CREDIT ELIAS ASSAD/EKO PEARL
"EKO Pearl offers you 2 NEW corporate towers. Located at a short distance from the residential towers. Corporate tower 2 has been demarcated and mobilized to commence construction."

Retired Lt. Fola Oyewole, 77, a Nigerian Military Officer of the Yoruba stock, fought on the side of Biafra during the ncivil war. Before then, he was, because of the first coup 50 years ago, imprisoned in Lagos and in the Enugu but was released by Lt Col Ojukwu.

He wrote his own war account too, entitled “The Reluctant Rebel”, which joined other civil war narratives like ‘The Biafra Story’ (1969) by Frederick Forsyth, ‘Why We Struck’ (1981) by Adewale Ademoyega, ‘Sunset In Biafra’ (1975) by Elechi Amadi, ‘The Nigerian Revolution And the Biafran War’ (1980) by Alexander Madiebo among others.

In this interview with Ademola Adegbamigbe and Femi Anjorin (Idowu Ogunleye snapped the photos), the retired army officer narrated what happened during the first coup, his participation in it and why he, despite being Yoruba, fought on the side of Biafra like other non Igbo officers like Lt Col. Victor Banjo, Major Wale Ademoyega and others.

Q: On January 15, it will be 50 years that the military struck, how will you assess the journey so far? Because there is always this stock phrase that the military spoilt Nigerian politics?

A: Well I don’t subscribe to that and maybe you will understand why I said that. I do not think that the military really spoilt Nigeria. More importantly, you will find out that right from Aguiyi Ironsi to the time the military sort of ended its intervention, if they had ended it at all, the military hadn’t any say in what is happening it is always the civilians dictating the pace, advising the military.

Q: It was on the allegation that you were among the people that planned that coup that you were detained by the federal government… we want you to assess the situation then, that really prompted the military to strike?

A: I was not one of the master planners of the coup. It will interest you to know that by half past eleven on the night of Janaury 14th, 1966, I had no clue about the coup. No clue whatsoever.

Q: So why did they link you?

A: Precisely, I was friendly with Emmanuel Ifejuna who was the brigade general and then after they had planned and done everything possible as the saying goes, some of the people who agreed to what they had agreed decided not to take part, it is a matter of getting anybody who could help and by virtue of my position, I had a telephone in my house which was the same thing that happened to most people there. The original planners started telephoning. Where are you.. I want to see you. It was an emergency period. I was second in command to the Transport Brigade in Apapa and we were on 24-hour alert. (So, like they will say something like this.. something is happening in Ogbomosho blah blah blah, can you help out? We did get instructions 24 hours).

It didn’t come as a surprise, so that is what happened. They drove to my house at about twenty five minutes to twelve and asked me to come to Ifejuna’s house. I got there and I saw a lot of officers, sitting down and they had even finished what they were talking about, and they said, you stay and I will brief you.

Q: Were you effectively court martialled before you were detained?

A: No.. No.. No… there was no trial, no court-martial nothing. I tell you, I got picked up before 8 o clock on Saturday morning and a group of senior officers interviewed me. I told them what I know and they said go and wait, that was the beginning of it all.

Q: There is a political tilt on how the coup was carried out and it has been generating controversy till today. Critics said the coup was lopsided. Ladoke Akintola was killed in the West, then Zik and Mike Okpara “were not around”. The argument was that they got wind of what was going to happen and left. There is this argument as to why were leaders from other parts killed and the Igbo leaders allowed to escape? What is your position?

A: I wouldn’t subscribe to that argument. They said Zik was ill, he was going for treatment and then he left the country and at the time of the coup, he wasn’t there, whether he got wind or he didn’t get wind of it, I would not know. Those who planned the coup must have taken a decision but it does appear that it was not in totality deliberate. I give you a specific example, the signal commencing the action in Enugu was delivered that morning and it did say: “Arrest, secure the key points and wait for further instructions”. And if you are in doubt, that was why Fani Kayode was arrested in Ibadan and brought down to Lagos, they wanted to kill him but what stopped them from killing him in his house in Ibadan was because of the instructions (waiting for further instructions) and he was brought down to Lagos.

Q: This interview is meant for people that are under 50 because even some people who witnessed what happened have forgotten. Tell us what happened before and after the coup happened and the pogrom leading to the Biafran war…

A:From that 15th of January, I was in prison, so it was all about they say, they say, they say.

Q: Looking at that time and now, have the factors that led to the coup and pogrom gone?

