Surely, it must require a demanding leap of imagination to recognise the omission of two attention-grabbing characters deserving prominence in the controversial list of 100 centenary heroes and heroines, both living and dead, which was approved by President Goodluck Jonathan. The noisy February 28 conferment of “Centenary Honours Awards” on the collection of “Nigerians and friends of Nigeria” across 14 categories lost much of its lustre not only on account of the significant rejections by a number of illustrious personalities, but also because of the treatment of the noteworthy duo as inconsequential.
On the contrary, there is no doubt that Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, who announced Nigeria’s first military coup on Radio Nigeria, Kaduna, on January 15, 1966, and then Colonel Chukwuemeka Odumegwu- Ojukwu, who on May 30, 1967, declared Eastern Nigeria a sovereign state to be known as Biafra, prompting a 30-month civil war, were undeniably men of striking consequence in the context of the country’s political evolution.
It is pertinent to contemplate whether these actors have a place in any of the classes that informed the Centenary Award Ceremony at the Banquet Hall, State House, Abuja. These include: Contributors to the making of Nigeria; Heroes of the struggle for Nigeria’s independence/Pioneer political leaders; Pioneers in professional callings/ Careers; Pioneers in commerce and industry; Promoters of democratic transition in Nigeria; Heroes in global sports competitions; and Accomplished pioneer public servants.
Others are: Accomplished contemporary entrepreneurs; Distinguished academics; Internationally acclaimed artists, literary icons and journalists; Outstanding contemporary public servants; Outstanding bravery and public spiritedness; Outstanding promoters of unity, patriotism and national development; and Exemplary service in the promotion of peace and moral excellence.
It is food for thought that Nzeogwu, speaking for the country’s first coupists, said, “The aim of the Revolutionary Council is to establish a strong, united and prosperous nation, free from corruption and internal strife.” According to him, “Our enemies are the political profiteers, the swindlers, the men in high and low places that seek bribes and demand 10 percent; those that seek to keep the country divided permanently so that they can remain in office as ministers or VIPs at least, the tribalists, the nepotists, those that make the country look big for nothing before international circles, those that have corrupted our society and put the Nigerian political calendar back by their words and deeds.” His punch line was: “We promise that you will no more be ashamed to say that you are a Nigerian.”
These words, uttered almost 50 years ago, are as potent and correct today as they were then, which is a tragic statement on the country’s trajectory. It is disturbing that Nzeogwu’s indicting declaration sounds contemporary. Worse still, the incumbent government seems to be perpetuating the old order. The point about this specific military intervention is beyond the fact that the coup plotters disrupted a democratic arrangement; the overriding consideration should be whether the aberrant move had redemptive value.
With due respect to the fashionable demonisation of military rule, the truth is that patriotism can be clothed in military uniform, which is not to say that benign dictatorship is preferable to democratic governance. Nzeogwu and his associates were apparently motivated by lofty objectives that reflected promotion of unity and corporate progress; they also seemed to care about peace and moral example.
It stretches the mind to think that Nzeogwu was dumped in favour of an individual like General Sani Abacha, another coupist of a later era, whose reputation for unrepentant evil and mindless acquisition outlived him and remains a reference point. He was, ironically, honoured for patriotism and national development. Not surprisingly, five days after his widow, Maryam, received his posthumous centenary award, it was reported that the United States (US) Department of Justice had frozen $458 million in corruption funds hidden in bank accounts around the world by Abacha who ruled the country with an iron fist from 1993 to 1998 when he died in strange circumstances. The action, described as “the largest kleptocracy forfeiture ever in the US”, was a further demonstration of Abacha’s insensitive dominance, continuing the unending tale of his mammoth loot stashed away in banks across the globe. “Gen Abacha was one of the most notorious kleptocrats in memory, who embezzled billions from the people of Nigeria while millions lived in poverty,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the US Justice Department’s Criminal Division.
It is incomprehensible that this same monster, apart from the glory of a centennial honour, has his odious identity positively publicised in various places across the country, whether in the naming of streets or even hospitals, among other incredible monuments to savagery and rapacity. The fact that his family members showed up for the award is a sad commentary on their shamelessness, particularly when eminently qualified persons stayed away from the ceremony on grounds of impropriety.
Paradoxically, in a case of reverse patriotism, Ojukwu who attempted a dismemberment of the country perhaps ultimately helped to advance the cause of unity, even if unknowingly. The civil war triggered by his spatial seizure underlined the intensity of a desire for togetherness by the rest of the country. The war slogan of the federal side, “To keep Nigeria one is a task that must be done”, mirrored the pursuit of unity in diversity.
Furthermore, the apparent display of magnanimity by the federal side at the end of the war, encapsulated in the improbable expression, “No Victor, No Vanquished”, was of historical import in the country’s march to nationhood, which regrettably remains a mirage.
It is worth highlighting Ojukwu’s naive insistence on fidelity to military hierarchy in the aftermath of the Northern counter-coup of July 29, 1966, which resulted in the killing of the Supreme Commander of the Nigerian Armed Forces and first military head of state, Major General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, an easterner. In other words, he stood for order and appropriateness, which has a ring of virtue. Ojukwu had argued that the most senior army officer after Ironsi, Brigadier Babafemi Ogundipe, should take over leadership, not Colonel Yakubu Gowon who was favoured by the coup plotters. The complication that arose from this disagreement contributed to the degeneration of the situation.
The official exclusion of these particular players from the centenary honours illustrates the extent of subjectivity that marred the show. What is the fundamental moral? The troubles of yesteryear are very much in the present.
