DecemberIV:


Keep educating that iPod and rubbishing his fraudulent attempts to revise history and wash his kinsman of his selfish act that has backfired disastrously for the Ibos.

Easterner Ironsi gave Nigeria its present unitary structure and they must continue to live with it. This is the simple truth.



You must think northerners are daft enough to sit back and allow some greedy okoros pick and choose the structure they want whenever they like and think it favors them.

The beautiful thing is that they have the political and military force to ensure such okoro greed never takes place.

So your rationale is that Igbo man created the unitary system which was wrong but because Hausa man continued it for 50 years after multiple genocide and multiple coups, we must continue to remain in it just to punish igbos.

Well I have breaking news for you. The unitary system which you all have been supporting is actually hurting Nigeria more than it has hurt ndigbo specifically.

Igbos are the most adaptable group and are doing much better than the rest of other groups in Nigeria. So if your idea of continuing the unitary system was to punish igbos, you have failed woefully in that mission.

And finally because of it, all the poor Asian nations that Nigeria was richer than in the 60s and 70s such as South Korea has surpassed us and left us in the dust. Good luck with your punishment for ndigbo.

It didn't work for awolowo or Buhari and it will not work for you guys. cc Deadlytruth

Fremancipation:


So your rationale is that Igbo man created the unitary system which was wrong but because Hausa man continued it for 50 years after multiple genocide and multiple coups, we must continue to remain in it just to punish igbos.

Well I have breaking news for you. The unitary system which you all have been supporting is actually hurting Nigeria more than it has hurt ndigbo specifically.

Igbos are the most adaptable group and are doing much better than the rest of other groups in Nigeria. So if your idea of continuing the unitary system was to punish igbos, you have failed woefully in that mission.

And finally because of it, all the poor Asian nations that Nigeria was richer than in the 60s and 70s such as South Korea has surpassed us and left us in the dust. Good luck with your punishment for ndigbo.

It didn't work for awolowo or Buhari and it will not work for you guys. cc Deadlytruth

When you keep doing the same thing and expect a different result, then the cranium is obviously sick. Seems to me that Nigerians are sick on the head... Will they cease from been humans if this country disintegrate or is finally restructured....?

blues20:

When you keep doing the same thing and expect a different result, then the cranium is obviously sick. Seems to me that Nigerians are sick on the head... Will they cease from been humans if this country disintegrate or is finally restructured....?

Abeg help me tell these insane people. The funny part is that they think that by supporting the current system, they are punishing ndigbo...lol

These people are delusional. What awolowo could not accomplish with with the 20 pounds policy is what they are still hoping to accomplish. It's even impossible now Igbos have so many minted millionaires....lol

It is like cutting your nose to spite your face...lol

Fremancipation:


Abeg help me tell these insane people. The funny part is that they think that by supporting the current system, they are punishing ndigbo...lol

These people are delusional. What awolowo could not accomplish with with the 20 pounds policy is what they are still hoping to accomplish. It's even impossible now Igbos have so many minted millionaires....lol

It is like cutting your nose to spite your face...lol

..... to the average Nigerian, hating and spiting the Igbos makes them more patriotic and loyal citizen. Its a duty call. 2015 general election was a typical example.

Fremancipation:


So your rationale is that Igbo man created the unitary system which was wrong but because Hausa man continued it for 50 years after multiple genocide and multiple coups, we must continue to remain in it just to punish igbos.

Well I have breaking news for you. The unitary system which you all have been supporting is actually hurting Nigeria more than it has hurt ndigbo specifically.

Igbos are the most adaptable group and are doing much better than the rest of other groups in Nigeria. So if your idea of continuing the unitary system was to punish igbos, you have failed woefully in that mission.

And finally because of it, all the poor Asian nations that Nigeria was richer than in the 60s and 70s such as South Korea has surpassed us and left us in the dust. Good luck with your punishment for ndigbo.

It didn't work for awolowo or Buhari and it will not work for you guys. cc Deadlytruth

Assuming Ironsi had not been killed and overthrown and his government had been left to entrench the unitary system with Igbo's perpetually in control of the centre under that arrangement as Ironsi envisaged, would you yourself have by now been asking for a scrapping of unitary system and demanding a return to the initial strictly federal structure? Be honest!

No one is suggesting that we must maintain this unjust status quo in order to punish Igbo's for introducing it. Far from that! Al we are saying is that Igbo's should stop playing this innocent victims card creating the impression that they are completely blameless as regards the failed state of Nigeria. In an atmosphere of honesty every one should admit where and how his own tribe contributed to the derailment of Nigeria from our strictly federal structure to this unitary system mess which seems impossible to get out from. And if you ask me, I am even of the opinion that the North which we Southerners heap all the blames on are actually the least guilty. They were initially so conservative of their agricultural economy built on groundnut farming that they did not initially eye oil revenue from another region. But Southerners, particularly of the Igbo extraction, kept on calling them sectional in orientation and tribalistic for their conservative stand on issues. But when they decided to become "liberal" and "nationalistic" in outlook and revenue seeking, we again began to call them oil revenue parasites. What exactly did we want?

Deadlytruth:


Assuming Ironsi had not been killed and overthrown and his government had been left to entrench the unitary system with Igbo's perpetually in control of the centre under that arrangement as Ironsi envisaged, would you yourself have by now been asking for a scrapping of unitary system and demanding a return to the initial strictly federal structure? Be honest!

Yes I and so many other Igbos will be fighting against it because we hate injustice. Any unjust system is unsustainable and a recipe for disaster. Igbos from my upbringing know this very well.

In addition, Igbo societies are traditionally democratic. That's why we never had empire or tried to conquer our neighbors. Example is ogoni people who are a very small group surrounded by Igbo clans yet our ancestors never conquered or colonized them. They maintain their language and culture even though they were surrounded by Igbo clans.

Fremancipation:


Yes I and so many other Igbos will be fighting against it because we hate injustice. Any unjust system is unsustainable and a recipe for disaster. Igbos from my upbringing know this very well.

In addition, Igbo societies are traditionally democratic. That's why we never had empire or tried to conquer our neighbors. Example is ogoni people who are a very small group surrounded by Igbo clans yet our ancestors never conquered or colonized them. They maintain their language and culture even though they were surrounded by Igbo clans.

Then why did you people not join all the other tribes when they were cautioning and fighting against Ironsi and Ojukwu for laying the foundation of this unjust system by centralizing the civil service?
I have never read it anywhere that any Igbo individual or group came out to publicly condemn Ironsi and Ojukwu while the duo unified the civil service by military fiat.
How come the Igbo's whom you claim are culturally democratic watched their own equally supposedly democratic brothers subvert a democratically prepared constitution with unilateral military fiat?
Mind you that each initial regional civil service was being paid their salaries from the revenue purses of their respective regions. So unifying the civil service already signaled a unifying of all revenue sources to the centre as a decentralized centre with 25% remittances could not have been able to take over salary responsibility for a unified civil service without equally unifying the revenue sources to the centre. So Ironsi's unification of the civil service was a very clear step towards the eventual centralization of the revenue sources, thus a destruction of resource control.
Why was it that no single Igbo man publicly disagreed with his civil service unification as other tribes did, if truly Igbo's hate oppression and injustice?

Deadlytruth:


Then why did you people not join all the other tribes when they were cautioning and fighting against Ironsi and Ojukwu for laying the foundation of this unjust system by centralizing the civil service?
I have never read it anywhere that any Igbo individual or group came out to publicly condemn Ironsi and Ojukwu while the duo unified the civil service by military fiat.
How come the Igbo's whom you claim are culturally democratic watched their own brothers tinker subvert a democratically prepared constitution with unilateral military fiat?
Mind you that each initially regional civil service was being paid their salaries from the revenue purses of their respective regions. So unifying the civil service already signaled a unifying of all revenue sources to the centre as a decentralized centre with 25% remittances could not have been able to take over salary responsibility for a unified civil service without equally unifying the revenue sources to the centre. So Ironsi's unification of the civil service was a very clear step towards eventually centralization of the revenue sources thus a destruction of resource control. Why was it that no single Igbo man publicly disagreed with his civil service unification as other tribes did, if truly Igbo's hate oppression and injustice?

