Tag: Biafra

  • Police confirm two DSS operatives, four others dead in clash with IPOB

    Police confirm two DSS operatives, four others dead in clash with IPOB

    Enugu State Police Command has confirmed two Department of State Security (DSS) operatives and four others dead in a clash with members of the proscribed Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB) on Sunday.

    A statement explained police moved in following credible information that suspected IPOB numbering over 500 had gone on rampage, blocking and burning tires on the road.

    They were said to have abducted operatives of the Department of State Security (DSS).

    Commissioner of Police, CP Ahmad AbdurRahman, immediately deployed operatives led by Enugu Metro Area commander to rescue the abducted operatives and restore normalcy.

    “On getting to the scene, the operatives, who were joined by those of DSS, Army and Air Force, came under serious gunfire attacks by the hoodlums.

    “They responded and in the ensuing gun duel, two of the hoodlums were gunned down while some of them escaped with bullets wounds.

    “The Operatives successfully restored normalcy and rescued one of the DSS Operatives, who were at the said school to disperse the hoodlums from their unlawful assembly while two others were found lifeless in the scene and later confirmed dead.

    “Five members of the group were arrested and they confessed to being members of the proscribed IPOB, and had gone to the school to hold a meeting and be trained in martial act and self-defense skills.

    “Machetes, cut-to-size woods with nails affixed, phones and other items were recovered at the scene.

    “Meanwhile, before getting to the scene, the hoodlums had macheted and gruesomely killed a young man, set another ablaze, while also attacking Police personnel resident in the area.”

    The police warned that acts of rebellion by persons and/or groups capable of truncating the peace and tranquility enjoyed in the State will not be tolerated.

    The statement signed by the Police PPRO, ASP Daniel Ndukwe urged hospitals and medical service providers against rejecting anyone seeking medical attention from bullet wounds.

    It, however, advised that such patient should be treated and the police duly notified.

  • [Video] Two feared dead, several injured as police, IPOB clash in Enugu

    There was tension in as men of the Nigerian Police Force and members of the Indigenous People of Biafra clashed on Sunday, in Emene, Enugu State.

    The menace according to reports threw the whole Emene and environs into chaos and disrupted church services as worshippers run for their dear lives.

    It was also reported two persons were feared dead while several IPOB members were also said to be injured.

    Watch video:

    An eyewitness who spoke to the newspaper said over 10 IPOB members have been arrested over the clash.

    An eyewitness account said that the trouble started at about 7.00 am when some police officers invaded the Community Secondary School Emene where members of IPOB were meeting, to disperse and arrest them.

    According to the account, the attempt was resisted, turning the encounter bloody with IPOB members reportedly overpowering the security operatives.

  • 2023: Igbos want presidency, not Biafra – Ohaneze

    2023: Igbos want presidency, not Biafra – Ohaneze

    The Apex Igbo socio-cultural organisation Ohanaeze Ndigbo has stated it is only interested in the 2023 presidency and not pursuit of sovereign State by any group in the zone.

    The group maintained that it is a right to the Southeast zone, not a privilege to get the presidency in 2023.

    Ohaneze spoke Tuesday in Awka, Anambra State through its President in Anambra State, Chief Damian Okeke -Ogene, while briefing reporters after the group’s meeting

    He said the leadership of Ohaneze has not mandated anyone or group to pursue actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra but Presidency of Igbo extraction.

    He said that some youths within the territory that make up the defunct Biafra Republic were restive and had made case for Biafra’s restoration because of the gross marginalisation of the zone.

    According to Okeke –Ogene: “We are pursuing Igbo president because the executive of Ohanaeze led by Nnia Nwodo has the mandate of Ndigbo to negotiate the Igbo position in Nigeria.

    “He wasn’t given a mandate for the Sovereign State of Biafra. That’s why we are saying, give us what is due for us and Nigeria’s president of Igbo extraction is what we are looking for.

    “The other aspect of IPOB is because our children seem to find out that Nigerians are not ready to give us what we want; we the elders.

    “They are now saying that if you’re not going to answer my father, I am going to tell my father that I am going to be myself.

    “They are two different things. Let me tell you, it is coming to a point that Igbo presidency is becoming a right; no more privilege because it is only the South East that has never tasted the presidency and we have been voting for everybody.

    “So, the younger ones are agitating that Nigerians are not ready to answer us.

    “If they are sure that Nigerians are going to answer us, I believe that they will calm down. Nigeria is for all of us.”

    He vowed Ndigbo would not relent until 2023 presidency is achieved.

  • Ex-President Jonathan denies presenting speech on Niger Delta, Biafra agitation in US

    Ex-President Jonathan denies presenting speech on Niger Delta, Biafra agitation in US

    Former Nigerian President, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan has disowned an online statement credited to him concerning the relationship between the South East and the people of the Niger Delta, describing it as a fabricated speech.

    The report claimed that the former President spoke on the position of Niger Delta over agitations for Biafra in a speech he presented recently in Texas, United States.

