₦airaland Forum

They (Ojukwu and Ironsi) were in power for a good six months but could not release Awo only for Ojukwu to start claiming he released Awolowo after the powers to do so had actually left him. Very funny.

I don't believe the coupists ever really intended to make Awolowo Prime Minister because as at that moment almost all Igbos-both civilians and military- had been made by Zik to believe that Awolowo was a tribalist citing the Western House issue. So how come a coup mostly planned and executed by Igbos was meant to install as Prime Minister a man who themselves had come to believe was a rabid tribalists who would most likely by extension pursue tribalistic agenda if placed in power at least according to Igbo logic.
Secondly, even Gbulie in this piece above made mention of the conversations during the planning stage and never added that anyone of them mentioned Awolowo in that conversation above.
Thirdly, Nzeogwu who was by far the only honest, truthful, sincere and totally devoid of tribal sentiments among the coupists never mentioned any plan to transfer power to Awo in either of the two interviews He granted to journalists between when he executed the Northern aspect of the coup and when he died. The assertion of such a plan by Nzeogwu would have super superceeded all other evidences that the plotters indeed planned to install Awo.
So this Awolowo dimension is just being introduced by the coupists and revisionists to mitigate and sort of blur the apparent Igbo agenda evidenced by the manner Ifeajuna, Don Okafor, Gbulie and Anuforo executed their own parts of the coup.

Unfortunately that Journalist who conducted this interview deliberately forgot to ask Ojukwu why he believed his secession bid and thus declaration of Biafra Republic was morally justified after he (Ojukwu) himself had crushed Isaac Adaka Boro's Niger Delta Republic secession bid, forced him back into Zik's 'one Nigeria', charged him with treason for trying to break away from Zik's 'one-Nigeria', and had him sentenced to death all within 15 months prior to when he himself later declared Biafra.
Ojukwu, to me, was a hypocrite who was looking for sleep after he himself had murdered sleep. He denied others freedom but later wanted the freedom himself. Thankfully he law of Karma thwarted his actualization of Biafra. Those who deny others freedom don't deserve it themselves............Abraham Lincoln.

Nearly every Nigerian believes that the bane of their country's development is bad governance/leadership.
It has become a stereotype that God has not blessed Nigeria with leaders who have the fear of Him at heart. Political Scientists of Nigerian origin who should know better also swim in this stereotype. Even comedians are not spared of this delusion as they frequently crack jokes with an imaginary situation where God was blessing every country with mineral resources and granted to Nigeria a quantity and variety that was disproportionately higher than every other country's, and that the other countries complained but God consoled them by drawing their attention to the fact that He did not add good leaders to Nigeria's blessings unlike with them.
We may call it a mere comedians joke but the laughter of approval which usually greets that joke whenever it is cracked on stage is an actual reflection of the minds of most Nigerians as regards the reason for our shameful and sorry state as a country.

However, governance is defined as the rule of man over his fellow men. Therefore governance, by its nature and definition, is bound to be intrinsically oppressive, corrupt and exploitative as long as men remain men and not saints.
It would therefore take a principled, resolute, proactive and responsible followership to check the excesses of leaders and thus force them to govern well whether they like it or not.
Leaders emerge from among followers. So the quality of leadership is only a reflection of the quality of followership. A followership that is greedy, unprincipled, docile, selfish and materialistic cannot produce leaders who are disciplined, principled, active, selfless and abstemious. Wherever you see bad leadership and you want to know why, then just check the followership. A bad followership can't produce good leaders any more than a kolanut tree can bear apple fruits.
For Nigerians, who are themselves bad, to expect who they vote into power to become good is similar to a group of thieves who decide to vote one of them as their leader and then begin to expect the new position to change him from a thief to a normal person?
We often admire America and most European countries as having leaders who fear God. Their leaders actually lead well not necessarily because of the fear of God but the fear of the followers.
But in Nigeria the leader does not fear the followers because he knows they are as weak and unprincipled as himself and therefore cannot even unite to push him out of power. Obasanjo once openly predicted that a strike against him by NLC and Nigerians will not take more than 4 days for the people to get tired of it and begin to adjust to his anti-human policy, and so it really became. I don't know which American President will utter such insult on Americans and last up to 4 days in power thereafter.
Some Nigerians also hold the opinion that we are where we are because the right person is yet to rule. Is it by sheer concidence that after 56 years now we still have not found that right person? A principled, resolute and disciplined followership actually makes the right person out of whoever rises to power.

Until we free ourselves of this stereotype of bad leadership and work on ourselves as follower good leaders will never emerge among us.

After all said and done Senator Smart Adeyemi now joins Tinubu and Buhari in APC citing Buhari's performance as his reason. Smart Adeyemi has outsmarted even those who hailed him here as being smart for turning a wedding to a campaign ground.

sharonbaron:
Op you can say all the negative things about the owelle of onitsha but he still remains one of the greatest nationalists africa has ever produced. Zik is one man who I know believed in Nigeria more than any politician living or dead because of zik the north is still part of nigeria every student of history knows that there will be Nigeria if zik had entered into an alliance with awo during the 1959 parliamentary election zik stood to gain a lot if that alliance succeeded. If zik had not defected to the Nigerian side in 1969 biafra will still be in existence by now please don't try twisting history because of your hatred for zik

If Zik made the North remain part of Nigeria, then Zik sowed the seeds of our problems as far as Zik's brothers still believe and insist that the North, which they derogatorily refer to as Arewanistan, is Nigeria's problems.
However, the North is not really our problem. The facts in the post make it clear that Zik knew what was supposed to be the best for Nigeria but a dubious hidden agenda made him prefer a dubious system that entrenched the mediocrity, injustice, looting, misgovernance, unrest, bloodshed, genocides, etc that have come to be our lot today. It is only in Nigeria people defend such a character based on ethnic identity. In a serious country such a person who deliberately advocated for a system he knew was evil would be blacklisted.
Your glorification of Zik for preserving Nigeria by forming alliance with the North in 1960 as well as defeting to the Nigerian side during Biafra War betray your lack og grasp of the crux of the post which is that a sincere anti-colonial crusader should not have sought to preserve the Nigeria created by the very colonial masters as a tool to exploit Africans as he (Zik) himself claimed.
However, remember he later turned around to form the UPGA alliance with the same Awolowo. That means he later was working for the dismemberment of Nigeria according to your logic. Also your logic suggests that he was working to dismember Nigeria as at the time he first stayed on the Biafran side at the initial stages of the war. So what makes him a nationalist then?