First of all it was ironsi and ojukwu that made the first coup by Nzeogu not to succeed as planned.They led the counter coup that disrupted the first coup.

Do you also know that during ironsi time, the military was seen as the savior and they brought stability to the chaos going on in the nation. Very few, apart from the north felt it was a bad idea because people were just fed up with the dirty politics going on at that time.

BBC has a documentary online that they showed peoples reactions in Lagos after ironsi took over and most taught it was a good idea.

It was 6 months later that the north redefined the coup as an Igbo coup even though the names of the coup plotters had yourubas, south south and middle belters.

I am sure that ironsi overtime would have been pressured to return to regional government not just from other Nigerians but from igbos. We have always been the biggest critic of our own. Ask any sitting Igbo governor.


Finally, if your agenda is to lay blame on igbos but at the same time you refuse to see the need to Restructure Nigeria because you think its punishment for Igbo then you will be shocked that the outcome is actually having the opposite effect. Don't let hatred for Igbos blind you from seeing the bigger picture.

Fremancipation:


First of all it was ironsi and ojukwu that made the first coup by Nzeogu not to succeed as planned.They led the counter coup that disrupted the first coup.

Do you also know that during ironsi time, the military was seen as the savior and they brought stability to the chaos going on in the nation. Very few, apart from the north felt it was a bad idea because people were just fed up with the dirty politics going on at that time.

BBC has a documentary online that they showed peoples reactions in Lagos after ironsi took over and most taught it was a good idea.

It was 6 months later that the north redefined the coup as an Igbo coup even though the names of the coup plotters had yourubas, south south and middle belters.

I am sure that ironsi overtime would have been pressured to return to regional government not just from other Nigerians but from igbos. We have always been the biggest critic of our own. Ask any sitting Igbo governor.


Finally, if your agenda is to lay blame on igbos but at the same time you refuse to see the need to Restructure Nigeria because you think its punishment for Igbo then you will be shocked that the outcome is actually having the opposite effect. Don't let hatred for Igbos blind you from seeing the bigger picture.

Ignore that dude. An Edoid jack that sees nothing good related to Indigbo. Dig his posts and see for youreself.... Igboid aka Pazianza have given him enough dose on history lessons, but his blind hate will never allow him accept the truth.

Fremancipation:


Yes I and so many other Igbos will be fighting against it because we hate injustice. Any unjust system is unsustainable and a recipe for disaster. Igbos from my upbringing know this very well.

In addition, Igbo societies are traditionally democratic. That's why we never had empire or tried to conquer our neighbors. Example is ogoni people who are a very small group surrounded by Igbo clans yet our ancestors never conquered or colonized them. They maintain their language and culture even though they were surrounded by Igbo clans.

Lol. Ogoni is surrounded by Ibo clans? Please stop talking and sharing rubbish on this forum. So Oyigbo, Obio/Akpor, Port Harcourt, Okrika, Ogu-Bolo, Bonny, Andoni, Opobo/Nkoro and Ikot Abasi are Ibo clans? You people won't seize to amaze me.

Ekinematics:


Lol. Ogoni is surrounded by Ibo clans? Please stop talking and sharing rubbish on this forum. So Oyigbo, Obio/Akpor, Port Harcourt, Okrika, Ogu-Bolo, Bonny, Andoni, Opobo/Nkoro and Ikot Abasi are Ibo clans? You people won't seize to amaze me.

Is Oyigbo - obigbo - an Awuri clan?

Blizzy9ja:
Why are you afraid of seccession? This north south thing to me was ill concieved and is right now only fuelled by the resources in the Niger Delta, As a Niger Deltan i do not in any way share anything in common with a northerner... They will do better if they stay in a northern caliphate or republic
Go to Ghana, US nobody talks about unity because they are naturally united and not divided along any line whatsoever.

you are correct, you do not share anythingin common with the northerner, but let's live together, I believewe need each other, though apparently the north needs the south than the south needs the north

Fremancipation:


First of all it was ironsi and ojukwu that made the first coup by Nzeogu not to succeed as planned.They led the counter coup that disrupted the first coup.

Do you also know that during ironsi time, the military was seen as the savior and they brought stability to the chaos going on in the nation. Very few, apart from the north felt it was a bad idea because people were just fed up with the dirty politics going on at that time.

BBC has a documentary online that they showed peoples reactions in Lagos after ironsi took over and most taught it was a good idea.

It was 6 months later that the north redefined the coup as an Igbo coup even though the names of the coup plotters had yourubas, south south and middle belters.

I am sure that ironsi overtime would have been pressured to return to regional government not just from other Nigerians but from igbos. We have always been the biggest critic of our own. Ask any sitting Igbo governor.


Finally, if your agenda is to lay blame on igbos but at the same time you refuse to see the need to Restructure Nigeria because you think its punishment for Igbo then you will be shocked that the outcome is actually having the opposite effect. Don't let hatred for Igbos blind you from seeing the bigger picture.

We are not talking about who planned the coup or who crushed it or who coloured it as a tribal coup.
We are talking of how federalism was dismantled and by who.
That has nothing to do with the coup which was an event of its own.
That Ironsi stopped the coup and then took over power for himself removes the credit from him. The objective of the five majors' coup was for military to take over. So if Ironsi, after stopping the coup, took over as a military man himself then of what use was his stopping the coup? His action yielded the same result as that of the boys whose coup he stopped.
So what was the difference? Truncation of democracy was going to be the result of both.
Moreover, of what benefit was his stopping of the coup after all the targeted people had been killed including innocent civilians and innocent army officer.
The fact that killing of Igbo's continued under Ironsi's regime and that even he himself was later killed means that his taking over power did not really stop the chaos.
Like I already said, it would have been correct to say he stopped the coup if and only if he had sworn in Dipcharima, replaced the slain premiers with their deputies and left the stage as a honourable professional army officer.
Military take over was military take over whether by Ironsi or by the five majors. If I must choose I would have even preferred that Ironsi never stopped the coup because the five majors' government would not have dismantled federalism since Nzeogwu in one of his interviews with journalists before he died described Aguyi Ironsi's unification decree as silly.
However, stories of the details of the coup do not alter the fact that Ironsi and Ojukwu put us in this mess. This is the simple truth Igbo's should accept and stop creating the impression that Northerners are the cause of our woes. It is only when we all mutually admit where our own brothers were wrong that we can succeed in restoring our true federalism. Blaming others and trying to rationalize the ugly quotas our kinsmen contributed to this mess will not engender the trust and cooperation we seek. If each and every Southern tribe is ready to admit where their own kinsmen were wrong in their actions in those trying times. I tell you that we will get Nigeria restructured within 6 months whether the North likes it or not.

Deadlytruth:
We are not talking about who planned the coup or who crushed it or who coloured it as a tribal coup.
We are talking of how federalism was dismantled and by who.
That has nothing to do with the coup which was an event of its own.
That Ironsi stopped the coup and then took over power for himself removes the credit from him. The objective of the five majors' coup was for military to take over. So if Ironsi, after stopping the coup, took over as a military man himself then of what use was his stopping the coup? His action yielded the same result as that of the boys whose coup he stopped.
So what was the difference? Truncation of democracy was going to be the result of both.
Moreover, of what benefit was his stopping of the coup after all the targeted people had been killed including innocent civilians and innocent army officer.
The fact that killing of Igbo's continued under Ironsi's regime and that even he himself was later killed means that his taking over power did not really stop the chaos.
Like I already said, it would have been correct to say he stopped the coup if and only if he had sworn in Dipcharima, replaced the slain premiers with their deputies and left the stage as a honourable professional army officer.
Military take over was military take over whether by Ironsi or by the five majors. If I must choose I would have even preferred that Ironsi never stopped the coup because the five majors' government would not have dismantled federalism since Nzeogwu in one of his interviews with journalists before he died described Aguyi Ironsi's unification decree as silly.
However, stories of the details of the coup do not alter the fact that Ironsi and Ojukwu put us in this mess. This is the simple truth Igbo's should accept and stop creating the impression that Northerners are the cause of our woes. It is only when we all mutually admit where our own brothers were wrong that we can succeed in restoring our true federalism. Blaming others and trying to rationalize the ugly quotas our kinsmen contributed to this mess will not engender the trust and cooperation we seek. If each and every Southern tribe is ready to admit where their own kinsmen were wrong in their actions in those trying times. I tell you that we will get Nigeria restructured within 6 months whether the North likes it or not.

