Katsumoto:

How could Calabar have taken orders from Ojukwu when Decree 34, promulgated by Ironsi in just January 1966 made all civil servants report to Lagos. In a twist of wicked irony, the day after Ironsi signed decree 34, Ojukwu would declare publicly that the Igbo would export Igbo civil servants to other parts of the country even though their intended destination was the North because Ironsi had also banned compulsory Hausa tests for workers in the Northern region. How then can Ojukwu claim a few months later that the Warden at Calabar reported to him? Was Ojukwu paying the wages of federal workers?

I will get back once I check the books. I am away from home and I can't check those books online.

CyberG:

Katsumoto. . .you must be 100 years old (though I know you are not)! All these 1 day old babies debating sentimentally are really funny! None of them (most probably) was born then but will in fact take a position like they were the major actors. Katsumoto should be Visiting Professor of History in all Nigeria's universities if he has the time. None of the people debating have presented any convincing argument backed by dates, times and references yet their opinion is king and must be accepted? Well, I will be looking at the drilling all you little babies will get today and the only thing I would have liked to do is in fact scan his book references and paste them here. 

rhymz:

Katsumoto and his arrogant revisionist accounts, one will think he actually witnessed the war, write with so much presumptions, funny enough, he forgets that writers too write with bias and as such could lean towards a slant to support or be against. It is only a person of unparalleled presumptuousness that would assert that he knows all there is to know about Nigeria's History based on books written mostly by people from his own tribe and thesame bias.

Don’t forget that the political purpose of the coup, the Ifeajuna coup that began all this, was to hand power over to Awo.

Awolowo, evidently, had a constant review of the Yoruba situation and took different path. That’s it. I don’t blame him for it. I have never done.

WilyWily5:
Awolowo

oduasolja:
stupid igbos.

how can ojukwu release awolowo .


the prison was a federal institution . no way a regional governor had any powers over it. even though it was located in the east.

its like saying that unilag is under the command of fashola because its in lagos. hell no.

why didnt he release awolowo before gowon took over , if he soo loved awolowo and considered him a hero. after all he was Governor since janurary . and he should have lobbied for him to be released by ironsi , but that never happened.

awolowo was released on the orders of gowon, plain and simple.

if he had not been released on gowons orders, then he would have been promptly rearrested and locked up , the minute he stepped back in lagos as an escaped fugitive.

Deadlytruth:
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.

zendy:


That is highly unfair to Ojukwu. How can you say that Ojukwu should have allowed Boro's so called declaration to stand? Are you forgetting that Ojukwu was a Soldier who was subject to the orders of his superiors and also was a man who once believed in one Nigeria? Who was Ojukwu to to go against the directives of Ironsi? However, with Gowon, it was a different ball game. Ojukwu was senior to Gowon (even though they were both Lt. Colonels) and Ojukwu didn't have to listen to Gowon. As the interview says, Ojukwu declared Biafra out of the necessity to protect his people. Ojukwu also sought the mandate of the people through the Eastern Nigeria consultative Forum before he did so. What Boro did on the other hand was just pure recklessness. Ojukwu was a great man, he literally dismantled Nigeria with the following


The Federation of Nigeria is today as corrupt, as unprogressive and as oppressive and irreformable as the Ottoman Empire was in Eastern Europe over a century ago. And in contrast, the Nigerian Federation in the form it was constituted by the British cannot by any stretch of imagination be considered an African necessity. Yet we are being forced to sacrifice our very existence as a people to the integrity of that ramshackle creation that has no justification

Deadlytruth:


The federation of Nigeria, in 1960 as at when Ojukwu believed in one Nigeria, was already as corrupt, as oppressive and as
irredemable as the Othoman empire. Corruption, oppression, etc started in Nigeria as far back as 1914 yet Ojukwu believed in and defended one Nigeria.
If Ojukwu's thwarting of Niger Delta Republic was justified on the grounds that he was subject to the order of Ironsi, then Awolowo's refusal to allow Biafra stand was also justified based on your logic as Awo too was subject to the orders of Gowon under whom he was serving. Is what is good for the goose no longer also good for the gander?
As at the time Ojukwu initially believed in one Nigeria it was already crystal clear that Nigeria was not really one and could never really become be one. Ojukwu was alive when Northerners massacred thousands of Igbos in 1945 and 1953 in Jos and Kano riots respectively, and even in 1966 right under Ironsi's nose and despite the innocent Igbo lives lost in those riots he continued believing in one Nigeria up till 1967. So was it not therefore hypocritical for the same Ojukwu to start disbelieving in one Nigeria only when his brother was killed and overthrown? That means loss of lives of his own brothers was not as important to him as Ironsi's remaining in power.
We are talking of morality here which supersedes any military seniority theory. If Ojukwu truly valued innocent civilian lives over position why then did he not resign from the army in protest to Ironsi's inaction in the face of the 1966 Igbo-targeted pogroms that happened right under Ironsi's regime? After all once he resigned he would not be bound by any military laws again and then he could rally against Ironsi as a civilian the same way he himself later expected Awolowo to have, as a civilian, rallied against Gowon.
Your claim that Isaac Boro was just reckless is the biggest comedy. When has it become an act of recklessness to strive to free one's people from oppression and domination? Boro rightly felt the Ijaws were being trampled upon in the Eastern Region by the Igbos and once the opportunity seemed to appear he declared Niger Delta Republic. The way he sought freedom from Nigeria and Eastern Region oppression was the same Way Ojukwu sought freedom from Nigeria. And mind you that Isaac Boro never at anytime believed in one Nigeria hence was not hypocritical like Ojukwu. Also Ojukwu did not consult all the traditional council of chiefs and rulers of the tribes that made up the Eastern Region but consulted only the Eastern Regional Assembly which Boro and many other Eastern minorities already viewed as not truly proportionally representative of the ethnic groups in the entire Eastern region.