₦airaland Forum

THE Conference could not continue as a result of the withdrawal of the Eastern Nigeria delegation led by Sir Francis Ibiam because they feared for their safety arising from the continued presence of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. The impasse and stalemate continued. On Monday May 1, 1967, Chief Obafemi Awolowo delivered an address to the meeting of leaders of thought of the West and Lagos at Agodi Ibadan titled: “The Four Imperatives”. Imperative number three stated that if  “Eastern Nigeria through acts of omission and commission left the federation, the West and Lagos would follow suit.” The exact text of the speech is in “Awo’s Book on the Civil War” (pages 18-24) that is being run now by the Tribune newspaper.

On Saturday, May 6 and Sunday, May 7, 1967, Chief Awolowo led a delegation of the National Conciliation Committee to a meeting in Enugu with Lt.-Col. Chukwuemeka Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he then was) and his team. The meeting failed to achieve its stated objectives. I have read and re-read the transcripts of the Enugu meeting over and over again and cannot find the basis for Odia Ofeimun’s assertion that the Enugu meeting discussed the “creation of states” in Nigeria. I repeat that I find no evidence for this in the transcripts of the meeting as published. Chief Awolowo’s central objective for the Enugu meeting was to persuade Ojukwu for Eastern Nigeria to send representatives to participate at future “National Conciliation” meetings; the Ad-Hoc Conference convened by Yakubu Gowon having become defunct. Also discussed very extensively were the plight of the East as a consequence of the pogrom, the “blockade of Eastern Nigeria”, the Aburi Agreement, “Southern Solidarity, and withdrawal of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. All these are to be found in the verbatim report of the meeting. Creation of states, which Ofeimun claimed was the “sticking point”, did not feature in the discussions. The parting comment of Chief Awolowo at the Enugu meeting is quoted in full here below: “I am grateful to you (Ojukwu) for the enlightened stand you have taken all along - the stand for freedom and equality for all the regions of the federation. I hope that we shall succeed. May I end by praying the people of Eastern Region that there is no doubt that they are suffering not only for themselves but for others and I do pray that their suffering will not be in vain.”

The stalemate continued and a Sovereign State of Biafra was declared on May 30, 1967 (more than three weeks after the Enugu meeting!). Chief Awolowo became appointed the Federal Commissioner (Minister) of Finance and Vice Chairman of the reconstituted Federal Executive Council, which was inaugurated by then Maj.-Gen. Gowon on June 12, 1967. Nigeria declared war on the fledgling state of Biafra early in July 1967. It was supposed to be a war of national unity, a war “to keep Nigeria one” and was expected to be of a short duration. An operational Code of Conduct had been issued for the Nigerian Army in June 1967 and signed by the Commander-in-Chief, Maj.-Gen. Gowon.

However as it happened, the Nigeria -Biafra war lasted for thirty months in the course of which over two million Biafran children died as a result of a deliberate “Policy of Famine” by the Nigerian government, and defenceless civilians were massacred at Asaba and elsewhere in flagrant disobedience to known codes of conduct of armies, the world over. Many of the starving, kwashiorkor children were evacuated to Gabon and other places and are now permanently “lost” in the Diaspora. Chief Awolowo publicly defended this policy of starvation. When the war ended in January 1970, Maj.-Gen. Gowon magnanimously made his “no victor, no vanquished” and “3Rs” declaration, for which he is still widely applauded by Ndigbo and the world.   However, there were very serious hiccups in the implementation of Gowon’s post-war declaration starting from the obnoxious “twenty pounds” “ex-gratia” award and the infamous “abandoned properties” saga.

Ndigbo have moved on with their lives working on the premise that they have received all the accommodation that existing structures in post-civil war Nigeria would yield to them. They have worked, scratched and clawed their way back into the Nigerian society and economy to the chagrin of all who did not wish them well. Meanwhile, the country drifted from one crisis to another, from one “transition” to another, what Achebe called “Painful Transitions” (p.243), and has not been able to achieve sustained economic growth and development.

Forty years after the end of the Nigeria-Biafra war, the country still struggles along, unable to develop into a well-rounded nation-state that operates a modern economy, and still unable to cater for the basic needs of its over one hundred and fifty million citizens, despite the enormous petrodollars it has earned during this period. Most importantly, the country has failed to define and assert fully what citizenship of Nigeria means in practical terms especially as it relates to the protection of lives and property.

The summary of Achebe’s contention in his latest book is simply that Nigeria can do better and must strive to do better. He proffers solutions and even gives his recipe on how Nigeria can address and improve the present unwholesome state of our politics, our economy and our society. This is what is expected of every patriot. I am convinced that after Achebe’s fiercest critics must have seen and read the book “There Was A Country”, they would find that their abuse has been unfounded and misplaced. It is then that they can participate in a frank national conversation on the book and the redefinition of the future of our country can begin.

To trigger the national conversation, Achebe has said that his latest book seeks to raise questions and perhaps also “cause a few headaches”. For sure, the book has certainly caused many headaches but it is important for the headaches and even belly aches to subside so that the nation can address the questions raised by “There Was A Country”. It is possible that as we examine frankly and dispassionately some of the questions raised, the headaches may develop into severe migraine. It does not matter: the questions need to be raised, addressed and redressed, more than forty years after the end of the civil war, so that Nigeria can move forward faster.

For example, we need to examine whether the January 15, 1966, military coup in Nigeria was truly an “Igbo coup” to foster Igbo domination. Why then did the July 1966 “counter coup” or “revenge coup” degenerate into a pogrom to be followed by the exodus of Ndigbo from all parts of Nigeria? Why did the entire Nigerian populace keep quiet as Ndigbo were hunted down all over Nigeria? Why could the non-Igbo not develop a collective voice against the pogrom? Why was it expedient for soldiers to breach the established military code of conduct in executing the civil war? Why was mass-starvation of innocent Biafran children necessary in a civil war? Was it important to reiterate this wicked policy at international conferences? Why the twenty-pound “ex-gratia” award (irrespective of the amount proven in an account) to further deprive an already devastated people coming out of war from a means of starting all over again? Why were there “abandoned properties” in a country that had become one again? Why the continued marginalisation of Ndigbo as exemplified by its five-states structure compared to the other zones, which have six and seven states? Why can Nigeria not develop to a modern country like the Asian tigers? These are some of the questions arising from There Was A Country that I shall give my views on in an attempt to kick-start a “conversation”.

To be continued.

•Nwosu is a former Minister of Health, Federal Republic of Nigeria

I AM of the view that the spate of comments elicited from Nigerians and non-Nigerians by Prof. Chinua Achebe’s latest book: There Was A Country is good for our development as a nation because it provides us again with another opportunity for national exhalation of “bad ethnic breath”, so that reconciliation and genuine inter-ethnic mix can happen.