This Deadlytrash of NL has resurrected in this 2017 with a renewed campaign of calumny to blackmail Igbos into staying put with him and his Uneme-Nekhua clan in this expired entity.

Restructure kó, Rebranding ní!

Remember, for a good part of 2016 I kept cautioning you of your incessant and baseless theories of absurdity geared towards blackmailing the Igbo Nation into staying put with you in this cesspit.

And like I have always maintained to you and your cotravellers that Igbos don't need you and all you ever stand for in life and hereafter. Stop attracting unnecessary attentions for yourselves on NL. It's pathetic already. Simply face OduaArewanistan republic or MOSUNDI.

Mosundi Demands Niger Delta Peoples Republic: https://www.nairaland.com/2355622/mosundi-demands-niger-delta-peoples

For the benefit of doubts let me remind you the sort of person you are. Here are some of the pathetic lies you vomitted in 2016; find below some notable hilarious quotes of the 'smart' Notorious Deadlytrash of NL:

1. "Aniomas themselves have never made the claim that Edos annihilated them during the Biafra war."

2. "Enahoro ...collude(d) with Awolowo in the coup plot when the dumb and daft Zik and Igbos...colluded with their NPC-NCNC Hausa slave masters to imprison them onto death"

3. "Igbos...collude(d) with Hausa-fulanis to kill other Southern tribes"

4. "Aburi Accord was nothing but a charade and jamboree organized by Ojukwu and Gowon to defraud the rest of Nigerians."

5. "Why should (Aburi Accord) issue of the structure to be adopted in governing Nigeria be subjected to the whims and caprices of Hausa-Fulanis and Igbos and government bureaucrats alone?
Why did they think they alone would just sit in Ghana and within some few hours decide the fate of all other tribes which were not represented there?"

6. "Aburi Accord was a plot hatched by...Hausa-Fulanis and Igbos to enslave and defraud other Nigerians as they had always done since independence."

7. "Igbos will remain back with Hasusa Fulani at the exit of NDR and Oodua Republic."

Deadlytruth:


We are not talking about who planned the coup or who crushed it or who coloured it as a tribal coup.
We are talking of how federalism was dismantled and by who.
That has nothing to do with the coup which was an event of its own.
That Ironsi stopped the coup and then took over power for himself removes the credit from him. The objective of the five majors' coup was for military to take over. So if Ironsi, after stopping the coup, took over as a military man himself then of what use was his stopping the coup? His action yielded the same result as that of the boys whose coup he stopped.
So what was the difference? Truncation of democracy was going to be the result of both.
Moreover, of what benefit was his stopping of the coup after all the targeted people had been killed including innocent civilians and innocent army officer.
The fact that killing of Igbo's continued under Ironsi's regime and that even he himself was later killed means that his taking over power did not really stop the chaos.
Like I already said, it would have been correct to say he stopped the coup if and only if he had sworn in Dipcharima, replaced the slain premiers with their deputies and left the stage as a honourable professional army officer.
Military take over was military take over whether by Ironsi or by the five majors. If I must choose I would have even preferred that Ironsi never stopped the coup because the five majors' government would not have dismantled federalism since Nzeogwu in one of his interviews with journalists before he died described Aguyi Ironsi's unification decree as silly.
However, stories of the details of the coup do not alter the fact that Ironsi and Ojukwu put us in this mess. This is the simple truth Igbo's should accept and stop creating the impression that Northerners are the cause of our woes. It is only when we all mutually admit where our own brothers were wrong that we can succeed in restoring our true federalism. Blaming others and trying to rationalize the ugly quotas our kinsmen contributed to this mess will not engender the trust and cooperation we seek. If each and every Southern tribe is ready to admit where their own kinsmen were wrong in their actions in those trying times. I tell you that we will get Nigeria restructured within 6 months whether the North likes it or not.

You should get some facts straight.

The first coup happend because of the general unrest in the land such as the 1963 census, the badly flawed elections of 1964 and the violence that it caused in the Western Region and other places in 1965. So its not like all was well when Nzeogwu and others struck in January 1966.

Nzeogwus coup was not an Igbo coup, even one of the main coup plotters, Major Ademoyega, said so in his book. Besides, Major Ademoyega, Captain Adeleke and Lt Oyewole were all major participants of the coup who were not Igbos. Even Northern foot soldiers were by far the largest participants of the coup.

Nzeogwus coup was initially popular with Nigerians. There was no way civilians could have carried on in that situation. With much of the military in support of the coup and Nzeogwu a national hero, there was no way civilians could have continued and Ironsi could not have handed over to civilians within 6 months.

Decree 34 promulgated by Ironsi was done with the full acceptance of the supreme military council and not something Ironsi alone made. Also, decree 34 did not abolish the regions. All it did was centralise Government which is how all military Governments run. The Regions still had a high degree of autonomy while Ironsi was there. Had Gowon and his Northern cohorts not abolished reagions and created states, Nigeria would have returned to the way things were run whenever civilians returned.

If Ironsi can be blamed for making a mistake with decree 34, what happend in Aburi was daylight robbery. When a loose federation had already been negotiated, Gowon went back on the agreement and created states which forced Ojukwu to seceed the Eastern Region out of Nigeria. Funnily enough, you will see people criticise Ironsi for decree 34 but hardly see the same people ever criticise Gowon for braking the Aburi agreement, creating states, taking away resource control and creating a worse unitary form of Government than Ironsi ever did.

Fremancipation:


So your rationale is that Igbo man created the unitary system which was wrong but because Hausa man continued it for 50 years after multiple genocide and multiple coups, we must continue to remain in it just to punish igbos.

Well I have breaking news for you. The unitary system which you all have been supporting is actually hurting Nigeria more than it has hurt ndigbo specifically.

Igbos are the most adaptable group and are doing much better than the rest of other groups in Nigeria. So if your idea of continuing the unitary system was to punish igbos, you have failed woefully in that mission.

And finally because of it, all the poor Asian nations that Nigeria was richer than in the 60s and 70s such as South Korea has surpassed us and left us in the dust. Good luck with your punishment for ndigbo.

It didn't work for awolowo or Buhari and it will not work for you guys. cc Deadlytruth

You can only fool yourselves.

The unitary system hurts Ibos the most because you are the weakest politically in the country, and representation at the centre is critical to benefit from a unitary system.

Why else do you keep crying that the SE lacks federal roads and other federal infrastructure? Why do you cry about being sidelined in this government today? Would you be screaming marginalization today or sacrificing dozens of your ipob yoots if Mazi Ironsi did not curse you with a unitary structure? Nobody is punishing Ibos, Ibos are punishing themselves.

As I said you can only fool yourself, and you will continue to live with the consequences of what Ironsi did.

iaatmguy:
you are correct, you do not share anythingin common with the northerner, but let's live together, I believewe need each other, [s]though apparently the north needs the south than the south needs the north[/s]

Receive common sense!

[s]

DecemberIV:
You can only fool yourselves.

The unitary system hurts Ibos the most because you are the weakest politically in the country, and representation at the centre is critical to benefit from a unitary system.

Why else do you keep crying that the SE lacks federal roads and other federal infrastructure? Why do you cry about being sidelined in this government today? Would you be screaming marginalization today or sacrificing dozens of your ipob yoots if Mazi Ironsi did not curse you with a unitary structure? Nobody is punishing Ibos, Ibos are punishing themselves.

As I said you can only fool yourself, and you will continue to live with the consequences of what Ironsi did.

[/s]

Atiku2019:
100% Restructuring

What is restructuring and what is Atiku?

DecemberIV:


Receive common sense!

I meant in terms of forex. ( Wealth creation. ) not SURVIVAL.
MIND you the South were eating FOOD before the amalgamation. Obviously they would go back to their land andsalcage some for agriculture

zendy:


You should get some facts straight.

The first coup happend because of the general unrest in the land such as the 1963 census, the badly flawed elections of 1964 and the violence that it caused in the Western Region and other places in 1965. So its not like all was well when Nzeogwu and others struck in January 1966.

