Although the Federal Government emerged triumphant from the civil war of 1967 -1970 with a great sense of pride for sustaining one Nigeria, it stands to reason that there were deliberate lapses on its part that made secession inevitable. It is therefore worthy of note that the Igbos never woke up one morning and declared Biafra. They loved (and love) Nigeria and they never planned to pull out of it. Biafra only became necessary when the people realised they would for a long time remain doomed as Nigerians. They were everywhere in the North, South and West living in peace among non-Igbos until one morning of January 15, 1966, a small group of disgruntled officers in the Nigerian army, fostered by their own nurtured grievances and interests, planned and executed a bloody coup to topple that first republican government.
The coup was spearheaded by six Majors among whom were five Igbos:
Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, Major Humphrey Chukwuka, Major Emmanuel Ifeajuna, Major Donatus Okafor, and Major Christian Anuforo. The only odd man among them was Major Adewale Ademoyega, a Yoruba. The victims of the coup among the army were three northerners, Brig. Zakariya Maimalan, Col. Kur Mohammed, and Col. James Yakubu Pam; two Westerners , Brig. Samuel Ademulegun and Col. Ralph Sodeinde; and two Easterners , Col. Arthur Obinyelu Unegbe and Col. Abogo Largema. Among the politicians were two Northerners, Sir, Abmadu Bello (Premier of the Northern Region); one Westerner Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintota (Premier of Western Region); and one Mid-Westerner Chief Fesuts Okotie Eboh (Federal Minister of Finance); no Easterner.
Obviously, with the preponderance of Igbo officers in the team of plotters and the victims of the coup dominated by non-Igbos, especially Northerners, it became very difficult to believe that the coup was not tribally motivated.
But far from it, the January 1966 coup had nothing to do with ethnic sentiments. If it had, why did Major Gen. Aguiyi fronsi, the General Officer Commanding the Nigerian Army at the time, foil the coup in the South? Why did Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu, the Officer commanding the 5th Battalion in Kano at the time, forestall the advancement of the coup in the North? Why where two Easterners (Col. Unegbe and Col. Largema) assassinated in the coup? Why were Major Gen. Ironsi and Col. Ojukwu marked for death in the coup only for them to escape by the whisker? Why did a Yoruba man (Major Ademoyega) become so gullible to be lured into an affair that would see three of his kinsmen (Akintola, Sodeinde and Ademulegun) murdered in cold blood. But contrary to this fact, the North strongly held a different view of the coup.
They misconstrued it to mean a sinister move by the Easterners to undo the Northerners. Thus, barely six months after Dr. Nwafor Orizu, then Senate President and the Council of Ministers handed over power to the military with Major Gen. Aguiyi Ironsi emerging as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and head of the National Military Government, a group of army officers from the North struck.It was an assumed counter coup let by Major Murtala Mohammed and in which Gen. Aguiyi Ironsi was killed together with Col. Fajuyi at Ibadan on July 29, 1966. Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon, then the Chief of Army Staff and a key player in the counter coup became the Head of State and Supreme commander, but his emergence was just the beginning of terrible times to come.
Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, then Governor of Eastern Nigeria, refused to recognize Gowon as the head of the National Military Government and Commander of the Armed forces. His reasons were: one, that Gowon should explain the myth surrounding the sudden disappearance of Gen. Ironsi (who had been alleged to have been abducted); two, that (Gowon was not qualified as the highest ranking officer in the army to mount that position. Ojukwu strongly argued that Brig. Babafemi Ogundipe was the highest ranking officer to take over the Government if precedent was to be followed; three, that why was there an unprecedented and willful killing of Igbo soldiers in both Northern and Western Barracks three days after the coup?
But amidst this wailing, a ray of hope flickered in, the Aburi meeting in Ghana. Ojukwu heaved a sigh of relief expecting that things would be sorted out there in Ghana. He thought that with some African brothers around and some Nigerians in attendance, he would be able to air his grievances and champion the course of his people. Based on this, Ojukwu assured his people to be calm and hopeful as Aburi would bring good tidings home. The people actually became calm with their fingers crossed. They hoped that all would be well soon. Ojukwu flew to Ghana and in a small community called Aburi, the country home of ex-president Nkrumah, an agreement was reached between Gowon and Ojukwu.
An agreement to place the army under the subordination of the Supreme Military Council. An agreement to resume the Constitutional Conference which had been suspended by Gowon. An agreement to solve the Eastern refugee menace. An agreement to solve the Eastern employment problem in the East. An agreement that the East should be treated as relevant component of the Nigerian Federation. This accord was witnessed by Lt. Gen. J. A. Ankrah, the Ghanaian leader who played host to these two discordant soldiers. Aburi came to an end and both parties returned from the two-day meeting that was held between January 4 and 5, 1967 with a sealed agreement.
