Remembering Biafra: A
literary review
Chioma Oruh (2007-10-31)
In the quest of understanding the causations of the
Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970), otherwise known as the
Biafran war, I stumbled upon an interview with Chinua
Achebe, a prolific Igbo writer that is best known his
book Things Fall Apart (1958) that has earned
over twenty honorary doctorates and several international
literary prize.[1]
In understanding this brief yet complex war of the
Eastern tribes of the colonial territory - which later
became the Federal Republic of Nigeria - it was important
for me to get under its skin, so to speak.
Getting-under-the-skin of Biafra implies that there were
causes much deeper than secession from the Federal
Republic of Nigeria, yet in order to understand the
struggle for a nation separate from Nigeria, it is
critical to include the well known driving force of
control over the oil territories and the policies that
disenfranchised, and continue to disenfranchise, the
various populations of Eastern Nigeria.
It is also necessary to understand the thick layer of the
divide-and-conquer strategy, as used by the British,
which stimulated negative relations and undermined any
unity efforts that would have taken place between Nigeria
and the proposed sovereign nation of Biafra. Resting at
the core of this getting-under-the-skin analogy is the
cancer filled causation of corruption that assisted in
the political and social unrest that attributed to the
senseless massacres of the Igbo that lived in the North
and Western regions of Nigeria ? a major factor in the
logical conclusion for the formation of the separate
nation of Biafra. All of these factors were addressed by
this leading writer, poet and intellectual, Chinua
Achebe, in an interview conducted in 1968 by Transition -
just a year into the three year arms dispute that was to
follow the Biafran legacy, a dream tainted by bloodshed
in the infancy of neo-colonialism.
Massacres in Nigeria
This interview started our with Chinua Achebe recounting
the trauma he felt from the reality of war by stating,
"you got used to sleeping with the sound of shelling
and all the other things - I only realized how nervous I
had become when I got out to London about three weeks
ago. The first sound of an aeroplane I heard and my first
reaction was to take cover."[2] Shortly after this
chilling prelude, he starts an even more devastating
story of killing sprees that defined his life as an Igbo
in post colonial Nigeria:
"..........between May and September 1966, there
were massacres in Northern Nigeria, and not only in the
North, but also in the West and Lagos. People were
hounded out of their homes, as I was from my house in
Lagos and we returned to the East?"[3]
It is in this retreat to the East that Achebe reported as
the involuntary organization that began the necessity for
a separate nation of Biafra. According to Achebe, this
necessity for a separate nation did not begin in an
egotistic desire to divide and create a separate world
for he mentioned that ?[Igbos] went out in the spirit of
this experiment of one nation,?[4] and that the
settlement outside of the indigenous Eastern region was a
voluntary move to work as one nation.
In further support of this argument, Achebe stated,
"The original idea of Nigeria had its base from the
leaders and intellectuals from the East, and they had,
with all their shortcomings, this idea to build the
country as one, and a long time this has been the paradox
of the situation. It was the Easterners who were pressing
for one Nigeria. The first people to object were the
Yorubas. Awolowo came and created the Action Group on the
basis that the sons of Odudu were the founders of the
Yoruba people. Eventually the Northerners took it on and
developed their own Northern Peoples's Congress. This was
supposed to be the national party, yet it refued to
change its name from Northern to Nigerian People's Party,
even for the sake of appearances - So you had a
possibility for tribal conflict accentuated by the power
struggle in the political scene."[5]
The most devastating part of these massacres, as Achebe
described, was the Nigerian governmental support against
this movement to annihilate the Igbos,
"....if it was only a question of rioting in the
streets and so on, that would be bad enough, but it could
be explained. It happens everywhere in the world. But
where you had a plan in detail - mass killing which the
Government - the Army, the Police, the people where there
to protect life and property - brought against the people
they were supposed to protect - this is to me something
quite terrifying."[6]
In another report of these massacres, more fittingly
described as genocide, C. Odumengwu Ojukwu described in
detail the events leading to the final retreat to the
East,
"From police reports, I know that the May, 1966,
riots claimed more than 3,000 lives. Indeed, the police
reports say 3,300. I know that on the first night in
Zaria, Northern Nigeria, 670 people were killed. I know
also that in Kano, also in the North, on the same day of
the riot, we lost over a thousand people, including women
and children. International Press Conference, Enugu.
