air force officer who formerly fought for Biafra as one of his presidential pilots.

Nigerians are an opinionated and self-critical bunch.  Dinner and beer parlour conversations among Nigerians almost inevitably turn to the country's underwhelming accomplishments and disastrous mismanagement.  Self-flagellation is a national obsession.  Despite our penchant for voicing our opinion when it comes to national failures, we suddenly become reticent when it comes to recognizing our national accomplishments.  This is puzzling as one of our most impressive accomplishments is a reconciliation that is unprecedented in modern history.

THE BROTHERS' WAR
Thursday January 15, 2009 marked the 39^th anniversary of the end of the Nigerian civil war.  *On that day in Dodan Barracks, a brutal 920-day civil war ended as former colleagues and combatants who had engaged each other in bitter warfare for over two and a half years embraced each other with unprecedented speech and warmth.  They ended a war wracked by famine, starving children, one million corpses, and violence and suffering of such an intensely grotesque magnitude that the words "pogrom" and "Kwashiorkor" were introduced into the standard Nigerian vocabulary.

NO NUREMBERG TRIALS, NO MEDALS
When the war ended, the Igbos grimly expected that their defeat would be followed by their wholesale massacre.  However the leader of the victorious army refused to proclaim victory, declared a general amnesty for all those who fought against him, invited members of the defeated side to join his administration, refused to conduct trials of, or execute the defeated, and refused to award medals to his own soldiers who had fought the war for years.  He even allowed some members of the enemy's army to join his own army.  For their part, Igbos quietly accepted their new fate in a united Nigeria, went back to their farms and businesses, and rebuilt their destroyed homes without any thoughts of sabotage or guerilla warfare.  All this happened without a United Nations resolution or peacekeeping force, international peace plans and conferences, or the protracted years long negotiations that it normally takes to resolve modern conflicts.  Nigerians decided for themselves that they had seen enough bloodshed and that they wanted a war free future for their children.

The war also ironically dissolved some of the negative stereotypes the combatants held about each other, and enhanced their mutual respect for each other.  Igbos won admiration from the federal side for the tenacity, iron will, and incredible improvisation with which they fought the war.  The federal side won the Igbos' respect for their magnanimity in victory.  Although pockets of bitterness remain (particularly over the emotional issue of properties abandoned by Igbos who fled for their safety, but which were illegally appropriated by other communities), it is undoubted that Nigeria's remarkable reconciliation is rivaled in the modern era only by black South Africans' forgiveness of their former oppressors.

AN ACHIEVEMENT MATCHED BY FEW OTHERS
42 years after United Nations resolutions called for them to cease hostilities, the Israelis and Arabs are still at each other's throats.  14 years after the Rwandan civil war, the government is still carrying out war crimes trials.  However, a remarkably sober pragmatism rose from the blood, fire and ashes of the Nigerian civil war.  It taught the combatants an unforgettable lesson in the evils of ethnic rivalry.  The bitter memory of the war means that Nigeria stumbles through and survives the sorts of crises that cause war and disintegration in other countries, such as June 12, Sharia, military coups, ethnic violence, and resource control. 

When an election was annulled in Algeria in 1991, it plunged Algeria into a decade long civil war in which up to 200,000 people died and terrorism linked to the event was exported to France.  When an election was annulled in Nigeria two years later, the winner of the election said he abhorred violence and urged the public to protest peacefully.  The former combatants now live, work, and intermarry with each other as if the war never happened.  Yet the civil war literature rarely discusses this most remarkable and impressive aspect of the war: the humanity with which Nigerians and Biafrans forgave each other, laid down their arms and got on with their lives.  Why was this remarkable reconciliation possible?

GENERAL GOWON: THE HEALER OF NIGERIAN WOUNDS
This reconciliation was possible due largely to one pivotal figure: the then Nigerian head of state Yakubu "Jack" Gowon.  It was he who insisted that Igbos should be treated as prodigal sons, rather than defeated foes.  He did so against the urgings of his own colleagues who wanted brutal punishment to be meted out to Igbos.  Even as the war raged, Gowon repeatedly declared that "We do not take the Igbos as our enemies; they are our brothers."

When he became head of state after the two bloody military coups of 1966, he initially seemed totally unsuitable for the job of ruling one of the most unruly populations on Earth.  He did not have the oratorical gifts of Ojukwu, the erudition of Awolowo, the stature of the Sardauna, or the imposing physicality of Aguiyi-Ironsi.  Yet he remained the only officer acceptable to the majority of the population and army. Why?

"JACK THE BOY SCOUT"
Gowon was a humble, soft-spoken infantry soldier who trained at the world's most elite military academy, yet had an oxymoronic distaste for unnecessary bloodshed.  It was as if his background and origin were deliberately woven from Nigeria's intricate ethnic matrix to ensure balance between the north and south.  Gowon was that rarest of Nigerians: acceptable to the north and south.  Gowon was from the north, yet practised the religion of the south.  He was a Nigerian PR man's dream.  His surname was even used as an acronym calling for Nigerian unity: "Go On With One Nigeria".  The bachelor son of a Methodist minister, he did not drink, smoke or curse.  He seemed so impossibly innocent and naïve that some foreign correspondents nicknamed him "Jack the Boy Scout".  The name was not fanciful. On one occasion he apologised to reporters for using the word "hell".

Former Biafran officer Ben Gbulie admitted that Gowon's forgiveness would probably not have been reciprocated had Biafra won the war.  Gbulie said "Probably if we had won the war, we would have shot him."  Scant attention has been paid to why Gowon chose this remarkable path of reconciliation. Many factors were at play. As a minister's son, he was a genuine Christian, and his humane approach to Igbos may also have been borne of the fact that at the time the crisis erupted, Gowon had an Igbo girlfriend named Edith Ike, whom he expected to marry (he eventually married a nurse named Victoria Zakari).  Gowon's mistake was that at the war's end, he did not realise that his job was done.  Had he stepped down at the end of the war, he would have maintained his prestige as Nigeria's Lincoln.