You have not addressed the issues raised in the post.

It is not uncommon to hear some Nigerians eulogize and attach to Nnamdi Azikiwe accolades of a Nationalist especially in contrast with his political contemporaries and equals whom Zik's admirers do label tribal and ethnocentric jingoists for the positions they took as regards how the foundation of Nigeria should be laid especially as it concerns the structure of government.
While the likes of Tafawa Balewa, Awolowo, Anthony Enahoro and Ahmadu Bello reportedly spoke in favour of a centrifugal/strictly federal structure characterised by a loose federation where each and every ethnic nationality is as much as possible allowed a high degree of administrative autonomy free from undue intrusion and interference from other nationalities coupled with a visible degree of territorial self expression, Zik is reported to have, in assuming himself a nationalist, favoured a centrifugal/unitary republic characterised by an overwhelmignly strong centre and very weak peripheral units in an atmosphere of total disregard for ethnic differences and cultural variations. He defended his acclaimed nationalistic position with a slogan he invented.........."One-Nigeria".... as a euphemism for his unitary system which was rather unpopular among majority of Nigerians back then and up till today.

However posterity has proven Zik wrong today and vindicated his opponents as the infusion of unitary system into Nigeria beginning with Ironsi (probably inspired by Zik in pursuit of a nationalist agenda as his admirers claim) and its being taken to the highest irritating levels by Gowon (in his quest to cage Ojukwu) and by his military successors (in their lust after oil wealth and also to criminally free up the SS' huge oil revenue to all parts of Nigeria to loot and plunder) has ruined Nigeria so much that even the foot soldiers of Zik and Zikism still alive now have become the loudest voices in the clamour for a return to true federalism.....the same centrifugal structure Zik inspired them to hate and reject with a passion initially on the grounds that it promoted ethnic jingoism over oneness/nationalism as conceived of by Zik. Thanks to hindsight and experience which they say is the best teacher.
However, a more detailed analysis and scrutiny of the total person of Zik seriously questions the nationalistic credentials frequently showered on him by his admirers.
First and foremost let me define the term nationalist with examples so that I have a reference point against which to make my deductions.
A nationalist is someone who believes in FREEDOM for the people of his country be it freedom from external powers of colonialism or freedom from internal domination and Neo-colonialism by their own fellow-country men.
For the first kind of freedom, Mandela and George Washington stand as a good examples of nationalists as they both spent a greater part of their lives fighting off external colonial forces occupying their lands. For the second form, Abraham Lincoln stands out as a quintessence as he , despite being white himself, lived and died trying to free Black Americans from their domineering fellow white Americans. Nationalism has no other dimension than these two above.
Coming back to Zik: none, absolutely NONE, of his actions or words reflected a genuine desire to free Africans from whites or to free them from one another's domination.
First and foremost Zik is quoted as saying he did not mind paying the ultimate price in his quest to see the decolonization of Africa thus the end of the imperialists' exploitation of Africans and for him to see Nigeria survive and remain one and eternally united country. On the surface this sounds convincingly nationalistic. But a closer analysis reveals a fraudulent contradiction in the sense that the same imperialists (whom he wanted chased out of Africa for the crime of exploiting Africa) created, as a tool for that very exploitation of Africa's resources, the same Nigeria he was ready to die to preserve. What sense does it make to resist a movement for the crime of exploitation and yet at the same time be ready to die for the preservation of the exploitative instruments invented by that very movement? The only logical explanation for such contradictory position is that Zik wanted the whites out but wanted their tool (Nigeria) left intact for he himself and his people to use in furthering a new round of exploitation of fellow Africans and fellow Nigerians. That is not a quality of a genuine nationalist. Did George Washighton seek to preserve any vestige of the British Monarchical style of government after he and his army had sent Britain off America's soil? In fact after the revolution George Washighton dismantled all Britain's idea of how America should be organized and governed. But Zik's case was the direct opposite. Any wonder why he so much wanted 'one Nigeria' despite all indications pointing to the contrary? In fact why could Zik, in order to demonstrate genuine anti-colonial and pan-Africanist disposition credited him, not simply champion a crusade for a complete cancelation of all the exploitative boundaries previously drawn by the colonial masters all over Africa with the view to drawing new ones which would reflect the true natural boundaries among Africans as regards their ethnicities, languages, cultural compatibility and other parameters so that the daily bloodshed currently happening all over Africa might have been forestalled?
Secondly; at a point in our history the colonial masters created the Western, Eastern and Northern Regions in response to their occupants' agitation for self government which was rather aimed granting each people freedom from one another and thereby forestalling a situation whereby one group would try to rule over and dominate another. But Zik who had his own region clearly carved out for him to rule decided to seek to rule another region..... a situation whereby one region already ruling itself wanted to capture another region and dominate it by using the deceit of unity and oneness to deny them freedom to rule themselves. Why did Zik not start that kind of charity and oneness from home by first making a Westerner or Northerner the premier of his own Eastern Region before going out to seek to practicalize that oneness outside? If he was actually convinced that such was good for Nigeria then he should have proven it by using his own Eastern Region as the experimentation ground first. Therefore a man who lived in pursuit of a dream he knew was tantamount to internal curtailment of the freedom of other fellows' self-government was definitely not a nationalist but a sectionalist with hidden agenda.
Thirdly; Zik schooled in the US. But before leaving Nigeria he had read it in Government textbooks that federalism is the only workable structure of governance for a multi-ethnic society like Nigeria. And on getting to the US, a multi-ethnic country just like Nigeria, he actually saw true federalism on ground fostering a peaceful atmosphere and genuine unity among the huge ethnic diversity, and yielding rapid development towards making the US a super power. But after six years of observing the benefits of federalism in an ethnically diverse USA, Zik returned to an equally diverse Nigeria to recommend and preach unitary system in the name of 'One-Nigeria'. Was that an indication that Zik was genuinely committed to rapid development and equity in Nigeria or that he had another evil plot in mind? Did Zik hear anyone preach 'One-America" while he schooled there? Or did Zik see any evidence that the practice of federalism in the US promoted ethnic loyalty over genuine national unity? Fourthly; Zik read Anthropology which is a discipline that studies the evolution of human cultures, traditions and value system with the view to understanding cultural differences and managing them properly to forestall a clash of cultures and its resultant bloodshed. To this end, it is a basic principle of Anthropology that the only way for peoples of diverse and even opposing cultures, opposing beliefs and ambivalent value systems is for laws and structures to be put in place to limit and control cross interactions and that they mutually understand and respect one another's cultures, beliefs and values however awkward they may appear to one another. These are the very basics and ingredients of federalism. But the Zik, who knew this as an anthropologist, returned to Nigeria to advocate a unitary system that would de-emphasize cultural differences in the name of unity and 'one-Nigeria'. He labeled as tribalists those who espoused these principles of federalism. Was that an indication that Zik was genuinely committed to peaceful co-existence among the various Nigerian tribes? In fact it is reported that Zik once met Ahmadu Bello and said, "Let us forget our cultural differences and move on" while the latter responded saying, "No no no, you don't move on by Ignoring you differences. I am a Northern Muslim while you are a Southern Christian, it is only when we understand our differences and respect them that there can truly be unity for us to move on or else you will cause bloodshed if you ignore differences. Clearly Ahmadu Bello who read mere Secretarial Studies had, by mere intuition, a better appreciation and grasp of anthropology principles than the Zik who wasted five years studying it and failed to apply the knowledge in his reasoning. Education is different from literacy. And Education is ttechnically defined as any process which an individual undergoes to become useful to himself and the society. Zik was only literate but not Educated because as knowledge of Anthropology was not usefully used to the benefit of his Nigerian Society. University courses are meant to be read and the knowledge gained therein invoked and applied in solving societal problems. But Zik was not prepared to apply his knowledge to help Nigeria prevent blood shed and clashes of culture which are now very frequent in Nigeria. Such a person can't be a nationalist. He was rather a fraud which befell Nigeria.