Nzeogwus coup was not an Igbo coup, even one of the main coup plotters, Major Ademoyega, said so in his book. Besides, Major Ademoyega, Captain Adeleke and Lt Oyewole were all major participants of the coup who were not Igbos. Even Northern foot soldiers were by far the largest participants of the coup.

Nzeogwus coup was initially popular with Nigerians. There was no way civilians could have carried on in that situation. With much of the military in support of the coup and Nzeogwu a national hero, there was no way civilians could have continued and Ironsi could not have handed over to civilians within 6 months.

Decree 34 promulgated by Ironsi was done with the full acceptance of the supreme military council and not something Ironsi alone made. Also, decree 34 did not abolish the regions. All it did was centralise Government which is how all military Governments run. The Regions still had a high degree of autonomy while Ironsi was there. Had Gowon and his Northern cohorts not abolished reagions and created states, Nigeria would have returned to the way things were run whenever civilians returned.

If Ironsi can be blamed for making a mistake with decree 34, what happend in Aburi was daylight robbery. When a loose federation had already been negotiated, Gowon went back on the agreement and created states which forced Ojukwu to seceed the Eastern Region out of Nigeria. Funnily enough, you will see people criticise Ironsi for decree 34 but hardly see the same people ever criticise Gowon for braking the Aburi agreement, creating states, taking away resource control and creating a worse unitary form of Government than Ironsi ever did.

Decree 34 actually abolished the regions. In fact by that decree Ironsi changed Nigeria's official name from 'Federal Republic of Nigeria' to just 'Republic of Nigeria' meaning that the federating units had ceased to exist. In the broadcast in which he announced that decree he even argued that intense regionalism had failed the country and just had to be replaced with a very strong centrist structure.
Recall that Gowon, in an attempt to placate the North, made his own decree 56 which reversed Ironsi's unification decree. If Ironsi's decree 34 did not abolish the regions and centralize the government, then why did Gowon find it necessary to make his own decree 56?
Your claims on Aburi Accord are quite distorted. The truth is that after Gowon reversed Ironsi's decree and returned Nigeria to the four structure status quo ante amidst other on-going attempts to reverse all other undesirable changes Ironsi made, the continued retaliatory massacre of Igbos by Hausas in the North which had gone full swing prior to that time forced Ojukwu's eyes open to the the futility of the 'One-Nigeria' pursuit which Zik had inspired in him and in all Igbo's all along. The assassination of Ironsi also further demoralized Ojukwu so much that the combined despondency from these two ugly scenarios actuated him into seeking a structure even looser than the status quo ante which Gowon had just started returning Nigeria to by his decree 56 among others. This culminated in the scheduling of the Aburi meeting as demanded by Ojukwu and to which Gowon consented on the assumption that Ojukwu like everyone else wanted a return to the full pre-Ironsi structure. At the meeting however Ojukwu's proposals went beyond the previous federal arrangement to pure confederacy. Out of ignorance of the difference between federalism and Confederacy Gowon agreed to Ojukwu's confederal proposals. But on return to Nigeria, the majority back home were shocked to see that Gowon had ignorantly accepted confederacy as against their expectation of a return squarely to the purely federal structure which Ironsi derailed. This made them advise Gowon to renege. So Gowon's reneging on the Aburi Accord was not his own personal decision but that of the majority of the other Nigerian tribes who expected to see their much cherished federalism restored but were shocked to see Confederacy being offered in the name of Aburi Accord. Of course they had to reject it flat.
Consequently, Ojukwu felt frustrated and declared Biafra. Gowon then had to, as a strategy to frustrate Ojukwu, begin to undo the reversals he had already made to Ironsi's changes. This included a re-centralization of the structure to weaken Ojukwu. Had Ojukwu's proposals at Aburi just stopped at federalism and not icontaminated with elements of confederacy, the accord would not have been rejected on arrival in Nigeria. Had Ojukwu not declared Biafra, Gowon would not have started reversing himself on returning Nigeria to the true federalism we had before the advent of Ironsi.
I agree with you that the prevailing circumstances in the first republic were tending towards anarchy. But we all know that the circumstances were as a result of Tafawa Balewa's abuse of power at the centre. If the centre's abuse of its little powers could caused so much anarchy, then commonsense and logic dictated that whoever came to the rescue with sincere intentions, either through a coup or whichever way else, should have further removed more powers from the centre to forestall the kind of abuse which Balewa perpetrated. But Ironsi came in and ironically began to strengthen the centre in the name of arresting the drift into anarchy. Was it not the powers at the centre that caused the anarchical circumstance in the first instance? This is my issue with Ironsi.
Gowon was too ignorant to have known that a constitution could be freely tampered with by a military officer had Ironsi not set the precedent.

However bad the circumstances had become, a military intervention was in no way justified. In fact Tafawa Balewa had already started realizing his mistakes and had begun trying to break loose from Ahmadu Bello's apron strings to become his own man. In the last interview he granted to the press he had already indicated a readiness to release all those in jail and settle the matter amicably out of court. Even Okotie-Eboh too waa already calling on Balewa to retrace some of his steps against the UPGA in the interest of saving the young democracy. So why the coup?
Civilians always have a way of coming back to their senses and shifting grounds for peace and harmony. That is why they say no permanent fiends or enemies in politics, but only permanent interest.

With the near anarchy currently in Nigeria from the massacres of Odi, Zakibiam, to Gbaramatu and Oporoza, to the Shiites, to the Ipob protesters, etc, would you say a coup is currently justified?

blues20:

Ignore that dude. An Edoid jack that sees nothing good related to Indigbo. Dig his posts and see for youreself.... Igboid aka Pazianza have given him enough dose on history lessons, but his blind hate will never allow him accept the truth.

It would have been better if you had addressed the issues raised.
Please can you tell me why no single Igbo person or group rose publicly to dissociate themselves from Ironsi's centralization of the civil service despite knowing fully well that such automatically meant he would also centralize the revenue sources in order for the centre to be able to meet the financial obligations of the centralized civil service, thus a first step towards killing of resource control.
I want real answers and not insinuations of hate against indigbo please.

Deadlytruth:
It would have been better if you had addressed the issues raised.
Please can you tell me why no single Igbo person or group rose publicly to dissociate themselves from Ironsi's centralization of the civil service despite knowing fully well that such automatically meant he would also centralize the revenue sources in order for the centre to be able to meet the financial obligations of the centralized civil service, thus a first step towards killing of resource control.
I want real answers and not insinuations of hate against indigbo please.

Deadlytrash and his cheerleaders, you lots must understand that Igbos are more than ever before determined to have a separate existence from greedy, treasury looters cum murderous backst*bbers.

You lots are not that concerned about the ethnic cleansing going on in your backyard and the hate messages being preached in the mosques coupled with the unconscionable, cold-hearted waste of human lives and reckless destruction of means of livelihoods in the North.

You desparately want Igbos and Easterners to remain in this fraudulent union so that they can help you ward off the Jihad being waged by Dan Fodio's descendants while you continually feign ignorance and rant endlessly on inanities.

That you lots rarely stand for anything good in life should not be an excuse for you lots to drag Igbos into your discussions, both online and offline to make yourselves feel good. Your rants of frustrations and hypocrisy cannot prevent the inevitable - you spending the rest of your miserable lives with your Fulani masters.

You shouldn't expect the Igbo Nation to follow your foolish ways of delusion. 

Taking cognisance of the pathetic and shameless manners you're wont to rant amiss, it's quite clear that you lots understand that your evil game is up and so you're desperately in search of any straw of baseless theory to hold onto to blackmail Igbos into staying put with you in this expired entity. The days when you used lies and propaganda to have your way in the polity is gone. Indeed the serpent head is severely bruised and that's why you lots are desperately struggling for life to continue your treachery.

Igbos are not interested in sharing a country with lying bigots. And it's the height of insanity to still need someone who doesn't want you.

You really have got no business with someone who doesn't want to be with you!

Leave Igbos out of your home troubles and go find yourselves an idea you can live and die for!

DecemberIV:


You can only fool yourselves.

The unitary system hurts Ibos the most because you are the weakest politically in the country, and representation at the centre is critical to benefit from a unitary system.

Why else do you keep crying that the SE lacks federal roads and other federal infrastructure? Why do you cry about being sidelined in this government today? Would you be screaming marginalization today or sacrificing dozens of your ipob yoots if Mazi Ironsi did not curse you with a unitary structure? Nobody is punishing Ibos, Ibos are punishing themselves.

