Ojukwu: Hero or Villain?


Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu is a man that inspires conflicting emotions in people.  To some he is a born leader and hero.  To others he is an ambitious man that tried to break up the federation of Nigeria.  Where Ojukwu is concerned, no one is a neutral.  The conflicting opinions on him are consistent with his inconsistent personality and history.  Ojukwu is an educated man that entered a profession that many Nigerians regarded at the time as a profession for the uneducated, a southerner born in the north who fought a three-year-long war against the north, a man who once led an attempt to secede from Nigeria, but later ran for President of Nigeria.

 

A leader must be judged by what benefits or misfortune he has brought to his people.  The question to be asked is: has Ojukwu brought anything positive to the Igbo?  His record is grim.  The “accomplishments Ojukwu  has brought his people are as follows”:

  1. Dragging them into a brutal civil war they had no chance of winning, and which resulted in 1 million of them dying.

  2. Even when it became clear that his people were starving to death in massive numbers, he continued the war which was doomed from the start.

  3. He fled and left his people after the war.

  4. The civil war caused his people to be stereotyped as disloyal and led to an unwritten discrimination against them.

It is remarkable that a man who has brought few tangible benefits to his people is so revered by them.  Although Igbo by parentage (his father was the millionaire businessman Sir Louis Odumegwu Ojukwu), Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu was born in Zungeru in the north and attended Nigeria’s most prestigious school Kings College, before later graduating with a degree in History from Lincoln College, Oxford University (where he joined the communist party) in the UK prior to joining the Nigerian army.  Ojukwu was the first university graduate to enlist in the Nigerian army.  Intellectually, Ojukwu  was in a different league to many of his peers.  Joining the army in an era of political crises and increasing officer politicization of the army, Ojukwu found his niche.  During the 1964 federal election crisis, the President and Prime Minister jockeyed for control and loyalty of the army.  In the heat of the crisis some of Ojukwu’s colleagues alleged that he approached them with a plan to overthrow the civilian government and replace it with a military government.  The matter was reported to the army’s then commander Major-General Welby-Everard. 

 

If Ojukwu  harboured political ambitions, he was given a chance to showcase his political acumen when a group of young army majors overthrew the democratic government in January 1966.  Contrary to what has been written in some quarters, Ojukwu  refused to cooperate with the majors – including Major Nzeogwu.  When Nigeria’s first military government emerged, Ojukwu  was appointed the Military Governor of Nigeria’s Eastern Region.  His appointment to be the East’s Military Governor was also ironic as he had spent very little of his life in the East.  Ojukwu  was the most politically active of the four military governors.   By mid-1966, the army was imploding and another army coup was staged by northern soldiers during which hundreds of Igbo soldiers (including General Aguiyi-Ironsi) were killed. 

 

A central plank of this coup was the elimination of Ojukwu.  The ‘pointman’ who was to execute the coup in the Eastern Region was a young Lieutenant named Shehu Musa Yar’Adua (the older brother of Nigeria’s current president).  A  middle-ranking, northern officer (Lt-Colonel Yakubu Gowon) was chosen by northern soldiers to replace Aguiyi-Ironsi, despite the objections of Ojukwu who insisted that the most senior officer Brigadier Ogundipe should succeed Aguiyi-Ironsi.  In the aftermath of the coup, northern soldiers and civilians carried out gruesome pogroms against the Igbo, and tens of thousands of Igbo were murdered.  As decapitated and badly mutilated corpses began arriving back in Ojukwu’s Eastern Region, there was a sense of insecurity and revulsion.  Separatist sentiment increased in the Eastern Region and many Igbo and other easterners began to call for the Eastern Region to secede from the Nigerian federation which could no longer guarantee their safety. 

 

Contrary to what is widely believed, Ojukwu  was actually a moderating voice in a sea of Igbo hawks who wanted immediate secession.  Ojukwu cooperated with Gowon as he (Ojukwu ) was anxious to limit the bloodshed and to protect the lives and property of Igbo still remaining in the north.  He also ordered all northerners resident in the east to leave for their own safety, and brokered a ceasefire deal with almost 1000 northern soldiers in Enugu which allowed the northern soldiers to leave unharmed with their weapons.  However there were limits to Ojukwu’s cooperation with Gowon, and he was still refusing to recognize Gowon as Nigeria’s Head of State.  Ojukwu  defiantly continued to address Gowon as the “the Chief of Staff (Army)” (the post which Gowon occupied before the coup that brought him to power).

 

ABURI – HIS FINEST HOUR

After Nigeria was dragged to the brink of the abyss by two military coups in 1966, and pogroms which followed them, Ojukwu  had refused to attend any meetings of the Supreme Military Council and continually repeated his mantra that “I, as the Military Governor of the east cannot meet anywhere in Nigeria where there are northern troops.”

