KINGSLEY EBERE
Notable group, Igbonine Great People’s Assembly, has said that the release of the memoir by former Head of State, Yakubu Gowon, is not merely another historical account but viewed as an attempt to define, perhaps even rewrite or distort facts.
In a release signed by Dr Ugochukwu Nnajiofor, President of Igbonine Great People’s Assembly, the group said, “After 60 years the guns fell silent, the Nigerian Civil War continues to cast a long shadow over the nation’s collective memory. The recent publication of General Yakubu Gowon’s 881-page autobiography, “My Life of Duty and Allegiance”, has reopened old wounds and reignited one of Nigeria’s most contentious historical debate”.
“For many Nigerians, particularly Ndigbo, the publication is not merely another historical account. It is viewed as an attempt to define, perhaps even rewrite, the narrative of a conflict that claimed millions of lives and altered the course of Nigerian history forever.”
“The question now confronting the nation is simple: Does Nigeria need another defence of wartime decisions, or does it need a sincere reckoning with the human cost of those decisions?”
The War Before the War
To understand why IGBONINE GREAT PEOPLE’S ASSEMBLY has reacted strongly to Gowon’s memoir, one must revisit the events that preceded the declaration of Biafra.
The Nigerian Civil War did not begin in 1967. Its roots can be traced to political instability, ethnic tensions, military coups, and the widespread killings of Eastern Nigerians living in other parts of the country in 1966. Thousands of Ndigbo lost their lives, while many more fled to the Alaigbo Region seeking safety.
For many Ndigbo, these events created a profound sense of insecurity and abandonment. The declaration of Biafra under Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu was viewed by supporters not as an act of aggression but as an attempt at self-preservation in the face of existential threat and extinction of a race. Any account of the war that ignores these realities risks presenting an incomplete picture of history.
On Aburi We Stand: Nigeria’s Lost Opportunity
Among the most controversial issues remains the fate of the Aburi Accord, negotiated in Ghana in January 1967. To many historians and participants, Aburi represented the last realistic opportunity to preserve Nigerian unity through dialogue rather than warfare. The agreement appeared to offer a framework for restructuring the federation and addressing the fears of the regions.
However, differing interpretations of the accord soon emerged. Ojukwu and his supporters maintained that the Federal Government later abandoned the spirit and substance of the agreement. Supporters of Gowon have argued that implementation presented constitutional and practical challenges.
What remains indisputable is that the failure of the accord was followed by war.
A generation later, many Nigerians continue to ask whether history might have taken a different course had the commitments made at Aburi been fully honored.
The Humanitarian Catastrophe
No discussion of the war can escape its most tragic dimension – the immense human suffering. Images of starving and dehumanized children with distended stomachs shocked the world and transformed the conflict into one of the twentieth century’s most visible humanitarian crises. The blocked imposed on Biafra remains a subject of intense historical and moral debate.
Critics argue that the blockade significantly contributed to widespread starvation and civilian deaths. Defenders of the Federal Government maintain that it was a legitimate wartime strategy.
Yet for survivors, the debate is not merely academic. Behind every statistic was a human being: a child who never reached adulthood, a community erased by war and hunger. These memories continue to shape perceptions of the conflict more than sixty years later.
Ojukwu: Villain or Patriot?
Perhaps, no figure remains more polarizing than Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu.
To his critics, he was a secessionist leader whose decisions prolonged a devastating conflict. To his supporters, he was a hero, a defender of a people who believed they had been the Nigerian state.
History often resists simple judgments.
What is beyond disputes is that Ojukwu became the symbol of Biafra’s Struggle and that this legacy continues to inspire intense admiration among many Ndigbo nile. Attempts to portray him solely through a negative lens, are therefore unlikely to gain acceptance among those who view him as a defender of his people during their darkest hour.
Why the Timing Matters
One of the questions being asked in response to Gowon’s memoir concerns timing. Why publish such an extensive account now, when many of the principal actors, military commanders, diplomats, and political leaders who participated in the events are no longer alive to offer their own rebuttals?
While only Gowon can fully answer this question, the concern reflects a broader anxiety about historical ownership. Who gets to tell the story of the war? Whose voices are remembered, and whose are forgotten?
History belongs not only to leaders, but also to ordinary people who lived through extraordinary times.
The Apology Many Still Seek
Perhaps the most emotionally charged issue is the question of apology.
Across the world, societies emerging from traumatic conflicts have often found healing through truth telling, acknowledgement, and reconciliation. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission stands as one example of this approach.
Many survivors of the Nigerian civil war believe that genuine national healing requires a similar willingness to acknowledge suffering. They argue that recognition of the pain experienced by millions of civilians would not weaken Nigeria but strengthen it.
An apology would not erase indelible wounds and pains of losing a dear one or history. It would not bring back those who died as a result of starvation and at the theater of an avoidable war. But it could serve as a powerful symbol of empathy and national maturity.
Beyond Blame: Towards Historical Justice
The purpose of revisiting the civil war should not be to reopen old wounds or encourage ethnic divisions. Rather, it should be to ensure that history is examined honestly and comprehensively.
Nigeria cannot build a stronger future by suppressing difficult conversations about its past. Nor can national unity be sustained by insisting that only one narrative deserves to be heard.
The challenge before historians, political leaders, and citizens is to create space for multiple perspectives while remaining committed to factual accuracy and historical integrity.
As debates surrounding Gown’s memoir continue, one truth remains clear: the Nigerian Civil War is not merely a chapter in a history book. It is a living memory carried by millions of Nigerians.
And for many of them, the question is no longer who won the war.
“The question is whether Nigeria has fully confronted its consequences. Nigeria cannot build a stronger future by suppressing difficult conversations about its past. Nor can national unity be sustained by insisting that only one narrative deserves to be heard.”
“Igbonine Great People’s Assembly, as custodians of our collective memory, we reaffirm our commitment to defending historical truth, preserving the legacy of our heroes, and promoting a Nigeria where every ethnic nationality is treated with dignity and fairness.”
“History must be remembered, but it must also be told truthfully.
Igbonine Anyi bu Ofu! Igbonine Anyi bu Ofu!! Anyi bu Ofu – Igbonine!!!”
