Biafran war and Nigerian government misinformation

First and foremost, it is time to state categorically that Biafra did not lose the 1967 to 1970 Nigerian civil wars to the heavily equipped, bloated and inept Nigerian army. By 1970, the Nigerian armed forces have ballooned to 250,000, yet they could not have the job done.
Biafra lost the war to three super powers – the United States of America, United Kingdom and USSR. Having let this conclusion out of the closet, we can now proceed to state the facts as they occurred. The position of this writer is based on the mountain of information available on the information super highway, books and other literature, that are trickling out slowly to the public.In an irrational world, there is a saying that what one does not know would be harmless. This supposition is the oldest fallacy in the book. In fact, what one does not know, pretend not to know or decided not to know can be inimical – physically or mentally. Ignorant of the law or of facts thereof is the worst detrimental disease that if not checked would permeate into perpetual ignominious.
For too long, the Nigerian people have been over dependent on the opinion of few elitists, self-centered and self anointed leaders to define issues and lead them on a gateway of progress, instead it skews and often goes wayward towards a path of disaster. In the past, these opinion leaders have applied a principle where they educate their fellow ethnic groups that one ethnic group is superior, inferior, or plain ignorant than other ethnic group. They have used a similar process in misinforming the Nigerian people and the world for more than thirty years on the Nigerian civil war that the Biafrans lost the war to the Nigerian government. That is not quite true.So, there comes a time when the truth shall be extolled and pronounced for all to see, read, digest and absorb. After all, the truth shall set you free so it was written in the Holy book.
The purpose of this essay is multi-fold, but before we proceed, it is incumbent upon the Igbos to understand that there is no need for continuous weeping, gnashing of teeth or mourn the death of Biafra. They should not cry because Biafra was not defeated by the Nigerian troops as was previously stated, rather, they were defeated by an amalgamated superiority of the three world super powers. These powers that be ignored their ideological differences because of the promise to control the Nigerian mineral resources – which amount to second partition of Nigeria in the 20th century. The first partition of Nigeria occurred in the early 20th century following the amalgamation of north and south and the eventual loss of some parts of Nigeria to Cameroon.Nigerian army has never won a war.
Nigeria has been involved in many conflicts since its partial independence from Britain in October 1960. It has been involved in at least six major wars and it is sad to say that it has won none. That makes its standing or ratio if you will 0:6 statistically speaking.The starting point was the Second World War. Almost all the Nigerian recruits entered the war in order to save Europe from Adolf Hitler and his Nazi menace in Europe. Those who went to the war were stationed in India, mainly in Bombay. The British does not trust the African soldiers nor were they comfortable having them fight with them in the killing of fellow white man. At that time in history, it was the biggest offense to kill a white man who was sacrilegiously regarded as closer to god. Secondly, killing or witnessing the killing of a white man would destroy the white fictitious belief of their race, thereby expose the fallibility of the white supremacist persona. The effect of a successful removal of colonialist mentality and oppression translate to economic demise for the colonial masters. In turn, this would drive the accelerated demand to decolonize.For the sake of fairness to those that participated in the WW II, we can conclude that the collective participation of the world at large guaranteed the successful defeat of Hitler’s heinous crime and expansionism. Nigeria happens to be a minute part of the whole equation, and that was the closest that the army has smelled victory.
The other area that Nigerian soldiers saw action was during the three-year civil war at home. This war lasted from 1967 to 1970. There are litters of stories written on the Nigerian civil war, primarily on the federal government triumph over the Igbo led Biafra. The conclusion that the Nigerian weak army defeated the ill-equipped Biafran people’s soldier is not true. It is a make believe that the Nigerian army won, the Gowon regime at the time was quick to declare the infamous "no victor, no vanquish." This proclamation was supposed to seal the deal and version of the war based on the Nigerian government perception.In fact, the world super powers – the United States of America, the defunct USSR and United Kingdom, in alliance with the Arab countries especially, Egypt collaborated and fought the war for Nigeria. Some of these expatriate participants were afraid that people of eastern Nigeria, with superior intellect, commerce resource and abundant mineral resources would pose a major problem to their domination of the African raw material based economy.The Arabs especially were driven to help the Hausa/ Fulani hegemony on two principles: they felt that the war was an extension of Christian v. Moslem century old dichotomy. Under this