Oral History Program Yara Baba Interviewed by Ademola Adetula 17 July 1972 i Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah Yara Baba Interviewed by Ademola Adetula 17 July 1972 Copyright © 2012 by Weber State University, Stewart Library ii Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. Archival copies are placed in Special Collections. The Stewart Library also houses the original recording so researchers can gain a sense of the interviewee's voice and intonations. Project Description The Weber State College/University Student Projects have been created by students working with several different professors on the Weber State campus. The topics are varied and based on the student's interest or task for a specific assignment. These oral history assignments were created to help Weber State students learn the value and importance of recording public history and to benefit the expansion of the Weber State oral history collections. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to the Stewart Library of Weber State University. No part of the manuscript may be published without the written permission of the University Librarian. Requests for permission to publish should be addressed to the Administration Office, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah, 84408. The request should include identification of the specific item and identification of the user. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Baba, Yara, an oral history by Ademola Adetula, 17 July 1972, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. iii Abstract: The following is an oral history interview with Yara Baba. The interview was conducted on July 17, 1972, by Ademola Adetula, in Baba’s residence. Baba discusses the Nigerian Civil War; how it started, its effect on Nigeria, and what went on during the years of the war. AA: How did you come to the United States? YB: I had a scholarship to go to Birmingham Junior College in England. After I graduated, I applied for a renewal of my scholarship to obtain my full B. S. degree, but my request was turned down. So then I made my way for the United States to further my education on my own. AA: Do you mind telling me more about yourself? YB: I am a Ghanaian by nationality. My parents are traders, trading between Ghana and Nigeria. My parents have most of their investments in Nigeria and because of that my parents spend most of their time in Nigeria. When I was young, my parents used to take me back and forth with them. I started my high school education in Ghana, but I went to spend the last four years in Nigeria. I left Nigeria for England to further my education and from England to the United States. I have been here for only three months. AA: Where were you during the Nigerian Civil War? YB: I was in Nigeria, mostly in Lagos. AA: What can you say about the civil war? 1 YB: There is much to tell about the war. Apart from heavy loss of lives, it is just like any other war fought by two brave and determined enemies. History will always record the war as the most advanced war any African country ever fought. Most of the weapons used were modern types. And both parties— Nigeria and Biafra—fought a good fight. Determination did not allow the Nigerians and Biafrans to realize their loss during the war. But when the war was over in January 1970, the people of Nigeria and Biafra were the happiest people in the world. AA: How could Nigeria have avoided the sad war events? YB: If there were no internal troubles of corruption and tribalism, the war may have been avoided. AA: What effect does the war have on Nigeria? YB: The war drew back Nigerian economic progress and caused Nigeria and Biafra to lose about two million lives. I think those two things are heavy effects on any country. AA: What are the main causes of' the war? YB: There are many things that caused the war. I feel that the most important ones are one, the unrest in the West, which was spreading to other parts of the country; two, the 1966 military takeover of the government from the civilians; three, the counter-coup of July 1966 in which many high military officers were assassinated; four, the high rate of bribery, tribalism, bureaucracy, nepotism, feudalism, and other social injustices; five, some of the leaders were running the country for their own benefit rather than for the good of the country and the people; six, the incapability of the civilian government in managing the affairs of the country; seven, the incapability of the first military 2 government to bring unity to the country; and finally the breakdown of laws throughout the country. AA: What can you say about Yakuou Gowon and his present military government in Nigeria? YB: If Gowon can keep his promise to do all things to unify the country, his government will be best for the country at present. But in person, Gowon is a sensible and lenient man. AA: What can you say about Ojukwu, the Biafran leader? YB: Ojukwu is a brilliant man with good academic qualifications. His ambition was to become a leader of his own country, but he failed. AA: What is your comment on Nigerian Economy before and after the war? YB: Nigeria was economically good before the war. The war drew back the economy, but since the war has been over, there have been many changes taking place. AA: What can you say, in general, about the present and the future of Nigeria? YB: Since the war, things have been taking good shape. If Nigeria can continue like that, it will be one of the leading countries in the world in the near future. AA: Before the war started in 1967, the Nigerian and Biafran soldiers were only numbered at 11,000. But during the war, the number rose to about 200,000 soldiers. May I know how the Nigerian and Biafran governments got their men to fight in such great numbers? YB: For sure. No one was forced, but the men responded to their leaders' appeal to fight for the good of their country. 