We had the earlier opportunity provided by the Justice Oputa Truth and Reconciliation Committee with Rev. Father (now Bishop) Matthew Hassan Kukah as secretary. I, therefore, read and retain all the comments and interviews by various individuals on the book as I came across them. It has been such a very long time from that horrid period (over 40 years), and we have moved on with our lives, that we should by now be able to reflect on these terrible events without being terrified of them. Achebe’s book has, therefore, come at the right time.

There is, however, this very curious write-up by Kole Omotosho (who is also a writer) titled: “The Trouble With Achebe” on page 19 of The Vanguard October 26, 2012, in which he quoted and agreed with a belittling review of Achebe’s book by William Wallis of the London Financial Times. Omotosho made much of this review. But what did Omotosho really expect on Biafra from William Wallis and London Financial Times? Achebe in his book had castigated Britain for its well-established anti-Biafra, anti-Igbo role in the entire crisis. Bluntly stated, Ndigbo (not only Achebe) hold the British Government responsible for having masterminded the pogrom and genocide against Biafrans, so to many of us, Mr. Wallis wrote what he had to write. So much for the Financial Times, the British, Mr. Wallis and his review of Achebe’s book.

Omotosho should also have quoted Nadine Gordimer, winner of the Nobel prize in Literature, who said that the book “exceeds all expectation”.

I went back to re-read Omotosho’s well-researched novel “Just Before Dawn” published in 1988 by Spectrum Books Ibadan. In his three-page acknowledgements, he had mentioned two persons who particularly excited my attention. The first person is Anthony Kirk-Greene whose two volumes titled: “Crisis And Conflict In Nigeria: A Documentary Source Book 1966-1970”, are a must-read for anyone truly interested in finding out the truth about the Nigerian crisis of 1966 and the Nigeria-Biafra War 1967-1970. The Kirk-Greene volumes are a repository of first-hand information consisting of over 227 broadcasts, press releases, speeches and official reports.

If, therefore, I had Omotosho’s opportunity to meet with Mr. Kirk-Greene, I would have asked questions on two documents namely: Document No. 104 (p.414) titled by Mr. Kirk-Greene as “Awolowo promises West will secede if East does,” dated May 1, 1967. Also, Document No. 109 (p.425) dated May 26, 1967 and titled: “Hassan Katsina’s interview on the Withdrawal of Northern Troops from the West.” These documents are important because the two subjects, as well as the possibility of a “Southern Solidarity” and Aburi Agreement, were extensively and frankly discussed at the Enugu meeting on Saturday and Sunday May 6 and 7, 1967, between Lt.-Col. Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he was then) and Chief Obafemi Awolowo and their teams. Prior to this meeting, the refusal of Yakubu Gowon to withdraw military personnel from the West and Lagos had been given as the principal reason why Chief Awolowo withdrew from the Ad-Hoc Conference on April 24, 1967.

Another person acknowledged was the Igbo legend, Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani (Zik’s long-time confidant and Arthur Nwankwo’s maternal uncle). I would be surprised that Omotosho was hosted by Dr. Ikejiani in Nova Scotia Canada, where he lived after the war, without hearing from him his strong views on the 1952 Western Nigeria elections, the January 1966 Military coup, events in Biafra, which he served loyally as ambassador plenipotentiary, and about his struggles over his “abandoned properties” in Port Harcourt and Lagos. These and other subjects are well-covered in Dr. Ikejiani’s 593-page autobiography titled: “The Unrepentant Nationalist” published in 2007.

In his autobiography, Dr. Ikejiani, who lived in Ibadan in 1952, wrote extensively (pp. 197-200) on the “cross-carpet” episode detailing his role and involvement and named NCNC-elected members who he and others had approached on the aegis of the party not to “cross-over” which they did, the next day. However, Dr. Ikejiani in his autobiography, also said that on reflection, he had come to terms with the “cross-carpet” issue, given that Nigeria comprised of ethnic nationalities that had not yet become a nation. Dr. Ikejiani is revered by Ndigbo and his attitude summarises the Igbo position on that 1952 Western Elections affair. It is not a big deal with Ndigbo who have since gone beyond it. But the “crossing over” or “crossing of carpet” did take place and that is all that has been said. Omotosho begs the question by saying Zik would not have done for the West what Awo did for them. May be; may be not. The bottom line is that Ndigbo generally accept the reality that Chief Awolowo needed to govern Western Nigeria at that time in Nigeria’s development as a nation, and that is really it. Achebe did not dwell on this in his latest book, and so Omotosho’s dismissal of Achebe’s reference to Awolowo (on another matter altogether) and describing Chief Awolowo as Achebe’s “bête noir” is petty and is neither here nor there.

Back to Achebe’s latest book, which I believe is a great work that will serve its purpose when the present furore subsides because the facts and truths raised by the book about Nigeria’s history cannot be submerged. They will always rise to the surface. It is a 333-page, four-part (Part I-IV) book covering from Achebe’s childhood to the Civil War and after, with copious footnotes showing Achebe’s sources and interspersed with poems. I am convinced after reading the book that its aim is not to drag Ndigbo and Nigeria backwards but is meant for us to acknowledge certain events of our national history like the Nigeria-Biafra War, pogrom and genocide, and to analyse those horrific events honestly for ourselves and ask questions why those events occurred so as to guard and protect the country from future occurrences. Denying continually that the events happened especially in the face of weighty evidence is sheer hypocrisy and impedes the development of a national ethos. There is an Igbo saying that ‘a child who does not enquire as to what or who killed his father sooner or later suffers the same fate’.

Some of the facts of our nation’s history, which will facilitate a better understanding of Achebe’s book, which devoted over two-thirds to the 1966 crisis and the 1967-1970 war are as follows: Post-Independence Nigeria had lost its salt and violence had erupted resulting in a military coup in January 1966. The coup was nationally acclaimed especially in Western Nigeria and Lagos for obvious reasons. There was a counter-coup in July 1966 followed by well-orchestrated pogrom against Ndigbo, resulting from the reactions of soldiers and others of northern Nigeria origin to the January 1966 coup, which later came to be regarded as an “Igbo coup”. Following the pogrom, there was exodus of Ndigbo from other parts of Nigeria to their homeland (Eastern Nigeria), thereby creating serious rehabilitation problems. An ad-hoc national conference was convened by the Federal Government under Gowon to defuse the tensions and insecurity arising from the impasse. Chief Awolowo who had just been released from Calabar Prison led the Yoruba to that Ad-Hoc conference.