Lastly Zik is reported to have deprecated attempts to include secession clause in our constitution on the excuse that it was inimical to a united, strong and indivisible "One-Nigeria". What a myopia! That clause was meant to give to any region which later felt cheated or marginalized the constitutional right to exit the union through simple referendum without a single bloodshed or any firing of bullet. The clause was secondarily intended to instill in all Nigeria's rulers the fear of the consequences of misgovernance. Had Zik cooperated that clause would have been included in our constitution and Nigeria would not have been this misgoverned till today. With such a clause Balewa would not have misgoverned to attract the Jan 1966 coup which permanently set the stage for Nigeria's retrogression till date, and eventually no region would have actually sought to seceed from a well governed Nigeria. Aburi Accord would not have been as issue let alone lead to war.
So why would a man who rejected such a clause aimed at creating a disciplined and focused leadership be rendered accolades of nationalism? What is the nationalist spirit in a man who denied everyone the freedom to seceed in case of misgovernance, reckless abuse of power, and victimization by the governing class? National unity achieved at the cost of national freedom is not genuine unity. A man who believed in surrendering freedom on the alter of unity can't be a genuine nationalist as only free men can actually unite with one another. There is no unity among prisoners and men in captivity no matter how they so pretend.

Qelvin:
Boro died like a rat, so sad he wasted his youth on misplaced priorities, the Nigerian govt aptly used him as a tool to " liberate" the oil rich minority areas from the same old revisions of "Igbo domination" but what was his outcome? Boro was wasted by the same Nigerians in a well hatched ambush(this was substantially confirmed by this article I read written by an Ijaw who exposed the bizarre circumstances surrounding Boro's death) I'll dig up that article and post it shortly.

As usual with and as characteristic of your people you left the main issue raised and started chasing secondary shadows.
The simple question is; Why did Ojukwu and Ironsi thwart Isaac Boro's attempt to seceed only for Ojukwu too to later cry and wail that Isaac Boro too thwarted Biafra Republic in revenge?
Who killed Boro is not the issue here, and moreover Ojukwu too intended to kill him through the instrumentality of Ironsi's government only that God intervened and extricated Boro from Ojukwu's firing squad.
An Ojukwu who intended to kill Boro is as guilty of his death as whoever else actually later killed him. After all the question of Boro getting killed would not have arisen had Ojukwu just allowed him have his republic just as Ojukwu too later wished the Nigerian government allowed him have his Biafra.
Your ilk are quick to mock Isaac Boro for allegedly being eventually killed by the Nigerian side he worked for but you conveniently forget that the same Nigerian side Ojukwu worked for by crushing Isaac Boro's Niger Delta Republic also eventually killed Millions of Ojukwu's Biafran brothers and nearly Ojukwu himself. Isaac Boro's case was far better that Ojukwu's because while the Nigerian side killed only Boro (assuming your theory is even correct) and killed no innocent ijaw civilian, same can't be said of Ojukwu whose fellow Igbos were killed in thousands by the same Nigerian side Ojukwu worked for in betraying Isaac Boro.
Those who deny others freedom don't deserve it themselves................Abraham Lincoln.

See dodging of issue!

