Breaking news, articles, Social, economic and political commentaries, news, views, reviews, interviews, travel writing, poems, Music sheets, etc
Tuesday, 20 August 2013
In Response To Femi Fani Kayode's Brazenly 'True B...
News: In Response To Femi Fani Kayode's Brazenly 'True B...: By Chukwudi OHIRI The polity, in the last couple of weeks has been inundated with a shameful debate, argument and co...
In Response To Femi Fani Kayode's Brazenly 'True Bitterness Against The Igbos'
By Chukwudi OHIRI
The
polity, in the last couple of weeks has been inundated with a shameful debate,
argument and counter arguments over Femi Fani Kayode’s open hate-infested piece
that amounts to nothing but a biased and poorly edited account of the Nigerian
History vis-à-vis the Igbo people. It is rather very unfortunate that a man of
his calibre can throw out such virulent venom in the name of seeking political
relevance among his people at a time the Igbos are trying hard to bury the
hatchet and forge ahead under one united Nigeria.
I
salute the courage of many well meaning Igbos who, rather than join in a
baseless altercation with Fani Kayode who, considering the tone of his piece
and other subsequent rejoinders, is evidently an intransigent tribalist,
distorting history to suit his whims and caprices. In fact, his last piece
titled, ‘A Word For Those That Call Me A Tribalist’ finally betrayed his
idiosyncrasy and irresponsible personality when he publicly disclosed his personal
private illicit affairs with some of his ex concubines or girl friends just to
prove a useless and incoherent point. This alone smacks of gross puerileness in
his character and deserves the snub he got on his infantile piece because,
silence they say, is the best answer to a fool. The same piece also clearly
depicted him as an attention-seeker when he lamented that nobody has put up a reasonable
argument to refute or discredit his lies-infested message. However, he raised a
very vital point which is that “The message is already out there and the genie
is already out of the bottle”. Our children born and yet unborn
may stumble into these imprecise and lethal accounts and believe them to be the
true history. This is precisely why I think a few of his submissions need to be
straightened for posterity sake.
Firstly,
it will be very instructive to note that Femi Fani Kayode’s poison came at a
time the Igbos and well meaning Nigerians across tribes and cultures were
questioning the atrocious act of the Lagos State government who reportedly
deported bonafide Nigerians from Lagos State to, be it Anambra, Ibadan, Osun,
the North or any other part of the country. The Lagos State government that
Fani Kayode is holding brief for has even owned up through its spokes persons
that there was a fundamental error in the way and manner the supposed ‘rehabilitation’
was carried out. The blames were left at the doorstep of officials and agents
who did not complete the assignment in the right way by dumping these people at
an ungodly hour in an ungodly place. The Anambra State government also took a
fair share of the blame for not responding responsibly to correspondences from
the Lagos State government. In all, the act was roundly condemned by a
respectable and more legitimate son of Yoruba land in the person of
Femi Falana (SAN), a well revered Human Rights Activist. His condemnation of
the act knows no boundary as it was holistic, whether perpetrated by Lagos,
Anambra, Abia or any other state for that matter. His words: “Accordingly, the
forceful removal of beggars from their chosen abode and repatriation
to their states of origin is illegal and unconstitutional as they violate the
fundamental rights of such citizens enshrined in the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended. In particular, deportation is an
affront to the human rights of the beggars to dignity of their persons (Section
34); personal liberty (Section 35); freedom of movement (Section 41); and right
of residence in any part of Nigeria (Section 43)”.
It still beats the imagination of many, how this simple and straightforward
issue degenerated into digging up and distorting history to implant deep seated
hatred among tribes. Only an ethnic bigot like Fani Kayode could have done
this.
For
the records, FFK alleged and I quote: “It
is amazing how one or two of the numerous nationalities that make up
Nigeria secretly wish that they were Yoruba and consistently
lay claim to Lagos as being partly theirs. This is
contradictory to his position that the Igbos have a domineering attitude
otherwise how could the same people wish they were other tribes other than
theirs. No Igbo man, no matter how long he or she has lived in another land
would wish to be of that tribe, let alone being a Yoruba (with a negative toga
of hooliganism, covetousness, Saboteur tendency, laziness and other vices
hanging around their personality). For clarity and in all modesty, these
allegations may be products of over-generalization and should not be considered
as factual.