scenario, it was an affront, according to the Holy Koran for none believer, in this case the Christians to engage in a war against the Moslems. Looking back on the Nigerian civil war, the issue was framed as Christian v. Moslem on the streets of London and other major European cities.Second, the Arab world came to the rescue of the inept Nigerian army because the Israelites lent minimal support to the Biafrans. For the Arabs, it was an extension of the Arab-Israel war in which the Arabs lost badly, both collateral wise and land. The Egyptian pilots dominated the Nigerian Airforce operation during the civil war. These pilots committed atrocities during their bombing run that targeted the innocent civilians who lived in the civilian enclaves away from the battlefields.Instead of fighting their war, the Nigerian government led by Yakubu Gowon used blackmail to whip the rival super powers to their corner. In order words, the Nigerian government sold their birth right by partitioning the Nigerian mineral resources among the participants. The iron and steel industrial development at Ajaokuta went to USSR. It is no surprise that the iron and steel industry had not taken off since its construction contract was signed over thirty years ago. The big oil companies secured long contracts for the exploitation, exploration and degradation of the oil producing communities.Still on the failed wars, Nigeria participated in boarder skirmishes with Cameroon and Chad. In several of this land incursions, Nigerian citizens were harassed, killed, maimed and lands seized by the intruders. Nigerian army was so weak that they lacked the bile to fight back.
Warrant Officer, Brian Wilson who was a member of the United States of American army contingent that were sent to Nigerian to train the 195th Motorized Infantry Battalion, attested to the weakness and inept training of the Nigerian army. He contended that the "Nigerians were the worst – trained army he had ever seen." (San Francisco Chronicle, January 26, 2001) Wilson’s conclusion was based on his participation in other training programs in the South and Central America and service in the peacekeeping force in Bosnia.It is because of the Nigerian ineptness and undisciplined armed forces that compelled the former USA president, Bill Clinton to authorize sending the USA soldiers to train Nigerian soldiers to attain 21 first century military standard. Furthermore, another reason for Clinton’s action was that the Nigerian army provides the bulk of the West African peacekeeping force at troubled areas in the region, notably Liberia and Sierra Leon. The Nigerian army activities and behavior at the peacekeeping theater has been reprehensible. They have been documented and implicated in many executions, looting and other brutal acts by international human rights organizations.The only war that the Nigerian army has won thus far, was intra army warfare called coup d’etat. They have become the undisputed specialist in violent change of military leadership, mass killing of those who are implicated or participated in a failed coup, extenuation of innocent civilians who opposed or rejected their brutal acts, and finally, embezzlement of public fund.
The Igbos should take solace knowing that Biafra was a victim of international conspiracy by those who put economic gain before human gain. Nigerian government has over the years attempted to rewrite Nigerian history. I can vividly recall that in the 1960s, the map of Nigeria used to have Bight of Biafra and Bight of Benin. What happened to Bight of Biafra still remains a mystery, although it was a part of the concerted effort by the Nigerian past and present leaders’ conspiracy to misinform the public of the true meaning of Nigerian history.The way Nigerian leaders are behaving, it seems that they are still afraid of the Igbos and yet the Igbos has not given the country any reason to panic. As soon as the war ended, the Igbos went about their business of rebuilding their lives and salvaging whatever that was left of their properties. The Igbos did not take to the forest in order to fight endless guerrilla warfare. They did not engage in acts of sabotage that would undermine the integrity, security or otherwise of Nigeria.The Igbos was a triple victim of Nigerian genocide.
Perhaps, the Nigerian elite was afraid that the Igbos would rise up again and avenge the traitorous inhibitions on them and their kindred by those who dominated the top hierarchy of government. So far, the Igbos have chosen to do things that they do the best, educate Nigerians on the need for patriotism, and interethnic relationship through travel, residing in other ethnic indigenous communities and speaking their languages. The Igbos, one would agree speak other Nigerian ethnic languages more than the combination of 300 plus other ethnic groups spoke Igbo language.
Each time my TV set shows a documentary of the Nazi atrocities in Europe, the killings, forced slave labor and rape of women, horrors that occurred at the beginning of last century, my heart bleeds. My heart bleeds for justice and that was exactly what is happening in Europe where the Jews have a sustained effort in fishing out those that are party to European genocide. The entire world have lent their support to the Jewish effort, so why not do the same to the Nigerian genocide against the Igbos in which millions perished as a result of the actions, directly or indirectly, by the Nigerian government.Coincidentally, this genocide occurred in the twentieth century, approximately forty years apart.