3 AA: How did the war start? YB: It was just like child’s play at first. But when Ojukwu declared the Republic of Biafra as a separate country from Nigeria, the leaders of the rest of Nigeria were not pleased at all. The leaders appealed for one Nigeria in which Ojukwu did not show any interest. And by the middle of 1967 bombing and shooting were reported throughout Lagos, the West, and the North. The Ibos were accused of the bombing and shooting. The Nigerian leader Gowon was later forced to declare war, which he did toward the end of 1967. The cause of the war was really a chain of events. AA: For the past five years, nearly all African countries have experienced overnight civilian government takeover by the military officers. Do you justify this attitude of takeover? What is your opinion about military coups in general? YB: I do not justify military coup in any way and for any reason as long as it takes away life. No report has been made about coups without taking at least one life. My opinion about it all is that people should do away with government takeover. The best place to form a government is through ballot boxes. AA: Do you mind telling me all you know about some of the most important events that took place during the civil war? YB: This is a hard question for me to answer because everyday events during the war were very important and to talk about each could take a hundred years. AA: You may just mention the most important ones. 4 YB: The war started in July 1967. The heaviest casualties happened in 1968 when the soldiers lost more than half a million lives at Ore. That year many civilians were killed in Benin City, Banjo also declared the State of Mid-West. The war was hot up until the end of 1969. It was the end of 1969 that the Nigerian Military Government gave their people the confidence that they were winning the war. But the most remarkable thing happened in January 1970, when the Biafran soldiers surrendered and the people of Biafra promised to be good citizens of Nigeria. The Biafran delegation received warm welcome from the Nigerian leaders. From there, Biafra became part of Nigeria and Nigeria became a united country. AA: As a foreigner living in Nigeria during the war, what can you say about genocide being involved in the war? YB: I heard that foreign countries cried about genocide, but I cannot think of genocide because both Nigeria and Biafra were careful in carrying out their war. They both realized that the war was an internal one and, after the war, Nigeria might possibly become one again. If there was genocide, with whom would either Nigeria or Biafra unite after the war? So, I will like to confess that there was no sign of genocide on the part of either party. AA: How did the war end? YB: AS I have said before, the war ended in January 1970 when the Biafran soldiers saw no sense in fighting the war anymore, and they gave up. They sent delegates to meet Gowon in Lagos to assure Nigeria that the Biafran soldiers had surrendered, and that they would become true Nigerians. They promised not to fight such a war in the future. 5 The Nigerian leader received them with a warm welcome and appealed to Nigerians to forget about the past and take the Ibos as brothers and sisters. After two days, all the Ibos in the war zone spread all across the country and things were as they were before. That's how the war ended. AA: What can you say about Federal government’s effort toward rehabilitation and reconstruction of Nigeria after the Civil War? YB: As far as I am concerned, the Federal Government took very good action at a very good time toward rehabilitation and reconstruction. They made loans available to the needy people and fed those who were hungry. I cannot expect more than that from any good government. AA: Do you support mostly Nigeria or would you rather see Nigeria in the old form of interior regions? YB: Personally, I don't subscribe to this idea of states and regions as you have in Nigeria. As you know, Mr. Ademola, I come from Ghana, a country which is similar to Nigeria in all aspects. We have so many tribes, each tribe speaking a different language, as you have in Nigeria. But among all these tribes there is one common thing—that is the awareness—in other words, the national awareness of all the people in Ghana. The reason this idea of regions or states detracts from national awareness is disunity; every Ghanaian feels that he belongs to Ghana and not to any region or state. If I had my way, I'd rather see Nigeria abolish this idea of states and stick to one nation. This, to me, would create national awareness among people and people would cease to think 6 about Yourbas, or Ibos, or Northerners, or what have you and rather think of themselves as Nigerians. AA: One of the most important causes of the civil war was the twelve state structure proposed by the Federal Military Government in 1966. May I know your opinion whether the twelve state structure is a good proposal for the country both at present and in the future? YB: I have already made my mind known to you about this idea of division into states and regions. At any rate, there are twelve states right now in Nigeria and to analyze the effectiveness of this division into states—I'd rather like to look at it from two points of view. One, you consider the personal aspect of this division into states, in other words, each state is going to have its own government; its own administrative structure and set up. Now, this to me is a costly exercise. It's going to cost each state a lot of money to put up a whole staff to man and administer a state which may be a small thing anyway. Now, secondly, it would be a big problem coordinating all these states and their activities with those of the central government. Now, on the other hand, if you look at it from the point of view of development, one can see that it may be in the interest of the various states to run their own governments because it’s only then that the states can