Commenting on Nigeria's reconciliation, a European observed that:

"when history takes a longer view of Nigeria's war it will be shown that while the black man has little to teach us about making war he has a real contribution to offer in making peace." (St Jorre – The Brothers' War)

*The official members of the Biafran and federal delegations who attended the formal war ending ceremony at Dodan Barracks on January 15, 1970 were:

Biafran Delegation:–

• Major-General Phillip Effiong – Officer Administering the Republic of Biafra
• Sir Louis Mbafeno – Chief Justice of Biafra
• Matthew Mbu – Biafran Foreign Minister
• Brigadier Patrick Amadi – Biafran Army
• Colonel Patrick Anwunah – Chief of Logistics and Principal Staff Officer to Ojukwu
• Colonel David Ogunewe – Military Adviser to Ojukwu
• Patrick Okeke – Inspector-General of Biafran Police

Federal Military Government Delegation:-

• Major-General Yakubu Gowon – Nigerian Head of State
• Obafemi Awolowo – Deputy Chairman, Supreme Military Council
• Brigadier Emmanuel Ekpo – Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters
• Brigadier Hassan Katsina – Chief of Staff, Nigerian Army
• Brigadier Emmanuel Ikwue – Chief of Air Staff
• Rear-Admiral Joseph Wey – Chief of Naval Staff
• Dr Taslim Elias – Attorney-General
• H.E.A. Ejueyitchie – Secretary to the Federal Military Government
• Anthony Enahoro – Commissioner for Information
• The Military Governors of the 12 states: , Ukpabi Asika, Audu Bako, David Bamigboye, Alfred Diete-Spiff, Jacob Esuene, Usman Faruk, Joseph Gomwalk, Mobolaji Johnson, Abba Kyari, Samuel Ogbemudia, Oluwole Rotimi, Musa Usman.

maxsiollun@yahoo.com

http://maxsiollun.wordpress.com/

Back

How Civil War lessons can benefit all Nigerians,
 by Ralph Uwechue

Chief Ralph Uwechue, then only 33 years old, had just been posted as Nigerian envoy to France when the 1966 coup took place. When the Civil War started, he hooked up with the Biafran side only to shift to the Federal side because of his strong belief in Nigeria's unity. Currently the President-General-elect of the apex Igbo socio-cultural organization, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Uwechue who attended the famous St. John's College, Kaduna, Major Kaduna Nzeogwu's alma mater, said as a Nigerian patriot, he only joined to the rebel cause because of the need for Igbo to protect themselves within Nigeria but backed out when he realised that Ojukwu wanted full independence. He spoke to HENDRIX OLIOMOGBE in Ogwashi-Ukwu, Delta State. Excerpts:

THIRTY-NINE years after the Nigerian civil war, what do you have to say about the conflict?

I was already in France, Paris when the war started. I opened our Embassy there. Nigeria and France had problems in 1960 when we had our independence over the testing of Atomic Bomb in what was then known as the Algerian Sahara. Nigeria didn't like the idea and so we broke off diplomatic relations. Then French President Charles de Gaulle didn't like the way we treated him. For nearly six years, there was no relation between Nigeria and France. When the matter was settled in 1966, I was the one sent to go and open our Embassy there. I was just 33 at the time.

You were close to Major Kaduna Nzeogwu, the main plotter of the January 1966 coup. How did you receive the news of the coup?

Most Nigerians just like me heard it on the radio. Coups are plotted by very few persons. One of Nzeogwu's closest friends, Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo, the former President, was not even aware though he was outside the country when it happened. We received it as something new. That was the first coup in Nigeria. We have had coups elsewhere. In Pakistan, Gen. Ayub Khan took over and Abdel Nasser, in Egypt.

They were idealistic young men who thought that they could do certain things and change the image of our country. Unfortunately, the coup was not bloodless. That was an aspect that complicated matters. It brought the complications that eventually led to the revenge killings. The January coup was on the 15 and six months later, there was another coup.

Gen. Aguiyi Ironsi who was the Head of the Army was invited by the remnant of Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa administration to help steady the nation. He was not part of the coup but was officially invited to take over government as Head of State. It was Ironsi who helped to put down the coup because senior officers were not involved. Ojukwu was in Kano commanding the Fourth Battalion. He didn't join the coup. So also was Col. Arthur Unegbe, the Quarter Master General who was in charge of the armoury. When they came to ask for the keys to the armoury so that they could arm their boys, he refused and was shot dead in Lagos. They were denied access to the armoury and therefore the means of executing the coup in the supremely strategic Lagos. If you have not taken the capital of a country, you have not succeeded. The following day, Ironsi had access to the armoury and armed his boys to ensure that the coup failed. It was Igbo officers who actually stopped the coup.

The problems that led to the coup are still there...
The truth of the matter is that the development of any nation is evolutionary. The boys had their own ideas. Eventually, confusion came and we had the threats of secession from Biafra and the civil war. Luckily, Nigeria remained intact but at a very heavy cost to lives. Some two million people mainly Biafran children died. It is a lesson that we have learnt. Nobody will wish another such fracas for Nigeria.

However, on the problems that the young men saw and thought that they could resolve through military intervention, some of them have over time been tackled. Obviously many of such problems remain. This is natural. As a country evolves, people come up with ideas to help solve the problems they meet. Some are solved but not all of them unless the country is not evolving and growing.