In the Nigerian genocide, the Igbo women were blatantly and brutally raped some taken into slavery by the Nigerian army where they became their sex slaves. The Igbo children died of kwashiokor, an outcome of the inhumane blockade of the eastern Nigerian territory that prevented food from reaching the civilians. The three super powers that helped the Nigerian government knew it, but chose to ignore it or buckled under the threat of Yakubu Gowon. The Igbos lost their entire livelihood when the war broke out, and at the end of the war, they could not recoup their properties. The most severe effect of the post Nigerian civil war was the denial of full citizenship to the Igbos; even forty years later after the war ended in 1970.
Abandoned properties is still a hot potato and successive Nigerian national governments have shied away from it. How can one consider his property abandoned in his own country? That can only happen in Nigeria.
Nigerian government should set up a civil war tribunal to look into the atrocities perpetuated against the Igbos and other southerners during the civil war, and continues this day. If the government balks, which is likely given the Obasanjo’s temperament and aversion towards the Igbos, perhaps, the Igbos should take their case to the International war tribunal and name the recalcitrant that perpetuated the Igbo genocide, which incidentally includes General Obasanjo (rtd.).
The country would not heal its wounds until all the aggrieved in Nigeria has been successfully put to rest. Any attempt to deal with the Nigerian problem cosmetically should be unacceptable.Nigeria has so much to learn from the Igbos. Nigeria needs the Igbos more than the Igbos needs Nigeria. Like the Ikemba of Nnewi rightfully argued, "we (Igbos) built armored cars and tanks. We modified aircraft from trainer to fighters, from passenger aircraft to bombers. In three years of freedom we had broken the technological barriers." (Ojukwu’s lecture on February 22, 1994). The Igbo phobia that grips Nigerian leadership has costed the nation the contribution of the Igbos as full citizens of Nigeria. Last year, upon the wanton killing of the Igbos in the far northern Nigeria following the introduction of sharia law, five Igbo governors held a meeting and afterwards, issued a statement or a stand. They condemned the atrocities against the citizens of their states who sojourned in the far north and they hoped that the nation would act swiftly, and that did not happen.The governors argued that perhaps the nation should look towards a confederacy if the national government cannot respect the sanctity of life and property of its citizens. That statement was the least anyone can ask of its government. Instead of seeking solution, the president of Nigeria attacked the governors and accused them of sabotage and treason. He was quick to attack the governors, but slow in discouraging the disrespect and scorn these sharia governors directed towards him and the living constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This act amounts to double standard.
Like Ikemba of Nnewi, Emeka Ojukwu said on a speech delivered on February 22, 1994, he argued that "the Tivs were in open revolt right from the dawn of independence, the West joined in this revolt in the fourth year of independence, Isaac Boro proclaimed his republic in the next year. In 1966 came the attempted coup led by Emmanuel Ifeajuna. Between 1966 and 1967 came the massacres (of Igbos) in the north of Nigeria. One fascinating aspect of all this chaos is that Nigeria only went to war against Ndigbo."There are hundreds of issues that hover on the borderline of mistrust of the Igbos. The Igbos constitute at least seventy percent of the movers and shakers of Nigerian commerce, yet they have to travel thousands of miles to the seaports and international airports in order to send or receive goods for local market. What the economists that have guided the national government have failed to tell their boss was that the cost of the transportation, the bribes along the route of the commodities to its destination features in the final cost of the goods to the consumers. One does not need a Harvard or Oxford degree to figure that out.Now that the cat has been let out of the bag, it is about time that the Nigerian civil war history, the real history be taught at all levels of the Nigerian academic world. Nigerians need to learn the source of the consternation, they need to figure out how to resolve their ethnic conflicts, they need to know that Biafra existed once in the map of the world and that like Ikemba of Nnewi once said, paraphrase, it exit in the mind of every Igbo person. Nobody can kill the Biafra of the mind. Nigerian leaders need to learn how to live with it for Biafra will never go away.
It is part of the Igbo and even Nigerian history.The Igbos need to fly the Biafran flags with impunity. They need to take the Biafran issue a little further. Those who would not mind should name their kids Biafra. It would be interesting to know what the federal government would do. Would they ban the child from full citizenship of Nigeria or would they annihilate the child, as they have attempted to destroy Ralph Uwazurike for standing up for what he believes in – his unwavering commitment in the preservation of his Biafran heritage.

Finally, as this article hits the press, one feels a heavy burden lifted from ones’ shoulders. Time has come when the leaders of Nigeria should live up to the oaths that they took when they were sworn into office. They were supposed to abide by the elements of the Nigerian constitution which among other stipulations stated that nobody should suffer from discrimination, Nigerians should live wherever they wish; there should be equal treatments of all ethnic groups, and since the national cake falls within the domain of the central government, there should be equitable allocation of money to all regardless of ethnicity.
I am proud of my Igbo heritage, likewise the Yorubas should take pride in being descendants from Oduduwa, the northern Nigerian Moslems cherished Usman Dan Fodio’s religious renaissance and the Fulanis should adore their Arabic heritage.
To show my pride and adoration for being part of the defunct Biafra, I still carry Biafra currency despite the fact that the war artificially ended thirty-two years ago. Biafra would rise up again, but in what form, is pregnant for there is a little bit of Biafra in every Igboman.

Inasmuch as I have followed the travails of Ndigbo, of which I am part of, you have not made any possitive contribution, especially where you actually stand regarding the Igbo nationhood. Somehow, I am kind of confused, to put it simply, where you belong.

You sound very much confused in declaring yourself, and very much confused in knowing the path to follow; hence, contradicting yourself and knowing truthfully where you belong and what you believe in.

But the bottom line is, it is either you support the Igbo causes or you back off, entirely. So far, you have not made any reasonable contribution supporting or backing the Biafra cause.

Your criminal OPC HAS BEEN TRYING THEIR best to evacuate the Nortghern masters forcefully but each time they come the Huasa will kick their butts. Many Hausa are already claiming ownership of Lagos. Why don't u go there and do something. One day they'll even establish sharia in Yoruba land. The Hausas lord themselves over u cowards in your land and u can't do anything about it.
THEIR strong presence in your land already indicates that your Odua Republic is a doomed republic. Who knows the Northerners will one day call it Arewa Republic afterall they are the ones in contrl of your land.

God bless you both. I'm very proud to be associated with you guys.

... Igbo fault Arewa on '66 coup
The vanguard
(Thursday, 26th July, 2001)
By Kayode Matthew & Lemmy Ughegbe

ABUJA — THE alleged continued marginalisation of the Igbo was the highlight of yesterday’s sitting of the Human Rights Violation Investigation Commission (HRVIC) where spokesman for the Igbo, Mr. Uche Chukwumerije said it was wrong to describe the January 15, 1966 coup an Igbo coup as alleged by the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF).

The commission, also yesterday, ordered one Mr. E.E. Nkang who was the Controller of the Port Harcourt Prisons during the hanging of the "Ogoni Nine" to appear before it (commission) on August 23, 2001 to say where the dead men were buried.

Mr. Chukwumerije, Information Secretary in the defunct transitional government in 1993 had at the Enugu sitting of the commission presented a petition on behalf of pan-Igbo group, Ohaneze where he chronicled cases of alleged marginalisation of the Igbo by the Federal Government.

He was recalled yesterday to be cross examined by counsel to the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Mr. Yahaya Mahmud.

During the cross-examination, Mr. Chukwumerije said it was wrong to describe the January 1966 coup as Igbo coup just because most of the coup planners were soldiers of Igbo extraction.