Guardian Newspaper
MONDAY, 12 NOVEMBER 2012 00:00 BY A. B. C. NWOSU OPINION - COLUMNISTS

cornellrealtors: so the government should pay the contractors in cowries?

^^^^^


You mean the govt. no longer collect tax ( or state inland revenue)?

What other projects are the Lagos state govt. running and how have they been paying contractors?

Guk: A responsible government opens up the "Market" in their domain in such a manner that the market creates wealth and prosperity for all propotional to their position in the class structure. The government of Lagos state's projects in the last 10 years in comparison with other states have achieved that and that is why you see more and more businesses keep opening up in Lagos on a daily basis and people migrating tyo lagos for greener pastures daily.

This road you are refering to i.e Lekki Epe expressway has (1)appreciated the value of land and property in that neighbourhood so much so that poor land owners who are not even known to Fashola, all of a sudden are prosperous. (2) Building material sellers from Sand carriers in 50 year old land rovers to paving stone to all manner of artisans are busy 12 hours of the day. (3) Warehouses and Coporate offices; Entertainment centres and eateries all employing thousands of people on a daily basis are now there just because the road was opened up but all you can see is the toll you are to pay but when you are bubbling on Elegushi beach every weekend, you forget that if not for the opening up of that area. Ditto goes for Orile Badagry expressway.

You would also notice that each major neighbourhood is been opened up to have shopping malls so that they are self serving and that reduces the number rushing to V.I only on a daily basis.

How many states in Nigeria have constructed Houses; provided mortgages to those who qualify? Lagos has built over 1,000 houses for low income people and have a mortgage scheme also for those who need it.

Lagos state has the smallest cabinet in the whole of nigeria even though they generate the most money.

How many times have you heard Lagos state owning genuine contractors?

How manay times have you heard Lagos state not compensating those they took their genuine land and houses??

And to let you know how well Lagos state govt is bn run, you cannot inflate your tender for certain supplies as lagos state has a schedule of prices obtained directly from the market place so you cant sell Lagos state a laptop for =N=1m like the Senate bought a few years ago because they have all the prices.

A lot of people do not educate themselves on what state governments are doing and look beyond the facade. Lagos state publishes what they do on their website and its all verifiable

^^^^^^


How did all that you stated above qualify the road for toll? Even the world's minimum standard for a road to be certified fit for toll, the road doesn't qualify to be used as toll.

Who own and run LCC?

Good road construction is a primary function of a responsible government. For now, Lagos state govt. is extorting innocent Nigetians in name of toll gate, ok?

A Muslim / Muslim ticket wouldn't work in present Nigeria, based on recent events , put that at the back of ur mind.

What really are Fashola's achievements?

I can only certify him credible when he stops extorting money from innocent Nigerians in the name of toll gate. The road (good road) is part of primary function of a responsible government.

WITH regard to the January 15, 1966 coup, being branded an “Igbo coup”, Ndigbo do not believe that it was, given (among other considerations) that Zik was president (albeit ceremonial) and Ironsi was the head of the Army. Ndigbo were not marginalised. So what was an “Igbo-coup” in 1966 supposed to achieve for Ndigbo? Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani was convinced in his autobiography (p.369) that it was not an “Igbo coup”, “even if most of the officers were Igbo and the executors had been misled”.

We in the East have been vaguely aware of the “Ifeajuna Manuscript” but did not know that Chief Obafemi Awolowo knew of it and had obtained the actual manuscript (whose major revelation was that the coup-makers intended to make Chief Awolowo Prime Minister) as far back as 1967, as Odia has revealed. Achebe reveals in the latest book that he had read the “Ifeajuna manuscript” having received it from Christopher Okigbo. If only he and Citadel Press had published 

^

It was never an Igbo coup as has always been branded by people that don't know what transpired

Achebe: Best Late Than Never

Guardian Newspaper
MONDAY, 12 NOVEMBER 2012 00:00 BY A. B. C. NWOSU OPINION - COLUMNISTS  

I AM of the view that the spate of comments elicited from Nigerians and non-Nigerians by Prof. Chinua Achebe’s latest book: There Was A Country is good for our development as a nation because it provides us again with another opportunity for national exhalation of “bad ethnic breath”, so that reconciliation and genuine inter-ethnic mix can happen.

We had the earlier opportunity provided by the Justice Oputa Truth and Reconciliation Committee with Rev. Father (now Bishop) Matthew Hassan Kukah as secretary. I, therefore, read and retain all the comments and interviews by various individuals on the book as I came across them. It has been such a very long time from that horrid period (over 40 years), and we have moved on with our lives, that we should by now be able to reflect on these terrible events without being terrified of them. Achebe’s book has, therefore, come at the right time.

There is, however, this very curious write-up by Kole Omotosho (who is also a writer) titled: “The Trouble With Achebe” on page 19 of The Vanguard October 26, 2012, in which he quoted and agreed with a belittling review of Achebe’s book by William Wallis of the London Financial Times. Omotosho made much of this review. But what did Omotosho really expect on Biafra from William Wallis and London Financial Times? Achebe in his book had castigated Britain for its well-established anti-Biafra, anti-Igbo role in the entire crisis. Bluntly stated, Ndigbo (not only Achebe) hold the British Government responsible for having masterminded the pogrom and genocide against Biafrans, so to many of us, Mr. Wallis wrote what he had to write. So much for the Financial Times, the British, Mr. Wallis and his review of Achebe’s book.

Omotosho should also have quoted Nadine Gordimer, winner of the Nobel prize in Literature, who said that the book “exceeds all expectation”.

I went back to re-read Omotosho’s well-researched novel “Just Before Dawn” published in 1988 by Spectrum Books Ibadan. In his three-page acknowledgements, he had mentioned two persons who particularly excited my attention. The first person is Anthony Kirk-Greene whose two volumes titled: “Crisis And Conflict In Nigeria: A Documentary Source Book 1966-1970”, are a must-read for anyone truly interested in finding out the truth about the Nigerian crisis of 1966 and the Nigeria-Biafra War 1967-1970. The Kirk-Greene volumes are a repository of first-hand information consisting of over 227 broadcasts, press releases, speeches and official reports.

If, therefore, I had Omotosho’s opportunity to meet with Mr. Kirk-Greene, I would have asked questions on two documents namely: Document No. 104 (p.414) titled by Mr. Kirk-Greene as “Awolowo promises West will secede if East does,” dated May 1, 1967. Also, Document No. 109 (p.425) dated May 26, 1967 and titled: “Hassan Katsina’s interview on the Withdrawal of Northern Troops from the West.” These documents are important because the two subjects, as well as the possibility of a “Southern Solidarity” and Aburi Agreement, were extensively and frankly discussed at the Enugu meeting on Saturday and Sunday May 6 and 7, 1967, between Lt.-Col. Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he was then) and Chief Obafemi Awolowo and their teams. Prior to this meeting, the refusal of Yakubu Gowon to withdraw military personnel from the West and Lagos had been given as the principal reason why Chief Awolowo withdrew from the Ad-Hoc Conference on April 24, 1967.