The Zik who claimed he was fighting against imperialism was on the other hand prepared to die to preserve a "Nigeria" created by the imperialists solely to perpetually enslave and exploit economy of the African whom Zik claimed to be fighting for.
How much sense does it make to claim you are fighting against an oppressive and exploitative movement/idea and yet be ready to die so that the institutions and socio-political entities created to perpetuate the very essence of that movement/idea may live? What then does it mean to fight against a movement?
Zik was a confused man.
As at when people were already seeing the evil intention behind the white man's amalgamation, Zik even wanted to further completely amalgamate us by way of unification through unitary system thereby seeking to perfect the fraud done by the white man whom he (Zik) himself claimed to be fighting off. For a Zik alone to have take those two contradicting positions on the issue in question, two possibilities were involved:

1. That Zik was a psychiatric hospital patient who mistook himself for a nationalist.
2. That Zik was more of a Neo-colonialist and in-house imperialist than a nationalist. The white imperialists used the force of fire arms to impose themselves on Africans, but Zik wanted to use the power of deception (in the form of nationalist pretense) in his subtle quest for him and his tribe to re-colonize Nigeria after the white colonialists would have left.
The second was more likely the case.

AntiMahdi:
The first coup was not the coup of Jan, 1966 but there were two coup plots prior.

The first coup was purely a yoruba affair and was thwarted as it began.

The second coup did not happen but was nipped during its planning stage and Awolowo was duly sentenced for his role as leader to 13yrs in prison.

A coup is any attempt (successful or unsuccessful) to take over government without following the laid down procedure which most times is the constitution. Judged against this background, the first coup was by the Balewa-Zik coalition government which prevented the Western Region's Assembly from sitting to vote to determine whether Akintola would continue as premier or not. The second coup was also by the same Zik-Balewa coalition government which later reinstated Akintola as premier without election against Western Region's constitution provisions. Awo's coup was the third and a self help in reaction to these previous two aimed at crushing his party. Nzeogwu's was fourth perhaps in sympathy for Awo.

ChoCandyDiamond:
[/s]
You are just typing trash, are you high on Oshogbo weeds, you are just ridiculing yourself thinking that you are bashing Igbos, did you go to school, have you read about the history of Nigeria, what did Igbos have to do with the southern Cameroon referendum, the middle belt of Benue and Kogi and the mid western Nigeria, please stop this your rubbish write up and show of illiteracy

Typical Igbo mentality and disease of not addressing issues raised but attacking persons and thinks whoever faults Igbo attitude of blind politicking is a Yoruba person. Very stupid mindset!
If you felt what I typed is trash then why not just disprove it with your own facts? You exactly are the one on Oshogbo weed. You are simply a misfit. Were Benue and Eastern Kogi not really originally part of Southern protectorate? Did Southern Cameroon not vote to Join Cameroon while Northern Cameroon voted to join Nigeria all in 1961? Flat empty head ignorant of history! Your Zik was busy looking for position in another man's land while his house was burning and rather than accept the truth you are here talking of Igbo bashing. Why is it that everyone else bashes only Igbo in Nigeria? It is because they rightly deserve it as they played too much of blind politics. They chanted One Nigeria when it was clear that Nigeria was not one and could never be. All those who maintained otherwise they labelled them tribalists. The same one Nigerianists are now asking for Biafra and claiming Nigeria is not one as if it was not them that started that trash. Very inconsistent people.

Igbos have always been their own problem. As at 1900 the whole of present Benue State, the Eastern parts of the current Kogi State together the South western parts Cameroon were all grouped into the eastern parts of the Southern protectorate of Nigeria, i.e. to the side of Igbos. This is due to the fact that Benue and Eastern Kogi areas were and till now are still predominantly Christian and were therefore more culturally compatible with the South than North. All my Benue friends look, reason, speak and behave purely like Southerners.
But before 1960 Igbos had lost Benue and Eastern Kogi to the North, and in 1961 further lost Southern Cameroon to Cameroon while the Hausa fulanis even gained Northern Cameroon. What exactly did Igbos do to offend Benue, Kogi and Southern Cameroon into gravitating away from them? Had Igbos been able to retain Benue and Eastern Kogi in the South till independence and as well retained Southern Cameroon after independence the North would not have been so numerically powerful over the South as they claim today. Igbos played politics of the moment without weighing the long term implications of their choices and decisions. Now they want Benue and Kogi back in Biafra after almost 70 years of losing them to the North due to carelessness and myopic politicking.
Even the SE minorities too wanted to break off into the proposed COR Region. Zik's style of leadership did not help matters as all he was concerned with was his quest to acquire the title 'Zik of Africa' and be so worshiped. The loss of Benue and Kogi by Igbos did not bother him at all. In fact while Igbos were losing these grounds he was far away in the Western Region seeking premiership there and crying of being a victim of tribal politics when it did not materialize. IGBOS need to sit down and check themselves by way of introspection.

gidgiddy:
You are living in dream land. This 'SS' you are talking about is not even recognised in the constitution. So who created it for you? You think the Efik Man knws who Itshekiri man is? You think the Ibibio Man knows who the Bini Man is? So how can the be brothers when nothing brings them together? You people should learn to speak for your tribes instead of speaking for other tribes you have no connection with. Pure madness

Neither is your SE in the constitution. But wait a minute.......Why is it only Igbos that are so pained by the creation of SS? The Yorubas who lost Edo/Delta to the SS don't shed tears like Igbos do for losing Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Cross River to SS. Why?
If you yourself knows about Ibibios, itshekiris, Efiks, Binis, etc despite being Igbo, then how come you expect these people don't know one another? The Old Eastern and Western Regions have been abandoned and permanently reconfigured to have the oppressed minorities out of them. Keep living in denial and fantasy that you still have brothers among them. The earlier you face reality the better for you. SS has come to stay whether you like it or not. You claim OBJ created it, yet you contributed largely to the votes that saw OBJ into power for him to crate SS region. So whose fault?

gidgiddy:
You are living in dream land. This 'SS' you are talking about is not even recognised in the constitution. So who created it for you? You think the Efik Man knws who Itshekiri man is? You think the Ibibio Man knows who the Bini Man is? So how can the be brothers when nothing brings them together? You people should learn to speak for your tribes instead of speaking for other tribes you have no connection with. Pure madness

Self delusion galore.

gidgiddy:
Speak for your tribe and stop dragging tribes, some of who don't even know you, into your non existent Niger-Delta.