He said the entire Igbo population did not plan or participate in the coup and that the coup did not take place in the East because of the visit of a foreign head of government.

Besides, he said the January 1966 coup was planned to install the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo (a Yoruba) as Prime Minister.

According to him, late Major Nzeogwu’s claim to teach the late Sardauna of Sokoto "a lesson he will never forget," for allegedly speaking Hausa to him was the opinion of an Igbo man and not that of the entire people.

He explained that it could be reasonable for the man on the street to say the 1966 coup was an Igbo coup but not the elite.

"We said in the petition that in spite of the 70 per cent massive vote of the Igbo for President Olusegun Obasanjo, the present dispensation still continues in its policy of dis-empowerment of the Igbo. There was genocide against the Igbo and every family in Igbo land felt the pogrom," he said.

"An estimated 600,000 Igbo were killed, and 12 million Igbo children suffered permanent intellectual disability.

"Before we arrived at the figures, we interviewed families of the affected Igbo which took us about three years."

Mr. Chukwumerije told the commission that he was not aware that 20 Northerners were killed by the police in their attempt to find those who beheaded an Igbo man, Gideon Akaluka in Kano.

He explained that he preferred a conference of economic renaissance to a sovereign national conference which according to him will take Nigeria back to the dark age.

When counsel to the ACF sought to tender the forum’s response to Ohaneze’s petition through Mr. Chukwumerije, the commission directed the author of the document, Col. Hameed Ibrahim Ali (rtd.) to mount the witness box.

After tendering the response of ACF, Col. Ali, the forum’s Secretary-General and former Kaduna State Military Administrator was then cross examined by Mr. Anthony Mowoe (SAN) counsel to Ohaneze. Col. Ali admitted that he did not read some of the books which he quoted in the forum’s document.

Mr. Mowoe accused the ACF of distorting the historical facts of the civil war as the document contained at least 23 false points.

He then started to point out each of the misrepresentations of facts which Col. Ali had no answer for.

The forum in its document had quoted from Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo’s book, My Command, to the effect that four Northern military officers were killed in Lagos during the time.

Col. Ali was asked to read the book further which stated that an Igbo military officer and a politician from the Mid-West were also killed.

In his explanation, he said the forum only picked what it wanted from the book and left the rest.

On the forum’s claim that the five majors who planned the 1966 coup were all Igbo, Col. Ali was asked if one of the five majors, Major Adewale Ademoyega was also Igbo to which he responded in the negative.

He was taken to task on why the forum should consider a Yoruba man an Igbo.

Mowoe: "Why did you put his name as Igbo?

He was presumed Igbo.

Why should a Yoruba man be presumed Igbo?

From the list of officers, we believed they were all Igbo.

Have you heard of the April 22, 1990 coup?

Yes, it was planned by Col. Nyiam who was from Delta and majority of his co-planners are from Delta.

So that was a Delta coup?

Yes.

You said the 1966 coup was an Igbo coup because majority of the planners was Igbo?

Yes.

Gen. Buhari, a Northerner and other military officers carried out a coup that removed Alhaji Shehu Shagari, would that be Hausa coup?

Of course not. Buhari’s coup was not a Northern coup. It could be called Buhari’s coup.

You said in the document that Ojukwu escaped to Ibadan, though it was not confirmed. Why did you include in your memo what was not confirmed, what do you want the commission to do with it?

Let the panel do whatever they want with it."

At the hearing of the petition filed by MOSOP in Port Harcourt, the commission ordered the Controller of Prisons to appear at its Abuja sitting but one Mr. Yohanna Bahako who took over from Mr. Nkang was present before the commission.

Mr. Bahako said he served in Port Harcourt between December 14, 1995 and September , 2000 and that he was now in charge of Kogi State Command.

Mr. Falana urged the commission not to listen to Mr. Bahako’s response as he was not the appropriate person to explain where the remains of Ogoni were buried.

At the request of a member of the commission, Mr. Bahako said Mr. E.E. Nkang was in office when the "Ogoni Nine" were hanged and that he was currently at the Staff College, Kaduna.

The commission then ordered that he should appear before it on August 23, 2001.