Again, the Igbos have never said they are the owners of the Lagos
as maliciously claimed by FFK. Instead, what they tend to say is: “Live and let
live. We are equally stakeholders in the land in view of our contribution to
the development of the state as well as our personal huge investments that evidently
litter every where in Lagos”. It is a deliberate mispresentation to say that
Igbos covet the Yoruba land.
FFK shot himself in the leg when he, in the concluding
paragraph of his ‘barrage of lies’ referred to Lagos State as “a melting pot where
equal opportunities are available to all”. If this assertion is taken for its
contextual meaning, it then implies that he concedes to himself that Lagos
State is not the patrimony of the Yoruba even when nobody is contesting the
fact. FFK is also stating the obvious that Lagos was the federal capital
developed by federal wealth and individual acquisitions of all Nigerians
including, but not limited to Igbos.
Another
issue raised by FFK is that “the Yoruba, more than any other nationality in
this country in the last 100 years, have been far too accommodating and
tolerant when it comes to their relationship with other nationalities in
this country and this is often done to their own detriment”.
While not questioning the veracity of that contentious claim, it will interest
all to know that hospitality is part and parcel of the Igbo customs as it is
regarded as a taboo to treat your visitors badly. Non-Igbos who have travelled
to the East can attest to this, especially Youth Corpers. The real issue here
is that unlike the Igbos, the Yorubas are not the travelling type as not many
of them live and work in the Eastern part of the country. It is only when you
travel out and you are treated badly that you can actually begin to make
comparison. Yet, there is no single reported case of Igbos stopping any Yoruba
from doing what they (Igbos) are allowed to do in Yoruba land. The statement”… we
have allowed them to do in our land and our territory what they have
never allowed us to do in theirs” therefore does not hold water.
FFK
in his infamous treatise referred to Igbos as “…those who never had any history
at all and who never even had monarchs or structured, properly-organised
hierachial societies that placed value on tradition and culture”. Unfortunately,
he ended up exposing his ignorance and naivety by this calumnious assertion. It
was obvious that he never had a single dose of history in his academic pursuit,
yet he may claim to be a (half-baked) Lawyer since lawyers are great
Historians.
The
Igbos indeed have a history just as rich as the Yorubas. In governance, Pre-colonial
Igbo political organization was based on communities, devoid of kings or
governing chiefs. The development of a heterarchical society, as opposed to a
hetriarchical society, marks Igbo development as sharply divergent from
political trends in pre-colonial West Africa. With the exception of Igbo towns
such as Onitsha, which had kings called Obis, and places like Nri and
Arochukwu, which had priest kings known as Ezes, most Igbo village governments
were ruled solely by an assembly of the common people. The Igbos had a more
advanced political system and that is why their societies are seen as
acephalous, Democratic, Republican and above all, egalitarian. This is far more
advanced than monarchy as evidenced by modern political trends. This may still
sound controversial, but just believe what you can.
In his jaundiced judgement, Fani Kayode
alleged again that “it is that same (domineering) attitude
that they manifested in Lagos and the Western Region in the
late ’30s and the early and mid-40s that alienated the Yoruba from
them, that led to the establishment of the Action Group
in April, 1951 and that resulted in the narrow defeat
of Chief Nnamdi Azikiwe in the Western Regional
elections of December, 1951”. As
was later revealed by a man of no mean repute in Nigeria’s historiography, Dr.
Mbu clearly stated that the September 1951 election was won by NCNC in the
western region. His was "Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe was betrayed by the Western
Region of Nigeria, not by the electorate, but by the leaders. The NCNC won the
election against the Action Group (led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo), but the
Action Group introduced what was unknown to Nigerian history", namely,
"carpet crossing. They Action Group bought members of the NCNC to join the
Action Group after these people had won election on the platform of the NCNC.