 

Ojukwu  finally agreed to attend an SMC meeting in the neutral territory of Aburi in Ghana in January 1967.  It was in the writer’s opinion, Ojukwu ’s finest hour.  While the other delegates arrived at Aburi with a simple, but unformulated idea that somehow, Nigeria must stay together, Ojukwu  prepared thoroughly and came armed with notes and secretaries.  In the words of one writer “Ojukwu was the only participant who knew what he wanted, and he secured the signatures of the SMC to documents which would have had the effect of turning Nigeria into little more than a customs union” (Miners – The Nigerian Army). 

 

Some claimed that Ojukwu  took the SMC for a ride by using his superior intelligence to trap the SMC officers into an agreement they did not understand.  Ojukwu was engaged in a constitutional debate by himself against five military officers, and two police officers, yet still got his way.  He can hardly be faulted for outwitting opponents that outnumbered him by seven to one.  Questions might be asked of the other SMC members of greater numerical strength who allowed Ojukwu  to extract such substantial concessions from them.  The agreement was never implemented as each side accused the other of bad faith.  Ojukwu cannot be faulted for the failure to implement the Aburi decisions as it was the federal government that reneged on the agreement. 

 

The federal government attempted to implement the Aburi agreement in diluted form by enacting a modified Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree which turned Nigeria into a de facto confederation.  Ojukwu  declined to accept the initial draft and insisted on a full and complete implementation of the accords reached at Aburi.  Nonetheless as the weaker party he could still have showed greater pragmatism to spare further suffering for his people.  At this point Ojukwu’s decision making must be questioned.  Ojukwu would have saved many lives had he shown a greater degree of flexibility by accepting the Decree as it gave him 90% of what he wanted.  In the “winner takes all” mentality that is so symptomatic of Nigerian politics, Ojukwu unrealistically held out for 100% of his demands and in the end, received 0%.  His intransigence placed him and his people in a worse position than they started in.  Rather than turning Nigeria into a confederation (which is what Decree 8 did), Ojukwu ’s intransigence gave the federal government an opportunity to overrun the Eastern Region, carve the country into several states and concentrate massive powers in the central government.  Forty years later many Nigerians now call for the restructuring of Nigeria, and for devolution of power to its regions. 

 

Ojukwu  had a golden opportunity to achieve this over 40 years ago but squandered it.  Had he shown some patience he may have achieved his objectives – albeit at a later date.  The old adage is that “the best comes to those who wait.” Ojukwu  could have taken a leaf from the book of another infant country named Israel.  For several decades Jews fought to be given their own state in what was then British Mandate Palestine.  In 1947, they were granted their state but only on half the land that they wanted.  Realizing that it is best to accept what is achievable today, rather than risk holding out for 100% and getting nothing, Israel’s first leader David Ben-Gurion accepted a state but cleverly did not enunciate the borders of this state – this leaving the door open to agitate for more land at a later date.  Today the “green line” borders of Israel encompass more land than it originally had at independence. 

 

The Biafra Story

When armed confrontation with the federal government was imminent, Ojukwu  knew as a military man that the eastern region had absolutely no chance of victory in a conflict with the federal government.  Yet he declared the secession of the eastern region which he governed, in the knowledge that federal troops would invade immediately after the secession.  Although Ojukwu doubtless possessed outstanding leadership and motivational skills which he used admirably to pull his people solidly behind the war effort, it is uncertain exactly how he possibly believed that the eastern region (armed only with a few elderly World War 2 era rifles) could succeed against an enemy armed with limitless mortars, machine guns, tanks, armoured personnel carriers, trucks and air force jets.  One does not have to be a military strategist to see the folly of this decision.

 

At the time, there was a widely held belief (propagated by Ojukwu  and other Biafran leaders) that defeat for Biafra would be met by mass indiscriminate massacres by the federal government.  If Ojukwu  believed this, then his escape at the end of the war is deplorable.  After over a million Igbo were killed in the senseless war, Ojukwu  fled in the last days of the war when his people were at their lowest ebb, despite repeatedly promising throughout the war that he would never leave his people to the mercy of the federal troops.  If he believed that all his people would be massacred then his flight to a luxurious exile abroad and refusal to stand side by side with them to finish a war he dragged them into, cannot be applauded.  Ojukwu is an iconic leader for his people, but has failed to deliver the aspirations of his people.  The question remains – is Ojukwu  a hero or a disastrous strategist?

Advertisements

8 responses

  1. Looking back, Ojukwu is without doubt a hero! It will be hard to make a case otherwise even if that seems to be your main motive