The Hausa/Fulani are not retarded, to daub the 1966 coup as an Igbo coup, and claiming ignorance that Adewale Ademoyega was Igbo is Arewa's classic way of achieving their objective while playing dumb.

They called it Igbo coup, with advise from their British masters; as a pretense to carry out the ARABA. Ndigbo were the only obstacle to their total domination of the country. With the Action group decimated, in 1964, the Igbo was next in line.

Having used the Yoruba, and other gullible Nigerians to subdue Biafra, the throne became unquestionably theirs. It was a suprise to the naive and gullible south-south peoples, when immediately after the Biafran war, the first thing they did was to build the Kaduna refinary, and the pipe line from the oil producing areas to the refinary.

Today, Nigeria is exactly as they had always wanted. Backward, inept and the south held hostage. The Northern peasants kept in check, so Islam will not be threatened.

Emmanuel Onwubiko
Abuja

Dark memories of the Nigerian civil war echoed at the Justice Chukwudifu Oputa panel yesterday as Ohanaeze Ndigbo and the Arewa Consultative Forum engaged each other in a fierce dispute over the cause of the 1967-70 war.

Ohanaeze's presentation, which was articulated by Uche Chukwumerije, a former information minister, was hinged on a thesis that the North, working in concert with some other parts of the country, embarked on a deliberate programme to marginalise and exterminate the Igbo.

Ohanaeze said the 1966 coup was an expression of the anti-Igbo sentiment, explaining that the Igbo drew the ire of their persecutors because of their enterprise in all spheres human endeavour which led them to all areas of Nigeria.

But, Secretary to Arewa Forum, Col. Hammeed Ali disagreed when he hinted that the war was spurred by the 1966 coup which he said was an "Igbo coup." He also tried to exonerate the North, saying "Buhari's coup of December, 1983 was not a Northern coup."

Earlier, the Ohanaeze listed its major grouse as marginalisation.

According to the group, "To help us understand our case on marginalisation and disempowerment, the petition defines this key concept. Marginalisation is purposeful denial of rights of some members of a given unit by some other members of the group who control the power of allocation of resources. Marginalisation must be understood as fundamentally different from marginality, which means loss of rights through self-inflicted under-development.

"In all the realms of public endeavour, Ndi Ibgo have the requisite manpower and natural resources. But their rights to a fair share of Nigeria's resources have been consistently denied them by Federal authorities."

Continuing, the group stated that: "It is necessary to emphasise the fundamental difference between Ndi Igbo's case of disempowerment and the new noisy national orchestra of marginalisation slogans most of which are raised to mock and trivialise our case. The distinctive difference is deliberate exclusion: ours is a case of deliberate exclusion of Ndi Igbo from common resources by a combination of ethnic groups which control the centre.

"Indeed, the observed consistent pattern of discriminary and exclusionary responses of the Nigerian system to Ndi Igbo in the commanding heights of the polity suggests that our exclusion is not only deliberate but also malicious."

Ohaneze described marginalisation of the Igbo to mean the denial of right to life, right to means of livelihood, right to human dignity, right to freedom of movement, right to freedom from discrimination, right to acquire and own immovable property anywhere in Nigeria and other rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Tracing the alleged injustices against the Igbo before the civil war, he said "The republican spirit of Ndi Igbo and their individual drive, expressing itself in a flair for fair competition in all spheres, encouraged them to exercise their citizenship rights all over Nigeria. The endeavours of Ndi Igbo, like those of other Nigerian citizens, were taking place in an atmosphere (so we thought) of brotherly debates and differences in our fledgling multi-ethnic democracy.

"But Ndi Igbo soon began to notice sinister stains in the responses of some national leaders to their differences with Ndi Igbo. Public statements of leaders of ruling political groups in Northern and Western Nigeria began to betray a disposition to extermination or total expulsion of Ndi Igbo as their acceptable solution of what they now saw as Igbo problem. Speeches of Northern Nigeria Ministers, as recorded in Hansard of March, 1964, and the anti-Igbo incitements in a booklet, UPGAISM, published by Western Government (1965) portrayed the new mood."