Shockingly, 21 days after the Aburi accord, precisely on 26th January, Gowon gave a Press Conference in Lagos rejecting all terms of the Aburi accord. Ojukwu was dumbfounded. The people became demoralised seeing that, again, the only beam of hope they had had been dampened. This was when Ojukwu, frustrated and betrayed, raised the song, On Aburi we stand! and the people followed suit.
It was in fact, the intoxicating tune of this song that let the Igbos into a genocidal war for three years. As if reneging on the Aburi accord was not enough, in May 1967, Gowon declared a state of emergency in the East and in the same hour, announced a decree abolishing the existing four regions and dividing Nigeria into 12 States. In a fit of anger combined with a feeling of betrayal and disappointment, the Igbos said No!, enough is enough. The pressures from the Consultative Assembly, the Advisory Committee of Chief and Elders and the entire Ndigbo became unbearable for Ojukwu. He bad no option but to announce the creation of Biafra.
Today, 34 years after the civil war, the Igbos still seem to suffer the same fate they suffered before the war. They have not only been marginalised economically, they have also been denied politically. 44 years since independence, the Igbos have only ruled Nigeria for six months (Jan. to July 1966). Its position as one of the three major tribes of the country has been relegated and for years they have suffered the same fate with the minority. Yet, many do not agree that the Igbos are being marginalised. Those who share this view have often recounted a number of Igbo sons and daughters who at one time or the other, in the past and in the present, have mounted respectable public positions in the nation.
Another group feels the Igbo do not deserve the presidency because they are not trusted. They feel the Igbos with the power of presidency will cart away the wealth of the nation and actualise Biafra, leaving Nigeria in the woods. In fact, if there is any essence for recounting the historical events of 1966 to1970 on the page of this paper, it is mainly to refute this argument. The Igbos only did what they did in 1967 because they had been pushed to the wall. Give Igbo presidency, and the story of Biafra will remain in the twilight of history. The idea of PDP, the ruling and most influential party in Nigeria, zoning presidency to the North after the embarrassing Northern hegemony has had its undue share, is quite unwise and oppressive.
The Igbos have suffered much. Many years after the war, the back of Ndigbo, like David Diop's Africa, has been broken under the weight of marginalisation. Ndigbo needs to be recuperated and energized once again, at least, by a sip of the honey called political power' with the Federal throne.
==============================================================
Bolade Omonijo
POLITICAL NOTES: The Anambra debacle
Last week, Anambra State witnessed one of the worst crisis to have shaken any part of the federation in recent times. According to Governor Chris Ngige himself, the destruction that attended the political battle to control the soul of the state led to the destruction of property worth about N30 billion. No less than 27 lives were also believed to have been lost to that senseless war that has continued to impede development in a state that has all the potentials of leading the search for commercial and industrial growth in the land.
It is unfortunate that this is happening in Anambra State once again. Throughout the tenure of Dr Clement Mbadinuju, the state witnessed decay and retrogression as the governor resisted all attempts to seize the key to the treasury by one of the godfathers who have seized the state. For four years, Anambra State knew no peace. Members of the same party fought for control of the territory and sought alliance or support from external forces.
The result was the despoliation of all sectors of the society: the non-payment of school teachers for more than 13 months, decay of health facilities and social disharmony.
But, under Mbadinuju, no one could have predicted that things would get so progressively bad up to the point that another godfather would literally and wilfully waste lives in a desperate attempt to establish control. It is a shame that at a time like this, in the 21st century, in a pseudo modern state, complete with agencies of coercion, such a show of shame could take place and all that the powers that be could do is set up a reconciliation committee.
Who did it? Is it no longer a crime to murder innocent souls in this country? Is wanton destruction of property no longer punishable under the law? How can Nigeria claim to be a member of the comity of decent, democratic countries when such basic things as maintenance of the public order cannot be guaranteed?
In all this, what role did the federal government and the president play? What steps did Mr President take to nip the crisis in the bud? What order did he give to the Inspector General of Police? How did the subsisting illegal withdrawal of the governor’s security details, and by extension, his control or influence on the security outfit in the state impact on the control of the situation?
One of the cardinal ingredients of a democracy is the scrupulous observance of the rule of the law. The law, it is said, is no respecter of persons. When the political crisis in the state first broke open on April 10 last year with an attempt to forcibly remove the governor, all the perpetrators of that dastardly act got was encouragement from the source of power itself.
Till date, no one has been punished for seeking to overthrow the rule of law in a part of the country. As it is playing out now, the president merely set up committees to look into the matter and settle amicably within the Peoples Democratic Party family. One such committee was headed by Commodore Olabode George, a chieftain of the party. On a visit to Vanguard last December, Commodore George pledged that peace would be fully restored to the troubled state before the dawn of 2004. One year after, the crisis in Anambra state has so fettered that there appears to be no way forward.