    However, a statement signed by his Media Adviser, Mr. Ikechukwu Eze, on Saturday described the report as false, declaring that the former President could not have presented the purported speech because neither did he travel to the United States nor send anybody to represent him at the unnamed event.

    Eze who noted that it was the second time in three years that the former President would be issuing a disclaimer on the purported speech, blamed the development on the effort of some unscrupulous criminals out to tarnish the image of Dr. Jonathan.

    He wrote: “Our attention has been drawn to a fake story with the title ‘Why Niger Deltans don’t want to be part of Biafra’ currently circulating online and purported to have been taken from a speech allegedly presented by former President Dr. Goodluck Jonathan at an unnamed event in Texas, United States.

    “The story which is being recycled in some online platforms claimed that the former President allegedly spoke on the relationship between the people of the Niger Delta and South East states while addressing the broader issue of agitation for Biafra.

    “We thought we had finally dealt with the issue of this falsehood with our timely and well publicised disclaimer, soon after the supposed speech first surfaced online in 2017. However, it beggars belief that the same jejune and disastrous effort at speech writing, hatched by some yet-to-be-identified shady character, is again being served to the social media public as a fresh dish.

    “We want to clearly state, as we did in 2017, that there was no such event involving the former President and that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan will never present such a sloppy and hate-filled speech.

    “We note that the false report is the same old statement that was first put out about three years ago by some unscrupulous elements. Now and as then, it began this way: “Former President of Nigeria, Goodluck Ebere Jonathan yesterday delivered a lecture at Texas, United States….

    “We recall that when the purported speech was first published in 2017, we dismissed it as pure fiction because, unknown to the authors, they made the claim at a time when the former President had neither been to Texas since leaving office in 2015, nor been invited to any speaking engagement in the US State. Our disclaimer which was issued on October 13, 2017 was published then in many newspapers.

    “That this odious concoction has not only resurfaced as a new document but continues to spread in May 2020 shows to what a sad extent the fake news and bizarre hoaxes industry is gaining ground in our public space.

    “It makes it even more distressing that such a poorly conceived dithyramb and the obvious falsehood around it, could receive any attention from discerning Nigerians. For instance, this is a speech that was purportedly presented in Texas, United States, but nothing was said about the actual date, venue, organisers and purpose of the event. Does it also make any sense that the former President would be assumed to have travelled to the United States to present a speech, at a time when airports are shut and public gathering banned across the world on account of Covid-19 pandemic?

    “We can only reiterate as we did in 2017 that this falsehood serves no purpose other than probably massage the ego of the faceless writer. At a time like this, Nigerians have more important things competing for their attention than waste their data on the hackwork of a fraudulent wannabe speech writer who thinks nothing of the criminal implication of attributing his duplicitous diatribe against a people to former President Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.”

  • The scam in the Biafra agitation process – Micheal Owoko

    The scam in the Biafra agitation process – Micheal Owoko

    By Michael Owhoko

    Where is the map of Biafra? This is the question I have often asked the promoters and sympathizers of the Biafra cause, and up till this moment, their responses have been feeble, vague, evasive and suspicious, failing to provide a specific drawing showing a clearly defined territorial area called Biafra.

    Why is the map of a potential sovereign state like the Republic of Biafra not being courageously and freely displayed like the way the flag is presented? The recurring sight of the Biafra flag raises consciousness of it. Once Biafra is mentioned, a mental picture of the flag pops, showing the rising sun along with the eleven rays symbolizing the provinces in Biafra. But where is the map?

    I am asking this question because of concerns being raised by neighbours sharing boundaries with the South-East states to the South, specifically, the Niger Delta Region. The fears of the Niger Delta people stem from its minority status and experience in the first separatist agitation and the subsequent declaration of the former Eastern Region of Nigeria as an independent state of Biafra.

    At the time, the present day, Akwa Ibom, Cross River, Rivers and Bayelsa states were part of the former Eastern Region while Delta and Edo states known as Midwest Region were captured by the Biafra forces and declared the Republic of Benin, even though, in their hearts, the region was part of Biafra despite the prevailing plural identities.

    Indeed, this was the only reason why these states were sucked into the Biafra struggle without known prior consultation and consensus. However, to allay the fears of the minorities and reassure them that they were safe within the Biafra union, Late Lt-Col Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu then appointed Late Major-General Philip Effiong, a minority from the present-day Akwa Ibom State, as second-in-command in the Biafra hierarchy.

    The geo-political setting of the country has since metamorphosed from the four-regional structure to six-geo-political grouping in consonant with ethnic, linguistics, cultural, historical, contiguous boundaries and affinity, leaving the Igbo in the South-East geopolitical zone and, the minorities in the South-South or Niger Delta geopolitical area.

    The present-day agitation for the sovereign state of Biafra, both the faction led by the Movement for the Sovereign State of Biafra (MOSSOB) and the Indigenous People Of Biafra (IPOB) and their leaders, have at different events, expressed that the South-South geo-political zone or Niger Delta region is part of Biafra.

    This position is stripped of respect for minorities and a demonstration of might in the quest for territorial expansion. How do you conscript an unwilling people from another region to be part of your conceived independent state without prior discussions and agreement on the form, organization and modality of administration? Even if this is an effect of hallucination, how then can you be trusted?