As I said you can only fool yourself, and you will continue to live with the consequences of what Ironsi did.

You clearly lack the capacity to understand things. On individual level, Igbos are doing marvelous in Nigeria. With the biggest middle class of all groups and the biggest in the Nigerian diaspora.

But one thing ndigbo refuse to do as long as they are still part of phantom one Nigeria is to let federal government marginalize them on federal infrastructures that other regions get for free.

Trust me, if igbos get Biafra tomorrow, you will see the largest mobilization of private capital for investment and infrastructure in African history. Igbos will build everything infrastructure that they need. In fact there will be 2 additional niger bridge that will be built.

But as long as you devils insists that we remain in Nigeria with you, we will continue to demand from federal government what they do for other regions.

I hope you get it now dummy.

Deadlytruth:


Decree 34 actually abolished the regions. In fact by that decree Ironsi changed Nigeria's official name from 'Federal Republic of Nigeria' to just 'Republic of Nigeria' meaning that the federating units had ceased to exist. In the broadcast in which he announced that decree he even argued that intense regionalism had failed the country and just had to be replaced with a very strong centrist structure.
Recall that Gowon, in an attempt to placate the North, made his own decree 56 which reversed Ironsi's unification decree. If Ironsi's decree 34 did not abolish the regions and centralize the government, then why did Gowon find it necessary to make his own decree 56?
Your claims on Aburi Accord are quite distorted. The truth is that after Gowon reversed Ironsi's decree and returned Nigeria to the four structure status quo ante amidst other on-going attempts to reverse all other undesirable changes Ironsi made, the continued retaliatory massacre of Igbos by Hausas in the North which had gone full swing prior to that time forced Ojukwu's eyes open to the the futility of the 'One-Nigeria' pursuit which Zik had inspired in him and in all Igbo's all along. The assassination of Ironsi also further demoralized Ojukwu so much that the combined despondency from these two ugly scenarios actuated him into seeking a structure even looser than the status quo ante which Gowon had just started returning Nigeria to by his decree 56 among others. This culminated in the scheduling of the Aburi meeting as demanded by Ojukwu and to which Gowon consented on the assumption that Ojukwu like everyone else wanted a return to the full pre-Ironsi structure. At the meeting however Ojukwu's proposals went beyond the previous federal arrangement to pure confederacy. Out of ignorance of the difference between federalism and Confederacy Gowon agreed to Ojukwu's confederal proposals. But on return to Nigeria, the majority back home were shocked to see that Gowon had ignorantly accepted confederacy as against their expectation of a return squarely to the purely federal structure which Ironsi derailed. This made them advise Gowon to renege. So Gowon's reneging on the Aburi Accord was not his own personal decision but that of the majority of the other Nigerian tribes who expected to see their much cherished federalism restored but were shocked to see Confederacy being offered in the name of Aburi Accord. Of course they had to reject it flat.
Consequently, Ojukwu felt frustrated and declared Biafra. Gowon then had to, as a strategy to frustrate Ojukwu, begin to undo the reversals he had already made to Ironsi's changes. This included a re-centralization of the structure to weaken Ojukwu. Had Ojukwu's proposals at Aburi just stopped at federalism and not icontaminated with elements of confederacy, the accord would not have been rejected on arrival in Nigeria. Had Ojukwu not declared Biafra, Gowon would not have started reversing himself on returning Nigeria to the true federalism we had before the advent of Ironsi.
I agree with you that the prevailing circumstances in the first republic were tending towards anarchy. But we all know that the circumstances were as a result of Tafawa Balewa's abuse of power at the centre. If the centre's abuse of its little powers could caused so much anarchy, then commonsense and logic dictated that whoever came to the rescue with sincere intentions, either through a coup or whichever way else, should have further removed more powers from the centre to forestall the kind of abuse which Balewa perpetrated. But Ironsi came in and ironically began to strengthen the centre in the name of arresting the drift into anarchy. Was it not the powers at the centre that caused the anarchical circumstance in the first instance? This is my issue with Ironsi.
Gowon was too ignorant to have known that a constitution could be freely tampered with by a military officer had Ironsi not set the precedent.

You are running away from the real issues and countering your own arguement. Ironsi did not abolish the 4 Regions. The 4 Regions were still existing the day Ironsi died, so how could he have abolished it? What Ironsi did was to centralise Government, the 4 Regions stayed intact.

Gowon went to Aburi to talk peace with Ojukwu and the 3 other military Governors. They debated for two days and signed an agreement. If Gowon went back home and decided that the Aburi agreement he signed infront of the president of Ghana was not right, he should sought a second meeting to amend it. Lets not forget that this was military rule and in the military, a junior officer does not dictate to his senior. Of the four military Governors of the time, Lt Colonel Ojukwu, Colonel Adebayo, Lt Colonel Ejoor and Lt Colonel Katsina. Adebayo, Ejoor and Ojukwu were all senior to Gowon. Only Katsina was junior to Gowon.

For Gowon to have held a meeting with his seniors, signed the agreement with them and gone back home to sing another tune is in it self a very bad thing.

You said that Gowon reneged on the Aburi agreement because of the wishes of the majority who wanted the pre-Ironsi situation? Then why didnt he do that? Instead, Gowon went ahead to dismember the 4 regions into 12 states. Why did he do this? Ironsi did not cut up the Regions, he onky changed the mechanics of how it was run. Aburi did not cut up the Regions, it only changed the mechanics of how it was run. Only Gowon came and not only changed the mechanics of how the 4 Regions were run but also cut them up into 12 pieces.

For your information, Gowon announced the division of the 4 Regions into 12 states on the 27th of May 1967, as a result, Ojukwu declared Biafra 3 days later on the 30th. So this talk of yours that declaring Biafra caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism is nonsense.

Had Gowon not cut up the 4 Regions, those 4 Regions would still have reverted to pre-Ironsi situation whenever civilian rule returned.

zendy:


You are running away from the real issues and countering your own arguement. Ironsi did not abolish the 4 Regions. The 4 Regions were still existing the day Ironsi died, so how could he have abolished it? What Ironsi did was to centralise Government, the 4 Regions stayed intact.

Gowon went to Aburi to talk peace with Ojukwu and the 3 other military Governors. They debated for two days and signed an agreement. If Gowon went back home and decided that the Aburi agreement he signed infront of the president of Ghana was not right, he should sought a second meeting to amend it. Lets not forget that this was military rule and in the military, a junior officer does not dictate to his senior. Of the four military Governors of the time, Lt Colonel Ojukwu, Colonel Adebayo, Lt Colonel Ejoor and Lt Colonel Katsina. Adebayo, Ejoor and Ojukwu were all senior to Gowon. Only Katsina was junior to Gowon.

For Gowon to have held a meeting with his seniors, signed the agreement with them and gone back home to sing another tune is in it self a very bad thing.

You said that Gowon reneged on the Aburi agreement because of the wishes of the majority who wanted the pre-Ironsi situation? Then why didnt he do that? Instead, Gowon went ahead to dismember the 4 regions into 12 states. Why did he do this? Ironsi did not cut up the Regions, he onky changed the mechanics of how it was run. Aburi did not cut up the Regions, it only changed the mechanics of how it was run. Only Gowon came and not only changed the mechanics of how the 4 Regions were run but also cut them up into 12 pieces.

For your information, Gowon announced the division of the 4 Regions into 12 states on the 27th of May 1967, as a result, Ojukwu declared Biafra 3 days later on the 30th. So this talk of yours that declaring Biafra caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism is nonsense.

Had Gowon not cut up the 4 Regions, those 4 Regions would still have reverted to pre-Ironsi situation whenever civilian rule returned.