Comment on the view that Igbo officers from the East conspired to torpedo the putsch because Nzeogwu was an Igbo man from the West.

It is not a question of Igbo from across the Niger and Nzeogwu being from the other side. There were non-Igbo who participated in the coup. It was the middle ranking officers who carried out the coup. The senior ones stopped it. Col. Conrad Nwawo is from Onicha-Olona, Delta State. It was he who was sent to Kaduna to go and bring Nzeogwu down to Lagos. They were against the coup. He is not from across the Niger. It has nothing to do with which side of the river the Igbo belonged to. It was a question of young idealistic officers versus the older ones who had other views.

Though Nzeogwu was buried with full military honours but some believe that as a patriot, he has not been fully honoured...
The fact that Gen. Yakubu Gowon who was the Head of State then decided to bury him with full military honours, is already a recognition that this gentleman was a Nigerian and a great nationalist. That in itself is an acknowledgement of the fact that Nzeogwu was a true Nigerian and a nationalist.

What kind of a man was Nzeogwu?
I was with him in college. We were students together for four years and I taught in that school for another two years, so I was with him for six years before he left and joined the army.

Nzeogwu was an idealist, a very intelligent young man at the time. If you use the word 'pure' in terms of attachment to principles, he was one such person. They were in the mould of people like Nasser who were idealistic and pan-African and wanted to bring about change through military means, the same changes that politicians wanted but through other means. He was somebody that those who knew him respected. Obasanjo said that much in his writings. When his mother died a few years ago, as President, he came all the way to Okpanam for the burial.

During the war, you were Nigeria Ambassador to France. You joined Biafra and later back-pedaled to the Federal side. Why the changes?
It is not a question of going to the Biafra side and back. I opened the Nigerian Embassy in Paris. The difficulties that arose which later led to the Civil War occurred. I personally felt that the Federal Government at the time under Gowon-I do not hold the government responsible for what happened that provoked the war- did not do enough to reassure Igbo people about their safety and security in Nigeria after the successive massacres of Ndigbo in the North and a tearful exodus of Igbo men and women with children on their backs running. Many people felt that the Federal Government should have come in and admit that something has gone wrong. The government should have taken over to see how it could repair it. That did not happen, I remember that Yoruba Obas came to Enugu. Some of them were crying at the airport when they saw what happened. They parted with the little money they had. The Federal Government did not do enough to reassure the survivors that it was taking enough to see their welfare was protected.

Like Nzeogwu, I am pan - Nigerian and African. What happened in Paris was that why the Igbo were under attack I felt that they needed support and defence to save the lives of those who were alive. I joined Ojukwu in helping to organise support for them but I made it clear from the word go that I did not believe in secession as the answer to the problems facing Igbo in Nigeria just like Nzeogwu who died at Nsukka on the Biafran side but he was a pan- Nigerian. That was why Gowon did what he did for Nzeogwu. I never believed in the Biafran cause but if you are being killed, you will be forced to fight and nobody should have any apology for that. The important thing is that people like us did not believe in secession and that was made clear to Ojukwu.

I met Ojukwu for the first time in 1976, six years after the civil war at Charles de Gaulle Airport. He came from Ivory Coast and I happened to be at the airport at the time. He was shopping but I recognised him from his pictures. Immediately I shouted "Emeka", he asked who I was. I told him I was Raph and we embraced and went out to a restaurant for lunch. What happened in Paris was that I felt that Igbo needed to defend themselves from attack. My support was conditional: 'within Nigeria, yes, secession no.'

We should use the experience of the civil war to readjust the Nigerian Constitution. What we got at independence was something arranged by the British. Our people took over the Nigerian structure from the British and the founding fathers were specific on what they wanted: a federation. When you talk of a federation it means that the corporate units constitute the base that then concede to the apex what they want it to do. The base of the federation is the unit that makes it up. That was what was agreed.

Since then other things had happened because of military intervention and socialization. In my book, Reflections on the Nigerian Civil War, in 1968 I recommended for Nigeria what I called an elastic federal union of six states, 24 years ahead of the concept of six geopolitical zones. In fact, the states coincided largely with the six zones. I mentioned North-West, North-East, North-Central, South-West, South-East and South-Central. What I called South-Central is South-South.

From your account, you got disillusioned with the Biafran Cause and so crossed over to the Federal side...
What happened is simple. Basically, I do not believe in secession. I had to help because the Igbo were under attack. The condition was that we should settle within Nigeria. We had a chain of peace talks. When they were collapsing, some of us knew that Ojukwu was insisting too much on sovereignty, we believe that what the Igbo was lacking in Nigeria was not sovereignty but security. Any arrangement that gave them and other ethnic groups security was good enough. I specifically mentioned the agreement we reached at Aburi in Ghana, which gave autonomy to the various regions. I felt that it was good enough as it will keep Nigeria together.

Now does the Igbo man have the security that he needs in Nigeria especially in the North where there are regular religious crises?
When there is crisis, a lot of people suffer. Those in the theatre of crisis always pay a price. There are more Igbo in other parts of Nigeria than other ethnic groups in Igbo land. That is a fact. So, when there is an explosion, it is those in the vicinity of the explosion that suffer. What we are saying really is that security in Nigeria should be for every Nigerian and not just for Igbo people alone. There is no reason to start slaughtering your neighbours if there is a minor disagreement. The government should come in and ensure that no one takes law into his hands especially taking peoples' lives whether it is over religious or political disagreement.

How do you view a conspiracy theory that holds that Ojukwu deliberately set up Nzeogwu at the war front because he saw him as a traitor?
I don't think so. You don't have people in any family or group having an identical view on every issue. Each person, military or otherwise has his or her own view. There are other people like Col. Banjo and co who had problems with Ojukwu and paid with their lives.