decide on the needs of the various states and perhaps provide them for the people in that state. This is assuming that the central government wouldn't do it or wouldn't have the time or the energy or the resources to provide development in the various states. But if the central government can do this, then I don't see the need for having state governments to take up this sort of activity. So this can be looked at from two points— from the personal point of view which also involves cost, from the point of view of 7 coordination of these states governments with the activities of the central government on one side—and from the development projects on the other side. Which one is chosen would depend on what Nigerians themselves feel about this idea of division into states and what they think would benefit them the most. AA: Since Nigeria had independence in 1960, there has been much unrest in the country and that had led to the 1966 military takeover. Does that show that Nigerians cannot mile themselves or do you think the people are not capable enough to know the right thing to do? YB: Well, Mr. Ademola, this is an interesting question, and being a Ghanaian in Northern Nigeria, I feel that it's rather interesting to answer a question like this. But I don't share your view, if you think the recent troubles in Nigeria can be interpreted to mean that the Nigerian is incapable of ruling herself. I will explain what I mean. Nigeria obtained independence in 1960, and prior to 1960, I happened to be in Nigeria and I saw the state of her economy. The state of her political scene, and the social life and everything was in bad shape. I am lucky to also to have been around at the time after independence, and I can assure you within the brief period, between 1960 and 1962, when the war cropped up, the rate of development which took place in Nigeria is perhaps one of the fastest I have ever seen in any part of the world. Schools, colleges, and all sorts of educational institutions were set up all over the place. Hospitals were built in such numbers, and they were all staffed and manned with the most modern managers. Bridges were built across the rivers and universities sprung up all over the place. Now, the British Government, in all the years that they spent in Nigeria, couldn't do all these things within all the period that they stayed in Nigeria. So, I would rather say 8 that if Nigeria had been able to achieve all that within a period of six or seven years, that is a credit to the Nigerians. What I believe has set the clock back is the civil war that cropped up. It's quite unfortunate that this war did crop up. But I still think that, now that the war is over, Nigeria should pull all her resources together and start developing the country as far and fast as possible. AA: Do you mind telling me about Nigerian and Ghanaian political scene? YB: Surely, Mr. Ademola. You realize this is rather a broad subject which may take a whole day to talk about. Ghana, after independence, had gone through a number of changes— politically, I mean. After political independence in 1957, Dr. Karma Kruma, who was the leader of the nation, led his convention people's party. It was also a law that no one should form a regional party as you had in Nigeria. Now, besides Dr. Kruma’s convention people’s party, we had one other party. These two parties sort of ruled the country up to 1966 when there was a military takeover. Now, what I see on the Nigerian scene or what used to be the practice over there, as far as my knowledge goes, is that your parties were sort of regional parties. The action group was sort of based in one region, the N.C.N.C. was also based in one region, and the Northern people’s party was based in one region. Now, because of this, concentration of regional parties in Nigeria, politics, to me, became sort of a travel affair. This was entirely opposite to the Ghana political scene. Now, maybe this is one of the reasons why we obtained some form of stability on the political scene in Ghana, but I cannot generalize from such a superficial observation. But all said and told, I think the Ghanaian political scene has undergone some changes quite recently. We changed over from a more or less British type of political system to a republican type of government. Then the armies 9 came in and took over; they handed over to a civilian government. Quite recently I heard that the army is now in control of affairs again, just as is the case in Nigeria. I don't know what else will happen in the near future. AA: Do you support a one party system? YB: This is an interesting question. Ghana was perhaps the first African country, as far as my knowledge goes, to have started this idea of a one party system. It was all the idea of our leader Dr. Karma Kruma at the time. He was of the opinion that developing countries don't have the money or the resources to be devoted to party political activities. He considered this a waste and, therefore, he believed that instead of wasting money and time going to booths, campaigning, and elections and whatnot, we could have only one party. Then prominent people and honest people within that party would be elected to mind the affairs of the state. He tried this experiment, but unfortunately it failed. Surprisingly a number of African countries are trying to practice this one party system. A case in point is Cerilean, which is right now a one party state. I'm told that Tanzania also plans to do the same. There is also concrete evidence that Cameroon also is following the same lines of practicing a one party system. Now, whatever the merits or demerits of having a one party system may be, it needs more than an ordinary observation of common facts to analyze the situation. But applied to Nigeria, I mean sort of trying to bring this on the Nigerian scene; I wouldn't recommend a thing of this nature to Nigeria. The society in Nigeria is a heterogeneous one and I just can't see how a one party system is going to work in that state so that whatever system of government a nation or a state chooses depends on a lot of practice, within and outside of the country. AA: What effect does a one party system have on the freedom of speech? 