A: For me I wouldn’t think so. This question of quota system, being fair to this side and outside, taking advantage is still there. It is probably even worse. That’s the way I look at it. It is unfortunate, otherwise the country should have moved forward better than we are now. That’s the way I look at it.

Q: It was quite surprising that the people who really carried out the coup were not allowed to govern…

A: In planning the coup they had an idea, they know what they wanted and went ahead and achieved it but they did not have the power. So what can you do?

Q: Now let us come down to your book, Reluctant Rebel. What prompted you to write it?

A: When you find out that there is life in you. In the last two years I have been trying to do some writings, I can’t do so, but in prison there is nothing to do but eat, sleep. I wrote everything in prison.

Q: Were you not monitored?

A: Yes and No. You, find a way!

Q: What were the challenges that you faced in writing the book?

A: I faced none because the face that keeps reccurring or that I was remembering, I document it. I didn’t need any reference book. I didn’t need anything. The book is a narrative of a personal experience.

Q: Do you still feel the same perception about the coup? I mean this is a coup that you do not know anything about, just because some people backed out and you were now drafted in.

They said Zik was ill, he was going for treatment and then he left the country and at the time of the coup, he wasn’t there, whether he got wind or he didn’t get wind of it, I would not know. Those who planned the coup must have taken a decision but it does appear that it was not in totality deliberate. I give you a specific example, the signal commencing the action in Enugu was delivered that morning and it did say: “Arrest, secure the key points and wait for further instructions”. And if you are in doubt, that was why Fani Kayode was arrested in Ibadan and brought down to Lagos, they wanted to kill him but what stopped them from killing him in his house in Ibadan was because of the instructions (waiting for further instructions) and he was brought down to Lagos.

A: I was not the only one. There are some other people who didn’t know until that day. For instance on the night people were briefed, a colleague was in the briefing and he told them, look I have to consult my family. They looked at him and said ok, go and consult your family. Just by the corridor, they told somebody: “Follow him maybe he will be the first casualty of the coup”! Of course, what do you want him to decide? So simple. That gentleman is still alive today.

Q: In what area did you take part in that coup?

A: Arrest, seize facility and others…

Q: In your book, you write that after the coup, you were detained in Lagos and then transferred to the East but Ojukwu released you. We wonder why you didn’t run away?

A: Where do you want to run to? In Nigeria I was absolutely persona non grata, is it heaven you want to run to? Apart from that I and my other Yoruba colleagues had the fortune of having a chat with Chief Obafemi Awolowo when he came to the East. He and leaders of south east I cant remember all of them. On behalf of Nigeria, they came to plead with Ojukwu and we had the fortune of meeting him (Awo) because my late uncle M A Oyewole was Awo’s friend. So when he was leaving Lagos, he jokingly told him, you must come back with my son. So when he came to the east, Awo started looking for me. Eventually he left a message where I would meet him and I did. I told my colleagues and we all went and we saw him and in the course of the discussion, we did ask if we could come home and he said ‘not now, don’t try it’. So what do you do? And the easterners were not chasing us, so why not stay where you are accepted? So we stayed.

Q: You didn’t run away. But why did you decide to fight on the side of Biafra?

A: Now there was a trade I learnt- that is soildiering. What will I be doing in Biafra if I did not fight? I only practiced my trade. It is as simple as that. You could not just be walking around town doing nothing.

Q: But Ojukwu asked people who wanted to leave to go to the federal side..

A: That is before the war. If you remember early 1966 before the war till late 66 during the pogrom, by the time the war started, non easterners were in the east, they had not gone.

Q: In the book you said you do not believe in secession.

A: Yes.

Q: Despite that, you have it in your book that Ojukwu had genuine grievances, yet you fought on Biafran secessionist side, help us reconcile those positions…

A: You might have your objections but the powers that be, this was what they wanted, you have no choice. Mark you, I was not the only one who, given the chance, didn’t believe in secession, more so because we were not ready, we did not have enough arms. We had manpower, yes, credible manpower was there, but manpower alone doesn’t do it.

Q: You were at a point, according to your book, with Captain Adeleke, another Yoruba soldier, who was he?

A: He was a colleague. He is the one who said he wanted to consult the family and we were friends, we both worked in Apapa before the crisis.

Q: I want you to describe what happened to other Yoruba people or non Igbo who fought on the Biafran side – Lt Col. Victor Banjo, Major Wale Ademoyega, then Major Kaduna Nzeogwu an Igbo from Opanam in Delta?

A: They were detained like myself, and Nzeogwu was detained, that was a common factor.