Those called the SS have actually come to know one another ever after their SS region was created for them. They have assimilated each other and so far are enjoying the union. The speed and manner they all recently convened and rose to unanimously dissociate themselves from Biafra speaks volume of their oneness. The manner they all also rallied round GEJ, even though GEJ was just from one of the minutest tribes among them (mind you Ogbia is not an Ijaw group) speaks volume of their oneness. What actually unites the SS is that they all suffered oppression under the Eastern and Western Regions, and that there is no single overwhelming majority tribe among them to dominate others by sheer numbers. This is why they believe in their proposed SS country more than any other grouping which will surely have a single dominant tribe bullying the others. Moreover no SS tribe has ever used state military power to attack another SS tribe or spoken derogatorily of another in the history of Nigeria hence there are no inter-ethnic resentments within the SS. In fact when Victor Malu from Benue attacked Odi in Bayelsa under OBJ's command, a Delta State Native Ogomudia, took it upon himself to avenge by later on attacking victor Malu's home town of Zakibiam in Benue. That is the SS spirit of oneness that defies their ethnic plurality.

MyGeneration:
LoL... All this long story simply because i told benin republic to stay on there own and stop attaching to the ss... LoL.
We are Benin.
Godbless federal republic of benin.
We know our boundaries.
We know our rivers.
We know our neighbour's.
In Benin republic we stand.

Quite funny. So the current SS is now just five states yet you Eastern Igbos rejected the granting of Anioma State claiming that it will make the SS have 7 states while the SE would still remain five? So which is then the sixth state which Anioma will be 7th to? You want Edo out of SS but want Delta in it yet you claim it is not the quest for oil that actuates your desire. You also forget that ethnically Edoid groups make up Delta and the same you Ironically want the Edoid groups in Delta to remain in your own version of SS while you cry blue murder everyday against Nigeria for excising Igboid groups like Ikwerre from the SE and merging them with SS. See original double standards and glaring hypocrisy! Una journey far well well. When you people speak the rest Nigerians just laugh at your inconsistencies. Continue in your hypocrisy that has alienated you from everyone in the past 56 years.

discusant:
People of then Midwest region agreed to have Benin Republic. They gave the name Benin Republic to the new country. Biafra soldiers secured and helped them inaugurate the new country. That's how a government of Bini Republic was formed by people of then Midwest, not only by the Binis.

False! David Ejoor, The military governor of the Midwest, declared with the support of the entire people that the Midwest from its northernmost Imoga village to its Southernmost Burutu Village was neutral between Biafra and the federal forces. The assassination of Okotie-Eboh by Ifeajuna and co had already planted deep resentment in the minds of Itshekiri's and urhobo's against Biafrans. So how could the Midwest have consented to having Biafran soldiers dictate their fate? In fact Ogbemudia rejected Biafran occupation of the Midwest. The federal forces respected David Ejoor's declaration even though he was obliged to the Nigerian side by virtue of his being a member of the Nigerian Army. But the Biafran forces never respected it thus their invasion of Benin to chase away David Ejoor who escaped their bullets by whiskers. How then did Biafra secure Midwest during the war when the Benin Republic the imposed on us was crushed by the Nigerian side in less than 24 hours and Biafran soldiers chased out of the region? Remember Ojukwu even refused to make a Midwesterner the governor of the Benin Republic but brought in one Okonkwo from Enugu as governor. Is that how to free a people and secure them against domination?

discusant:
Benin Republic was secured and inaugurated by Biafra soldiers during the war.

If you want, I can tell you where the Headquarters of Benin Republic stayed in exile in Igbo land long after the civil war ended; before the officers of Benin Republic went home long after the war.

Ask Your senior Binis some questions before coming to NL to disparage Biafra.

I don't get you on your claim that the headquarter of Benin Republic was outside the Republic itself in Igbo land. It is like claiming the Headquarter of Biafra was in the Northern Region back then. That is quite strange, and no senior Bini, Urhobo, itshekiri, Esan, Isoko, Etsako, Akoko-Edo, Owan, Ijaw, etc has ever said anything like that. Professor Nowamagbe Omoigui, the most respected historian of the Midwest, has never insinuated such. So where did you get your own account from?

discusant:
@Deadlytruth my dear,



Ironsi's unitary government system was not as over-centralized as the present unitary government system. There was 50% for derivation to be retained by regions for proceds from every region in Ironsi's unitary government system.
Ironsi proclaimed the Decree for unification to arrest the disintegration of Nigeria which was looming then.

Ironsi's unitary government system retained the regions and their governments.

States were created later hy Arewa soldiers who proliferated too many states and local government councils in the north to channel more proceeds from oil to the north. That's why Arewa leaders- military or civil- continue to strengthen unitary government system and over-centralize powers in Abuja central government.

No body can think of New Biafra to be composed of many tribes without first having in place a proposal for fiscal federalism, and Right to Secession included in the constitution to govern the new country.

Fiscal federalism and Right to Secession are the agreed principles already in place. Read the manifesto by real and informed proponents of New Biafra. The real proponents are the informed peoples from the old eastern region, not IPOB.

Note that IPOB members are just a bunch of youths led by Nnamdi Kanu to sensitize people from the old eastern region and to protest on the streets, just like MEND was made up by a bunch of youths who sacrificed to fight for more dividends from oil proceeds from their areas. Youths of MEND could not have been able alone to acquire all the instruments of coercion which they used to fight for their right, without "adults" backing them; just as IPOB youths could not have been able alone to muster enough courage to confront Nigeria in their protests, without "adults" backing them.

You may not believe that without MEND action, the 13% paid to the oil producing areas could have been taken away, no matter the pronouncenent of the Supreme court on that. Even at that, Arewa still protest against 13% as Arewa says that the 13% makes some states richer than others!!! Imagine that.