October 11, 1966" [7]
It is with these recounts that I began to question the
true motivations that led to this seemingly obvious
state-sponsored acts of violence, a trend that Africa
will see time and again in the successive tragedies of
Rwanda, Somalia and, most recently, in Sudan. It is here
the excavation of layers of debris of understanding the
effects of colonization begins for me, and with the help
of Chinua Achebe (amongst other brave souls that took it
upon themselves to tell this story), my comprehension is
learned through Biafra.
Divide and conquer
The term "divide and conquer", rooted in the
Latin words divide et impera, can be understood
in its modern usage in computer science as splitting a
large system into manageable components.[8] Ironically,
this system that works well for the computer technology
currently craved by contemporary African countries
seeking development was a major tool of implementation
and sustainability of colonial rule. As Walter Rodney
describes in his famous book How Europe Underdeveloped
Africa (1973):
"............the gap in levels of political
organization between Europe and Africa was very crucial.
The development of political unity in the form of large
states was proceeding steadily in Africa. But even so, at
the time of the Berlin Conference, Africa was still a
continent of a large number of socio-political groupings
who had not arrived at a common purpose. Therefore, it
was easy for the European intruder to play the classic
game of divide and conquer. In that way, certain Africans
became unwitting allies of Europe. Many African rulers
sought a European "alliance" to deal with their
own African neighbour, with whom they were in conflict.
Few of those rulers appreciated the implications of their
actions. They could not know that Europeans had come to
stay permanently, they could not know that Europeans were
out to conquer not some but all of Africa. This partial
inadequate view of the world was itself a testimony of
African underdevelopment relative to Europe, which in the
late 19th century was self-confidently seeking domination
in that part of the globe."[9]
It is with this science that Biafra found itself a victim
of divide and conquer. In Achebe's reporting of the
involvement of the former colonial master, Britain,
during the Nigerian Civil War, he lamented that, "my
position would be that [Britain] has no right to supply
arms to Nigeria, in these particular circumstances and
especially on this scale."[10] In the truly
invisible nature of divide and conquer, it was difficult
to fully implicate the British as allies of the Nigerian
Army as Achebe explained, "They will try to
refute your charge by technicalities: they would say, for
instance, that they are not sending any airforce pilots
or any Royal Navy personnel; they are merely seconding
them to the Nigerian Navy or Air Force.?[11]
The strategy of divide and conquer was also used in
efforts to build divisions between the various tribes of
Eastern Nigeria. As Achebe responded to a question posed
about the alleged ill-treatment of non-Igbo groups that
reside in the Eastern region,
"A very good example of propaganda. Rather than go
into any special pleading, I have made the position quite
clear, if anyone things that these minorities would
rather not go among the Biafrans, it is quite a simple
procedure to go and ask them through plebiscite, and if
they want to go with Nigeria - my own personal belief is
that if you did hold this plebiscite you would find that
these people would not want to go with Nigeria."[12]
Unfortunately, divide and conquer continues to play an
active role in Nigerian politics as there has not been a
president from the East since before the Biafran War and
this continues to inspire organized efforts at secession
such as the Movement for the Actualization of the
Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) due to charges of
discrimination and marginalization as evident in
federally mandated policies towards issues that concern
Eastern Nigeria.[13]
The oil factor
Nigeria?s first oil-cargo was exported in 1958 from the
Oloibiri oil-field (located in present day Bayelsa State
in the Niger Delta region), under the sponsor of the
Shell-BP Development Company of Nigeria, jointly financed
by the Royal Dutch Shell group and a British Company.[14
Shortly following this discovery, the Nigerian government
granted 10 oil exploration licenses to five companies -
Shell-BP, Mobil Exploration Nigeria Incorporated,
Amonsea, Texaco and Nigerian Gulf oil - and in 1965
commissioned the first oil refinery to be located at Port
Harcourt, also in the Eastern region of Nigeria.[15]
By the beginning of the Biafran war, Nigeria was already
a major oil producing nation with its production of more
than 152 million barrels per annum being extracted from
the Eastern region.[16] The desire to keep control of
this lucrative oil business was a motivating factor for
the British involvement in supplying Nigerian Army with
arms against Biafra.