Q: In the book, you applaud Ojukwu’s performance in Aburi, explain to us what actually happened because there is this argument that he bamboozled Gowon

A: If you listen to the Aburi accord or the proceedings as a whole, you will duff your cap for Ojukwu whether he is a villain or whatever you want to call him, call him. He really dictated the pace of the discussion, he was prepared for it, he kind of put together all the things and if you listen, the moment he started talking, others kept quiet and when he finished, they will say ok ok ok. To give you a full grasp of what the theme was, you need to read the comment of the super perm sec who led us to were we are today.

Q: Was it Philip Asiodu?

A: The group – Asiodu, and the rest. Their recommendations, what they brought back from Aburi was agreed to be implemented but when they came here they tore it into pieces/.

Q: Ok, was after the agreement was signed in Aburi? They came back to Nigeria….

A: To put it in whatsoever you can say political implementation. They desired to analyse it, it was an agreement not suggestion, that’s where our problem sort of started.

If you listen to the Aburi accord or the proceedings as a whole, you will duff your cap for Ojukwu whether he is a villain or whatever you want to call him, call him. He really dictated the pace of the discussion, he was prepared for it, he kind of put together all the things and if you listen, the moment he started talking, others kept quiet and when he finished, they will say ok ok ok. To give you a full grasp of what the theme was, you need to read the comment of the super perm sec who led us to were we are today.

Q: Kindly let us into what the agreement was? Because there was this talk of confederation, federation…And some critics said that was where Ojukwu bamboozled Gowon…

A. At the conference, Ojukwu spoke his own views, and they were entitled to theirs too, and fortunately or unfortunately they agreed. So what do you bamboozle?

Q: Do you have any reason to disagree on the war accounts of people like Frederick Forsyth, Wale Ademuyoga, Elechi Amadi?

A: It is their opinion. I only sympathise with them, they were writing after so many years after the event and in all modesty I will say I wrote more accurately than many of them. I wrote immediately after the war. I have nothing to refer to. I did not copy anybody and I wasn’t getting wiser after the event. I only reported what I saw. They have their own opinion, that’s how they see it.

Q: How will you describe the experience, in such traumatic detention circumstance, it is difficult to have power of recollection, how did you navigate?

A: That is the easiest thing to do, especially when I started writing it. What really prompted it, was the account being given by a lot of these igbo people- of what happened or what did not happen only to exonerate themselves. What is all these story telling, rather than keep quiet? That’s why I wrote. I wrote my book 1971-72 which wasn’t published until 1975. I don’t think any soldier wrote before 1980. Everything settled down. The difference is clear!

Q: Whats your view on the war accounts by Ojukwu himself and even Obasanjo?

A: I refuse to read, I don’t want to read. You cannot say Obasanjo was not telling the truth or Ojukwu was not, but if you want to value or know the value of Obasanjo’s book, go and read Alabi Isama, you find the difference. I am proud to say nobody has come up to say anything opposite in what I wrote. It was more or less reporting.

Q: Awolowo was accused of being behind the blocking of food supply to the easterners which really affected the civilian populace, what is your view on this?

A: Well he is the only one who has the view on it. I don’t have any view.

Q: Critics have been arguing about whether or not what he did was right…

A: Is any thing right in war?

Q: People who were in charge of Biafran propaganda said oh, the federal side took the advice of Awolowo and stopped food to the East….

A: Awolowo said, hunger, is the legitimate instrument of war so what else do you want to say? You want to be feeding your enemy so that he can fight you? Anything you have, you use it.

Q: Awo defended himself . I want your reaction to that. He argued that the Biafran soldiers (you were with them), were seizing food meant for the civilian population, that’s why the civilians were having kwashiorkor and soldiers were looking robust. How will you react to that?

A: O ma se oo (It is a pity!). I didn’t look robust anyway. If anything, civilians were donating food to the soldiers. It is not true. It is the civilians. They know they have a stake, and they said, lets maintain these soldiers so that they can fight for us. And where is the food anyway? In Biafra, Ojukwu introduced what we called land army because there was no food. So land army will say, yes we have this area now, it will be good for cultivating corn-if it is corn, plant.

I wouldn’t subscribe to the argument that soldiers were taking food from civilians, where is the food? The ones available it was like let us share, for instance which was an argument I put up on fuel price, fuel subsidy. I used to produce petrol for Biafra-I, Fola Oyewole. Yes. It is like brewing ogogoro, put it in something, fire it, and it would produce steam, pass it through cold water. So if you have a small river around your camp, about one third of the crude you put is petrol, the second third or there about is kerosene, without doing anything and the next is diesel, because we didn’t know what to do, we threw away the rest, but people who do know can tap it into something.