Any how, it's hard to believe that some of you anti-Biafra on NL are from the SS. But if you truly are from the SS, it's also very hard to believe how you failed to understand that if the SS and SE don't get united to free both zones from Nigeria, both sides shall find it very difficult to free themselves on individual group basis from the political quagmire and regression of Nigeria.

Nigeria has refused to restructure its failed political system because of oil proceeds. And can NEVER restructure in a democracy. Unless you chose to live with it, you need not continue to pick on other groups like the Igbo who want to pull out.

@discusant, I must first commend you for being the first Igbo I have seen trying to honestly address the genuine fears the SS nurses about their inclusion in Biafra. You have impressed me greatly unlike other Igbos who, whenever a SS person raises those fears, either term him as a Yoruba person faking SS identity or a SS person brainwashed by the Hausa-Yoruba oligarchy against Igbos. Even on Radio Biafra platforms and online fora it is the same negative labelling of SS persons who genuinely seek clarification on Biafra. If just 25% of Igbos were like you the SS might not have been this apprehensive of Biafra. Other Igbos have a lot to learn from you. In fact your likes should be the ones leading the Biafra movement and not these bunch of saucy and acerbic folks currently creating more aversion to Biafra by their methods of approach. However I will proceed to react to the points you made.
1. That Ironsi's unitary government was moderate in centralization but that Arewa came and took it to the current irritating heights: Well, I agree perfectly with you on that. Only a revisionist will deny it. I love speaking truths they way they appear hence my moniker Deadlytruth Speaks. However, Ironsi's moderation does not exonerate him from the blame of starting an evil and thereby emboldening all those who came after him to do worse than him. Whoever introduces evil remains the guiltiest of whatever extent to which that evil is later carried by others. When you sow a seed you don't reap a single seed but multiple seeds. Whoever sows the wind, they say, reaps the whirlwind. That is just the law of nature. If Ironsi had avoided tampering with structure the Arewa would not have had the moral justification to later tamper with it too.
2. You claim that Ironsi introduced unitary system to arrest the drift towards anarchy. Well, the prevalent drift towards anarchy back then was immediately caused by the coup and remotely caused by the rift between Awo and Akintola coupled with the misrule by the Zik-Balewa-Akintola led government at the centre which perpetrated mountainous rigging of censuses and elections against the South. Now how exactly were all these connected with the structure of governance? How exactly was the introduction of unitary system by Ironsi meant to address these fundamental causes of the anarchical situation then? In actual fact the central government of the day abused the little power it had to unduly interfere in the Western Region's affairs thereby precipitating a chain of crises which attracted a coup. If the government at the centre could so much abuse power to rig elections and censuses leading to anarchy, then common sense and logic dictated that whoever sincerely came to the rescue should have further weakened the centre so as to curtail the abuse of power rather than strengthening it. How sure was Ironsi that the civilians he planned to hand over to would not further abuse power at the centre again with a stronger centre than before? This is why Ironsi's action was against logic hence people rightly suspect he had a different agenda other than the rescue mission he claimed he was on. Moreover Ironsi was warned by both the North and West to shelve his plan to unify Nigeria. They both threatened to violently resist it. A man who really came to arrest anarchy would quickly shelve an idea that did not resonate well with public opinion and was sure to spark off bloodshed if implemented.
3.On your claim that Ironsi's unitary system retained the regions: I doubt that the fear of Igbo domination would have been heightened leading to his assassination if he really retained the regions as they exactly were before he took over. Ironsi actually removed the adjective 'federal' from Nigeria's official name which became just "Republic of Nigeria" meaning the federating units had ceased to exist. Then he immediately and unilaterally set up a committee to review the constitution towards becoming more unitary despite that the public did not demand for constitution review. All those unilateral desicions of his betrayed a hidden agenda in my own opinion.
4. You claim Arewa army officers proliferated states and LGAs to the North's advantage. Well, there is no time the regions would not have still later been split into smaller regions in response to agitations for same by various ethnicities who felt being cheated within the three initial regions as had already started with Midwestern Region and COR Region was next on line. Even Middle Beltern Region agitations had commenced too. The only difference is that the true federalism, resource control and the 75% derivation already in force then would have trickled down to as many new regions as were to be later created if ironsi had left the regions alone and faced the real problems he came to solve. In fact had ironsi left the structure he met, not many ethnicities would have asked for separate regions as there would have been the fear that there was no federation account for them to depend on but fend entirely for themselves. So the North would not have later created more burden of states and LGAs for themselves.
I really don't join the southern bandwagon of blaming the North for the problems of Nigeria because the North always made it clear that they did not want to form a country with the Christian South. They never allowed any opportunity to denounce the proposed Nigeria slip by. Ahmadu Bello tried and tried to have the South let the North be on its own. He described Nigeria as a mistake. Tafawa Balewa expressed apprehension and termed Nigeria an undesirable British economic experiment. But Zik kept on wooing them with Awo's passive support. Now the North tired of being wooed decided to succumb on the condition that they be allowed to dominate, and Zik and Awo acceded. So they joined Nigeria and started dominating only for Ahmadu Bello and Balewa to be killed by the same South that wooed them into the union. So why blame them now for reacting angrily and dominating therafter? If you were in their shoes will you act differently? The truth is deadly. Honestly speaking if I were in their shoes I would do worse than what the North is currently doing to the South. It was like deceiving them into a union they did not want to be in only to kill them. So painful!
5. You expressed surprise that the SS people are the most vocal in anti-Biafra pronouncements. Yes, it is just like how we too are always surprised to read or hear that it was Ojukwu, the very Biafra protagonist, that crushed the move by a SS group led by Adaka Boro to declare and secure the Niger Delta Republic 15 months before Ojukwu himself declared Biafra. It surprises us more that another biafran, ironsi, retained Enahoro in jail and detained Isaac Boro, both SS persons, and was even ready to execute Isaac Boro for treason of trying to pull out of Zik's 'one Nigeria' at a time the same Ironsi was busy releasing Northern political prisoners and treating with kid gloves the IGBOS who planned and executed a bloody coup that set the country on the precipice. It took Gowon, an Arewa, to release Boro and Enahoro. So why would the SS not feel more at home with Arewa than Biafrans? We therefore suspect that If the friendship Igbos continuously sought with the North had materialized they would have called the bluff of the SS, but that they are only falling back on the SS now because Arewa turned them down and massacred them. I don't intend mockery please.
So if the SE and SS must come together to fight off the North, there must first be a conference between the two to iron out these past misunderstandings and that igbos acknowledge and admit that they frustrated Ijaws and by extension the SS first in their attempt to pull out of Nigeria rather than just rallying each other blindly again only to be used and dumped.
I am however yet to see the comprehensive Biafra document detailing out the terms of coexistence as you claim. Could you please e-mail it to me?