Zik, the leader of a majority party in the Western Region became the Leader of
Opposition overnight". In his own account, late Dr. K. O. Mbadiwe disclosed
in his autobiography, ‘Rebirth Of A Nation’, that: "But in pursuance of
the policy of creating a political climate healthy enough to make one a citizen
wherever he lived, Dr. Azikiwe contested and won the general elections in 1951
into the Western House of Assembly. To stultify this policy of one Nigeria in
favour of his tribally-based philosophy, Chief Awolowo got some elected members
to cross carpet from the NCNC to his AG side. Zik the victor lost. And
Awolowo's party was able to form the government of the Western Region."
This was the major first case of betrayal and ethnic chauvinism in Nigerian
politics. In spite of this, NCNC continued to win substantial number of seats
in the West against the AG. In fact, Lagos had five seats in the West Regional
Assembly all won by the NCNC in the election of 20 November 1951.
The point being buttressed here is that
contrary to FFK’s claim that ethnic politics and Southern disunity was
introduced by the Easterners, it was actually the Westerners who started and
have maintained this status quo till date and have even gone as far as
encouraging the Easterners to adopt the same methodology as a potent panacea to
their present political doldrums and frustration in Nigeria.
Another
point raised by FFK to prove the magnanimity of the Yorubas towards the Igbos
is that Herbert Macaulay “saw no tribe and he happily handed the leadership of
the party over to Azikiwe, an Igbo man, in 1945 when he was on his
dying bed.” Firstly, the truth is that NCNC was co-founded by Herbert Macaulay
and Dr Azikiwe. Every history book has this unbiased fact. It was only natural
that as co-founder, the death of one of the principal partners would confer
power to the next living partner as anything to the contrary would have been an
aberration.
Somebody
should educate FFK on the history and culture of the Igbo people (which he for
the first time honestly said he does not know of), especially on the aspect
that dogmatically explains how guests are treated. Igbos have an unwritten
custom which forbids them to give up their guest, for whatever reason to an
adversary. Even when the guest is guilty of the crime he is accused of, it is a
taboo to hand over a refugee, visitor, guest to even his parents for punishment
unless the said person leaves on his or her own. A typical example is that if a
little child commits an offence and in the course being punished, he or she
runs to even a younger person for refuge, the elder chasing the person must, as
a custom, desist from touching the offending child until when the child is no
longer in the custody of his little host. This elementary analogy is in
response to FFK’s question: “Would Aguiyi-Ironsi, or any other Igbo
officer, have stood for Fajuyi, or any other Yoruba officer, and
sacrificed his life for him in the same way that Fajuyi did had the roles been
reversed”? Unfortunately, there are no known case scenarios (that I can
remember) where an Igbo man had to sacrifice his life for the Northerner or
Yoruba and he fails. Moreover, if Fajuyi had not been killed before Ironsi,
history would have taken another twist. Who knows if the Igbos would not have
alleged a Yoruba conspiracy in the death of Ironsi.
I
want to believe that FFK is not expecting any response to his flimsy and
unwarranted introduction of certain notable Yorubas as Nigeria’s firsts in
their various fields of endeavour. While noting that the issue of Sapara and
Nathaniel King introduced by FFK sounds like the submission of someone who
suddenly stumbled into a public fact that he never knew of for ages and
ignorantly believes he has made a novel discovery. This is quite debasing for
someone of his status and so I cannot join him in the foray of listing notable
Igbo ‘Firsts’. It might however interest him to here just this: While, as he
claims, Yorubas “were (and still are) major industrialists
and investors, “Sir Louis Odumegwu Ojukwu (father of Emeka Ojukwu) was the
first and founding President of The Nigerian Stock Exchange, the goose that
laid the egg of Yoruba investment portfolio.