As an Igbo man who grew up in the North, how did you feel about the mass killing of your kinsmen in the North during the 1966 pogrom?
Wherever you find crisis involving the killing of human beings, any normal person will feel distressed. We are going through the process of nation building; different ethnic groups with different traditions, different ways of thinking. These groups are being fused together and in the process of fusion, you have friction, some of which become violent. We hope that with time we all will be learning from each mistake that has occurred in the process of nation building.

Nigeria is still in the process of nation building and we hope that with time as we learn progressively from experiences and mistakes that we have made, we will continue to move closer and closer to what will be a save and prosperous country for everybody. Igbo as a nation, Yoruba as a nation, Ijaw as a nation, Hausa/Fulani as a nation: every Nigerian should feel happy and save within the Nigerian union. That should be the ultimate objective. We talk a lot about Nigeria unity, that is important but the easiest way to guarantee unity is to carry out programmes and policies that encourage people to feel happy that they are part of the group. Unity becomes automatic when people feel happy to associate and belong. Government at any giving time must ensure that every ethnic unit in Nigeria has cause to feel happy within the Federal union.

That takes us to the agitation by the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign States of Biafra (MASSOB)...
MASSOB is like Chief Ganiyu Adams-led Oodua People's Congress (OPC). When the people have a problem confronting them, different members of that community have different views on how to solve the problem. In the case of MASSOB, if they break the law of the land, then obviously they are wrong but if they have views that will not coincide with other peoples' views but are not violent and do not carry arms to cause confusion, what you do is to note what they are saying.

What they are trying to achieve for Igbo can be achieved without breaking away from Nigeria. You have to balance the need for government to be in control with the need for individuals to have enough freedom to express their views as long as they do not express these views with violence and the expression of these views does not break any known law of the land. You must balance the need to keep Nigeria together and have peace with the need to allow people free expression. If they have taken no step to break the laws of the land, then, you must respect their views. It is where they take up arms that you take up arms to stop them. They are free to think the way they want to think and that is what freedom is all about.

What do you think is the problem confronting Ndigbo in Nigeria today?
The problem confronting Ndigbo as a unit is like the problem confronting other units in Nigeria because most groups keep talking of marginalisation. What the Igbo require is to identify what their needs are and to walk together in harmony with other ethnic units to achieve what is good for Ndigbo. Fusion is taking place and it is important that all the various units respect the rights of the other units. Igbo need to identify their interests just like any other ethnic nationality need to do the same. They should negotiate and move together to ensure that what is best for each unit is achieved.

Yesterday, January 15 was the anniversary of the end of the Nigeria Civil War. Have the issues surrounding the war been resolved?
Civil war is not a good experience in the life of any nation. One of the causes was the question of emancipation of slaves, President Abraham Lincoln said 'stop this thing' but the Southerners said 'no.' It was one of the major planks on which the American civil war was based. But today, a black, an African-American, Barrack Obama is the President-elect of the United States of America. What we must do is to know that the civil war is one of the processes- a bad experience for Nigeria of course-of fusing people who have different views and tradition just like in America. With time, we are going to have more understanding.

One of the things that impressed me the other day when I was going through statistics is the level of inter-ethnic marriage. A lot of people marry across ethnic lines. With time, our people will be half-Yoruba/half-Igbo, half-Hausa/ half -Yoruba, half-Igbo/half-Urhobo, etc. The biggest fusion is in this kind of process. In a history book, you read something in two sentences but that something you read in two sentences took about fifty years to happen. It is natural to be impatient with the slow progress being made towards nation building but the end result will justify the time it took to consolidate the Nigerian nation.

As the President-General Elect of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, what do you have in stock for Ndigbo?
You cannot be a good member of your town if you are a bad son or daughter of your family. If your are a thief and a liar within the family you won't be a good member of the town and if you are not a good member of your town you cannot be a good member of your ethnic group, if you are not a good member of your ethnic group, you cannot be a good Nigerian. The same goes with being a good African and charity begins at home, if at the source we are able to develop an ethos that produces good citizens automatically; we are helping to build Nigeria and Africa.

My hope is that with the cooperation of everybody, we will be able to help Ndigbo revive their cultural heritage. Ohanaeze is not a political organization. It is a socio-cultural organization and we intend to invest our time and effort in helping to revive the Igbo language, which some people are losing now because of where children are being brought up outside Igbo land. We will dig into our culture and revive it.

Obviously, Ndigbo besides serving their tradition and culture are part of the world and have economic and political interests. Where we notice that there is need to give out rice, we will encourage Ndigbo who are involved in economic and political activities to be good citizens of their country. Ohanaeze cannot be partisan in terms of politics, you have people belonging to the various political parties, and they all have the responsibility of Ohanaeze. We do not tell people what party to join and so fort, but we are interested in every Igbo person that is doing the right thing. If they go into politics or business, they should not go in there as thieves and be a disgrace to the community, both to the Igbo nation and to Nigeria in this case. So, our job will be to help revive and improve upon whatever successes that have been achieved by our predecessors in the traditional and cultural fields of Ndigbo. You know Prof. Chinua Achebe will be honoured soon; all these have to do with getting our people to know the achievements of their sons and daughters. We intend to encourage more of that especially the young ones to be better citizens of the Igbo nation and of their country Nigeria.