    It is this fear of domination and territorial ambition by the major ethnic groups that led to the setting up of the Willink Commission in 1957 to look into the fears of the minorities who were scared of the imbalance of the three-regional political structure, and this led to the creation of the fourth region, the Midwest in 1963. By the body language, the Biafra gladiators are provoking a reenactment reminiscent of the old political structure.

    Perhaps, the drivers of Biafra are still living in the past, unable to come to terms with the reality that the Niger Delta is now a different geopolitical area with its distinct political aspirations. Perhaps, they are being misled by the word, Biafra and, the symbol of the Biafra flag.

    The name, Biafra, has its origin from the Bight of Biafra, now Gulf of Guinea, a Portuguese name representing the West Coast from where waters flow into the Atlantic Ocean. Biafra, still conjures false sense of one region based on the old four-regional structure. The word, Biafra, no longer has geographical and historical relevance to the present South-East geopolitical area, but the South-South geo-political grouping.

    The rising sun on the Biafra flag with the eleven rays representing the eleven provinces of Biafra under the old Eastern Region, is also misleading. The Niger Delta region is no more part of the South-East geopolitical zone. The moment the old four-regional structure was dismantled and replaced with the six-geopolitical zones, the eleven provinces ceased to exist, and therefore can no longer be reflected on the Biafra flag, particularly when previous political affinities had also been terminated.

    Unfortunately, the continued use of the symbol on the flag creates false sense of one region in the minds of the protagonists of Biafra with the eleven provinces. It is time to recreate the map; otherwise, it is a scam.

    Under the current dispensation, each geopolitical zone has its distinct socio-economic and political aspirations, which are now at liberty to develop at their paces. This does not, however, exclude two or more geopolitical areas from forming an alliance in furtherance of their social, political and economic ambition, if they so wish, but this should be preceded and predicated upon a willful truce negotiated from a position of equality and respect for one another.

    Governance is easy if one has nothing to hide. The process becomes complex and difficult when there are hidden motives induced by entrenched interests and cover up. Why are the drivers of the sovereign state of Biafra not making the Biafra map public and visible? We see the flag, but where is the map? Or is this a strategy to smuggle the Niger-Delta region through the backdoor into the Biafra dream?

    As minorities, the South-South geo-political area also has a right to assert itself, particularly, in line with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as adopted on September 13, 2007 within the context of their dignity, culture and survival as a people. Besides, the United Nations Charter in Article 1 also recognizes the right of a people to self-determination for the realization of their cultural, economic, social and political dreams.

    It was on the basis of this that President Muhammadu Buhari, as a military Head of State in 1984, supported the aspirations and right of the Sahrawi people for self-determination and independence despite the opposition of the Morocco’s government. Buhari’s position then was based on the resolutions of the African Union (AU) on Western Sahara at the time.

    The Niger Delta is no longer a kindergarten region. It has all the resources required to deliver on its responsibilities as an independent state, if it so desires in line with the wishes of the people. Thus, the scramble for the region by other regions for purposes of annexation is exercise in futility. If in the event that emerging development in the country makes separatist agitation inevitable in the future, the Niger Delta region is capable of governing itself as an independent sovereign state.

    It is the right of people to pursue their collective aspirations, particularly if they believe their common interest is being violated or endangered in a federation. The Biafra people have a right to pursue their dreams, but this should be done within the context of their territorial boundaries without any intention or ambition of annexing other regions or any part thereof as part of its geographical area. It is this element that makes the current agitation for the sovereign state of Biafra a scam.

    Most countries that have attained independence today started with a struggle for self-determination, a process aimed at controlling their socio-economic and political destiny. Once a decision is reached among a people to form a state, implicitly, there must be a delineated territory agreed as a sovereign boundary, and a government capable of meeting the needs of the people that could also interface with other countries.

    Once this is settled, the next natural thing to do is to draw up a map depicting the proposed independent territory, even before a flag and other paraphernalia are developed. This has been the trend in the struggle for self-determination. Apart from sensitization, the map and the flag are used as symbols of appeal to shape and drive sentiments and collective aspirations of the people.

    This same process was adopted by countries that had gained independence and those that are still in the trenches for independence. Thus, from Scotland to Catalonia, from Hong Kong to Siberia, from Tibet to Luhansk and from Crimea to Quebec, this is the pattern and trend.

    Biafra needs to review its strategies and restore confidence among neighbouring boundaries, otherwise, a case of territorial ambition and annexation are implied, a discernment that is capable of thwarting and rendering its efforts unfeasible.

    Michael Owhoko

    Michael Owhoko is a journalist, author and public relations consultant who has mostly worked in the banking, oil and gas, and media industries. He is the author of The Language of Oil and Gas; Career Frustration in the Workplace; Nigeria on the Precipice: Issues, Options, and Solutions; The Future of Nigeria; and Feminism: The Agony of Men. He is also the publisher of Media Issues, an online newspaper that can be found at www.mediaissuesng.com.