Your argument that the continued existence of the regions under Ironsi automatically meant federalism was still in place is very faulty when looked at against the fundamentals of what unitary system and federalism entail. In principle what makes a society federal is not the mere existence of regions or subnational divisions in it but the extent to which those divisions are autonomous and independent of the centre. That Britain has districts and regions like Sheffield, etc does not automatically translate to Britain being a federalism. Actually Britain is a unitary state because even though regions are present in it, the centre has overwhelming control over them. That was similar to what Ironsi did. He left the regions in existence but was actually weakening them and stripping them of their autonomy in favour of the centre, thereby subtly converting Nigeria to a unitary state. The regions that existed under Ironsi were very very weak and almost dead. His centralization of the civil service was an attack on the most fundamental definitive feature of regional autonomy. Regions which had lost control over their civil service had lost everything else as the civil service is the pivot and life blood of any administrative entity. The civil service generates the revenue, implements the governments programmes and policies, and practically runs the government. In fact the civil service is the only tool by which any government operates and does its business of governance. So unifying the civil service was tantamount to taking away government from the regions completely. It was like removing the engine of the regional governments and taking those engines to the centre. Then what was left in the regions even though they were still existing merely on paper?
Your defense with the claim that Gowon's division of the country into 12 states came before Ojukwu's declaration of Biafra is nonsense. After majority of Nigerians rejected the Aburi Accord, it was practically impossible for Gowon to continue with his already commenced process of returning Nigeria to the pre-Ironsi status quo because Ojukwu had already mounted the campaign of 'On Aburi Accord ALONE we stand' thereby making it clear that he would not under any condition or for any reason accept anything other than confederacy which ironically the majority did not want. His mind was made up so Gowon did not need to waste his time trying to convince him again that majority wanted just a full return to federalism and not confederacy.
If Ojukwu had agreed with the majority that we went back exactly to pre-Ironsi federalism, Gowon would not have split into states the regions which he was already rescuing from Ironsi's damage.
Your argument on seniority in the army is irrelevant because there was chaos at that moment and that the choas was not an about internal affairs of the army but was even more about the affairs of the civilian populace. So army hierarchy considerations had to be jettisoned in the interest of seeking the best solution that resonated with the wish of the civilian majority. Soldiers don't exist for themselves but for civilians.

"If-I'm-not-sure-I'll-make-it-alone-then-let-us-all-stick-together-and-see-if-we-could-make-it-together-in-a-jealous-tribalistic-wicked-painful-way." 
- Deadlytrash of NL

To all notorious history distortionists and wicked propagandists who insult and malign others continually with lies and falsehood, and shout and make much noise on every available media, here are the names of 31 officials and representatives of the 4 Regions who attended the Aburi Accord meeting in Ghana:

Chairman of the Ghana National Liberation Council -Lt.-General J.A. Ankrah-Chairman
Lt.-Col. Yakubu Gowon- Head of State
Lt.-Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu - Governor Eastern Region
Major Mobolaji Johnson - Governor Lagos State
Lt.-Col. Hassan Katsina - Governor Northern Region
Lt.-Col. David Ejoor - Governor Mid-Western Region
Commodore Joseph Edet Akinwale Wey - Vice President of Nigeria
Colonel Robert Adebayo - Governor Western Region
Alhaji Kam Selem
Mr. T. Omo-Bare

Others as follows:

N. Akpan Secretary to the Military Governor-East
Alhaji Ali Akilu Secretary to the Military Governor-North
D. Lawani Under Secretary, Military Governor's Office-Mid-West.
P. Odumosu Secretary to the Military Governor-West
S. Akenzua Permanent Under-Secretary-Federal Cabinet Office
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aburi_Accord

HOW NIGERIA'S BREAKUP IN 1966 WAS SCUTTLED BY MIDWESTERNERS (EDOS) - Umaru Dikko
https://www.nairaland.com/233153/north-would-have-regretted-nigerias-break-up-in-1966-Umaru-Dikko

HOW ABURI ACCORD OF JAN 1967 WAS SCUTTLED BY MIDWESTERNERS (EDOS), LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR - Retired Lt. Fola Oyewole
https://www.nairaland.com/2854914/why-fought-side-ojukwu-biafra-fola-oyewole

https://www.nairaland.com/3143222/biafra-memo-oba-akenzua-frustrated-implementation-of-aburi-accord-january-1967
http://www.punchng.com/biafra-memo-akenzua-aburi/

THE ACTION OF ENAHORO IN SCUTTLING THE CONFEDERATION PLAN - Tanko Yakassai
http://nigerianpilot.com/restructuring-calls-fears-igbos-yakassai/

Let it be clear to the Unemes and their cotravellers that the Igbo Nation cannot continue to subsidise their vassalage, parasitism and obliviousness. Igbos are not willing to self-destruct with the Uneme-Nekhua people. The earlier you channel your negative energies towards consolidating OduaArewanistan republic or MOSUNDI the better for your survival.

Mosundi Demands Niger Delta Peoples Republic: https://www.nairaland.com/2355622/mosundi-demands-niger-delta-peoples

Deadlytruth:


Your argument that the continued existence of the regions under Ironsi automatically meant federalism was still in place is very faulty when looked at against the fundamentals of what unitary system and federalism entail. In principle what makes a society federal is not the mere existence of regions subnational divisions but the extent to which those divisions are autonomous and free of the influence of the centre. That Britain has districts and regions like Sheffield, etc does not automatically translate to Britain being a federalism. Actually Britain is a unitary state because even though regions are present in it, the centre has overwhelming control over them. That was similar to what Ironsi did. He left the regions in existence but was actually weakening them and stripping them of their autonomy in favour of the centre, thereby subtly converting Nigeria to a unitary state. The regions that existed under Ironsi were very very weak and almost dead. His centralization of the civil service was an attack on the most fundamental definitive feature of regional autonomy. Regions which have lost control over their civil service sections had lost everything else as the civil service is the pivot and life blood of any administrative entity. The civil service generates the revenue, implements the governments programmes and policies, and practically runs the government. In fact the civil service is the only tool by which any government operates and does its business of governance. So unifying the civil service was tantamount to taking away government from the regions completely. It was like removing the engine of the regional governments and taking those engines to the centre. Then what was left in the regions even though they were still existing merely on paper?
Your claim that Gowon's division of the country into 12 states came before Ojukwu's declaration of Biafra is nonsense. After majority of Nigerians rejected the Aburi Accord, it was practically impossible for Gowon to continue with his already commenced process of returning Nigeia to the pre-Ironsi status quo because Ojukwu had already mounted the campaign of 'On Aburi Accord ALONE we stand' thereby making it clear that he would not under any condition or for any reason accept anything other than confederacy which ironically the majority wanted. His mind was made up so Gowon did not need to waste his time to try to convince him again that majority wanted just a full return to federalism and not confederacy.
If Ojukwu had agreed with the majority that we went back exactly to pre-Ironsi federalism, Gowon would not have split into states the regions which he was already rescuing from Ironsi's damage.
Your argument on seniority in the army is irrelevant because there was chaos at that moment and that the choas was not an about internal affairs of the army but was even more about the affairs if the civilian populace. So army hierarchy considerations had to be jettisoned in the interest of seeking the best solution that resonated with the wish of the civilian majority. Soldiers don't exist for themselves but for civilians.

You keep changing positions each time. Now it is no longer the declaration of Biafra that caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism, it was because Ojukwu insisted on the confederation agreed at Aburi. Laughable. Who told you that the majority wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times? Who where this majority? The North? All 4 Regional Military Governors and Gowon signed a binding agreement in Aburi on behalf of their people. why would Gowon unilalterally renege on what he signed with others? How can a person sign an agreement, have a change of heart and not call all those he signed the agreement with to renegotiate? Your argument is really funny. So Ojukwu was stubborn and adamant on confederation, Gowon wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times, but because Ojukwu was stubborn, Gowon now decided to ignore Ojukwu and the same majority who want true federalism and decided to introduce full blown unitary rule by dividing the regions, and making things much worse than either Ironsi or Ojukwu advocated for? Who are you kidding? So where was this so called majority that wanted true federalism when Gowon was doing this? Where were they when Gowon won the war and there was no more stubborn Ojukwu? Why did the same unitary system continue? So Ironsi started a bad precedence and all of you happily ran with it, even fought a war to keep running with it and kept running with the same precedence in an even worse form for 50 years. Who are you people kidding?

Guy face the truth. Long before the first coup, the North has always wanted economic and political domination of Nigeria. The first coup and counter coup was the perfect excuse to put that agenda in place. Knowing that the Western Region had no fight in them, the only opposition they faced and still face is from the former Eastern Region and part of the former Mid west Region which some people now collectively call SE/SS. So they implemented 'divide and rule' Thats why Aburi agreement was bad fir them, it stopped their plans for domination in its tracks cause Ojukwu thats what they were up to.