Another person acknowledged was the Igbo legend, Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani (Zik’s long-time confidant and Arthur Nwankwo’s maternal uncle). I would be surprised that Omotosho was hosted by Dr. Ikejiani in Nova Scotia Canada, where he lived after the war, without hearing from him his strong views on the 1952 Western Nigeria elections, the January 1966 Military coup, events in Biafra, which he served loyally as ambassador plenipotentiary, and about his struggles over his “abandoned properties” in Port Harcourt and Lagos. These and other subjects are well-covered in Dr. Ikejiani’s 593-page autobiography titled: “The Unrepentant Nationalist” published in 2007.

In his autobiography, Dr. Ikejiani, who lived in Ibadan in 1952, wrote extensively (pp. 197-200) on the “cross-carpet” episode detailing his role and involvement and named NCNC-elected members who he and others had approached on the aegis of the party not to “cross-over” which they did, the next day. However, Dr. Ikejiani in his autobiography, also said that on reflection, he had come to terms with the “cross-carpet” issue, given that Nigeria comprised of ethnic nationalities that had not yet become a nation. Dr. Ikejiani is revered by Ndigbo and his attitude summarises the Igbo position on that 1952 Western Elections affair. It is not a big deal with Ndigbo who have since gone beyond it. But the “crossing over” or “crossing of carpet” did take place and that is all that has been said. Omotosho begs the question by saying Zik would not have done for the West what Awo did for them. May be; may be not. The bottom line is that Ndigbo generally accept the reality that Chief Awolowo needed to govern Western Nigeria at that time in Nigeria’s development as a nation, and that is really it. Achebe did not dwell on this in his latest book, and so Omotosho’s dismissal of Achebe’s reference to Awolowo (on another matter altogether) and describing Chief Awolowo as Achebe’s “bête noir” is petty and is neither here nor there.

Back to Achebe’s latest book, which I believe is a great work that will serve its purpose when the present furore subsides because the facts and truths raised by the book about Nigeria’s history cannot be submerged. They will always rise to the surface. It is a 333-page, four-part (Part I-IV) book covering from Achebe’s childhood to the Civil War and after, with copious footnotes showing Achebe’s sources and interspersed with poems. I am convinced after reading the book that its aim is not to drag Ndigbo and Nigeria backwards but is meant for us to acknowledge certain events of our national history like the Nigeria-Biafra War, pogrom and genocide, and to analyse those horrific events honestly for ourselves and ask questions why those events occurred so as to guard and protect the country from future occurrences. Denying continually that the events happened especially in the face of weighty evidence is sheer hypocrisy and impedes the development of a national ethos. There is an Igbo saying that ‘a child who does not enquire as to what or who killed his father sooner or later suffers the same fate’.

Some of the facts of our nation’s history, which will facilitate a better understanding of Achebe’s book, which devoted over two-thirds to the 1966 crisis and the 1967-1970 war are as follows: Post-Independence Nigeria had lost its salt and violence had erupted resulting in a military coup in January 1966. The coup was nationally acclaimed especially in Western Nigeria and Lagos for obvious reasons. There was a counter-coup in July 1966 followed by well-orchestrated pogrom against Ndigbo, resulting from the reactions of soldiers and others of northern Nigeria origin to the January 1966 coup, which later came to be regarded as an “Igbo coup”. Following the pogrom, there was exodus of Ndigbo from other parts of Nigeria to their homeland (Eastern Nigeria), thereby creating serious rehabilitation problems. An ad-hoc national conference was convened by the Federal Government under Gowon to defuse the tensions and insecurity arising from the impasse. Chief Awolowo who had just been released from Calabar Prison led the Yoruba to that Ad-Hoc conference.

(To be concluded)

• Nwosu is a former Minister of Health, Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Guardian Newspaper
TUESDAY, 13 NOVEMBER 2012 00:00 BY A. B. C. NWOSU OPINION - COLUMNISTS  

Continued from yesterday

THE Conference could not continue as a result of the withdrawal of the Eastern Nigeria delegation led by Sir Francis Ibiam because they feared for their safety arising from the continued presence of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. The impasse and stalemate continued. On Monday May 1, 1967, Chief Obafemi Awolowo delivered an address to the meeting of leaders of thought of the West and Lagos at Agodi Ibadan titled: “The Four Imperatives”. Imperative number three stated that if  “Eastern Nigeria through acts of omission and commission left the federation, the West and Lagos would follow suit.” The exact text of the speech is in “Awo’s Book on the Civil War” (pages 18-24) that is being run now by the Tribune newspaper.

On Saturday, May 6 and Sunday, May 7, 1967, Chief Awolowo led a delegation of the National Conciliation Committee to a meeting in Enugu with Lt.-Col. Chukwuemeka Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he then was) and his team. The meeting failed to achieve its stated objectives. I have read and re-read the transcripts of the Enugu meeting over and over again and cannot find the basis for Odia Ofeimun’s assertion that the Enugu meeting discussed the “creation of states” in Nigeria. I repeat that I find no evidence for this in the transcripts of the meeting as published. Chief Awolowo’s central objective for the Enugu meeting was to persuade Ojukwu for Eastern Nigeria to send representatives to participate at future “National Conciliation” meetings; the Ad-Hoc Conference convened by Yakubu Gowon having become defunct. Also discussed very extensively were the plight of the East as a consequence of the pogrom, the “blockade of Eastern Nigeria”, the Aburi Agreement, “Southern Solidarity, and withdrawal of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. All these are to be found in the verbatim report of the meeting. Creation of states, which Ofeimun claimed was the “sticking point”, did not feature in the discussions. The parting comment of Chief Awolowo at the Enugu meeting is quoted in full here below: “I am grateful to you (Ojukwu) for the enlightened stand you have taken all along - the stand for freedom and equality for all the regions of the federation. I hope that we shall succeed. May I end by praying the people of Eastern Region that there is no doubt that they are suffering not only for themselves but for others and I do pray that their suffering will not be in vain.”