Achebe explains his belief that oil was a major factor in
the arms struggle in Nigeria,
"'Well, I think there are many economic reasons. It
is probably clear to them that Nigeria will be the worse
for not having the place now called Biafra, not only in
terms of natural resources but in human resources. But
more, there is the glamour with oil. I think this is by
far the most important reason?"[17]
Unfortunately, Achebe?s assertions would be proven
correct and made evident in the policies taken after the
end of the Biafran War. In May of 1971, a year after the
end of Biafra, the Nigerian national Oil Corporation
(NNOC) was set up as a government agency empowered to
engage in all phases of oil industry from exploration to
marketing - this being a formation of a powerful
governmental union between the ministry of petroleum and
the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).[18]
By the mid 1980s, under the leadership of the military
leader President Babagida, NNPC would re-organize itself
into six semi-autonomous units known as sectors in a bid
to privatize oil and under the pretenses of encouraging
revenue, Nigeria would sell oil at a cheaper rate than
other member of OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries) - hence making way for inflation
that has led to the disparities of lack of economic
compensation in the present day conflicts in the
Niger-Delta region on claims that the indigenous tribes
are not receiving reparations for the privatized oil
drilling by foreign corporations.[19]
Biafra: A dream tainted by blood
Towards the end of the interview, Achebe remembered the
enthusiasm that came as a result of Tanzania recognizing
Biafra as a sovereign nation. He recounted, ?it was a
fantastic day?.the streets were filled with people
dancing and singing. For the first time in months you
found dancing again, and the radio was playing Tanzanian
music?the gesture meant nothing in military or material
terms but it assured us ? the effects it had on us ? was
electric.? [20]
It was with this innocent desire for autonomy that
inspired millions of tribes-people of Eastern Nigeria to
believe in this liberation and waited for the world to
support them in their desire for freedom and
independence?a call that would be answered in trickled
and faint responses. As Ojukwu reported,
"The Biafran problem, to most major powers, is a
nuisance. They would rather not have to deal with it in a
world that is already gripped with the Vietnam war,
economic crises, monetary crises, election fever here and
there. There is an initial resentment against Biafra for
leading them into another problem when they have got so
much to deal with?"
Address to delegation of World Council of Churches,
Umahia, March 28, 1968.[21]
Biafra was isolated. There were only five countries in
the world that officially recognized Biafra: Gabon,
Haiti, Ivory Coast, Tanzania and Zambia.[22] A big part
of this isolation was due to the lack of media coverage
of this case due to the state-sponsorship of the
atrocities towards the people of the East, particularly
the Igbos. Achebe recounted the bombing in the center
city of Aba that happened in the presence of twenty
foreign journalists just arriving and how that event
broke the news and successive international protests at
the injustice imposed on the people of the East.[23]
As a descendant of two ex-Biafran soldiers, my mother and
father, this story stings with the remembrance of a
tragic time in our people's history. However difficult
the subject matter of this may be, it is necessary to
remember how situations like this arise so as to be part
of efforts to stop them from happening again.