Some Igbo in Rivers State and the Anioma area of Delta State believe that they are not benefiting much from the Igbo union. How do you intend to come into this issue?
First of all, the very fact that somebody from Anioma which is the Igbo speaking part of Delta state has been elected by the entire Igbo nation to lead the Ohanaeze Ndigbo organisation should put paid to any thinking that the Igbo across the Niger have anything against us on this side participating in their activities. You cannot be against a people and you ask them to come and lead you. We have been told, you know my election stems from a slot given to Anioma people, Ndigbo decided that this time the President-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo must come from Anioma and Anioma people came together and asked me to be the candidate and I was elected by all Ndigbo. So, my feeling is that whoever has that kind of view that the others across the river didn't pay us enough attention should now realise that if that didn't happen in the past, that today attention is being paid particularly in the choice of Anioma to produce the leadership of the apex Igbo organization world-wide.

How do you see the present state of affairs in the country with President Yar'Adua at the helm of affairs?
President Yar'Adua has just been confirmed by the Supreme Court as duly elected President. He has had about a year and half in power and he has taken certain steps to put his stamp on the governance of Nigeria. The first major reshuffle he did is only a matter of weeks ago and if you look at the caliber of people he has put in there, you feel that he is trying to bring about improvement. So, I think we need to give him time to organise himself and his government.

Quote
I do not believe in secession. I had to help because the Igbo were under attack. The condition was that we should settle within Nigeria. We had a chain of peace talks. When they were collapsing, some of us knew that Ojukwu was insisting too much on sovereignty, we believe that what the Igbo was lacking in Nigeria was not sovereignty but security. Any arrangement that gave them and other ethnic groups security was good enough. I specifically mentioned the agreement we reached at Aburi in Ghana, which gave autonomy to the various regions. I felt that it was good enough as it will keep Nigeria together.
Source: The Guardian, 16^{th January 2009.}

MASSOB calls for release of members

Abakaliki—Mr Alphonsus Ajuka, Regional Administrator, Movement for Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), wants the Federal Government to release 2,000 of its members currently in prison custody.

Ajuka further appealed to the international community to put pressure on the government to ensure their release.

He made the appeal at Onueke, Ezza South Local Government Area of Ebonyi while addressing MASSOB members.

Ajuka regretted that in spite of the non-violent posture of MASSOB, its members were being persecuted by agents of the government.

The administrator said that MASSOB was floated in 1999 to start a non-violent protest to bring to the attention of the international community the deprivation of the people of the former Eastern Region.
Source: Vanguard, 13^{th June 2008.}

Uwazurike has betrayed MASSOB — MacDavies
Written by Vincent Ujumadu

AWKA— A MAJOR crisis appears to have engulfed the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), with the erstwhile director of information of the Movement, Comrade David Mac Davies alleging yesterday that MASSOB leader, Chief Ralph Uwazurike has betrayed the struggle.

Davies, who announced his resignation from the Movement, accused Uwazurike of having been compromised by the Federal Government, which, he said, made the leader to abandon about 130 members of MASSOB currently languishing in detention.

It was however gathered that Davies stand might not be unconnected with the recent reorganisation in the Movement which led to the dropping of many former officials, including provincial administrators.
According to Davies, it was due to the ugly development in the Movement that contributed to non observance of the Biafra Day on May 30 this year which, he noted, was the first time such a thing happened since the Aba declaration many years ago.

"I am no longer part of what Uwazurike is doing. I have resigned from the Movement and asked our former members to stop associating with the group. He compromised this struggle by telling the Federal Government that he was going to bury his mother and since then, he has been enjoying himself at home while over 130 of our members are still in detention. How can we continue with the struggle when our leader has compromised?"

According to him, the 78 members of MASSOB who are facing trial in an Enugu court for alleged treason should have realised that the dance steps have changed, adding that they ought to have remained at home on May 30.
He recalled that about 2000 people have lost their lives since the struggle began, noting that from what is happening, it would appear that they died for nothing.

But the new administrator of MASSOB for Onitsha, Mrs. Uba Ezeonu said she was not aware of any betrayal by Uwazurike, regretting a situation whereby some people were going about vilifying the MASSOB leader.
She explained that she is in constant contact with the MASSOB, insisting that the struggle is still on course.
Source: Vanguard, 6^{th June 2008.}

Rumble in MASSOB
From GEOFFREY ANYANWU, Awka

Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) suffered a major setback on Thursday when its acting Director of Information, David Mac Davis, announced his resignation and membership of the organization.
Mac Davis said he was resigning because MASSOB leader, Chief Ralph Uwazuruike, compromised the struggle and betrayed the group.

He specifically accused Uwazuruike of fraternizing with the Federal Government, which enabled him to get bail, while abandoning over 130 members of the group being detained by the law enforcement agencies.

Mac Davis told newsmen that the 78 members of MASSOB, who were charged in Enugu with treason, should not have participated in the rally, in the first instance, because he had earlier directed that everyone sat back in their homes and steered clear of MASSOB activities.
He said: "I am no longer part of what Uwazuruike is doing. I have resigned and I have asked members to lay low for now until further notice.

I am now the former director of information. He compromised the struggle by telling the Federal Government of Nigeria that he was going to bury his mother. Now he has gone home to enjoy himself, while over 130 of us are still in detention. My boss, the former director of information, Uchenna Madu, is still in police custody and the man (Uwazuruike) doesn't care about that. How do you expect us to continue when our leader has compromised?

"Those who are being charged with treason in Enugu shouldn't have embarked on any rally or meeting, because I had earlier directed that they should stay in their homes and forget about the anniversary. Though it is an unfortunate development, I must once again state that Chief Uwazuruike has abandoned us and betrayed the struggle.