  2. A collateral and relevant question is, “was Gowon a hero or villain?”
    It was Gowon who clearly violated the Aburi accords. This is what lead
    to the civil war.
    Gowon’s counter-offer of a watered-down confederation was unacceptable to Ojukwu because it contained a provision that allowed Gowon to declare a state of emergency and to legislate in any region WITHOUT that particular region’s Governor’s consent, if at least three other Governors concurred. From Ojukwu’s perspective, this was a ridiculous offer.
    This provision was clearly designed to undermine Ojukwu.
    If this represented 90% of what Ojukwu demanded at Aburi then Ojukwu
    must have not asked for very much at all.
    However, as in any set of negotiations, there are always more options
    available other than all or nothing.
    Ojukwu should have responded with a counter-offer of his own that
    removed that particular provision. The war was not necessarily inevitable.
    Maybe fact that the two protagonists were well-trained soldiers probably
    contributed to the descent into war.
    Both Ojukwu and Gowon should have done everything in their power to
    avoid a bloody confrontation.
    The Igbos certainly had a legitimate greivance. They were,after all, being regularly slaughtered like cattle in explosions of genocidal
    massacres throughout the North.
    SOMEONE had to stand up and speak for them. Gowon wasn’t acting to stop
    the butchery.For that, Ojukwu is a hero.
    The sad irony regarding Ojukwu is that, the action that he took to
    end the slaughter of his people, lead to an even GREATER slaughter of
    his people.
    For that, Ojukwu is a villain.

  3. Unlike the victims of ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, Dafur, Nazi Germany, etc. Ojukwu and the Ibo’s proved to the world that you do not have to be ethnically cleansed just because you are out gunned. Unlike the six million Jews who were murdered like sheep by the Nazi’s, the amazing Ibo’s put up a formidable fight with little or no resources and guess what, they survived. The Biafran’s have taught the world a priceless lesson: When terrorist thugs attack churches and murder pregnant women, you pick up whatever weapon is available and fight……like a Biafran!

  4. EJIKE ANYADUBA | Reply

    Ojukwu couldn’t have been a villain if we consider the circumstance uder which Biafra was. In that context, he did that which was expedient. His will always be kind with him.

  5. Aniesi O'Daniels | Reply

    A man is a some total of what he knows, and what he does with what he knows. It is very easy for anyone to listen/read the stories in their versions; and like a student of logic, begin to impress whoever wills. But it is important for us all to understand the Biafra/Nigeria war was a real story and not a literary work of art. The man off the pitch knows exactly what the player should have done. If that was a drama in unconsciousness, it would have been good someone else to take Ojukwu’s postion.

    FREEDOM IS EXPENSIVE, SLAVERY IS CHEAP. OJUKWU IS A HERO is a statement of fact whcih should not be a subject to be argued upon. After that, we can now begin to suggest to the past. But instead of suggesting to the past, can these wise analysts suggest to us what to do because Ojukwu has succesfully contributed his own quota to the survival of Igbos, but like Samson, he did not finish the job and so the mission is still on and let no one be decieved into believing otherwise. THE POGROM HAS NOT CEASED, THE UNWRITTEN RESENTMENT HAS TAKEN AN UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION.

    Let the people that has advice bring it forward because as it was in the beginning, so it still is today. NIGERIA AS A COUNTRY IS UNWRITTENLY INEXISTENT. THE POOR BRITISH DESIGNED STOOGE IS STILL WHAT IT WAS- A PUBLIC MEAL IN THE JUNGLE.

  6. CHARLES KING | Reply

    Ojukwu is a hero but his mistakes came as a result of Gowon and his nothern stupidity.Only the Ibo’s could blame Ojukwu little bit for some mistake, But the entire Nigeria should blame Gowon for the civil war where he trade BAKASI PENISULAR for the sake of the Ibo’s.
    We all saw the civil war coming there is a lot of need to blame Gowon more than Ojukwu. We should remember that both parties are not realy matured in mind to hold those position as at that time. Millitary just got to power by accident and within their six months in power you could notice their useless and senseless thoughts that led to the counter coup which trigers the civil war.
    The first coup was carried out by intelligent soldiers who know’s what they are looking for in goverment than the hopeless counter coup which realy elevated the tension for civil war.
    Gowon has a great chance to avoid that war than Ojukwu but beign a blood thirst soldier gowon let the whole blood to flow because British government is behind him and the Nigeria government had a large number of soldiers and amunitions than Biafrans.
    Gowon is a dumb, when he assumed power he could have immediately comand the notherners to stop the masacre of the Ibo’s with immediate affect and ensure the security of the remaining Ibos all over the country so that his new government could gain more support rather he supported the killings and promised his nothern boys whole heaven and earth.
    Also Gowon snatched the power from his seniors which ojukwu complains seriously that gowon is not the right person to be c-of-c after the demise of Ironsi.There are whole lot of senior army officers ahead of gowon who suposed to replaced Ironsi. If gowon could had did the right thing and gave the power to the right person “Brigadier Ogundipe”, ojukwu could had remain loyal to Ogundipe regardless of the already damages which Ibo’s had suffered in the second coup.

  7. Ejikeme Kenechukwu Ceasar | Reply

    Amongst the Igbos,there is no doubt Ojukwu is a hero.He identified with them during their most difficult period even when that constitute a risk to his father’s investment scattered all over Lagos.
    Four decades after the war,it is becoming clearer that we had to fight it.After foiling an attempt to build one of the most developed and peaceful countries in the world,Nigeria has no plans for itself fourty yeras after.

  8. ojukwu is a hero in all standard.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: