Aburi was not a single’s tennis match between Gowon and Ojukwu — Professor ABC Nwosu

Former Minister of Health and eminent statesman, PROFESSOR A. B. C. NWOSU, in this interview responded to some of the issues raised by General Yakubu Gowon in his recent interview, on his roles in the Nigeria – Biafra War.  He is of the view that there were critical issues that the former Head of State did not address, warning that “Nigeria will continue to be an unstable state until we restructure.”

You must have read General Yakubu Gowon’s interview; as a person close to Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu and final year undergraduate who was politically active, how did you feel at the time?

I felt sad.  Very sad because I had expected that Gowon would reveal at least some of the things which have bothered me and Ndigbo from 1966 till now.  Gowon’s interview was not only sad for me because of his self-serving half-truth but also for the major things not said. I don’t think that Gowon believes that total deviation from the Aburi agreement was the cause of the civil war but everybody, and I mean everybody who was a “Biafran” at the time, doubted that it was.  That’s why ‘On Aburi We Stand’ was the war cry from the East.  If Aburi had been implemented there would have been no Nigeria – Biafra War.  I thank the respected Journalist, Chuks Iloegbunam, for his masterful response to General Gowon published in the Saturday Vanguard.

For example, when General Gowon said that he didn’t call his Secretary to Government to the Aburi meeting whilst Ojukwu did, I said to myself that General Gowon has lost it because Aburi was not a single’s tennis match between him and his so-called friend, Ojukwu.

Why was Aburi critical for Nigeria?

Aburi was critical because every other discussion on what had happened namely, the January 15 coup, May 29 pogrom and the July 29 counter coup had failed to resolve the matter as the various delegations had feared for their lives and would not attend further meetings. Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s meeting with Ojukwu on May 5th and 6th, 1967 did not succeed in bringing the Eastern delegation to the meeting. As Gowon correctly said, the East could not attend any meeting in Nigeria because they feared for their lives. As Gowon also said, a British war plane as well as a Naval war ship were considered but rejected by the East because of the involvement of Britain in the conflict.  So the acceptable venue was General Ankrah and his offer of Aburi in Ghana.  It was not a meeting between Gowon and Ojukwu, that’s why I insist it was not a single’s tennis match between the two of them.  It was a meeting between General Gowon, who came with the federal cabinet secretariat; General Hassan Usman Katsina and the Secretary to the Northern Government; Governor David Ejoor, who came with the Secretary of the Midwest Government; Governor Adeyinka Adebayo, who came with the Secretary of the Western Nigerian government and Governor Odumegwu Ojukwu, who came with Eastern Nigerian government.  So, it was a full-fledged Nigerian meeting to avert a war and not a meeting between Gowon and Ojukwu.

One of the key unanimous decisions at Aburi was that the conflict would not be settled through a war.  Therefore to say that we fought to live together is not true since all of them had agreed that fighting was not necessary and would not be used to settle the matter. In any case, the matter of dividing Nigeria into 12 states was neither tabled nor discussed at Aburi. What was discussed was devolution of powers from the centre to the federating units including coercive agencies of State like Police, Army etc.  What was discussed with unanimity was in making appointments to  “Super Permanent Secretaries”, Inspector General of Power, etc.   This greatly irked the super permanent secretaries at the time, who submitted an anti-Aburi agreement memo.

What was required in order to keep good faith was a follow-up meeting by all those present at the original meeting where the original agreement was reached.  The other members couldn’t implement their version of the agreement without consulting and getting the concurrence of the Eastern government that wore the shoes that were pinching them on all sides – refugees and  rehabilitation, burial of so many dead bodies and fleeing citizens, etc. So, it was wrong to have implemented the civil servant-mutilated Aburi Agreement.  If one checked the sequence of events leading to the Nigeria – Biafra war, the creation of 12 states on 5th May 1967, which was not part of Aburi, was done to take the wind off the sails of the urge for the creation of Biafra. This was clearly bad faith shown by the federal government.  Unfortunately, this was the impetus that accelerated the declaration of Biafra on 30th May, 1967 because people of the East feared that the federal government could declare a state of emergency and invade the East.   Biafra was not declared before the creation of the 12 states, which was not in the spirit of the Aburi agreement.

One of the major agreements of the Aburi was the repatriation of soldiers to their states of origin.  The West continued to whine over this until the Nigeria – Biafra war, where they joined the fight against Biafra.