"I wish to recall those who lost their lives, about 2,000 people and those who are languishing in prison custody. But the man is at home enjoying himself. I will not make any move at ensuring their release because he could not release those that were in jail with him."
In a swift reaction to Mac Davis's allegation, the MASSOB Administrator in Onitsha, Mrs. Uba Ezeonu, said neither her nor her people were aware of any betrayal by Uwazuruike whom, she said, remained the great leader for the group.

Mrs. Ezeonu berated those she described as paid agents who went about peddling rumours of alleged betrayal by the MASSOB leader, stressing, "no matter how hard they try, the struggle will continue."
She said, "I am not aware of any betrayal by Uwazuruike. What Mac Davis is saying is not true. There are some opposition people who are being paid to run the movement down. Some people have been going about peddling rumours of crisis and betrayal. I have just finished speaking with Uwazuruike and the MASSOB struggle is still on course. Presently, I am in the hospital with my husband who has been ill for some time now."
Source: Sun, 6^{th June 2008.}

MASSOB Releases List of Slain Members
From Charles Onyekamuo in Onitsha

Movement for Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), yesterday in Onitsha, Anambra State, made public, its list of about 2,020 members killed by agents of the state between 1999 and 2008, for agitating for actualisation of Biafra.
In a joint press conference addressed by Comrade Edison Samuel, MASSOB's Regional Administrator for Awka, and Onitsha, and Nze Christian Umeaka, its regional administrator for Nnewi, all in Anambra State, MASSOB said the compendium of the dead in which the names, addresses, date and year of death of each member was compiled showed that in Okigwe Zone, Imo State, 263 people were killed, while the casualties in Aba/owerri, Enugu/Abakaliki axis of the South-east stood at 448 and 198 respectively.
The organisation said it lost 1044 members in the "Onitsha Massacre of 2006/2007," while 67 others were killed in different communities in Abia north during the period under review.
MASSOB said most of these killings were extra-judicial, while the massacre and detention of its members across the country have continued unabated.
The group plans a peaceful demonstration march, which will begin from Okigwe through Enugu down to Onitsha between May 22 and 30, 2008, in commemoration of the 41st anniversary of the declaration of the defunct Republic of Biafra.
Source: This Day, 13^{th May 2008.}

MASSOB decries persecution of members
Written by Enyim Enyim

Ebonyi— The Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) yesterday called for the release of its members in prisons across the country.

Leaders of the organisation made the call at a news conference at Onueke, Ezza South Local Government Area of Ebonyi, alleging that their members were being discriminated against in various parts of Nigeria.

Mr Chuks Eze, Ezikwo Regional Information Director of the organisation, who spoke on behalf of others, alleged that more than 1,000 MASSOB members were languishing in prisons.

Eze said the hardship inflicted on its members would not deter the organisation from pursuing "a noble cause".
He said MASSOB planned to hold a peaceful protest march that would start at Okwe, Okigwe, in Imo and cover major cities in the South-East region to draw attention to the maltreatment of its members.
Source: Vanguard, 13^{th May 2008.}

Settling questions in Nigerian history
By Edwin Madunagu

NOWADAYS, almost each time I read a commentary by a Nigerian media commentator on an aspect of Nigerian history, I become depressed. Before now, I used to be merely irritated. But now the irritation has transformed into depression. The source of my irritation used to be the confusion of names, places and dates, and, of course, sequence of events. This I used to attribute to impatience, carelessness or laziness on the part of new-generation commentators and analysts. The explanation may be correct. But how do I explain this strong feeling that, going by media commentaries, no question in Nigeria's recent history appears to be settled - in terms of facts. Interpretations can last forever.

True, history is not mathematics where, once a matter is settled by proof (step-by-step logical argument erected on a small number of axioms), it is settled forever. Questions in history, society and law are often settled on the basis of "balance of evidence". The unstated assumption here is that the settled questions may be overturned in the future. Even then, history would be meaningless if at no point in time can we say that certain major questions have been settled, transformed, or reduced to simpler questions. More concretely, it would be unfortunate if, for instance, key questions on the events of (1966-1970) are still being formulated the same way they were formulated in the early 1970s - the passage of time, testimonies of direct partisans, expansion of knowledge and the appearance of hundreds of books and tonnnes of publications notwithstanding.

My thesis here is that most of the key questions still being asked on the (1966-1970) crisis have either been answered completely, or transformed, or reduced to simpler questions. The questions include: Was the January 1966 coup an Igbo coup? Who was the leader of the January coup? Was the July 1966 coup a revenge coup? Was General Aguiyi-Ironsi involved in the January coup? Was Colonel Victor Banjo involved in the January coup? Why was Banjo arrested and detained by Ironsi? Was General Yakubu Gowon involved in the July coup? Were the leaders of the January coup in support of Biafra's secession? Was there a plot to overthrow the Biafran regime in September 1967?

I would like to state that what follows is not an account of the Nigerian crisis (1966-1970). I am also not making any evaluation, or taking positions. This is simple an attempt to answer the questions raised above or reduce them to simpler questions. Let us begin by settling a rather simple question: Should the (1967-1970) armed conflict be called the Nigerian Civil War or the Nigeria-Biafra War? To answer this question you may adopt the legal perspective, or the historical perspective. For the legal perspective: A delegation of the Biafran regime, led by Major-General Phillip Effiong, surrendered to General Gowon in Dodan Barracks, Lagos, on January 15, 1970. The officers asked for "deployment". This was a clear statement that the conflict was a rebellion, a civil war. From here it follows, for instance, that Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu was a dismissed Lieutenant Colonel of the Nigerian Army until this dismissal was converted to retirement.