MyGeneration:
Go there nd fight them i am not an ipob, on Benin republic i stand .

There is nothing like Benin Republic. That was the name Ojukwu forced on us when he invaded us in 1967. We named ourselves Midwest not Benin as Benin alone is not representative of the whole Midwest. Only in biafra's domineering mentality will one tribe's name be forced on others. Biafrans attitude of domination punctuates everything they do and say.

MyGeneration:
D answer u wud find it in Anambra state go to ojukwus grave and ask him.
Ojukwu has his idealogy nd his reasons, we new generation has gone tru and corrected the mistakes that's y we refused to make his mistake.
But put it tobu dat Benin republic wud be on his own if Nigeria breaks up, let them leave ss alone.

Even before Ojukwu came invading he too claimed Midwest was on its own but later turned round to attack. The same way you too are claiming you have corrected Ojukwu's mistake now but will surely change your mind and invade again when the time comes. A people who kept chanting "GEJ till 2019, one Naija" but after GEJ lost out, suddenly changed tune to "Give us Biafra" cannot be trusted with their words. Don't just come to Benin/Delta again. We sincerely hope you'll stick to your promise when the time comes.

MyGeneration:
Dat deadlytruth guy keeps lieing up nd down, before the excuse was igbos dont hv oil nd they wud suffer in Biafra.
Now the excuse became igbos want ss,
Despite the fact that we know what we mean when we say our brothers in the ss, what concerns igbos nd an isoko, isekiri or ijaw man....or urhobo man not to talk of Benin.
If we take our Igbo brothers in particular that were criminally carved into the ss, if the rest like they can form country with cameroun south its there business.

What you obviously don't realize is that I, Deadlytruth, joined Nairaland not too long ago. So how have I been lying up and down? Please check my posts and exhume anyone in which I ever based my arguement on oil. As long as Kanu and his IPOB don't stop dragging any part of Bendel on their Radio Biafra platform we will keep denouncing Biafra. You rather go and tell IPOB Facebook admin to leave Urhobos, itshekiris, Isokos, Binis, Esans, etc alone.

MyGeneration:
LoL... My guess is ryt u re one of doz benin rats, stay with ur benin republic and leave ss alone.

Of course we Binis, Urhobos, Esans, Ijaws, Itshekiris, Isokos, Uvwies, Etsakos, etc were staying peacefully in our Benin (Midwest) Republic and did not venture out of our zones in 1967 when you Biafrans came invading us. So how sure are we now that your current order to us to stay in our zone is still not lip service and that you won't still attack us again when another opportunity appears on the horizon?
Your response has not addressed the concerns I raised. Why invade Benin when you yourself knew they should be on their own? Simple questions need simple answers.

Why it will be foolish for any SS state to think of joining Biafra.
1. The official name of Biafra is just "Republic of Biafra" without any loosening adjectives like "United" or "Federal" to indicate any level of autonomy for the component parts.
2. The absence of any loosening adjective in the name clearly indicates Biafra will be run strictly on unitary system in reflection of Zik's ideology and Ironsi's blunder of dismantling Nigeria's federal structure and forcefully replacing it with unitary system. Now, how can the SS currently asking for true federalism open its two eyes wide open and enter into a Biafra Republic which all indications show will be governed by unitary system?
3. Till tomorrow, the proponents of Biafra have not produced any draft constitution or detailed map of states division, LGAs structure, revenue allocation formula, etc to convince the SS of equity in the proposed republic.
4. What we hear is let's just get out of Nigeria first and we'll settle all that later. However history has taught us never to agree to such approach to freedom again. We all recall that we all just wanted the military out in 1999 and therefore did not bother whoever the military gave us as civilian (OBJ) hoping that with the military out first and foremost, we could then sit down to refine our democracy. But here we are today as OBJ militarized and corrupted that democracy beyond salvage till today.
If the well organized and co-ordinated Nigerian military establishment fooled us the first time in 1999, we can't be fooled a second time by the unco-ordinated ordinary IPOB members after 17 years.
Biafra is another Nigeria. Pure and Simple!

MyGeneration:
Has the Amaechi or Wike ever accepted Benin republic?
Stick to ur tribe and ur Benin boundary, leave the ss out of ur greed, there re no Muslims in the ss stay away from the ss with ur land grabbing benin tendencies.

So you knew Edo and Delta had Muslims yet you invaded Benin City and the entire Midwest in 1967 trying to take over a land where Muslims were? Your Biafra soldiers even claimed they came to free Edo people from Islamic Hausa Fulani domination. How come you wanted to free Edo Muslims from Islamic Hausa domination? You wanted to free Muslims from Muslims? Honestly Igbos are just too daft. They don't reason deeply before they vomit thrash. And that's why they have always made blunders since 1914. The same Igbos claim today that the North is Arewanistan Republic but they forget it was their own Zik who first went into an Alliance with that same Arewanistan thereby subjecting the South to perpetual slavery under the North. Igbos and short memory.

MyGeneration:
Wetin dae vex u, y are u fooling urself this wont Change d fact that benin wud remain an entity of its own in the advent of Nigerias break up, y we Igbo's wud face our igbo land simple, is dat too much to ask, or is sth scaring u abt u being alone?