10 YB: At the time of the introduction of a one party system in Ghana a lot of writings and symposiums were heard on this. Great efforts and pains were taken to explain the merits of a one party system. Those who argued for the one party system say that it’s a good idea in that it doesn't mean that you can't criticize the government, but it gives everybody the opportunity to criticize constructively, in other words to criticize from within the party. They believe that having one party has nothing to do with criticism. Now, other people, who had different ideas, they believe that if all people belong to the same party, then criticism is going to die out completely. In other words, there would be no reason to criticize ones party. As I said, whether this is good or bad depends on a lot of practice. After all, Cerileon, Cameroon, and Tanzania are all practicing one party systems of government. One cannot say, for instance, that a one party system failed in Ghana because it is a bad practice. What led to Dr. Kruma's overthrow has nothing to do with the institution of a one party system of government. AA: Did anybody talk to you about Nigeria before, since you've been in the United States? YB: Yes. Quite a number of people have talked to me about Nigeria and especially about the Nigerian Civil War. It appears that in this part of the world that more people know about the Nigerians than about Ghana. In fact, the first person I talked to or who talked to me when I came here was of the opinion that I was a Nigerian. To them, anybody from Africa comes from Nigeria. Now it isn't surprising if one considers the fact that during the civil war lots of television movies were shown on the American televisions. So lots of people got to know about Nigeria and about the civil war that happened there. Now, by talking to them and by answering their questions, I got the impression that they sort of look on the civil war in Nigeria as a war of religion. In other words, they think that 11 the Southerners belonged to one religion and the Northerners belong to another religion--just like the case in Ireland right now where the Catholics are fighting the Protestants. But, I surely told them my mind about this war, and I'm sure most of them believed what I said. It isn't a question of religion that propagated the war, but rather the reasons that I advanced earlier. AA: What's your opinion about the big powers like China, Russia, or America aiding smaller countries with ammunition to solve their internal problems rather than helping them to solve them in a peaceful way? YB: This to me is an interesting question. Most of the smaller independent nations, especially in Africa and Asia, belong to the United Nations and it is among the articles of membership of the United Nations that each country is independent and sovereign. In other words, each country is autonomous and should rule herself. But, very often, we see the big powers infiltrating into the rank and file of the smaller nations, either to help solve problems or to help give aid in one form or another. Now a case in point is the Nigerian Civil War where some of the big powers had to go to the aid of either Biafra or Nigeria. The other side of the picture is also quite clear if one takes a look at it in that, if one delves very deep into it, one realizes that it isn't the big powers infiltrating into the rank and file of these smaller countries, but rather the smaller countries sort of seeking aid or help from the big nations. Now, even in the case of the Nigerian Civil War, Biafra had to solicit the help from some of these big powers, and Nigeria also had to do the same. In this case, one cannot blame the big powers for coming to the aid of either party. Though, too, I think the smaller nations must also take some of the blame for this idea of big powers infiltrating into the affairs of the smaller nations. 12 AA: What is the importance of the O.A.U. and the U.M.O. as far as solving the problems of the needy nation is concerned. Do you think they are active in their part or do you think they are not? YB: You have sort of mentioned two very big and important organizations in the world today—that is to me. You mentioned the U.N.O. -- the United Nations Organization-and the O.A.U. – the Organization of African Unity, and you want to find out if they play a useful role in solving some of these problems in the major nations. First, let me take the United Nation Organization. Most major nations already belong to this, as I have already said, and what immediately comes to my mind is the Congo Crisis. This happened somewhere in the late fifties or the early sixties. Now you recall that during the Congo Crisis, the Secretary- General of the United Nations, Mr. Daug Hammershold, lost his life. He was flying across to Cotanga, the trouble torn area, when his plane was involved in an accident. Now, prior to this the United Nations had sent troops to go and restore order in the Congo. So the United Nations has done quite a lot. Now, looking at the Organization of African Unity, I think one can say the same about them as well. You look back or reflect on the Nigerian Civil War, even long before the war started, the O.A.U. had made concrete attempts to put Ojukwu and the Nigerian side together. There were meetings as far as I remember, there were two or three of them, even though the Biafrans boycotted two of these meetings, the fact still stands that the O.A.U. made a very good attempt to reconcile the two factions. So my answer to this question is this, and if your question is do they actually play active roles in solving internal problems of major nations, the answer is yes. But as to how effectively they help is another question all together. 