     

  • The scam in the Biafra agitation process, By Michael Owhoko

    The scam in the Biafra agitation process, By Michael Owhoko

    By Michael Owhoko

    Where is the map of Biafra? This is the question I have often asked the promoters and sympathizers of the Biafra cause, and up till this moment, their responses have been feeble, vague,evasive and suspicious, failing to provide specific drawingshowing a clearly defined territorial area called Biafra.

    Why is the map of a potential sovereign state like the Republic of Biafra not being courageously and freely displayed like the way the flag is presented? Recurring sight of the Biafra flag raises consciousness of it. Once Biafra is mentioned, a mental picture of the flag pops, showing the rising sun along with the eleven rays symbolizing the provinces in Biafra. But where is the map?

    I am asking this question because of concerns being raised by neighbours sharing boundaries with the South East states to the South, specifically, the Niger Delta Region. The fears of the Niger Delta people stem from its minority status and experience in the first separatist agitation and subsequent declaration of the former Eastern Region of Nigeria as an independent state of Biafra.

    At the time, the present day, Akwa Ibom, Cross River, Rivers and Bayelsa states were part of the former Eastern Region while Delta and Edo states known as Midwest Region were capturedby the Biafra forces and declared Republic of Benin, even though, in their hearts, the region was part of Biafra despite theprevailing plural identities.

    Indeed, this was the only reason why these states were sucked into the Biafra struggle without known prior consultation and consensus. However, to allay the fears of the minorities and reassure them that they were safe within the Biafra union, Late Lt-Col Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu then appointed Late Major-General Philip Effiong, a minority from the present day Akwa Ibom State, as second-in-command in the Biafra hierarchy.

    The geo-political setting of the country has since metamorphosed from the four-regional structure to six-geo-political grouping in consonant with ethnic, linguistics, cultural, historical, contiguous boundaries and affinity, leaving the Igbo in the South East geopolitical zone and, the minorities in the South-South or Niger Delta geopolitical area.

    The present day agitation for the sovereign state of Biafra, both the faction led by the Movement for the Sovereign State of Biafra (MOSSOB) and the Indigenous People Of Biafra (IPOB) and their leaders, have at different events, expressed that the South-South geo-political zone or Niger Delta region is part of Biafra.

    This position is stripped of respect for minorities and a demonstration of might in the quest for territorial expansion. How do you conscript an unwilling people from another region to be part of your conceived independent state without prior discussions and agreement on the form, organization and modality of administration? Even if this is an effect ofhallucination, how then can you be trusted?

    It is this fear of domination and territorial ambition by the major ethnic groups that led to the setting up of the WillinkCommission in 1957 to look into the fears of the minorities who were scared of the imbalance of the three-regional political structure, and this led to the creation of the fourth region, the Midwest in 1963. By the body language, the Biafra gladiators are provoking a reenactment reminiscent of the old political structure.

    Perhaps, the drivers of Biafra are still living in the past, unable to come to terms with reality that the Niger Delta is now a different geo-political area with its distinct political aspirations. Perhaps, they are being misled by the word, Biafra and, the symbol of the Biafra flag.

    The name, Biafra, has its origin from the Bight of Biafra, now Gulf of Guinea, a Portuguese name representing the West Coast from where waters flow into the Atlantic Ocean. Biafra, still conjures false sense of one region based on the old four-regional structure. The word, Biafra, no longer has geographical and historical relevance to the present South-East geopolitical area, but the South-South geo-political grouping.

    The rising sun on the Biafra flag with the eleven rays representing the eleven provinces of Biafra under the old Eastern Region, is also misleading. The Niger Delta region is no more part of the South-East geopolitical zone. The moment the old four-regional structure was dismantled and replaced with the six-geopolitical zones, the eleven provinces ceased to exist, and therefore can no longer be reflected on the Biafra flag, particularly when previous political affinities had also been terminated.

    Unfortunately, the continued use of the symbol on the flag creates false sense of one region in the minds of the protagonistsof Biafra with the eleven provinces. It is time to recreate the map; otherwise, it is a scam.

    Under the current dispensation, each geopolitical zone has its distinct socio-economic and political aspirations, which are nowat liberty to develop at their paces. This does not, however, exclude two or more geopolitical areas from forming an alliance in furtherance of their social, political and economic ambition, if they so wish, but this should be preceded and predicated upon a willful truce negotiated from a position of equality and respect for one another.

    Governance is easy if one has nothing to hide. The process becomes complex and difficult when there are hidden motives induced by entrenched interests and cover up. Why are the drivers of the sovereign state of Biafra not making the Biafra map public and visible? We see the flag, but where is the map? Or is this a strategy to smuggle the Niger-Delta region through the backdoor into the Biafra dream?

    As minorities, the South-South geo-political area also has a right to assert itself, particularly, in line with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as adopted on September 13, 2007 within the context of their dignity, culture and survival as a people. Besides, the United Nations Charter in Article 1 also recognizes the right of a people to self-determination for the realization of their cultural, economic, social and political dreams.