The stalemate continued and a Sovereign State of Biafra was declared on May 30, 1967 (more than three weeks after the Enugu meeting!). Chief Awolowo became appointed the Federal Commissioner (Minister) of Finance and Vice Chairman of the reconstituted Federal Executive Council, which was inaugurated by then Maj.-Gen. Gowon on June 12, 1967. Nigeria declared war on the fledgling state of Biafra early in July 1967. It was supposed to be a war of national unity, a war “to keep Nigeria one” and was expected to be of a short duration. An operational Code of Conduct had been issued for the Nigerian Army in June 1967 and signed by the Commander-in-Chief, Maj.-Gen. Gowon.

However as it happened, the Nigeria -Biafra war lasted for thirty months in the course of which over two million Biafran children died as a result of a deliberate “Policy of Famine” by the Nigerian government, and defenceless civilians were massacred at Asaba and elsewhere in flagrant disobedience to known codes of conduct of armies, the world over. Many of the starving, kwashiorkor children were evacuated to Gabon and other places and are now permanently “lost” in the Diaspora. Chief Awolowo publicly defended this policy of starvation. When the war ended in January 1970, Maj.-Gen. Gowon magnanimously made his “no victor, no vanquished” and “3Rs” declaration, for which he is still widely applauded by Ndigbo and the world.   However, there were very serious hiccups in the implementation of Gowon’s post-war declaration starting from the obnoxious “twenty pounds” “ex-gratia” award and the infamous “abandoned properties” saga.

Ndigbo have moved on with their lives working on the premise that they have received all the accommodation that existing structures in post-civil war Nigeria would yield to them. They have worked, scratched and clawed their way back into the Nigerian society and economy to the chagrin of all who did not wish them well. Meanwhile, the country drifted from one crisis to another, from one “transition” to another, what Achebe called “Painful Transitions” (p.243), and has not been able to achieve sustained economic growth and development.

Forty years after the end of the Nigeria-Biafra war, the country still struggles along, unable to develop into a well-rounded nation-state that operates a modern economy, and still unable to cater for the basic needs of its over one hundred and fifty million citizens, despite the enormous petrodollars it has earned during this period. Most importantly, the country has failed to define and assert fully what citizenship of Nigeria means in practical terms especially as it relates to the protection of lives and property.

The summary of Achebe’s contention in his latest book is simply that Nigeria can do better and must strive to do better. He proffers solutions and even gives his recipe on how Nigeria can address and improve the present unwholesome state of our politics, our economy and our society. This is what is expected of every patriot. I am convinced that after Achebe’s fiercest critics must have seen and read the book “There Was A Country”, they would find that their abuse has been unfounded and misplaced. It is then that they can participate in a frank national conversation on the book and the redefinition of the future of our country can begin.

To trigger the national conversation, Achebe has said that his latest book seeks to raise questions and perhaps also “cause a few headaches”. For sure, the book has certainly caused many headaches but it is important for the headaches and even belly aches to subside so that the nation can address the questions raised by “There Was A Country”. It is possible that as we examine frankly and dispassionately some of the questions raised, the headaches may develop into severe migraine. It does not matter: the questions need to be raised, addressed and redressed, more than forty years after the end of the civil war, so that Nigeria can move forward faster.

For example, we need to examine whether the January 15, 1966, military coup in Nigeria was truly an “Igbo coup” to foster Igbo domination. Why then did the July 1966 “counter coup” or “revenge coup” degenerate into a pogrom to be followed by the exodus of Ndigbo from all parts of Nigeria? Why did the entire Nigerian populace keep quiet as Ndigbo were hunted down all over Nigeria? Why could the non-Igbo not develop a collective voice against the pogrom? Why was it expedient for soldiers to breach the established military code of conduct in executing the civil war? Why was mass-starvation of innocent Biafran children necessary in a civil war? Was it important to reiterate this wicked policy at international conferences? Why the twenty-pound “ex-gratia” award (irrespective of the amount proven in an account) to further deprive an already devastated people coming out of war from a means of starting all over again? Why were there “abandoned properties” in a country that had become one again? Why the continued marginalisation of Ndigbo as exemplified by its five-states structure compared to the other zones, which have six and seven states? Why can Nigeria not develop to a modern country like the Asian tigers? These are some of the questions arising from There Was A Country that I shall give my views on in an attempt to kick-start a “conversation”.

To be continued.

•Nwosu is a former Minister of Health, Federal Republic of Nigeria.


Guardian Newspaper
WEDNESDAY, 14 NOVEMBER 2012 00:00 BY A. B. C. NWOSU OPINION - COLUMNISTS  

Continued from yesterday.

WITH regard to the January 15, 1966 coup, being branded an “Igbo coup”, Ndigbo do not believe that it was, given (among other considerations) that Zik was president (albeit ceremonial) and Ironsi was the head of the Army. Ndigbo were not marginalised. So what was an “Igbo-coup” in 1966 supposed to achieve for Ndigbo? Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani was convinced in his autobiography (p.369) that it was not an “Igbo coup”, “even if most of the officers were Igbo and the executors had been misled”. The Special Branch Report on the events of January 15, 1966; Brigadier Hilary Njoku’s blow-by-blow account of how the coup was foiled (“Tragedy Without Heroes”); Peter Enahoro’s 743 page bombshell of a book titled: Then Spoke The Thunder; the published accounts of planners and executors of the coup namely Major Adegboyega (“Why We Struck”), Colonel Gbulie (“Nigeria’s Five Majors”); and now the unpublished manuscript of Major Emmanuel Ifeajuna (revealed in some detail by Odia Ofeimun) have raised very serious doubts reading the branding of the January 15 Coup as an “Igbo coup” for the domination of Nigeria. The facts simply do not add up. I shall stop at this point until the national conversation becomes much more rigorous especially in the scrutiny of the “Ifeajuna Manuscript” (because known facts of the January 15, 1966, suggest that Major Ifeajuna not Major Nzeogwu was the brain behind the coup). For example, the Special Branch Report is explicit that planning of the coup began in August 1965 but Major Nzeogwu joined only in October 1965.

We in the East have been vaguely aware of the “Ifeajuna Manuscript” but did not know that Chief Obafemi Awolowo knew of it and had obtained the actual manuscript (whose major revelation was that the coup-makers intended to make Chief Awolowo Prime Minister) as far back as 1967, as Odia has revealed. Achebe reveals in the latest book that he had read the “Ifeajuna manuscript” having received it from Christopher Okigbo. If only he and Citadel Press had published it!