The
claim that Igbos generate 55% of revenue accruing to Lagos State (which FFK
feels slighted by) is an empirical claim that hardly requires any scientific
proof. It is as clear as crystal and even the government of the day have never
downplayed the contribution of the Igbos to the economy of Lagos. FFK may need
to drive round major markets and business concerns that pay taxes in Lagos to
ascertain for himself, the veracity of Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu’s claims. In some
quarters, the 55% claim is often seen as an understatement. The Igbos do show
pride in this feat, but are rather humbled that God, the giver of wealth and
riches, is with them.
Fani
Kayode shamelessly brought up the issue of Igbo abandoned property, lost jobs
and accommodation in Lagos State as mark of Yoruba generosity. If they were
magnanimous enough as he so claims why did it have to take resilient legal
battles and litigations for the like of Chief Emeka Ojukwu to reclaim his
father’s property in Lagos almost 30 years after the war? Many other Igbos
totally lost their properties till date and if anyone recovered anything, it
was just as much as was recovered elsewhere in the country. Note also that at
the end of the war, Gowon declared ‘No Victor, no Vanquished’ encouraging the
Igbos to return to their bases (though not guaranteeing reinstatement). Lagos,
being the federal capital territory and the major commercial centre of Nigeria
easily attracted the hardworking Igbos to return to commence their commercial
ventures.
FFK
failed to educate his gullible audience that it was Awolowo (whom Ojukwu
unconditionally released from prison in Calabar) that brought the blueprint
that ensured the decimation of the Igbos during the war. He perhaps, also
forgot to include in his malicious article that Awolowo was solely instrumental
to the starvation policy, 20 Pounds policy and numerous other anti-Igbo
policies of the war and post war era. Giving full details of this and many more
that are already in public domain will amount to falling victim of creating the
same heinous animosity the world has condemned Fani Kayode for. However,
attributing Awolowo’s hideous conspiracy to aid and abate the annihilation of
Ndigbo will be out rightly an unfair sentencing of the Yoruba tribe as not all
agreed with his (Awo’s) conspiracy. Many informed Yorubas have this opinion
too.
In
any case, Igbos have never been treated fairly since after the war as already
alluded to by FFK so saying that the Yoruba treated the Igbos better is
fallacious. Again, I need not prove, to avoid unnecessary arousal of negative
sentiments.
The
twelfth point raised by FFK which appears true to the point of political
propaganda is that “people of the old Mid-West and the Eastern
minorities (who make up the zone that is collectively known as the
‘’South-south’ today) have always viewed them with suspicion,
have always feared them and have always resented them deeply”. My question is:
“who is not suspicious of the Igbos in Nigeria?” The fact that Igbos are very
enterprising people just like the Jews, United States and other
advancement-conscious people is enough reason for anyone to fear domination.
That they feared domination does not mean that they did not and cannot trust
the Igbos.
The
‘minority’ question predates Nigeria’s independence and it was not peculiar to
the Igbos alone. In fact, it was prevalent in all the three major regions
leading to the agitation for the creation of more regions or states such as
Rivers State, Midwest State, and Calabar, Ogoja, Rivers (COR) State. Just as
the Eastern minorities feared the Igbo majority, the Midwestern minorities also
had the same resentment and fear of domination against the Yoruba majority in
the Western region despite having very strong cultural affinities with them.
Which one is worse? Whereas these fears were only natural in any dealing
between two heterogeneous groups, it remains to be proven that the Igbos
actually maltreated the minorities. In fact, Ojukwus second in command was Philip
Effiong, a minority.
FFK
in his 13th point deliberately distorted History by listing names of
those who led the January 15, 1966 coup and edited the names of non-Igbos. Any
naïve person reading this portion of the article will go home with a ferocious mindset
about the Igbos. For the sake of straightening the mispresentated records,
apart from those names mentioned in the piece, Captain Adeleke, Lt. Fola
Oyewole, Brig. Victor Banjo, Lt Fola Olafimiha, Col. Ejoor, Maj. Alale and of
course, Maj. Ademoyega were among the leaders. These names may not be at the
highest echelon of the coup plot but are part and parcel of core plotters. Any
account that omits these names has an underlying ulterior motive of inciting
hatred and misleading the readers and the future generation by terming the
coup, an Igbo coup. This allegation had been long debated and even well meaning
northerners and Yorubas know the truth. It was a mere coincidence that Igbos,
by virtue of their military positions in the army and of course their common
affiliations that Igbos were more prominent and at the top.