    It was on the basis of this that President Muhammadu Buhari, as a military Head of State in 1984, supported the aspirations and right of the Sahrawi people for self-determination and independence despite the opposition of the Morocco’sgovernment. Buhari’s position then was based on the resolutions of the African Union (AU) on Western Sahara at the time.

    The Niger Delta is no longer a kindergarten region. It has all the resources required to deliver on its responsibilities as an independent state, if it so desires in line with the wishes of the people. Thus, the scramble for the region by other regions for purposes of annexation is exercise in futility. If in the event that emerging development in the country makes separatist agitation inevitable in the future, the Niger Delta region is capable of governing itself as an independent sovereign state.

    It is the right of people to pursue their collective aspirations, particularly if they believe their common interest is being violated or endangered in a federation. The Biafra people have a right to pursue their dreams, but this should be done within the context of their territorial boundaries without any intention or ambition of annexing other regions or any part thereof as part of its geographical area. It is this element that makes the current agitation for the sovereign state of Biafra a scam.

    Most countries that have attained independence today started with a struggle for self-determination, a process aimed at controlling their socio-economic and political destiny. Once a decision is reached among a people to form a state, implicitly, there must be a delineated territory agreed as a sovereign boundary, and a government capable of meeting the needs of the people that could also interface with other countries.

    Once this is settled, the next natural thing to do is to draw up a map depicting the proposed independent territory, even before aflag and other paraphernalia are developed. This has been the trend in the struggle for self-determination. Apart from sensitization, the map and the flag are used as symbols of appeal to shape and drive sentiments and collective aspirations of the people.

    This same process was adopted by countries that had gained independence and those that are still in the trenches for independence. Thus, from Scotland to Catalonia, from Hong Kong to Siberia, from Tibet to Luhansk and from Crimea to Quebec, this is the pattern and trend.

    Biafra needs to review its strategies and restore confidence among neighbouring boundaries, otherwise, a case of territorial ambition and annexation are implied, a discernment that is capable of thwarting and rendering its efforts unfeasible.

    Michael Owhoko

    Michael Owhoko is a journalist, author and public relations consultant who has mostly worked in the banking, oil and gas, and media industries. He is the author of The Language of Oil and Gas; Career Frustration in the Workplace; Nigeria on the Precipice: Issues, Options, and Solutions; The Future of Nigeria; and Feminism: The Agony of Men. He is also the publisher of Media Issues, an online newspaper that can be found at www.mediaissuesng.com.

  • Anatomy of the Nigerian – Biafra War, Regional Security, Ethnic Militias and Peace

    Anatomy of the Nigerian – Biafra War, Regional Security, Ethnic Militias and Peace

     

    By Samuel Akpobome Orovwuje

    This year marked 50th anniversary of the end of the Nigerian civil war. The then Military Head of State sloganeering of Novictor, No vanquishedand its three pillars of rehabilitation, resettlement and reconstruction marked the fragile beginning of a new era of peace, national reconciliation and development.

    Nevertheless, for many of the Igbo’s, and the peripheral states of the Niger- Delta, where the most frightful of the civil war was experienced, that healing is yet to come 50 years on, when so many scars of war remain unresolved.

    This article examines the trajectories of the war and the lack oftransitional justice framework of the Gowon era to addressingthe core issues of separatism and secession that were prevalent before the war and offer new perspectives on one of the most important and popular current streams of agitations, above all, the collective trauma, victimhood and trail of similarly traumatized groups within the country, but also offers elucidation of the mechanisms and factors shaping them in the light of recent happenings in the country.

    For the avoidance doubt, it is necessary to look at the various agitations within the country from 1950 to 1970. The first separatist demand was made in 1950 during the review of the Richards Constitution on the ratio of representation in the central legislation on the quotas of 45:33:33 for the Northern, Western and Eastern provinces respectively. This recommendation was rejected by the Northern delegation. Speaking on behalf of the North, the Emirs of Zaria and Katsina warned, Unless the Northern Region was allotted 50 percent of the seats in the Central Legislature, it would ask for separation from the rest of Nigeria on the arrangements existing before 1914.

    Conversely, the separatist agitation moved to the Western Region in 1953/1954 on the controversy of the possession of Lagos. In 1953, Obafemi Awolowo, the premier of the Western Region cabled the Secretary of State for colonies demanding among other things the right of the Western Region to decide whether or not they will remain in the proposed federation.Nevertheless, Awolowo request was turned down, with a warning that the secession of the Western Region from the federation would be regarded as the use of force.

    Furthermore, in 1964, the Tiv people of the Middle Belt also complained of Hausa- Fulani domination and demanded for their own state within the country. A United Middle Belt Congress (UMBC) member of the Northern Regional House, Shaahu stated; The only course we can take now since we are not wanted in the North, is to pull out of the North and the Federation as a whole.Additionally, the Eastern Region also demanded for separation as result of the 1963 controversial census, the 1964 federal elections and the 1965 Western Regional elections respectively. In addition, Isaac Adaka Boroin 1966, declaration of the Delta People Republic was also an agitation to secede from the Eastern Region.