If the historical perspective is adopted, the following facts come out and become prominent: The Eastern Region of Nigeria was declared the Republic of Biafra on May 30, 1967 on the basis of the resolution passed by the joint meeting of the Consultative Assembly and Leaders of Thought on May 26, 1967. At the point of that declaration, the regime in Eastern Region was in total control of the region. Subsequently, Biafra was recognised by four independent countries - all members of the United Nations. Biafra fought a war with Nigeria for 30 months before the former collapsed. During that war, the Biafran leader, Chukwuemeka Ojukwu, was made a four-star general by the Executive Council of the Republic of Biafra. He retained that title till the end of the conflict, until Biafra ceased to exist. Ojukwu was therefore a General of the Biafran Army. Nothing can wipe out these historical facts.

January 1966 coup: The following points have been established: The core of the plotters was made up almost exclusively of Igbo-speaking army officers. The geopolitical coverage of the operations and the pattern of casualties suggest that the coup had Igbo ethnic motivations. But the coup leaders denied ethnic motivation and argued that the operation assumed those patterns because of mistakes committed by other leaders. Only an open trial could have begun the process of resolving the matter. But there was no trial. General Ironsi was not part of the plan, but as head of the army, he "collected" power from the confusion that characterised the execution of the coup. Colonel Victor Banjo was not part of the coup. But he was not trusted by Ironsi and the army officers close to him. On account of pressures and counter-pressure to which he was subjected, Ironsi could not put the coup plotters on trial, or otherwise punish them beyond putting them in detention.

Accounts of the January 1966 coup so far published implicitly identified Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu as the leader. But in one of the newspaper interviews he granted several years ago (and I think in his book, Because I am involved), Ojukwu insisted that Major Ifeajuna was the leader: Nzeogwu took over from Kaduna when he saw that the operation was failing, or had failed, in Lagos. Ifeajuna wrote a long account of the operation, but this has never been published in book form. The coup leaders, in their accounts, maintained that they intended to restructure the country and end corruption, tribalism and nepotism. At least one of them said in an interview that they intended to release Chief Obafemi Awolowo from prison and make him Head of State. It is clear that most of them did not support secession; and when war broke out and they were released from prison, they planned to complete the project they started on January 15, 1966. They failed again.

July 1966 coup: General Yakubu Gowon was not part of the plan or execution. As Chief of Army Staff under General Ironsi, he learnt of the operation when it had already started. Presented with a fait accompli, he pleaded that the operation should be bloodless. He reminded the coup operators that too much blood had already been shed in the country. Like General Ironsi, General Gowon "collected" power from the confusion that characterised the operation in which General Danjuma played a decisive role. Danjuma arrested Ironsi, neutralised his regime, charged him, and dismissed his plea of innocence. In his February 2008 interview in The Guardian, Danjuma confirmed that the July 1966 coup was a "revenge" coup. General Adeyinka Adebayo's attempt to dispute this characterisation is, at best, irritating. The man who arrested and charged Ironsi - an act which according to Lindsay Barrett, signaled the completion of the coup - says it was a revenge coup. And the man who was not even around at the time says it was not!

Treason trial in Biafra: As I said earlier, Victor Banjo was not part of the January 1966 coup. But he was nonetheless arrested and detained with the coup leaders. In September 1967, as Nigerian troops advanced on Enugu, capital of Biafra, Victor Banjo, a Brigadier in the Biafran army and Commander of the Biafran expeditionary force that invaded and briefly held the Mid-West Region, was put on trial for treason. He was the first accused. His three co-accused were Emmanuel Ifeajuna, colonel in the Biafran army; Phillip Alale, a Marxist labour leader; and Sam Agbam, a civil servant. They were accused of plotting to overthrow the Biafran regime. They were tried by a three-member special tribunal. They were found guilty and sentenced to death by firing squad. Ojukwu, as Head of State, confirmed the sentences. The sentences were carried out at Enugu on September 24, 1967.

References: Of the books written by combatants and published in the late 1970s and early 1980s I single out the following as references for the conclusions stated above: Nigeria's five majors, by Ben Gbulie; Why we struck, by Wale Ademoyega; Reluctant Rebel, by Fola Oyewole; Requiem Biafra, By J. O. G. Achuzia; No place to hide (Crisis and Conflicts inside Biafra) by Bernard Odogwu; The Nigerian Revolution and the Biafran War, by Joe Garba; Danjuma: The making of a general (written by Lindsay Barrett, but based on extensive interviews with the subject, a combatant).

To this list I add the following accounts by non-combatant: Let the truth be told (the coups d'etat of 1966), by D. J. M. Muffett; Perspectives on the Nigerian Civil War, by Siyan Oyeweso (editor); The Man Died and You must go forth at dawn, by Wole Soyinka. I also

add the recent two-part interview which The Guardian newspaper conducted with General Theophilus Danjuma and the reaction of General Adebayo, also published by the same newspaper. Finally, I refer readers to Rebel against rebels written by Nelson Ottah. The book is an account of the treason trial in Biafra. It is based on the verbatim record of the proceedings of the special tribunal. Those who are impressed by the brilliance of Victor Banjo as shown in his recently published prison writings need to read Rebels against rebels to confirm their impression.
Source: Guardian, 10^{th April 2008.}

Biafra and its discontents
BY SAM OMATSEYE

The fury is so hot and full of molten magma that it can burn a whole race of people if they stood in its way. That was the impression that I got from the barrage of text messages and phone calls in the light of my articles on the Nigerian crisis in the 1960's.

You would think I have been declared enemy number one of the Igbos. But this comes from a wicked misreading of my prose, which was simple enough. I was only articulating a view that I thought was not only objective but based on facts. For some people to think that I am anti-Igbo is not only mischievous but wicked. Some of my best friends are from the east. I was there a few months ago and enjoyed the sights and sounds and the warmth of the people.