FFK
cannot claim he is ignorant of a certain document popularly called ‘Ifeajuna’s
manuscript’ that was stumbled into by the federal forces during the capture of
Enugu which explicitly revealed the intentions of the January 15, 1966 coup
plotters to hand over power to Chief Awolowo, one of the politicians trusted by
the ‘boys’. If it were an Igbo coup, could they have thought of handing over to
a ‘respectable’ Yoruba man afterwards? If it were an Igbo coup, why did Ojukwu
refuse to and personally aided the foiling of the coup with Ironsi another Igbo
man who was the GOC? Historians, political scientists and well meaning
Nigerians have in later years adjudged the Nzeogwu/Ifeajuna coup as well
intended, though a monumental miscalculation based on the final coincidental
colouration it took.
Another
point, which might be inimical to the growing synergy between the core Igbos
and the Delta/Anioma Igbos is that the so called Igbos in the picture were
mostly from the minority Igbos of the former Eastern Region. Col Animam Keshi, one
of senior officers who was on ground at the January 1966 coup, but allegedly did
not participate expounded on this based on his personal encounter with Nzeogwu.
The piece titled ‘Stop Blaming Igbos Of The South East Nigeria For The 1966
Coup And Civil War. Anioma Igbos And Their Yoruba Coup Plotters Friends Started
The War’ drew a line between the so called Igbos who were part of the plot and
the core Igbos giving further insight on those who actually led the plot. In
the piece, he inferred that the Igbos were drawn into the war in defense of
their minority brothers whom they, till today regard as pure Igbos. Nzeogwu,
Ifeajuna, Chukwuka, Nwawo, Iweze, Okwechime, Okonkwo, Igboba, Trimnell, Nzefili
who were at the top echelon of the coup plot were all Anioma Igbos. For Keshi,
the Core Igbos suffered brutally and are still suffering for the crimes of the
non-core Igbos. In spite of this, core Igbos still see these people as Igbos
all the same and have no regrets whatsoever calling them Igbos even when some
of them tend to dissociate themselves the Igbo people and the Yoruba seem to
claim them.
On
the issue of selective killings that spared the lives of Igbos, especially Dr.
Azikiwe and M. I Okpara, the history books written by unbiased authors have it
that for yet inexplicable reasons, Zik was not in the country. There was a,
though laughable myth around the person of Zik of Africa that he was invincible.
This is a well known legend among the Igbos to the point that he was believed
(until recently) to have the ‘keys to the River Niger’ and could unlock it at
the slightest provocation. Ironsi had this type of myth about his personal
crocodile staff around him too. Like I said, this is preposterous, but the
point is that those insisting that Zik ought to have been killed forget that
the Yoruba equivalent of Zik was Awolowo who had treason charges hanging on him
at that time and was supposed to be
equally killed. Perhaps, because of the integrity of these 3 people mentioned
amidst the overarching allegation of a corrupt political class, their lives
were (overtly or covertly spared). Hassan Katsina and M.I. Okpara were both
arrested but freely released because, like Zik, Balewa (who was only killed as
an afterthought when the coup apparently headed for failure), no serious
allegations of corruption were leveled against them. Ironsi was actually
penciled down for killing, but he was tipped off by Adjutant General James Pam
(who had to pay for it with his life), yet he did not run away, but faced the
coupists and subdued them. His name appearing in the list of those to be killed
was not for corruption charges, but his strategic position in the military. In
fact, it is on record that despite serving in the military for 25 years,
holding strategic office in the United Nations Peace mission in Congo, being
the GOC and then Head of State with unfettered access to national coffers, 18,
500 Pounds debt overhang was on him at death depicting his as a less corrupt
officer.