Do you know that the Northern officers who conducted the counter coup initially wanted to seceed the North out of Nigeria? But they realised that the North would not be viable without the South and changed tune to what their political fathers wanted which was control of Nigeria. The war was inevitable because the Igbo man was not prepared to accept Northern domination as readily as the Yoruba man was. Our history has taught us all that Nigeria does not work as a nation and we are all better apart than together.

zendy:


You keep changing positions each time. Now it is no longer the declaration of Biafra that caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism, it was because Ojukwu insisted on the confederation agreed at Aburi. Laughable. Who told you that the majority wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times? Who where this majority? The North? All 4 Regional Military Governors and Gowon signed a binding agreement in Aburi on behalf of their people. why would Gowon unilalterally renege on what he signed with others? How can a person sign an agreement, have a change of heart and not call all those he signed the agreement with to renegotiate? Your argument is really funny. So Ojukwu was stubborn and adamant on confederation, Gowon wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times, but because Ojukwu was stubborn, Gowon now decided to ignore Ojukwu and the same majority who want true federalism and decided to introduce full blown unitary rule by dividing the regions, and making things much worse than either Ironsi or Ojukwu advocated for? Who are you kidding? So where was this so called majority that wanted true federalism when Gowon was doing this? Where were they when Gowon won the war and there was no more stubborn Ojukwu? Why did the same unitary system continue? So Ironsi started a bad precedence and all of you happily ran with it, even fought a war to keep running with it and kept running with the same precedence in an even worse form for 50 years. Who are you people kidding?

Guy face the truth. Long before the first coup, the North has always wanted economic and political domination of Nigeria. The first coup and counter coup was the perfect excuse to put that agenda in place. Knowing that the Western Region had no fight in them, the only opposition they faced and still face is from the former Eastern Region and part of the former Mid west Region which some people now collectively call SE/SS. So they implemented 'divide and rule' Thats why Aburi agreement was bad fir them, it stopped their plans for domination in its tracks cause Ojukwu thats what they were up to.

Do you know that the Northern officers who conducted the counter coup initially wanted to seceed the North out of Nigeria? But they realised that the North would not be viable without the South and changed tune to what their political fathers wanted which was control of Nigeria. The war was inevitable because the Igbo man was not prepared to accept Northern domination as readily as the Yoruba man was. Our history has taught us all that Nigeria does not work as a nation and we are all better apart than together.

I have not changed position. In the prevailing circumstances Ojukwu's insistence on Aburi Accord or nothing else was already a disguised declaration of a separate republic. Awolowo's announcement that 'if the East was allowed to go the West too would go' was an indication that Ojukwu's body language was showing clearly that he, deep down in his mind, was already making concrete preparations to declare Biafra despite insisting on Aburi Accord implementation on the surface. In fact his proposal of regional army at Aburi was not only strange to the whole world as no other country had ever even thought of that, but was also an indirect way of seeking power in advance to declare Biafra should Gowon implement the accord. If not for a secession strategy why would anyone propose a regionalized army? Where has such ever happened? Then what is the meaning of army?
In principle, apart from Ojukwu, the the other three military regional governors did not really represent their regions' civilian populace's interest because they were forced on them by Ironsi. They were not voted into their positions by those civilians. Before they left for Aburi they did not consult the civilian masses in any way, therefore their blind endorsement of Ojukwu's numerous Confederal proposals was not representative of the true wish of the civilian populace of their respective regions. Only Ojukwu could be said to have been properly accepted by his own region's people to represent them because he was chosen for them by a fellow Easterner - Ironsi and was practically consulting the Eastern Regional Assembly for most of the steps he took. If the known leading politicians endorsed and loved by their people in each of each of the regions had been allowed to represent their regions at Aburi, do you think Ojukwu's confederal proposals would have scaled through for Gowon to sign? Recall that in arrival of Ojukwu and Gowon from Aburi, it was these leading politicians from other regions that rejected the Aburi Accord with their peoples support because they were not carried along to Aburi coupled with the fact that the outcome of that accord was far from the wishes of the civilians they represented. Those civilians from the 3 other regions were the majority and not the 4 regional military governors who represented a military establishment that had illegally imposed themselves on them.
Gowon had no choice but to renege on the agreement because on return he got to know that what he mistakenly signed was the interest of a very small minority and not the majority. There is nothing morally wrong about that. It would have even been morally wrong for him to stick to the accord after the overwhelming majority told him on his arrival that it was contrary to their expectation and therefore did not want it implemented.
Ojukwu's stubbornness was ultimately aimed at declaring a separate republic by all means, and a military government at the centre would not allow it since the constitution did not provide for that. In fact the constitution had it that the unity of Nigeria was non-negotiable courtesy of Zik. There was no secession clause in it, and it was endorsed like that by all at the time of formulation, including Igbos
. Even prior to that time the same Ironsi and the same Ojukwu never allowed Isaac Boro's declaration of secession see the light of the day on account of the non negotiability of Nigeria's unity. So Gowon too had to defend the unity of the country by any means possible just as Ironsi and Ojukwu too did to Isaac Boro earlier on. Therefore the majority who wanted federalism did not mind whatever strategy (whether reverting to unitary system) Gowon used to prevent Ojukwu's secession or confederacy which would have endanger their lives. If secession would not endanger peoples lives, then why did Ojukwu and Ironsi not allow Isaac Boro go?
It doesn't matter if we spend 50 years trying to get federalism back.
Who introduced an evil remains the guiltiest irrespective of the extent to which others later copied it. Adam ate only fruit thus committing far lesser sin that most people who came after him. But he is still called the father of sin because he set the precedent in the first instsnce.

Your insinuation that the North and West broke Aburi Accord because they wanted to dominate is a distortion of facts. Recall that the North initially did not want to be part of Nigeria but even described Nigeria as the mistake of 1914 prior to independence. In fact Ahmadu Bello repeatedly asked for the de-amalgamation of Nigeria and same with Tafawa Balewa. It was Zik who kept on courting them into co-forming a country with the South. The same Zik gave them power over the South by taking the NCNC into an alliance with the NPC to throw up Balewa as the first ruler instead of the all-South alliance that would have made a Southerner, specifically Zik himself, the first prime minister to help curtail the born to rule agenda. So whose fault?

Deadlytruth:


I have not changed position. In the prevailing circumstances Ojukwu's insistence on Aburi Accord or nothing else was already a disguised declaration of a separate republic. Awolowo's announcement that 'if the East was allowed to go the West too would go' was an indication that Ojukwu's body language was showing clearly that he, deep down in his mind, was already making concrete preparations to declare Biafra despite insisting on Aburi Accord implementation on the surface. In fact his proposal of regional army at Aburi was not only strange to the whole world as no other country had ever even thought of that, but was also an indirect way of seeking power in advance to declare Biafra should Gowon implement the accord. If not for a secession strategy why would anyone propose a regionalized army? Where has such ever happened? Then what is the meaning of army?
In principle, apart from Ojukwu, the the other three military regional governors did not really represent their regions' civilian populace's interest because they were forced on them by Ironsi. They were not voted into their positions by those civilians. Before they left for Aburi they did not consult the civilian masses in any way, therefore their blind endorsement of Ojukwu's numerous Confederal proposals was not representative of the true wish of the civilian populace of their respective regions. Only Ojukwu could be said to have been properly accepted by his own region's people to represent them because he was chosen for them by a fellow Easterner - Ironsi and was practically consulting the Eastern Regional Assembly for most of the steps he took. If the known leading politicians endorsed and loved by their people in each of each of the regions had been allowed to represent their regions at Aburi, do you think Ojukwu's confederal proposals would have scaled through for Gowon to sign? Recall that in arrival of Ojukwu and Gowon from Aburi, it was these leading politicians from other regions that rejected the Aburi Accord with their peoples support because they were not carried along to Aburi coupled with the fact that the outcome of that accord was far from the wishes of the civilians they represented. Those civilians from the 3 other regions were the majority and not the 4 regional military governors who represented a military establishment that had illegally imposed themselves on them.
Gowon had no choice but to renege on the agreement because on return he got to know that what he mistakenly signed was the interest of a very small minority and not the majority. There is nothing morally wrong about that. It would have even been morally wrong for him to stick to the accord after the overwhelming majority told him on his arrival that it was contrary to their expectation and therefore did not want it implemented.
Ojukwu's stubbornness was ultimately aimed at declaring a separate republic by all means, and a military government at the centre would not allow it since the constitution did not provide for that. In fact the constitution had it that the unity of Nigeria was non-negotiable courtesy of Zik. There was no secession clause in it, and it was endorsed like that by all at the time of formulation, including Igbos
. Even prior to that time the same Ironsi and the same Ojukwu never allowed Isaac Boro's declaration of secession see the light of the day on account of the non negotiability of Nigeria's unity. So Gowon too had to defend the unity of the country by any means possible just as Ironsi and Ojukwu too did to Isaac Boro earlier on. Therefore the majority who wanted federalism did not mind whatever strategy (whether reverting to unitary system) Gowon used to prevent Ojukwu's secession or confederacy which would have endanger their lives. If secession would not endanger peoples lives, then why did Ojukwu and Ironsi not allow Isaac Boro go?
It doesn't matter if we spend 50 years trying to get federalism back.
Who introduced an evil remains the guiltiest irrespective of the extent to which others later copied it. Adam ate only fruit thus committing far lesser sin that most people who came after him. But he is still called the father of sin because he set the precedent in the first instsnce.