    Alas, the sad events following January 1966 coup, and the Unification Decree 34, which had sought the centralization of the military government, and the distrust created by communal violence between the predominately Christian Igbo of Eastern Nigeria and the Hausa / Fulani Muslims of Northern Nigeria, and the urgent need to have an unbiased adjudicator led to January 1967 Aburi, Ghana meeting to work an acceptableconstitutional arrangement for Nigeria.

    Sadly, the Federal Government under Gowon did not respect regrettably, the fine points of the Aburi agreement by both parties, which include the devolution of the Armed forces, repatriation of civilian to their states of origin to reduce social tension amongst others. Critically, the Aburi Accord or agreement amounted to confederation for Nigeria. Nevertheless, the poor implementation particularly with the creation of more states by a decree on May 27 1967, Ojukwu replied by pulling out the Eastern Region from the fragile and contentious federation in the name of Biafra on May 30 1967.

    Have we learned anything from that experience that might help prevent a similar outcome for Nigeria?

    The anniversary is bittersweet as it comes at the same time as the country is still facing unprecedented security challenges,new agitations for resource nationalism, separation, secession and the nagging paradox of authentic leadership reminiscent of the pre- war era. Perhaps, to understand the current Nigeria crisis, it is important to note that the issues at play from the independence struggles and the events preceding the civil war are still afflicting our existential reality as a nation.

    The present security challenge, in my view, is a product of the accelerated conditions of the Nigerian civil war and mutual suspicions, which are inextricable from globalised capitalism,colonialism, divide- and- rule, and contemporary imperialism. It also foreshadows the increasing lack of courage of the compromised political elites to implement the reports of the various constitutional conferences advocating for a united Nigeria.

    Though the discourse shaping federalism and the call for restructuring and devolutions of powers provide intertwined concerns for harmonious affiliation, the varied use of the terms,is not meant, to imply that they are interchangeable. Rather, they signal the complex political ways that terminology feature in general understandings of the Nigerian condition.

    Indeed, the Igbo’s who were the victim of the war, have outclassed others in commerce, entrepreneurship, trade and havecontributed considerably to the national income and productivity, at a distance from the receivables of cursed oil resources. Furthermore, for five decade now, the Igbo’s of West and East Niger are still victim of war and even today, to some extent suffer lack of inclusion in the wider context of political re – engineering in the last 20 years particularly with the elusive presidential slot and the voodoo shenanigan of sectional leaders across the political landscape.

    Intriguingly, the Igbo’s, are also caught, in the web of lingeringpolitical cast out and pilloried as a people rejected within a nation state . The Biafra – Nigeria impasse is an unbearable blunder in our national psyche and imagination. It is equally evident that the Nigeria state under Yakubu Gowon leadership failed in its core responsibility of sustainable transitional justiceand to very large extent has unanswered questions in enthnopolitics and post – conflict-healing mechanism.

    The dissension with the current arrangements and the loudvoices from IPOB, Amotekun, Boko Haram, Revolution now and other liberation movements across the country, may not spiral into another civil war, but it will have grave repercussions for insurgency, militancy, banditry, terrorism and their implication for sustainable peace remain to be seen in the nearest future. The promise of national unity remains largelyillusionary and aspirational and fulfilling the equality of all ethnic nationalities will likely prove most challenging, where deep socio- political inequalities and equities persist.

    All things considered, the heinous atrocities of genocide, gender- based violence, systematic extra judicial killings, amputations and other war crimes associated the civil war canno longer be prosecuted 50 years on, but a transitional post – conflict audit reforms with the establishment of Truth and Reconciliation commission by the National Assembly will serveas a bridge – building process that would lead us away from the deeply divided past to a realistic future through truth – finding and national reconciliation. Again, history beckons!

     

    Orovwuje, is founder, Humanitarian Care for Displaced Persons, Lagos. 08034745325, orovwuje@yahoo.com

     

  • Fifty years after civil war: Biafra’s surrender speech, Nigeria’s victory speech [For the records]

    Fifty years after civil war: Biafra’s surrender speech, Nigeria’s victory speech [For the records]

    Biafra’s surrender speech

    Being text of speech by acting Head of State of Biafra, General Philip Effiong, that announced the surrender of the secessionist state on January 15, 1970.

    I , Philip Effiong, do hereby declare: I give you not only my own personal assurances but also those of my fellow officers and colleagues and of the entire former Biafran people of our fullest cooperation and very sincere best wishes for the future.

    It is my sincere hope the lessons of the bitter struggle have been well learned by everybody and I would like therefore to take this opportunity to say that I, Maj. Gen. Philip Effiong, officer administering the government of the Republic of Biafra, now wish to make the following declaration:

    That we are firm, we are loyal Nigerian citizens and accept the authority of the Federal Military Government of Nigeria.

    That we accept the existing administrative and political structure of the Federation of Nigeria.

    That any future constitutional arrangement will be worked out by representatives of the people of Nigeria. That the Republic of Biafra hereby ceases to exist.

    Nigeria’s victory speech

    Citizens of Nigeria, It is with a heart full of gratitude to God that I announce to you that today marks the formal end of the civil war. This ends thirty months of a grim struggle. Thirty months of sacrifice and national agony.