Having
said this much, it is not controvertible that the Nzeogwu Coup (not Igbo Coup)
was a generally welcomed revolution among the ranks of the Nigerian army. Both
Northerners and the Southerners were actively involved in the killings (at
least this much has never been denied), but the South, nay Igbos provided the
requisite leadership by dint of their position and especially, the burning
passion for a greater Nigeria. Every unfortunate coincidence that tended to
change the real motive being capitalized on by tribal extremists who do not
want the country to move forward were never premeditated. Later revelations
have proved this to be true.
Fani
Kayode alleged that the Igbos were the first to stage a foiled coup in the
country, but he forgot that the first coup ever in the history of Nigeria was
that plotted by Awolowo for which he was jailed as early as 1962. Rather than seeing
this as power-seeking, he cleverly pushed that to the Igbos as seeking to dominate
Nigeria. In any case, even if the Igbos were and or are seeking to dominate the
political landscape of Nigeria, it is evidently not for selfish reasons, but to
turn the tides of years of maladministration deliberately unleashed on the country
by the British overlords (post
independence era) in other to guarantee the continued servicing of their
interests in Nigeria. FFK cannot deny the knowledge of this as our History
books are replete with this assertion that the British were never comfortable
with handing over power to the more enlightened South apparently to forestall
early (if at all) liberation from their imperialist clouts. Suffice it to say
more bluntly and with pride at this point that the Igbos have not given up on
feeling the leadership lacuna that is still eluding this ‘great’ country since
over 50 years of independence. If this is seen as a domineering attitude, then
so be it because, more than any other tribe, the Igbos indubitably have
sacrificed so much for this country and it is really painful to continue to
watch it snowball into extinction.
“At
Gun Point”, that was how Fani Kayode described the ascension to power of Gen.
Aguiyi Ironsi after the botched coup, but he forgot that had Ironsi not acceded
to power, there was an concluded arrangement to invite both the British and the
American military to intervene as the country was in total chaos. Perhaps the
history of Nigeria would have taken another twist if that had happened.
Interestingly, FFK mentioned the names of 3 prominent Nigerians who were privy
to the meeting that led to the emergence of Ironsi to power. He deliberately
refused to inform Nigerians that Alhaji Shehu Shagari had long dispelled this
erroneous insinuation that Ironsi forced them to hand over to him in an
interview with a national daily years back. Ex-President in the interview was
quoted to have said; “indeed he (Ironsi) confessed his personal reluctance to
take over because of his ignorance of government, but insisted the boys were
adamant” which implies that he was clearly doing the bidding of ‘the boys’ who,
not only believed in his neutrality, but expected him to rescue the country
from chaos as the GOC rather than invite foreigners who left barely few years
ago. The language of the military has always been ‘force’ even when milk of
human kindness is flowing under their sleeves. Perhaps, this accounted for why
Ironsi, after being pressured had to say (in military language) that they (the
remnants of Balewa’s cabine) “either hand over as gentlemen or hand over by
force”. It would have been foolhardiness
to hand over to civilians when the polity was still very hot with lots of
apprehensions in the air. Indeed, as FFK had put it, he could not guarantee
their safety as the boys were on rampage and ready to revolt again if he
rejected the political power. Everyone knows that the (ironsi’s) delay in
decisively dealing with the coup plotters finally led to mistrust and subsequent
counter coup. Ironsi meant well for the country. His search for the elusive
unity cost him his life. Zik lost his pride of place among the Igbos because he
cherished the unity of this country and Africa as a whole to the detriment of
his people.
Again, FFK
deliberately lied when he said Igbos drew the first blood during the January
1966 coup. In fact he made his preys believe that the reprisals by the
Northerners marked the beginning of the wanton killing of Igbos in the North.
