There Was a Country: A Personal History of Biafra by Chinua Achebe Page B
Authors: Chinua Achebe
Ads: Link
of the managers were Igbo “and it is threatening to reach 60 percent
by 1968. Moreover, regrettably though, [the] North’s future contribution” 11 was credited with only 10 percent of the existing posts.
Of particular dismay to the authors of the report were the situations in the Nigerian
Railway Corporation, in which over half of the posts were occupied by Igbos; the Nigerian
Ports Authority; and the Nigerian Foreign Service, in which over 70 percent of the
posts were held by Igbos. Probably the pettiest of the accusations was the lamentation
over the academic success of Easterners who graduated in larger numbers in the 1965–66
academic year than their counterparts from the West, Mid-West, and North. 12
By the time the government of the Western Region also published a white paper outlining
the dominance of the ethnic Igbo in key government positions in the Nigerian Railway
Corporation and the Nigerian Ports Authority, the situation for ethnic Igbos working
in Western Nigeria in particular, but all over Nigeria in general, had become untenable.
This government-sanctioned environment of hate and resentment created by self-serving
politicians resulted in government-supervised persecutions, terminations, and dismissals
of Nigerian citizens based on their ethnicity.
In most other nations the success of an ethnic group as industrious as the Igbo would
stimulate healthy competition and a renaissance of learning and achievement. In Nigeria
it bred deep resentment and both subtle and overt attempts to dismantle the structures
in place for meritocracy in favor of mediocrity, under the cloak of a need for “federal
character”—a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt Nigerian form of the far more successful
affirmative action in the United States. 13
The denial of merit is a form of social injustice that can hurt not only the individuals
directly concerned but ultimately the entire society. The motive for the original
denial may be tribal discrimination, but it may also come from sexism, from political,
religious, or some other partisan consideration, or from corruption and bribery. It
is unnecessary to examine these various motives separately; it is sufficient to state
that whenever merit is set aside by prejudice of whatever origin, individual citizens
as well as the nation itself are victimized. 14 , 15
The Army
Before I go further an effort should be made to explain the nature of the dynamics
at work within the Nigerian military at the time of the January 15, 1966, coup and
the events that followed. Striking a balance between a level of detail that will satisfy
readers who still feel the impact of these events deeply and that which will be palatable,
if not to say comprehensible, to a less well-informed reader is an impossibility,
but I will strive to do so nonetheless.
Historians have argued incessantly about the makeup of the January 15, 1966, coup
and its meaning. It was led by the so-called five majors, a cadre of relatively junior
officers whose front man of sorts was Chukwuma Nzeogwu. Very few people outside military
circles (with the exception of the poet Christopher Okigbo) knew very much about him.
What I heard of him was what his friends or those who happened to know him were telling
us. He seemed to be a distant, mysterious figure. 1
Nzeogwu had a reputation as a disciplined, no-nonsense, nonsmoking, nonphilandering
teetotaler, and as an anticorruption crusader. This reputation, we were told, served
him well as the chief instructor at the Nigerian Military Training College (NMTC)
in Kaduna, 2 and in recruiting military “intellectuals.”
In the wee hours of January 15, 1966, in a broadcast to the nation, Nzeogwu sought
to explain “the coup attempt.” It happened that some journalists had approached him
to clarify the situation. Apparently the plan of the coup plotters was to take control
of the various military commands in
by 1968. Moreover, regrettably though, [the] North’s future contribution” 11 was credited with only 10 percent of the existing posts.
Of particular dismay to the authors of the report were the situations in the Nigerian
Railway Corporation, in which over half of the posts were occupied by Igbos; the Nigerian
Ports Authority; and the Nigerian Foreign Service, in which over 70 percent of the
posts were held by Igbos. Probably the pettiest of the accusations was the lamentation
over the academic success of Easterners who graduated in larger numbers in the 1965–66
academic year than their counterparts from the West, Mid-West, and North. 12
By the time the government of the Western Region also published a white paper outlining
the dominance of the ethnic Igbo in key government positions in the Nigerian Railway
Corporation and the Nigerian Ports Authority, the situation for ethnic Igbos working
in Western Nigeria in particular, but all over Nigeria in general, had become untenable.
This government-sanctioned environment of hate and resentment created by self-serving
politicians resulted in government-supervised persecutions, terminations, and dismissals
of Nigerian citizens based on their ethnicity.
In most other nations the success of an ethnic group as industrious as the Igbo would
stimulate healthy competition and a renaissance of learning and achievement. In Nigeria
it bred deep resentment and both subtle and overt attempts to dismantle the structures
in place for meritocracy in favor of mediocrity, under the cloak of a need for “federal
character”—a morally bankrupt and deeply corrupt Nigerian form of the far more successful
affirmative action in the United States. 13
The denial of merit is a form of social injustice that can hurt not only the individuals
directly concerned but ultimately the entire society. The motive for the original
denial may be tribal discrimination, but it may also come from sexism, from political,
religious, or some other partisan consideration, or from corruption and bribery. It
is unnecessary to examine these various motives separately; it is sufficient to state
that whenever merit is set aside by prejudice of whatever origin, individual citizens
as well as the nation itself are victimized. 14 , 15
The Army
Before I go further an effort should be made to explain the nature of the dynamics
at work within the Nigerian military at the time of the January 15, 1966, coup and
the events that followed. Striking a balance between a level of detail that will satisfy
readers who still feel the impact of these events deeply and that which will be palatable,
if not to say comprehensible, to a less well-informed reader is an impossibility,
but I will strive to do so nonetheless.
Historians have argued incessantly about the makeup of the January 15, 1966, coup
and its meaning. It was led by the so-called five majors, a cadre of relatively junior
officers whose front man of sorts was Chukwuma Nzeogwu. Very few people outside military
circles (with the exception of the poet Christopher Okigbo) knew very much about him.
What I heard of him was what his friends or those who happened to know him were telling
us. He seemed to be a distant, mysterious figure. 1
Nzeogwu had a reputation as a disciplined, no-nonsense, nonsmoking, nonphilandering
teetotaler, and as an anticorruption crusader. This reputation, we were told, served
him well as the chief instructor at the Nigerian Military Training College (NMTC)
in Kaduna, 2 and in recruiting military “intellectuals.”
In the wee hours of January 15, 1966, in a broadcast to the nation, Nzeogwu sought
to explain “the coup attempt.” It happened that some journalists had approached him
to clarify the situation. Apparently the plan of the coup plotters was to take control
of the various military commands in
Similar Books