With this background on the January 15, 1966 coup, why then did the counter-coup, the revenge-coup of July 1966 not stop at “revenge” killings of officers and soldiers of Igbo origin? Achebe had written earlier in one of his published essays and in his latest book that if the “revenge-coup” had stopped with the killing of soldiers and officers, it would have been seen and regarded by Ndigbo as a “horrendous tit-for-tat”, and the exodus of Ndigbo from Nigeria, secession and war would never have taken place. I agree with him. So why then were ordinary civilians killed? Why and how did northern civilians get involved with soldiers in executing the pogrom? Why did the pogrom continue even after the May 29, 1966, broadcast by the military governor of the North; Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu’s appeal for calm to Easterners in the North on May 30, 1966; and the statement issued by the Supreme Military Council on June 8, 1966? Why did Ndigbo have to flee from Lagos and Ibadan? (I fled the University of Ibadan where I was a scholarship student, our Igbo lecturers, professors and Vice-Chancellor, Prof. K. O. Dike, also fled.). How did matters degenerate to this stage as the Federal Government became impotent to protect Ndigbo as citizens of Nigeria? Why did non-Igbos except for very few (like Wole Soyinka, Tai Solarin notably) lose their voices as they looked on at the horrors? Ndigbo ascribe to this silence and acquiescence of non-Igbos that they (non-Igbos) believed that the pogrom served us Ndigbo right. It was a very bad feeling at the time. This bad feeling needs now to be expurgated. But before then, the feeling like expired breath needs to be exhaled.

Ndigbo in 1967 expected Chief Awolowo to speak out especially on the non-implementation of the Aburi Agreement, which had become the “sticking point” on which secession was declared (“On Aburi We Stand”). At the Enugu meeting on Sunday, May 7,  (p.81) Chief Awolowo had said that:

“With regard to Aburi, I was taken into confidence by the military governor of the West, and I can assure you that he was quite as valiant as he could be in seeking to get the decisions taken at Aburi implemented, and during my recent discussions with Gowon, I told him that it was improper, most improper, for any civil servant to sit in judgment over decisions taken by the highest authority in the land”.

He continued: “I have met a lot of people in Western Nigeria; not one of them suggested that the stand you (Ojukwu) took was wrong. On the contrary, they all supported the stand you took (on Aburi)”.

One can, therefore, imagine how horrified Ndigbo and Biafra were when the Biafra Information network reported that apart from Chief Awolowo’s defence of starvation policy, “Awolowo’s attitude towards ceasefire and peace talks proposals were negative throughout. On arrival in London, he said: “The rebels had committed a crime and must be punished”. These statements were quoted verbatim and are reported by Suzane Cronje on page 115-116 in her book: The World and Nigeria, published in 1972. Ndigbo were perplexed by such a drastic change of attitude and since the end of the war, have asked themselves why it was that these things happened.

Ndigbo do not accept that the “Igbo-coup” (spurious as it was) was reason enough to have produced a pogrom of the ferocity of 1966. We believe that the pogrom resulted from deep-seated hatred of Ndigbo. Havard-educated Prof. Amy Chua formerly of Princeton, now of Yale in her 2003 bestseller titled: World on Fire (346 pages) posits that ethnic cleansing assaults and ethnically targeted confiscations in a country are not spontaneous; they are always sponsored and encouraged by governments. In her analysis, such acts are triggered by circumstances such as the January 15, 1966 coup, fueled by hate-filled demagogues, passionately supported by an aroused and angry “indigenous” majority motivated by tremendous feelings of grievance. So it appeared to have been with Ndigbo who had become labelled in a half-insulting and half-admiring manner as “Jews of Nigeria” in the 1960s. Prof. Chua without being specific to the Igbo (who she discussed severally in her book) lists behaviour, which “indigenous majorities” find objectionable as “acting insularly”, indulging in “conspicuous consumption” and the “flaunting of their ethnic pride”.

Achebe in his latest book has been more specific on the tendencies that Ndigbo must put in check as they interact with the others. Ndigbo have listened to Achebe’s admonitions and advice and are using their tongues to count their teeth, but are insisting that the other micro nations in Nigeria should do likewise, because these other ethnic nationalities also have their own faults. It is when the various ethnic nationalities treat each one another with reciprocal understanding and tolerance that a national character will begin to emerge and the nation will face the 21st Century world with hope and optimism.

As we embark on this new journey, Achebe insists that there are no-go areas like pogrom, mass-killings and ethnic-motivated violence. In his lecture: Africa Is People in Paris 1998 he said, “Our humanity is contingent on the humanity of our fellows. No person or group can be human alone. We rise above the animal together or not at all. If we learned that lesson even this late in the day, we would have taken a truly millennial step forward”. I hope that Achebe’s traducers are listening. We all can begin now to build the new Nigeria of our dreams; a Nigeria that caters for the basic needs of its citizens; a Nigeria that is a pride to Africa and Black peoples of the world, if we mean to do so: This is what Achebe’s book exhorts us to do and I suspect this is why he paid a tribute to Madiba, Nelson Mandela at the end of the book.

Achebe has not changed one bit. In the Trouble With Nigeria published in 1983 (almost 30 years ago), he had said:

“I believe that Nigeria is a nation favoured by Providence. I believe that there are individuals, as well as nations who on account of peculiar gifts and circumstances are commandeered by history to facilitate mankind’s advancement. Nigeria is such a nation. The vast human and material wealth with which she is endowed bestows on her a role in Africa and the world, which no one else can assume or fulfill. The fear that should rightly haunt our leaders (but does not) is that they may have betrayed irretrievably Nigeria’s high destiny.” He then asks and answers for us a very disturbing question: “We have lost the twentieth Century; are we bent on seeing that our children also lose the twenty-first? God forbid!”

In his keynote address at the “Guardian Silver Jubilee” in Lagos on October 9, 2008 titled: “What Is Nigeria To Me?,” Achebe said:

“Being a Nigerian is abysmally frustrating and unbelievably exciting. Nigeria needs help. Nigerians have their work cut out for them - to coax Nigeria along the path of useful creative development. We are the parents of Nigeria, not vice-versa. A generation will come if we do our work patiently and well - and given luck - a generation that will call Nigeria father or mother. But not yet.”

He concludes his thoughts on There Was A Country: as he writes (p.252) “Nigeria’s story has not been, entirely, one long, unrelieved history of despair. Fifty years after independence, Nigerians have begun to ask themselves the hard questions: How can the state of anarchy be reversed? What are the measures that can be taken to prevent corrupt candidates from recycling themselves into positions of leadership? Young Nigerians have often come to me desperately seeking solutions to several conundrums: How do we begin to solve these problems in Nigeria? Where the structures are present but there is no accountability.”

This is Achebe for us, a world-acclaimed writer deeply concerned about his people and his country, Nigeria; an extra-ordinary person, very clear-headed but reticent. He is not given to frivolities. Consistency is his hallmark. Whenever he speaks, he is blunt, fearless and to the point, but always measures his words. At almost 82 years of age, he has spoken again that it is not too late for us to mend our ways and salvage our destiny. So fellow Nigerians, what are we waiting for? Let the national conversation begin on the way to truly transform Nigeria into a great nation.