Unfortunately, Africa finds herself in many other
conflicts that resemble Biafra and it is with this
knowledge that I take the time to remember the root
causes that stem in public policies towards certain
groups, primarily on ethnic bases. As Biafra served as
the sound bell for one of the most tragic consequences of
the colonial tool of divide and conquer in its
neo-colonial manifestation, so must of its memory serves
as a reminder that in 2007 African nations still suffer
from this type of seemingly invisible rule. As Kwame
Nkrumah, the first president of Ghana, prophetically
noted the five point of neo-colonialism in 1965:
?It continues to actively control the affairs of the
newly independent state
?In most cases neocolonialism is manifested through
economic and monetary measures. For example the
neocolonial territories become the target markets for
imports from the imperial centre(s)
?While neocolonialism may be a form of continuing control
by a state's previous formal colonial master, these
states may also become subjected to imperial power by new
actors. These new actors include the United States or may
be international financial and monetary organizations
?Because of the nuclear parity between the superpowers,
the conflict between the two take place in the form of
"limited wars." Neocolonial territories are
often the places where these "limited wars" are
waged.
?As the ruling elites pay constant deference to the
neocolonial masters, the needs of the population are
often ignored, leaving issues of living conditions like
education, development, and poverty unresolved. [24]
The consequences of going against the grain of
neo-colonialism were expressed by Chinua Achebe in his
concluding statements at the end of this published
interview on Biafra as he affirmed, ?I have no intention
of being placed in a Nigerian situation at all. I find it
untenable. I find the Nigerian situation untenable. If I
had been a Nigerian, I think I would have been in the
same situation as Wole Soyinka is ? in prison.? [25]
It is with this reflection on neo-colonialism that I also
conclude this review with the hopes in remembering Biafra
because I realize my part in the efforts to recognize the
bigger picture of what has gone wrong for Africa since
the 1960s, the supposed era of independence. This
remembrance is not aimed at the continuous tensions
inspired by divide and conquer tactics but as an
invitation to look at Pan Africanism despite the scars
and wounds with sympathy towards all other African
nations that have fallen prey, and continue to fall prey,
to the divisive effects of neo-colonialism.
Endnotes
1] ?Chinua Achebe Profile? found at http://ww.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/chinua-achebe.shtml
2] Chinua Achebe on Biafra? by Achebe, Chinua. Transition
No. 36 (1968), pp. 1-38. Durhan, NC: Duke university
Press
3] Ibid, pp. 32
4] Ibid, pp. 32
5] Ibid, pp. 33
6] Ibid, pp. 35
7] ?On Genocide,? Random Thoughts of C. Odumegwu Ojukwu,
General of the People?s Army by Ojukwu,Chukwuemeka O. New
York: Harper & Row Publishers, Incorporated, 1969.
8] Divide et Impera: A Computational Framework for
Verifying Object Component Sustitutability by Nordhagen,
Else K. Olso, Norway: University of Oslo, Department of
Informatics, November 1998
9] ?Europe and the Roots of African Underdevelopment: 4.4
The Coming of Imperialism and Colonialism?. How Europe
Underdeveloped Africa, Rodney, Walter. London:
Bogle-L?Ouverture Publications, 1963.
10] Achebe on Biafra, pp. 35
11] Ibid, pp. 36
12] Ibid, pp. 37
13] http://www.biafraland.com/massob.htm
14] ?Oil Policy in Nigeria: A Critical Assessment? by
Nwaobi, Godwin Chukudum. Abuja: Quantative Economic
Research Bureau, 2005.
15] Ibid
16] Ibid
17] Achebe on Biafra, pp. 33
18] Oil Policy in Nigeria, 2.0 ?Nigeria?s Oil History?
19] Oil Policy in Nigeria, 3.0 ?Oil Policy Evaluation?
20] Achebe on Biafra, pp. 37
21] ?On the World,? Ojukwu.
22] http://www.biafraland.com/nations_that_recognized_biafra.htm
23] Achebe on Biafra, pp. 35
24] ?Neocolonialism? by Yew, Leong, Research Fellow,
University Scholars Programme of Singapore. http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/post/poldiscourse/neocolonialism1.html
25]Achebe on Biafra, pp. 37
* Chioma Oruh is a Doctorate student at Howard University
in Washington DC.
* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org
or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org
|