    Exactly four years ago on January 15, 1966, a group of young army officers overthrew the government of the country with violence. The country hoped, however, that the military regime which followed would quickly restore discipline and confidence in the army and introduce a just, honest, patriotic and progressive government. The country was disappointed in those hopes. There were further tragic incidents in the army leading to the death of many officers and men in July, 1966.

    I then assumed the leadership of the Federal Military Government. I gave a solemn pledge to work to reduce tension in the army and the country, to restore the Federal Constitution and to prepare the country for an orderly return to civilian rule as early as possible. Despite my efforts and the cooperation of all other members of the Supreme Military Council, the former Lt. Col. Ojukwu pushed us from one crisis to another. This intransigent defiance of Federal Government authority heightened tension and led to the much regretted riots in September/October, 1966. He subsequently exploited the situation to plunge the former Eastern Region into secession and the nation into a tragic civil war.

    The world knows how hard we strove to avoid the civil war. Our objectives in fighting the war to crush Ojukwu’s rebellion were always clear. We desired to preserve the territorial integrity and unity of Nigeria. For as one country we would be able to maintain lasting peace amongst our various communities; achieve rapid economic development to improve the lot of our people; guarantee a dignified future and respect in the world for our posterity and contribute to African unity and modernisation. On the other hand, the small successor states in a disintegrated Nigeria would be victims of perpetual war and misery and neo-colonialism. Our duty was clear. And we are, today, vindicated.

    The so-called ‘Rising Sun of Biafra’ is set for ever. It will be a great disservice for anyone to continue to use the word Biafra to refer to any part of the East Central State of Nigeria. The tragic chapter of violence is just ended. We are at the dawn of national reconciliation. Once again, we have an opportunity to build a new nation.

    My dear compatriots, we must pay homage to the fallen. To the heroes, who have made the supreme sacrifice that we may be able to build a nation great in justice, fair play and industry. They will be mourned for ever by a grateful nation. There are also the innocent men, women and children who perished, not in battle but as a result of the conflict. We also honour their memory. We honour the fallen of both sides of this tragic fratricidal conflict. Let it be our resolution that all those dead have not died in vain. Let the greater nation we shall build be their proud monument forever.

    Now, my dear countrymen, we must recommence at once in greater earnest, the task of healing the nation’s wounds. We have at various times repeated our desire for reconciliation in full equality, once the secessionist regime abandoned secession. I solemnly repeat our guarantees of a general amnesty for those misled into rebellion. We guarantee the personal safety of everyone, who submits to Federal authority. We guarantee the security of life and property of all citizens in every part of Nigeria and equality in political rights. We also guarantee the right of every Nigerian to reside and work wherever he chooses in the Federation, as equal citizens of one united country. It is only right that we should all henceforth respect each other. We should all exercise civic restraint and use our freedom, taking into full account the legitimate rights and needs of the other man. There is no question of second class citizenship in Nigeria.

    On our side, we fought the war with great caution, not in anger or hatred, but always in the hope that common sense would prevail. Many times we sought a negotiated settlement, not out of weakness, but in order to minimise the problems of reintegration, reconciliation and reconstruction. We knew that however the war ended, in the battlefield or in the conference room, our brothers fighting under other colours must rejoin us and that we must together rebuild the nation anew.

    Those now freed from the terror and misery of the secessionist enclave are therefore doubly welcome. The nation is relieved. All energies will now be bent to the task of reintegration and reconciliation. They will find, contrary to the civil [thus in press release; but probably ‘evil’ ?] propaganda with which they were fed, that thousands and thousands of Ibos have lived and worked in peace with the other ethnic groups in Lagos and elsewhere in the Federation throughout the dark days of the civil war. There is, therefore, no cause for humiliation on the part of any group of the people of this country. The task of reconciliation is truly begun.

    There is an urgent task to be done. The Federal Government has mounted a massive relief operation to alleviate the suffering of the people in the newly liberated areas. I have as announced, assigned special responsibility for this to a member of the Federal Executive Council. We are mobilizing adequate resources from the Federal Government to provide food, shelter and medicines for the affected population. Rehabilitation and reconstruction will follow simultaneously to restore electricity, transport and communications.

    The problem of emergency relief is a challenge for the whole nation. We must prove ourselves equal to the task. Our resources, which have enabled us to prosecute the war successfully and without obligations to anyone, are considerable. I appeal to the nation for volunteers to help in the emergency relief operations in the newly liberated areas. Doctors, nurses, engineers, technicians, builders, plumbers, mechanics, administrators – skilled hands willing to help are urgently required. The detailed arrangements for recruitment will soon be announced. I am sure that there will be a prompt and good response to this call.

    Regarding the future, we shall maintain our purpose to work for stability with the existing political structure of a minimum of twelve states. The collision of three giant regions with pretensions to sovereignty created distrust and fear and led to the tragic conflict now ending. The multi-state structure will therefore be retained with the minimum of the present twelve states. Immediate post-war platting and reconstruction will continue on this basis. Any new constitution will be the result of discussion by the representatives of all the people of Nigeria.