The question to ask is, what is the president’s interest in all this? He is not known to have any blood link with Anambra State. Neither is he likely to be in contention for any elective position by 2007 when his tenure is expected to come to an end. Yet, he has shown more than a passing personal interest in on-going development in the state. Neither the president nor his aides, including Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode, has come up with a credible reason for the president’s action and inaction on the Anambra debacle.
Why hasn’t the president worked out a scheme by which the coup plotters of April 10, 2003 would be tried? What informed the protection for those known to have played active role in that botched abduction of a serving governor? Doesn’t it amount to hypocrisy to, in one breath deny Ngige the security details due to a serving elected governor, and in another allow him attend all meetings of state governors including the Council of State meeting? If, as the federal government has argued, the position is still in dispute, and the governor is therefore undeserving of certain paraphernalia of office, why is he allowed to attend such meetings.
There is certainly more to it all that meet the eye. There may, after all, be some truth in the suggestion that the president might have promised one of his aides from the state the key to the Awka Government House in 2007. Chief Chris Uba, the governor’s opponent in the power struggle, is known to have boasted, too, that he made a mistake in not personally contesting for the governorship.
What is the way forward? The solution lies in Aso Rock which controls all the security apparatuses. The president must learn to play a proper role of a statesman, a father of the nation when situations like this arise. He must be seen as impartial and decisive. He must be able to engender confidence of all those involved in the crisis. If the truth must be told now, this is not the situation. Mr President is seen as an ally of those who want Ngige out. Rightly or wrongly, there is a groundswell of support for the governor in the state today. Mr. President would do well to abandon the track he has followed so far. It is simply not working.
Concerned citizens of Anambra State must get involved. The matter is too important to be left for politicians alone to handle. Already, the respected Professor Chinua Achebe has shown the way forward. By rejecting that national honours and linking it to the unresolved crisis in his home state, Professor Achebe demonstrated that leading lights from the state have roles to play in resolving the dispute. Others like Chief Jacob Nwokolo, Dr Alex Ekwueme, Prof. Alphonsus Nwosu, Chief Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, among many other eminent personalities, especially leaders of the PDP, must get engaged in this matter. The future will not forgive them if they choose to stay aloof any further.
That Chuma Nzeribe bombshell?
Chief Chuma Nzeribe is a member of the House of Representatives. Since last year’s botched attempt to kidnap the Anambra State governor, Dr Chris Ngige, in which Nzeribe was implicated, the legislator has kept away from public glare. But, following the latest round of crisis in the state, newsmen could not resist the urge to find out his views on the development. What he said was as instructive as it was shocking. His exact words: "I am not a stakeholder. I am just coming out of my cocoyam farm in Ihiala which I do to augment my salary and allowances since baba has stopped bringing Ghana Must Go."
What a revelation. As a two-term honourable member of the house, Nzeribe must know what he was saying. He was suggesting that in the early days or years of this administration, members of the federal legislature were pampered with public funds emanating from Aso Rock, authorised by the president himself. Little wonder that the anti-corruption crusade is such a colossal failure. If Nigeria must be saved, leaders, starting from the president must begin to say exactly what they mean and mean exactly what they say. It is no use setting up an agency to prosecute a war against corruption, fund it to the tune of billions of naira when the government is not really prepared to do what is necessary to ensure success at the battle field.
Thanks to Honourable Nzeribe for that piece of information.
Still on Dariye
By the time the public is reading this, the position of the president on emergency rule in Plateau State would have been known. All through the past two weeks, spin doctors in Aso Rock have been at work. Only on Tuesday, the presidency decided to take the battle to frustrate the return of the state governor to the public.
Documents were released to the public through the office of the Attorney General of the Federation, implicating the governor for embezzlement of public fund. It was obviously meant to weaken the moral appeal of Governor Dariye and his aides. But, we must learn to do things properly. The House of Assembly Speaker to whom Chief Abiodun Olujinmi, the Hon. Attorney General addressed the letter remained suspended. In what capacity was he expected to receive and treat the letter? In any case, Dariye and the legislators were suspended because of the prevailing security situation in the state.
Whatever happened to public fund has nothing to do with the fate of the governor. He must be allowed to resume his tenure while whatever evidence of corruption there may be against him could then be looked into by the legislature. This is the due process. Nothing must be done to abridge it. Nothing in this submission must be read or interpreted to mean endorsement of misappropriation of public fund.
If Dariye is culpable, he has to go. But, that will come only when he has been restored as governor. Resignation is not even enough. This must not be allowed to go the way of Salisu Buhari. If guilty, he must be punished according to the law of the land. But, due process must be scrupulously followed.