The anti-Igbo mood, he further alleged, found a ready platform for "explosion and used as a rallying cry to mobilise Northern Nigeria and some parts of the rest of the Federation to advance genocidal plot against Ndi Igbo. The fiction and falsehood of Igbo coup has long been admitted by some of the major actors in that episodes (example, Lt. Gen. T.Y Danjuma in Nigerian Civil War 1967-1970 edited by Major-General H.B. Momoh P.373)."

According to Chukwumerije, the brewing "genocidal mood" "served" and "in response to anti-Igbo incitements, Igbo citizens in Northern Nigeria were massacred in three waves of pogrom in most sadistic and inhuman methods that made Jewish holocaust appear like mercy killings. 50,000 Igbos were slaughtered. Some of the inhuman methods of slaughter were recorded in affidavits of eye witness.

He added: "The massacres which evidently were well planned and co-ordinated by ruling authorities had the character of genocidal attacks on Ndi Igbo. The acquiescence of other ethnic groups in the rest of Nigeria emphasised the isolation and helplessness of Ndi Igbo. The insensitivity of the Federal Government and its failure to implement a peace agreement (the Aburi Accord) compounded the sense in security of Ndi Igbo. When the Federal Government proceeded with an economic blockage and ill-motivated balkanisation of Eastern Region, Ndi Igbo were left in no doubt that the genocidal plot had thickened. Eastern Nigeria was forced to declare the Republic of Biafra on May 29, 1967."

Ohanaeze continued: "The petition offers a little, just little, glimpse into the enormity of the holocaust that forced us out of Nigeria - the masacre of Igbo women and children who were deceived into flocking to railway stations in search of passenger trains to take them home, forcible collection of Igbo female students from schools and herding of them into leper colonies, to be defiled by lepers; the slaughtering in the transit zone of Middle-Belt of Igbo refugees who managed to escape the wrath of far North; the refusal virtually all Nigerians to give protection to any Easterner; the active involvement of law-enforcement agencies in the pogroms; and the exodus of 2 million people in flight from a country that has rejected them and that has offered them nothing but a mass grave. Indeed the future of no future confronting Ndi Igbo at this time was symbolised by the fate of Igbo babies in the Kano railway holocaust.

On the atrocities during civil war (1967-1970), the Pan-Igbo group said:

"A 30-month civil war ensued as a result of Nigeria's attempt to quell what she described as a civil war. The civil war..gave Nigeria a perfect excuse to cast Ndi Igbo in the role of treasonable felons and wreckers of the nation.

"Nigeria's prosecution of the war violated all aspects of the Geneva Convention and all code of civilized behaviour. Indeed, the violations were carried out with so much glee and abandon that it was clear that the war was an earnest pursuit of the programme of ethnic cleansing begun in 1966.

"The committee of International Jurists, foreign press and other Independent observers have also testified to this fact. Indeed, the international Committee on The Investigation of Crimes of Genocide whose investigation included interview of 1,082 people representing the two sides of the conflict concluded thus through its investigator (Dr. Mensah of Ghana); 'Finally, I am of the opinion that tin many of the cases cited to me hatred of the Biafrans (mainly Igbos) and a wish to exterminate them was a foremost motivational factor.'

Listed in the petition as methods through which the violations took place are:

the genocidal content of Nigeria's war slogans;

the use of starvation as an instrument of war;

the massacre of civilians in conquered areas;

the target of air attacks on concentrated civilian habitations;

rape, torture and dehumanization of Igbo women;

destruction of properties; animals and everything as in a scorched earth policy, and

torture and murder of war prisoners and civilians who surrendered. Over one million people, the petition added, died during the war through these atrocities.

On the atrocities and disempowerment immediately after the war (1970-1975), the apex Igbo group stated thus:

Nigeria's proclamation of a peace formula of three Rs (Reconciliation, Rehabilitation, and Reconstruction) turned out in practice to be a smokescreen behind which she continued the war against Ndi Igbo by other means. Besides the continuation of killings in the first three months after the end of the war, the new method was the strategy of disempowerment and strangulation in all areas of public endeavour.