In fact, one caller wanted to know the origin of my hatred for the Igbos, and I said that was unfounded. If I say that a group of people was misled by their leaders, that does not mean the people are bad. I cannot say, for instance, that the Americans are a bunch of evil people because George W. Bush and his monstrous cabinet led the country into a disastrous war. In fact, I got about the same grief I am getting from some Igbos when I was teaching at an American university. Before the Iraq war, I told them that the United States President had not been sincere with the people about the so-called weapons of mass destruction. I thought his claims were apocryphal and tendentious. I wanted to take my students along with me on the path of reason and conscience, but some thought I was a mere immigrant ingrate who was deploying the didactic platform of a classroom to denigrate the hallowed institution of the American presidency and the American people.

A year after the war, one of the students accosted me on the streets and apologised for misjudging me. Americans now give Bush a lot of indignant scorn for his addle-brained rush to the battlefield.

That was the kind of point I made about Biafra. I thought Ojukwu was selfish and egomaniacal to focus more on mundane issues like military hierarchy. --+He should have focused on the higher points of reconciliation. Was it more important that he was superior to Gowon in the army? Even others in the Supreme Miliatry Council were ready to work with him. He would not blanch. I maintain that he conned the majority of the Igbos into a meaningless war. He should have bargained for more concessions for the Igbo. The Aburi Accord provided enough independence for the Igbos and if every Igbo man wanted to live in the eastern region that would have been worked out. But that was not the right thing at the time. What we needed was a way to move forward, reconcile and heal the wounds of the pogrom.

But emotions were high in the east. Many people were being killed like dogs. Whole families suffered bestial lynching, especially in the north. I cannot even claim to be able to empathise with the Igbosover the grisly barbarism unleashed on them. I have always wondered what it would have been to be an Igbo man when the killings raged. It was awful. My point, though, was that if ten thousands died, should we not have done something to avoid two million from going the same way, especially if it was avoidable. And it was. That's why I think Ojukwu was a disaster for the Igbos. I think a leader should pause and think before embarking on a war. It was not as though he had the wherewithal to confront the federal might, neither the international clout. He did not count the cost. That's why some of his generals did not see eye-to-eye with him during the war. He was also a hopeless general who did no know how to strategise for victory.

If his aim was just Biafra, why did he go on expansionist missions? People should understand Ojukwu for who he is, a selfish man who lost an opportunity to be a head of state for too long. My view on Ojukwu should not be expanded to mean condemnation of the Igbo. That would be a wicked and mischievous reading of my position. People always need good leaders, men of wisdom and courage. Men who can chasten his people when they err and derail. If the Igbo intelligentsia forced Ojukwu, then he was not a man of his mind. Such men can't and shouldn't be leaders. But Ojukwu was pursuing a selfish ambition which coincided with the agitations of the intelligentsia. That's what Americans call double whammy! It was also a double jeopardy.I always wondered how many great talents dissolved in the flames of that war on both sides. I have always contemplated poet Christopher Okigbo, perhaps the best poet this country has ever produced. He fell in that meaningless war. If the thunder of the war did not peal and consume, shall we be celebrating two Nobel laureates in Nigeria today?

I also noted from the responses that many were just emoting, few dwelled on facts and clear logic. One of them said he did not believe I was born during the crisis because my picture gives me away as a child of the 1970's. A few snapped and growled at me.

What I would like to read is THE BOOK, which Ojukwu has promised to write for almost forty years. Maybe if he spends more time on it rather acting like a leader that he is not, then we can really debate the issues from his point of view. But the records on those years are clear. Maybe that is why he has not published. I hope, though, Bianca's lovely presence is not distracting him. Ojukwu, tell us your tortoise story.
Source: The Nation, 23^rd July 2007.

Top                             Go to  Biafra News 2

Biafra and its discontents

Ironsi's widow Slams Danjuma
VULTURE WILL EAT YOUR CORPSE!

Benjamin Adekunle: The man who murdered sleep!

I Did Not Dislike Igbos, But I Had A War To Win

Benjamin Adekunle's War Memoir: A Script of Blood, Rebirth Still Deferred...

Benjamin Adekunle: My Personal Recollections of the War

The War Letters

Ironsi... A Forgotten Hero Keeps Returning

The Story Tale Of Ndume Without Ironsi

Those Who Chose To Forget Ironsi, Should Remember He Was Once Their Master

They Shot Him In The Chest

As A Family, We Are Through With Anything Military'

Crash Of The Elephant

Ironsi's Death Retards Us 100 Years

We need Biafra of mind, not physical –Ohaneze Youth Leader
 

Obasanjo's historic visit to Amichi

Obasanjo Blames Biafran War on Nigerian Society

Let's Avoid the Mistakes that Led to the Civil War

Obasanjo Wants Conflict Centre In Amichi

Nigerian Civil War: Obasanjo Unveils Unity Plague

Biafra, Nigeria, and the Road not taken

After Biafra, the new agenda

Civil war: Akwa Ibom demands compensation

Igbos Treated as Conquered People, Says Chukwumerije

It's Time to Put Civil War Experience Behind Us

Igbo won't apologise over civil war, says Okorafor

Ojukwu Defends Nigerian Civil War

We Fought to Make Nigeria Better, Says Ojukwu

Ajaegbu condemns Kalu on apology

Kalu Didn't Apologise Over Biafra, Says Terry Waya

Apology Over Civil War: Terry Waya Defends Orji Kalu

President Obasanjo and Biafra Fixation

Calls for Biafra Unnecessary

'Igbo 'll support MASSOB for self determination'

May 30, Biafra Independence Day

MASSOB to Continue Struggle for Biafra

NONI Remembers the Dead Igbo of the Nigeria- Biafra War