Paschal Chiduluemije Onyiorah
So
even the leadership of our so-called Ohanaeze Ndigbo still lives and
shares in the illusion that Biafra died in 1970 and as such that all
matters relating thereto ceased to exist thenceforth – based on the
imposed and theoretical “end” of the Nigeria-Biafra war which in the
estimation Yakubu Gowon ended on the note of no victor, no vanquished?
Indeed, to say the least, it is just a pity that this sort of remark
could be blurted out by an ordinary Igbo person in the first instance,
let alone when it is reported to have emanated from a hitherto highly
respected group of elders who as a matter of fact are not only in
position to know but also to speak authoritatively about the fact of the
subsisting state of Biafra in the hearts and minds of the vast majority
of our people (old and young alike) and in their spirits too.
Of
course, we have been reportedly told by Dr. Chris Eluomunoh (the
Chairman of forum of state Presidents of Ohanaeze in the seven
Igbo-speaking states) that the mere fact that the late Dim Chukwuemeka
Odumegwu Ojukwu, Ikemba Nnewi, did contest for Senatorial election under
the Nigerian political fabrics, and coming in the aftermath of the
Nigeria-Biafra war, marked the actual demise of Biafra as a sovereign
state (?). Anyway, much as it is not the intention here to begin to join
issues with some of our highly respected elders and chieftains of
Ohanaeze Ndigbo on issues bordering on the raging pro-Biafra
demonstrations across the states of the Igbo enclave and beyond, the
truth of the matter is that our individual and collective failure to set
the record straight now, and within the purview of justifiable
historical realities, will not only amount to doing a great disservice
to ourselves and posterity alike, but also it will avail charlatans,
opportunists and, above all, mischief-makers ample opportunities to
re-write our history for us and in the process present and propagate
sheer fallacies, canards and personal opinions as historical facts.
To
begin with, perhaps not a handful of us (Ndigbo) still recall that it
was basically because of this sort of unbecoming attitude and
unhistorical remarks which tended to emanate from certain members of
Ohanaeze Ndigbo that the late Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu would be
impelled to disagree sometimes with the positions being canvassed by the
leadership of the apex Igbo socio-cultural organization, Ohanaeze
Ndigbo, on certain serious issues of regional interest and concern,
during his life time.
Moreover,
concerning Dr. Chris Eluomunoh’s assertion that Biafra died since 1970
and which, according to him, can be well buttressed by reference to late
Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu’s political participation in Nigeria,
there is no gainsaying that this is one of the examples of the awkward
mentality of some of our Igbo elders and Chieftains of Ohanaeze Ndigbo
who, while parading themselves as leaders, are most unfortunately
endowed with oddities instead leadership qualities and this in itself
can be implicated as part of the bane of Igbo leadership. And the
reasons for this submission are not far-fetched.
First
and foremost, as one may wish to know, what has Dim Chukwuemeka
Odumegwu Ojukwu’s political participation in Nigeria, in the aftermath
of the Nigeria-Biafra war, got to do with the obvious fact that the
people of Igbo nation, particularly their youths, still desire and
agitate for self-determination and/or the establishment of the sovereign
state of Biafra, decades after the Nigerian state led by General Yakubu
Gowon had brutally waged one of the bloodiest wars in the history of
humanity against their forebears? And even though the people’s General,
Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, did rightly decide to participate
actively in the Nigerian politics (which we all know is a continuation
of war by other means), does this decision in itself vitiate the fact
that this legend never for once gave up on Biafra and the pursuit of the
cause of his people till he breathed his last? Even by stretch of
anybody’s imagination, is there any proof that Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu
Ojukwu did at any time downplayed or undermined the agitation for Biafra
or the fact of its survival on the minds of the people?
On
the contrary, rather, it is still very much on records that Dim
Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu never relented in giving his unalloyed
support to Mr. Ralph Uwazurike-led Movement for the Actualization of
Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), throughout his life and time.
Incidentally, unlike Dr. Chris Eluomunoh and his ilk in the Ohanaeze
Ndigbo group, our dear Ojukwu would never have failed or hesitated to
pressure President Muhammadu Buhari to release Mr. Nnamdi Kanu
unconditionally, if he were to be alive today.
To
this end, it will suffice at this juncture to take a look at his
immortal words of reproach to the then government of President Olusegun
Obasanjo over the continued incarceration of Ralph Uwazurike and other
MASSOB members as follows: “There
were so many still in detention. And very often, you ask, what have
they done? Why are they still in detention? It’s like you and I are
talking. Today, the Niger-Delta is in flames but their union leader,
with all threats he has made, is not in detention now. On the Yoruba
side, in the West, the leader of OPC, everybody knows. He is not in
detention. Why do you then have to keep locked in detention, Ralph
Uwazurike? He is still there in detention. Sooner or later people will
say it’s because he is an Igbo man” (see Newswatch, July 30, 2007).
Interestingly,
does the above excerpt portray late Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu in
any way as a man who actually gave up on the cause of Biafra or one who
chickened away from supporting his people’s inalienable right to
peacefully, legitimately and non-violently seek self-determination from
the Nigerian state?
On
the other hand, assuming that Biafra became a dead phenomenon in the
1970 as Dr. Eluomuno is inclined to think, then the question that
follows is: why does the name (beyond looking at the increasingly
current agitation over it) still evoke concern, fear, trepidation,
comments, actions and reactions? In the same vein, why must the likes of
Generals Gowon and Obasanjo appear to be in a hurry to speak to the
public about the dead (phenomenon) called Biafra? Or, is it no longer
customary and instructive in our clime not to speak (ill) about the
dead? Or, again, could it be that Dr. Chris Eluomunoh merely wants the
pro-Biafra protesters to reckon with his self-conceited idea which seems
to postulate that an unrealizable dream of yesterday can no longer be
earnestly pursued or realized as a viable last resort of today or as the
hobson’s choice that allows for the attainment of a guaranteed
prosperous future for a people?
Indeed,
it is high time that Dr. Chris Eluomunoh and his Ohanaeze Ndigbo group
co-travellers began to throw their weight behind the growing demands for
an immediate convening of a United
Nations’ backed referendum in Nigeria and the non-violation of the
inalienable right of Ndigbo to seek self-determination, bearing in mind
that the Nigerian state as presently structured and operated, especially
under the watch of President Muhammadu Buhari, is clearly nothing to
build on and repose a people’s hope in it for their general good and
security alike.
0 comments :
Post a Comment