• Concluded.

• Nwosu is a former Minister of Health, Federal Republic of Nigeria.

[quote author=Okija_juju][b]I died..

Students with their Urine powered generator at Maker Faire Africa in Lagos

Now on the face of it it ticks a lot of boxes – developing nation ingenuity, young kids sticking it to the energy companies and the green credentials (hey – urine’s a renewable resource right?).

But I’m not so convinced.

The claims

The claims is that “1 Liter of urine gives you 6 hours of electricity.”

Wow, 1 Litre of urine and 6 hours of electricity.

The following is on the site explaining it.

The system works like this:

Urine is put into an electrolytic cell, which separates out the hydrogen.
The hydrogen goes into a water filter for purification, which then gets pushed into the gas cylinder.
The gas cylinder pushes hydrogen into a cylinder of liquid borax, which is used to remove the moisture from the hydrogen gas.
This purified hydrogen gas is pushed into the generator.
Along the whole way there are one-way valves for security, but let’s be honest that this is something of an explosive device…

What is in Urine?

Going to that bastion of semi-reliable information (wikipedia) – I find that:

Urine is an aqueous solution of greater than 95% water, with the remaining constituents, in order of decreasing concentration urea 9.3 g/L, chloride 1.87 g/L, sodium 1.17 g/L, potassium 0.750 g/L, creatinine 0.670 g/L and other dissolved ions, inorganic and organic compounds.

Ok, so nearly all water – and 9.3 g/L of urea. Hrmm.. On the face of it and with limited research into the chemical energy in urea – that’s not sounding like something that is likely to power a generator with a 10-40% efficiency (and that’s being very generous with the range).

The apparatus

Let’s take a look at the picture from here.

https://nathan-lee.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/IMG_4498_resized.jpg


The setup

Now it looks to me like a very daggy looking battery (the “electrolytic cell”), several water filter holders, a modified gas cylinder, some tubing, clamps and a generator. The bit from the generator to the electrics is pretty non-contentious – have seen similar things – a light to provide some load/indicator that energy is getting through and some powerpoints to plug the stuff in you want power to.

The “electrolytic cell”

Can’t really see what’s inside that or how it is filled up with urine etc – but keep in mind it’s got to be well sealed enough to pressurise the gas cylinder via the water filter thing in between. Also curious about the wires leading from it to the generator. What’s up with that?


Close-up of the battery and generator

https://nathan-lee.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/batteryAndGeneratorCloseup.jpg

Have they just hooked up the battery to an inverter perhaps? Surely people will expect the generator to be running while it is powering the lights. Or is it supposed to close the loop on supplying power back to produce hydrogen?

Water purifiers

https://nathan-lee.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Water-Filter.jpg

Next in the chain is the first of the water filters. What’s it for? “The hydrogen goes into a water filter for purification, which then gets pushed into the gas cylinder.”
Ok, let’s go with that. First up it has no filter in it. Next up: it’s not pushing liquid through and a “water filter” only makes sense if you’re pushing water through it – I’m not sure what the point of it is – surely the gas would just bubble straight through to the exit? e.g. the liquid in it is irrelevant like blowing into a glass with a straw not in the water – the air doesn’t magically go down into the water – it just stays at the top. If you filled it to the top you might get a bit of water blown out initially but then it would have cleared a path. If it had a hose down it you’d get a sheeha/bong type result – but how it is currently I don’t see how it does anything. It’s ok, these kids don’t hang out with the drop-out pot-heads enough to know how to fashion a bong out of an Orchy bottle. Even if you tipped it upside down during operation it would proceed to blow out all the water until it was clear and then the gas would flow straight through.

Here’s how they are usually set up to filter water:


Water filter.

So water comes in – is pushed or pulled through the filter – and then flows out. If you don’t have the filter there – the water just flows straight out.. If you tried blowing air through – it’d just flow straight to the exit.

So you could take that out of the system – a sign of many “perpetual motion” and “free energy” machines where they stick a big coil, magnet or a mystery big resistor or something in there.

The gas bottle
There’s some things wrong with the gas bottle too.

https://nathan-lee.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/bottleCloseup.jpg


Some suspect bits on here too

No clamp on the “input” – which I’m not sure what that is and how it works. Looks like a repair job, but not sure what that other bit is – looks like a plug or something on the side of it. The corrosion might be because they welded the wrong metal on there? But generally you don’t want too many valves/openings in your tank as it is a point of failure – certainly not a big drain sized opening or whatever that is.

Another water filter

https://nathan-lee.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/filterWithCrapOnEnd.jpg

Then there’s the next bit – don’t have any idea why you would have filters on the stuff going out to the atmosphere (I presume that’s what that is).


What is all this on the end?

Huh? Why would you care about filtering whatever comes out that bit – either they’ve hooked up their sham rig incorrectly (e.g. this stuff with the filters should be hooked to the electrolyte cell or to the gas tank or somewhere that makes sense. Double filtering something that is going nowhere – why? Again, those could be removed for the same impact.

And finally – 6 hours of running a generator on a litre of petrol is probably pushing the friendship a bit – 6 hours of running a generator on 95% water content – unless it’s uranium or fairy dust disolved in it is probably a stretch.

Conclusion

While I’d love to believe the story – I just don’t buy it. There’s either something very wrong with their setup or it’s just pointlessly complex for no apparent reason.

I’m labelling this a quack gadget – in line with the perpetual energy machines, magnet only motors.. Urine powered generators are in good company.

But happy to be proved wrong and we can finally harness the grubs who piss in the street and the urinal at the pub could run the lights.

Anyone else got any thoughts?

[/b]



https://ken-welch.com/Reports/graphics/Busted.gif[/quote]^


End of discussion.

A Urine powered generator would mean pouring Urine directly into the Generator, and a Generator produced by the girls too.

Big scam.

The engineering behind their experiment is also questionable.

Should be:

Nigerian girls experiment on using Urine to power generator, better put.


There's a great difference b/w "Invent" and "experiment"

ChinenyeN: I believe we may be derailing, and I wouldn't like to entertain the derailment too much, but I do feel I need to comment on the bold. Ngwa did not acknowledge or identify with "Igbo" until the mid 20th century. Before that time, Ngwa had always maintained that they formed a single, distinct people. As recent as the 60's, there were Ngwa who did not identify as "Igbo", and though you may not want to believe it, some still don't. Although, the Ngwa body now generally acknowledges "Igboness", but a strong sense of distinction and distancing between Ngwa and Igbo identity still actively pervades.