    Fellow countrymen, the civil war is truly over. We thank God. But the state of national emergency and emergency regulations remain. Discipline and sacrifice are essential if we are to achieve our goals in the immediate postwar period and lay sound foundations for the future. I demand of your patience, resolution and continued dedication. I demand of the workers and employers continued restraint in industrial relations in keeping with the recent decree. A decree on price control will soon be promulgated. We shall soon review wages and salaries to improve the lot of the ordinary man. The immediate economic problems are challenging and we must behave accordingly.

    The Armed Forces deserve the greatest praise for their valour in battle, their loyalty and dedication and for their resourcefulness in overcoming the formidable obstacles placed in our way. I praise them for observing strictly the code of conduct issued to them at the beginning of the operations. It is necessary now more than ever when the rebellion is ended, for them to maintain the high standard they have attained. The letter and spirit of the code must be obeyed. Their first duty is to protect the lives and property of all surrendering troops and civilians and to give them humane treatment. Stern disciplinary measures will be taken against any who violate the code. I know, however, that I can continue to count on your loyalty and discipline.

    All Nigerians share the victory of today. The victory for national unity, victory for hopes of Africans and black people everywhere. We must thank God for his mercies. We mourn the dead heroes. We thank God for sparing us to see this glorious dawn of national reconciliation. We have ordered that Friday, Saturday and Sunday be national days of prayer. We must seek his guidance to do our duty to contribute our quota to the building of a great nation, founded on the concerted efforts of all its people and on justice and equality, a nation never to return to the fractious, sterile and selfish debates that led to the tragic conflict just ending. We have overcome a lot over the past four years. I have therefore every confidence that ours will become a great nation. So help us God.

    Long Live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

  • IPOB: Police confirm attack, killing of two cops in Anambra [Graphic Photos]

    The Police command in Anambra have confirmed the death of two police officers, allegedly attacked and shot by suspected members of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) at Oraifite in Ekwusigo council area of the state.

    The command’s spokesman, Mr Haruna Mohammed, disclosed this in a statement in Awka on Monday.

    Part of the statement read, “on the 2/12/2019 at about 11:30 am, there was a formal complaint against one Barr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor, a member of the proscribed IPOB in Oraifite on alleged case of abduction, assault occasioning harm and malicious damage to property.

    “Following the report, police patrol teams, led by the Area Commander, Oraifite, Mr Oliver Abbey, mobilised and rushed to the scene in order to arrest the suspect, who declined police invitation.

    “However, as soon as police arrived at the house, armed men, suspected to be IPOB members, descended on the police, set ablaze one patrol vehicle and attacked them with rifles and machetes.”

    Mohammed stated that two police officers, whose identities were being withheld, were killed by the IPOB members, while others received machete cuts.

    He said that the injured operatives were taken to a hospital for medical attention.

    “Consequently, the command deployed reinforcements from the state headquarters, comprising PMF, Special Anti-Robbery Squad and Special Anti-Cult Units, in conjunction with the army and other sister agencies.

    “The area has been cordoned-off in order to fish out the culprits, while joint patrol are still ongoing in the town to prevent further breakdown of law and order,” Mohammed added.

    He further noted that some arrests were made and that the Commissioner of Police, Mr John Abang, had visited the scene and vowed to bring the perpetrators of the dastardly act to justice

  • Biafra: Police speak on alleged plans to arrest Nnamdi Kanu’s father

    The Abia State Police Command has debunked claims by the leadership of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) that its personnel were planning to arrest the father of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu.

    IPOB had at the weekend raised alarm about the presence of policemen and other security personnel around the home of their leader. This is even as they (IPOB) claimed that the target of the security agencies was to arrest Kanu’s father who reportedly arrived his compound almost two years after his compound was invaded by soldiers.

    Speaking with newsman on Monday, the State Police Commissioner, CP Ene Okon said “What IPOB has given to you people is completely false.

    “As a matter of fact, we received intelligence report that IPOB is going to have a meeting in Nnamdi Kanu’s house.

    “They prepared also for a protest over the alleged killing of their members during the operation Python Dance and as an organization that is charged with maintenance of law and order and to ensure peace, based on the intelligence that we gathered, we have to fortify the already existing police points within the area which has been there for the past two years.

    “All that we did is to put in more number of police in that area to ensure that there is peace in that area. No policeman entered Nnamdi Kanu’s house or his father’s house.

    “IPOB is pushing out propaganda to blackmail the police. The police didn’t even know whether Nnandi Kanu’s father is at home or not. Under what offence will the police go to arrest Nnamdi Kanu’s father; a 90-years-old man?

    “If police have anyone to arrest, it is Nnamdi Kanu that the police will arrest because he has been declared wanted and not the father.

    “It is mere propaganda or blackmail to win the sympathy of the Igbos by the IPOB. Remember that IPOB has been proscribed by law and they remain proscribed.

    “Any of their activities and gathering is illegal. If we get intelligence of their gathering which will disrupt the peace of the area, I don’t think that we should sit back and look at them disturbing the peace of the area,” Okon stated