So you knew Benin would remain an entity of its own in the advent of break up yet during the impending break up in 1967 you and your Biafran soldiers suddenly invaded Benin and subdued it even though the military governor, David Ejoor, declared that Benin (Midwest) was neutral thus on its own? You claim a place will be on its own in the event of break up. Break up really came and those people actually declared to be on their own yet the same you who claimed they should be on their own attacked them and took over their land which you said should be on its own.
Is that not supreme hypocrisy?
When the eventual final break up comes you will still want to attack and grab Benin as you did before despite you currently claiming it should be on its own.
Were you unaware that Edo State had Muslims in it in 1967 when you and your Biafran soldiers came to grab it in claiming you came to free them from Hausa Fulani domination? How come you came to free Muslims from Muslim domination? Hypocrites! Abi you think say na after Biafra war Muslims enter Edo State?

MyGeneration:
No reasonable politician wud speak in support of secession, even Enugu state governor nd imo state governor say they re not in support of Biafra.
Nobody is Biafranizing any body.
WE KNOW OUR LAND AND WHERE IT STARTS AND ENDS, ITS YOU I WILL TELL TO STOP NIGER DELTANIZING IT.
KADUNA CHUKWUMA NZEOGWU FROM ANIOMA LED D FIRST COUP, WHEN THE consequences CAME THE SO CALLED NIGER DELTANS ABANDONED THERE CLAIMED NIGER DELTAN AND NIGER DELTANS, NOBODY HAS FORGOTTEN ABOUT WHAT BENIN PEOPLE DID IN ASABA IN 1967, D ASABA MASSACRE.
EVEN IN RIVERS BEFORE NOW 2 OF RIVERS LOCAL GOVT USED TO BE PART OF OLD IMO STATE, THIS PEOPLE ALSO LOST THERE PROPERTIES DURING THE 1970 ABANDONED PROPERTY SAGA IN OLD PORT HARCOURT, BUT MYSTERIOSLY AFTER IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT OYIGBO HAS ONE OF THE LARGEST OIL RESERVE'S, OBJ CAME AND CEEDED 2 OF THIS LOCAL GOVTS TO RIVERS STATE.
Note this re 2 pure igbo and core igbo local govts, if not for d findings about the oil, this local govts wud hv been in the se, d list goes on.
So when we mention SE we know who, where and the people we re referring to, wetin concern urhobo man or itsekiri man with Biafra.

So OBJ removed two LGAs from Imo State and merged them with Rivers State in the 70s yet Igbos gave him block votes in 1999 and also voted in 2003 for the same OBJ against their own hero Ojukwu who risked his carrier for them? Then who is to blame for Igbos' predicament other than Igbos themselves?

Go and read the updates on Radio Biafra's Facebook wall and there you'll see claims by Kanu's boys that Urhobo, itshekiris, Binis, Esans, etc are all Biafrans. Why not rather tell Kanu and his boys to stop biafranizing the Urhobos and itshekiris first before you tell me Urhobo and itshekiri have nothing to do with Biafra?

You forgot to add in your account that Biafra Soldiers, without invitation or provocation by the Midwest, invaded Benin City, Warri, Sapele, Auchi, Igarra and Lampese raping teenage girls especially in Benin City, hounding into makeshift prisons the able bodied men in Benin claiming they are Aborkis friends for the singular fact that David Ejoor declared the Midwest neutral between Biafra and the federal forces, and that Biafran soldier chased after David Ejoor with the intention to kill him, etc. These were the oppressions from Biafra soldiers that made the entire Midwest rescind their initial decision to support Biafra hence they invited federal forces to route Biafran Army out of the Benin and the Midwest.
You sound naïve to claim Benin people did whatever in Asaba. Did Benin people have guns to shoot anyone then? We all know that the Binis had virtually no army officer then. Ogbemudia is not a Benin man. So how did Benin civilians secure military vans and guns to travel to Asaba during a tension soaked period to kill Aniomas there? Binis only protected themselves from the oppressive excesses of Biafra soldiers either by poisoning them or pointing them out to the federal forces for elimination within Benin City.
If Binis killed Aniomas, then why do Aniomas still identify with Bendel till today?
FYI Nzeogwu did not plan the coup. He and Ademoyega were only brought into the plot just three months to the day of business. The coup was Ifeajuna's idea and his immediate lieutenants were Anuforo, Okafor and Nwobosi. Even Ojukwu confirmed this fact before he died. So trying to place the responsibility on the SS through Nzeogwu is an attempt at fallacy. SE Igbos (Ifeajuna, Nwobosi, Okafor and Anuforo) planned the coup and executed it with tribal considerations while Nzeogwu the only Niger Deltan among them did his part patriotically without tribal bias.

Aubrey1:
sometimes most Nigerian fails to understand that war bonded us together..........so amalgamation of the northern and Southern protestors was a mistake that shouldn't have happened.

most of us are familiar with the biblical story of the Israelites and the Egyptians, they endured for thousands years, but they believed that God will someday send a saviour to save them from bondage and suffering..........and it's surely came to pass because God doesn't forget his people.

the question we should be asking ourselves, should be: why we were amalgamated ?

Reasons:

Northerners - mostly Muslims

Southerners - mostly Christian


the Northerners are so mean when it's comes to killing, just like what happened in benue state

sometime they don't even believe in one Nigeria, because i see no good reason a brother should bomb and kill his fellow brother for nothing.
and also refuses to embrace amnesty even till date.



WHY WERE HUMANS AMALGAMATED WITH ANIMALS ?

Northerners made it clear from the very beginning that they did not want the amalgamation. In fact after the amalgamation they tried all their possible best to have the amalgamation reversed. At a point they declared that the South should accept independence and leave the North alone, but Southern politicians, most especially Zik, insisted and in fact forced the North into joining Nigeria. Northerners warned that Nigeria will end up being a theatre of daily bloodshed if Nigeria was not de-amalgamated. In fact they made it clear that the Muslim North was wary of forming a country with the Christian South. But southern politicians kept on wooing them by hook and crook to join Nigeria. Eventually they joined and all the bloodshed they foresaw in a "one-Nigeria" began to happen. So whose fault?