^

Stop contributing to the topic if you're sleepy, were did you read that Ngwa didn't originally identify as Igbo? Do know you that Aba is Ngwa? Do you know how the name Ngwa ( Ndi Ngwa Ngwa and Ndi Ohuhu) came about?

I may come back to comment on topic.

ChinenyeN: I believe we may be derailing, and I wouldn't like to entertain the derailment too much, but I do feel I need to comment on the bold. Ngwa did not acknowledge or identify with "Igbo" until the mid 20th century. Before that time, Ngwa had always maintained that they formed a single, distinct people. As recent as the 60's, there were Ngwa who did not identify as "Igbo", and though you may not want to believe it, some still don't. Although, the Ngwa body now generally acknowledges "Igboness", but a strong sense of distinction and distancing between Ngwa and Igbo identity still actively pervades.

^

Stop contributing to the topic if you're sleepy, were did you read that Ngwa didn't originally identify as Igbo? Do know you that Aba is Ngwa?

I may come back to comment on topic.

smackimorn: 1st

^

What do you mean by "1st"?

This forum is not for babies, ok?

The other part of it that is killing is:

When you visit any of the countries where each religion started, the believe of most of their highly educated and intelligent people is different from what we believe and practice here, or majority would be practicing the religion they are originally known for, not borrowed religion.

Sometimes I sincerely see it as part of conspiracy used and being implemented by the West to confuse and tie Africans down.

Please, NLers what you ppl think?

It's actually correct, I read it in today's Punch.

The aspect that is most annoying is that, when you evaluate how religious Nigerians are compared to what's obtainable, you would want say that any atom of religion should be forbidden in Nigeria.

[quote author=Kay-Dee]He was too polite which was a huge mistake, Romney would have been dead and buried in the polls by now.[/quote]^

Yeah, though it seems more like part of his strategy by giving him the false impression that the Obama we know forgot his exceptional presentation skills.

abes:

^


Meaning that it would be easier to work on Iran once the right American is installed in Syria, huh

Advanced politics and thinking ahead, not minding the number life that would be lost.

[quote author=Kay-Dee]Reagan was a moderate republican, the republicans of today are ultra conservative, that's why there's no cooperation in Washington.[/quote]^

Sounds real.

I'm now convinced that Obama didn't want to flow during the 1st debate.

Yes, since the designer is yet to change the name.

The topic should rather read:

Can a $2.5m Bra change the taste of breast?

Usama binYamiri: What the hell is this man ^ smoking?
Wetin concern Agbero with overload?
Wetin concern Bakassi with Biafra. No be Nigeria sell Bakassi? Abi its better for NIgeria to sell Bakassi rather than for Igbo to have it?
What is the story line behind Afghanistan....Maybe you can educate us instead of spewing trash?

^

What was the reason that made Nigeria to sell Bakassi?, based on your assertion that Nigeria sold it.

Iraq scenario is highly related to that of Afganistan, nobody likes planting in vain, ok?, though non is related to Nigeria vs Biafra in terms of relationship b/w the states involved.

Giving you a comprehensive script on Afganistan means being your instructor which I mentioned earlier, I'm not.

Learn not to insult others if you're really educated, when you don't agree with sm1, prove the psn wrong with u're facts / view, ok?

ba7man: A young igbo guy just came over to work with my partner and due to all this online squabbles i interrogated him(without his suspicion). If i had gotten signs some people display online he wouldn't have gotten the deal. I asked him how he felt bout Yorubas and he replied "I stay in Lagos and i love it,why not its people??". I also tried discussing the civil war to see his stand but he replied "That's old school,I never witnessed it,I just want to make my money". I'm right in saying there are a lot of good Igbo folks out there. I just don't understand what's goin on on Nairaland.

^

Is all about people seeing things from different perspective, and don't forget sm people's mind run in one track. Some twist things to give bad impression about others.

Yes, there are a lot of good Igbo folks. Igbos are nice people and the only tribe that still practice one Nigerian by existing and settling in every part Nigeria.

Usama binYamiri: Oh so now Biafra was victorious and not a conquered republic?
It is very muck akin to America conquering Afghanistan, or if you prefer
American Union forces defeating the Confederate Slave Holding South.
The Slave Holding South became an internal colony of the north, after Sherman's march to the sea destroyed Atlanta.
All the Industry in the South were Northern companies that then encouraged laws that encouraged the incarceration of blacks for labour in chain gangs, or cheap labor in share-cropping in the so-called reconstruction.

Haba! Why are you arguing yourself into a hole.

^


Is it by using Bakassi as BARTER to win Biafran war?

No need reminding you, go and get it back from Cameroon, huh, after that we start the discussion on relating it with Afganistan scenario.

Do you know the story line behind the war in Afganistan? I'm not u're history instructor though...

Katsumoto: So others have to be like Igbos for Nigeria to be better? You make statements like this and then claim afterwards that you are not claiming superiority.

Because of the differences between the various ethnic groups in Nigeria, conferedationism was adopted in the first Republic. Do you know how the first Republic ended? Some Igbo sons, not only killed non-Igbo leaders, they also killed those who were supposed to be their brothers. For instance. Brig. Maimalari escaped from his home only to run into Ifeajuna who was his protege. Believing that Ifeajuna was his brother, he walked towards him only for Ifeajuna to shoot him in cold bold. Was that an act of bravery or backstabbing?

Secondly, the confederationism was killed by whom? Who introduced the unitary form of government with decree 34 because Ndigbo wanted to export civil servants to other parts of the country? Who abolished compulsory Hausa tests in the North so as to remove the advantage of being an Hausa speaking person in a Hausa dominated region? The answer to all is Ironsi.

People who live in glass housed shouldn't throw stones. People with short memories shouldn't tell stories because they forget the start of the story and be reminded by wiser folks.

^


The ideas is not that others have to be or behave like Igbos for Nigeria to make progress,.

It's all about allowing someone who is better off (may be competence, intelligence or skills) to do it, rather than giving it to someone who would never do it right, that is one of the greatest reason we're not making the required progress, ok?

shymexx: ^^^How can that be true when their region is just as backward, if not worse than the rest of Nigeria

And are their governors not Igbos?

^

Shymexx, don't forget that there's hardly any state that the Igbos didn't and still contributing to its present status.

To answer u're question, do u think same is applicable to eastern states?

[quote author=ekt_bear]That may even be true.

But the point I have made in this thread is that while Achebe's attitude is prominent among Igbos, this will never happen. Everyone will remain their enemies[/quote]^


Some of his concepts may have different meaning. The generalized is that people not just Igbos, should be allowed and encouraged to to be where they fit in best.