The point is the kerosene I got, I didn’t need. I gave to people of Owerri Nkwo Orji, the village where my camp was. Then I was chief so to say, I gave them anytime I boiled- petrol, kerosene, so everybody was looking after everybody so to say. If you snatched food from civilian, who do you want to control? Who do you want to command? It doesn’t make sense.

Those who ejaculate 21 times monthly cut prostate cancer risk by 22%



ARE you finding it difficult to get it up or keep it standing? Are you having poor erection or rather erectile dysfunction? You may have a short lifespan.

Recent study has found that men suffering erectile dysfunction are 70 per cent more likely to die early. Erectile dysfunction is an embarrassing condition that can affect a man’s performance in the bedroom.

The team of researchers from the University of Mississippi, United States (U.S.) has warned erectile dysfunction could have an impact on a man’s lifespan because the disorder is an important marker of cardiovascular risk.

The study, published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, concluded: “These findings have major public health and clinical implications in that erectile dysfunction is a strong predictor of premature mortality.

“Further research is needed to see the long-term results over a longer follow-up period.”

It was already known that erectile dysfunction is linked to cardiovascular disease risk factors – including hyperlipidemia, hypertension, obesity, diabetes and smoking.

The disorder has also already been recognised as a risk factor for stroke and coronary heart disease – in addition to angina myocardial infarction.

Erectile dysfunction is often thought of as an issue that primarily affects older men.

Yet, researchers said, nearly 20 per cent of men under the age of 40 are affected by the disorder.

Meanwhile, another study has found that men who have regular orgasms – once a day – are less likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Scientists have discovered that regular ejaculation throughout their lives reduces the risk of the disease.

The researchers, from Harvard Medical School, U.S., said they could not explain why orgasms could lower prostate cancer risk, adding further research is necessary.

However, it has previously been suggested that regular orgasms may flush out cancer-causing chemicals in the prostate.

Another theory is that if sperm is regularly cleaned out to allow new cells to develop, it helps stop the build-up of old cells that might be more likely to turn cancerous.

The prostate is a small satsuma-sized gland located between a man’s penis and his bladder.

Its main function is to produce a thick white fluid that is mixed with the sperm produced by the testicles, to create semen.

The Harvard study is the largest to date to examine the frequency of ejaculation and related prostate cancer risk.

The researchers found that men in the 40 to 49 age bracket who ejaculate 21 or more times a month reduced their risk of prostate cancer by 22 per cent.

This was compared to men who ejaculate four to seven times a month.

Also, another study has found that men who sleep with multiple women reduce their risk of prostate cancer.

To protect against prostate cancer, take a lover – or 20.

The research was published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology.

According to a study, men who sleep with multiple women are almost a third less likely to develop the disease.

Researchers at the University of Montreal, Canada, found men who have more than 20 notches on their bedpost slashed their risk of prostate cancer by 28 per cent.

And the study also revealed that men who have slept with more than 20 women reduced their chances of getting the most aggressive tumours by 19 per cent.

Celibacy, on the other hand, doubles the risk of the disease.

Meanwhile, the scientists said the link between erectile dysfunction and cardiovascular risk may arise as a result of endothelial cell dysfunction and impaired production of nitrous oxide.

To arrive at their conclusions, they examined data from 1,790 men between the ages of 20 to 85 who participated in the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

They linked the survey data with death certificates from the National Death Index through December 21, 2011.

Erectile dysfunction was measured by asking: “How would you describe your ability to get and keep an erection adequate for satisfactory intercourse?”

Those who answered ‘sometimes able’ or ‘never able’ were determined to have the disorder.

The scientists found that 557 of the survey participants had erectile dysfunction.

After a follow-up of nearly eight years, 244 of the original group had died.

Meanwhile, while the researchers said they were unclear as to why ejaculation lowers the chances of prostate cancer, they called the results ‘particularly encouraging’.

The study followed almost 32,000 healthy men for 18 years – 3,839 of whom later were diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Dr. Jennifer Rider, of Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, said the results are ‘particularly encouraging’ but should be interpreted with caution.

She said: “While these data are the most compelling to date on the potential benefit of ejaculation on prostate cancer development, they are observational data and should be interpreted somewhat cautiously.

“At the same time, given the lack of modifiable risk factors for prostate cancer, the results of this study are particularly encouraging.”