He forgot that ever before the 1966 events, over 200 Igbos were killed in Kano
in 1945. In 1953, anti-Ibo riots broke out in the north in protest of Ibo
domination of social, political, business and military institutions. Ibos were
hunted down and attacked in Kano, 245 were injured and more than 152 were
killed. There was also another round of killings in Jos in 1945 and Kano genocide of
1953. By 1966, the figure jumped to an
estimated 50,000 and continued until after the war.
Prior to the
war, Igbos never considered any form of revenge even when provocative words
were used by notable Northerners to malign the Igbos. Some authors have written
this and are quoted copiously here. In 1953, when Independence loomed, Ahmadu Bello, the
founder of Gamji said: "We cannot fight to dispense of white masters only
to be ruled by new black masters called Ibo. Even here in the North, they run
the post offices, railways, civil service and they have taken up all the shops
we create. Call them Ibo, but you can also call them Zionists, but we shall not
relinquish the estate of our fathers to such wretched people who have never had
an administration before." Source: 1968: the year that shook the world, by
Walter Schultz.
In 1964, Major Gibson Jalo, after
downing a bottle or two at the Kachia Barracks mess, moaned: "we are
captives to these Ibos. We can never enjoy our new nation until we chase every
single Ibo man out the North." Source: The five majors. In 1967, Inuwa
Wada, addressing Northern leaders in Luggard Hall, Kaduna, cried: "For
long, we had cried that these vermins, Ibo, must be removed from our soil. Now
we have seen the result of our negligence. A new opportunity of reducing the
population is here (the war)." Source: Last days of Biafra, by A. Madiebo.
Please, note that these quotes copied verbatim from another article on the
subject matter si not in any way meant to incite any bitterness, but to
straighten the records satanically tilted by FFK.
The anti Igbo sentiments that
followed the first foiled coup, according to former President Ibrahim
Babangida, IBB in an interview with a national daily was strictly a Northern
elitist propaganda deployed at that time to win the sentiments of the
northerners as a prelude to the counter coup, and it really worked. IBB himself
confessed to this: Twenty-four years later, Babangida
speaking to Newswatch on January 8, 1990 Interview said
that January 15 (so called
Igbo coup) “was
not an Igbo based thing as far as I could imagine but the execution of the coup
was poorly done and made people to think that it was one sided. I could recall
Nzeogwu saying that some chaps in the south let him down because they had not
been able to carry out the instruction the way he wanted them."
Quoting verbatim from ‘The inside
Story of Nigeria’s First Military coup’ by Max Siollun, 2005, “Nzeogwu later
described the detachment of troops accompanying him to (Ahmadu) Bello’s house
as “a truly Nigerian gathering” (new Nigerian—18th January, 1966).
Nzeogwu pointed out that the northern soldiers accompanying him “had the chance
to drop out. More than that, they had bullets. They had been issued with
bullets, but I was unarmed. It they disagreed, they could have shot me…most of
the other ranks were northerners, but they followed”. Atom Kpera, who later
became the military governor of Benue State, was among the soldiers who
executed Bello with Nzeogwu. In Lagos, a larger chunk of those who helped
Ifeajuna abduct Tafawa Balewa were northerners who sincerely believed in the
revolution. Why would FFK resurrect this long resolved issue at a time the
nation is seriously in search of an elusive and most desired peace in the
country and the powers that be are not reprimanding him officially?
In conclusion, it may sound
fallacious, but with an embedded truth: Ojukwu revolted because of perceived
injustice against the Yoruba when he refused to recognize Gowon as Head Of
State, insisting that Brig Gen Ogundipe (a Yoruba)
should take over since he was the highest ranking officer as at that time. In
essence, he fought for the Yoruba, secession bid was simply an aftermath.
Again, the first so called “Igbo Coup” was a fight for the Yoruba since Awolowo
was to be the direct beneficiary if it had succeeded. I am sure FFK knows more
than these before his venomous vituperations ever went to press, but
deliberately chose to hide it for self-glory that he will never get, even from
his fellow Yoruba.
(Chukwudi Ohiri
is Public affairs analyst, a social critic and non-violent social crusader
based in Lagos).
Contact:
07052415807)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)