Your insinuation that the North and West broke Aburi Accord because they wanted to dominate is a distortion of facts. Recall that the North initially did not want to be part of Nigeria but even described Nigeria as the mistake of 1914 prior to independence. In fact Ahmadu Bello repeatedly asked for the de-amalgamation of Nigeria and same with Tafawa Balewa. It was Zik who kept on courting them into co-forming a country with the South. The same Zik gave them power over the South by taking the NCNC into an alliance with the NPC to throw up Balewa as the first ruler instead of the all-South alliance that would have made a Southerner, specifically Zik himself, the first prime minister to help curtail the born to rule agenda. So whose fault?

Why dont you answer the questions I asked? If you cant answer then say so. You said that Gowon reneged on the agreement he signed in Aburi because the majority did not want confederation but a return to how things were before Ironsi. Who were these majority? Did different ethnic groups come out in protest or something? If you say that politicians and leaders went to Gowon to impress on him the need to return things to pre-Ironsi times then tell us who these leaders and politicians were. Since you say that they were the majority, there must have been many of them. What are their names cut across the 4 Regions of the time? This is your whole arguement about why Gowon was justified in going back on the gentlemans agreement he signed, causing Ojukwu to seceed and the civil war that followed. So tell me this majority that wanted Aburi repudiated and the names of these leaders that wanted it.

Also, this majority that insisted on pre-Ironsi times, what were their reaction when Gowon then decided to do much worse than Ironsi or Ojukwu and introduced unitary rule by dividing the regions into 12 states. If they felt so bad at the confedral agreement reached at Aburi, just how did they feel when Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions for 12 states? Also, if Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions to neutralise Ojukwu, why did he not return the country to pre-Ironsi times in 1970 when he won the war and there was no more Ojukwu?


Answer questions instead to trumpeting the same Yoruba propaganda we have heard for years

zendy:


Why dont you answer the questions I asked? If you cant answer then say so. You said that Gowon reneged on the agreement he signed in Aburi because the majority did not want confederation but a return to how things were before Ironsi. Who were these majority? Did different ethnic groups come out in protest or something? If you say that politicians and leaders went to Gowon to impress on him the need to return things to pre-Ironsi times then tell us who these leaders and politicians were. Since you say that they were the majority, there must have been many of them. What are their names cut across the 4 Regions of the time? This is your whole arguement about why Gowon was justified in going back on the gentlemans agreement he signed, causing Ojukwu to seceed and the civil war that followed. So tell me this majority that wanted Aburi repudiated and the names of these leaders that wanted it.

Also, this majority that insisted on pre-Ironsi times, what were their reaction when Gowon then decided to do much worse than Ironsi or Ojukwu and introduced unitary rule by dividing the regions into 12 states. If they felt so bad at the confedral agreement reached at Aburi, just how did they feel when Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions for 12 states? Also, if Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions to neutralise Ojukwu, why did he not return the country to pre-Ironsi times in 1970 when he won the war and there was no more Ojukwu?


Answer questions instead to trumpeting the same Yoruba propaganda we have heard for years

We all know that each regions with their civilian populaces had their political leaders of thought. The Midwest had the likes of Enahoro, Arthur Priest, Igenuma, and orhers; The West had the likes of Awolowo, Alhaji Adegbenro, etc, while the North, after the wicked assassination of Ahmadu Bello and Tafawa Balewa, still had the likes of Dipcharima Maitama Sule and co. Each of these regions believed more in these politicians than the imposed military governors who were hardly their political leaders. Due to the followership these political leaders enjoyed among the civilian populace of their respective regions, whatever positions they took on any matter was automatically accepted by them being their leaders from time. And it was these politicians that asked Gowon to renege on Aburi Accord as it did not resonate with their quest for a return to nothing other than federalism. The West, North and Midwest which they represented were together an overwhelming majority compared with the Igbo fraction of the east which Ojukwu represented.
If the Aburi summit was really well intended, then why were the normal political leaders of each region not invited to it? Why was it just a purely military establishment affair? Was the military in the picture of legislation and constitutional debates issue prior to that time? How could soldiers hijack legislative process from civilians? What do soldiers know about good constitutions and good governance? Were soldiers supposed to be the ones dictating how a country should be structured or the civil populace through their elected political leaders? In principle was Ojukwu himself even supposed to represent the East where Zik and Okpara the Eastern political leaders were available? In the Aburi Accord was there any statement on how and when the military would return the country to civil rule/democracy? All the agreements revolved around how the military would and should share powers henceforth without a single reference to when democracy would be restored, yet you wanted civilian majority of the West, North and Midwest who had been enjoying democracy and represented by their politicians to accept that document? Gowon's gentleman's agreement with Ojukwu was contrary to the wishes of the civilian majority in whose interest the summit was purportedly held, so Gowon was under a moral obligation to renege on it when the majority made him realize it was against their wish.
If the agreement had been for something purely between Ojukwu and Gowon alone, then it would have been morally wrong for him to renege. But the subject of the agreement was one which concerned millions of persons other than Gowon, so he had to respect those peoples' rejection of his gentleman's agreement. Had Ojukwu mistakenly agreed to what you Igbo's felt would endanger your lives would you have asked him to stick to the agreement just because it was gentleman's?
The residual majority did not feel bad about Gowon's dismantling of the four regions because they understood it to be a necessary discomfort they had to bear to forestall the greater discomfort Ojukwu's activities would cause them.
On why Gowon could not return Nigeria to pre-Ironsi status quo after the war ended: It is very simple. The regions had, within the three years of unitary system introduced by Ironsi and sustained by Gowon to weaken Ojukwu, been forced to abandon their farms for oil revenue coming from the now centralized government courtesy of Ironsi, thus the groundnut pyramids and plantations of the North. the cocoa plantations of the West, The rubber plantations of the Midwest and the Oil Palm plantations of the East had all practically disappeared. Now, for these regions to suddenly go back to their agro-based economy which took them over 40 years to build before Ironsi killed them with his unification of the civil service was not going to be a child's play. So they all just preferred that the centre kept sustaining them with oil money rather than go back and start all over again from square one with agriculture. And oil money was so easy to get that no one, not even the owners of the oil, even bothered to talk of a return to federalism again. Three years of war was such a long time that people were too emotionally wrecked to just be taken back to pre-Ironsi federalism when no region really had the agricultural base anymore to fend for herself without the oil money we had become used to, thus Gowon had no choice than to keep the new order alive. In the six years of peace that followed before Gowon was ousted, the humanitarian crises resulting from the war were huge enough of a national challenge to prevent the preparation of a comprehensive roadmap back to agriculture thus federalism.
Had Ironsi not tampered with the structure at all from the beginning, all these ripple effects of it would not have followed. The indiscipline that came with oil boom would not have come. Had Ironsi not been overthrown and killed, he and Ojukwu too would not have ever returned Nigeria to federalism when the anarchy caused by the January boys would have subsided.