The policy of economic disempowerment of the Igbo, alleged the group were:

federal government's vindictive enactment of the abandoned property law, and the consequent dispossession of Igbo property owners of their houses and plots in Rivers State as "abandoned property," in a ploy to incite the Easterners against one another.

the impoverishment of all Ndi Igbo through payment of a flat paltry sum of £20 irrespective of individual savings at the end of the war,

the intentional timing of the enactment of the "indigenisation decree" at the height of total destruction of the purchasing power of Ndi Igbo;

the denial of the reconstruction of utilities, structures and infrastructure damaged during the war;

excision of oil petroleum-rich areas of Igbo land, and exclusion of other mineral deposits found in Igbo land from the benefits of operations of umbrella organisations like OMPADEC or its successor, NDDC;

mass dismissal of Igbo public servants;

continuation of starvation policy and rejection of aids from foreign aid/donors;

treatment of Igbos as social pariahs in all the states of Nigeria;

the exclusion of Ndi Igbo from the higher echelons of policy-making;

manipulation of census figures to reduce Igbo ethnic group to a minority status; and

Igbophobia as the basis of creating states. Categorising what it called atrocities and disempowerment between 1975 to date, Ohanaeze stated:

"What would have been dismissed as unfortunate excesses of revengeful excitement in the flush of victory soon settled into a policy of marginalisation and disempowerment of Ndi Igbo. Successive governments maintained a disturbing continuity of a policy of strangulation of Ndi Igbo in spite of all rhetorics to the contrary. Public policy and practice since the mid-seventies to date have followed the same pattern.

"In the political arena, observed pattern of appointments suggest that the Federal Government is decided that no Igbo man should be trusted with a key sensitive command position for a long while. In the public service, our share of federal employments is far below the constitutional stipulations of the constitution and the quota chart of the Federal Character Commission.

"The history of the creation of states clearly suggests a policy of containment and siege, a policy designed to reduce the demographic leverage and financial strength of Ndi Igbo. Lastly, a new height in political disempowerment has been reached in the most blatant marginalisation by the present regime of President Obasanjo of South-East zone which gave it the second largest electoral support in the presidential democratic election of 1999.

"In the social realm, the racial discrimination against Ndi Igbo continues to rage, unabated. The blood-chilling consistency in which Igbo citizens have always been scape goats of all bloody riots in Nigeria confirms that they enjoy less protection of the law than any other ethnic nationality in the republic.

Commending President Obasanjo, the group said "there have been some positive developments since then, May 29, 1999.

Commenting on their prayers the group stated that it asked the panel to order payment "of reparations and appropriate restitution as a healing balm not just to Ndi Igbo but to the nation."

Ohanaeze said "the remedies sought include financial compensations for bereaved and humiliated families in respect of the murdered, the maimed, the raped and the dehumanised; financial compensation for wrong dismissals; financial compensations for the havoc of scorched earth policy; reversals of economic marginalisation policy, and restitutions where possible.

"But financial and economic redresses can never adequately compensate psychological wounds. The deepest wound of Ndi Igbo is a haunting spectre of insecurity, hanging like a dark cloud over a persistent ugly objective reality that continues to feed on traditional prejudice. Periodic anti-Igbo riots continue to warn Ndi Igbo that Nigeria has learnt nothing and has forgotten nothing.

"Our prayer therefore emphasises two requests as the key reliefs. One is a national apology. The other is an assurance of Ozoemena! - a national vow that violations of our human rights will never occur again. Indeed, the essence of all our prayers is summed in our relief."

Making suggestions on how to move the nation forward, the group asserted: "Our Constitution must address more explicitly and unequivocally than it has done hitherto the foundation question of the character of our Federal union. Should Nigeria be a mosaic of self-reinforcing ethnic mini-sovereignties barely interacting horizontally but intensively engaged vertically in a cockpit fight for the largest loot from the centre? Or, a dynamic multi-ethnic community purposefully evolving towards the end state of healthy national integration? It is surprising that our utterances and actions have shown that this basic choice has not been made after 40 years of togetherness.

"If our choice is a multi-ethnic nation, as forward-looking patriots should prefer, then the constitution should be supported with necessary institutional arrangements which should invest more energy and resources on three areas:

*