13 AA: There is rumor that Nigeria may become part of Russia, now that Nigeria used their ammunition to fight the war to victory. What is your opinion about this? YB: This sounds rather interesting to me. Nigeria did obtain ammunitions from the Soviet Union to fight Biafra, that is a fact. But at the same time, one has to recognize or realize that Nigeria paid for all these ammunitions. Now, my understanding of an aid is a gift. Now, if Nigeria really paid for all that she got from the Soviet Union, then it ceases to be an aid. In other words, they bought it with hard cash and they could have as soon bought it from any other nation other than the Soviet Union. Now, why people should say that Nigeria would become a satellite state of the Soviet Union makes no sense to me at all. After all, until I left Nigeria, there was no sign of Nigeria going communist. Nigeria hasn't said anything about going communist or practicing communism. And I don't think Nigeria would do that just because she got ammunitions from the Soviet Union, so all the rumors about Nigeria going communist don't make sense to me. AA: Do you foresee any political stability in Nigeria in the near future? YB: Well, as far as political stability in Nigeria is concerned, I would not like to stick my neck out. I remember that immediately after the civil war, when I was in Nigeria, I talked to a couple of young men in Lagos. The impression I got from the talks we had was that the Biafran people are still not yet satisfied with the outcome of the war. Their only handicap is that they are scouted right now. Now, if I understood them correctly, what they meant was that as soon as they got together again, they were going to start trouble. This may be wishful thinking; I hope it is so. But otherwise, I would rather like to see one Nigeria and one government, and I think this is what a lot of the people are actually looking forward to. With the army people in control of affairs, I can see some level of stability. 14 But I would advise a civilian government at this stage of the Nigerian political development because as soon as the civilian government raises its head there is going to be a lot of trouble with division. So I rather advise that is if my advice is to be taken seriously, that the army people stay in power for some time—at least up until the time the wounds of this civil war have been completely healed. AA: Is there any sign of government in exile for the Biafrans? YB: This was what a lot of people were saying after the war. Now, I still think that people believe that there is a Biafran government in exile. I have no proof to that effect. All I know is that some Biafrans are out of Nigeria, but as to whether they have formed themselves into a government in exile or not, I don't know; and I can't comment on that. AA: Do you support foreign government giving political asylum to those politicians who offended their government and escaped from their countries? YB: I think it’s a question of international etiquette or decorum—a sense of decency if you like—that all political refugees are accorded hospitality in some other country. It1s been happening ever since the days of civilization and will continue to happen as far as I can see. I don1t see anything wrong with a foreign government giving political or granting political asylum to any politician from any other country. It all depends on how the foreign country or foreign government looks on the refugee. If, in their opinion, it’s a good idea or a good thing to give political asylum to a political refugee— fine! On the other hand, if they think that would cast a shadow on the integrity or perhaps the honesty or the image of the nation, it is in their part to reject such a refugee. So, this is purely a question of what a country thinks of political refugees. 15 AA: May I know your opinion about government in exile? YB: Government in exile, as far as I am concerned, have no place in the African political scene. We do hear quite a lot about governments in exile in African countries—people who flee their countries because they cannot stay or because they cannot put up with the ideologies of the government in power. They flee to other nations and form governments. It has happened to Ghana on two occasions, if I remember quite correctly. Now, what normally happens on the African scene is that when these governments stay in exile, they unfortunately plan attacks on the government of the nation from outside the country. This has happened to Ghana, and because of that Ghanaian experience that we have had I don't subscribe to having governments in exile. I wish they don't stay. AA: Now to the point of the Nigerian war again, who can be blamed for the cause of the war? YB: No one in particular can be blamed for this terrible war. I'm saying this because war is inevitable when necessity compels. AA: What do you like to say in general about Nigeria? YB: Nigeria should come together as a country and a united tribe. The leaders should try to think about their people and unite the country. The country should make wise use of the resources and products. If Nigeria can do this, it will surely be a peerless country in Africa. In doing this, they should learn from the past and I pray that there -will be no more war in Nigeria. AA: What can you say about the future of Nigeria? 16 YB: Nigeria is one of the few African countries endowed with natural resources, especially the rich oil deposits you have in Nigeria. If you look in Northern Nigeria, you have lots of granite, which the Americans call peanuts. Now this, in addition to the cocoa, which you grow extensively in Nigeria, makes your economy a valuable one. And in the future, or looking ahead, I can only forecast a rather valuable economy for the Nigerians. I think that the trouble is the use of these resources in developing the country and not the lack of resources. When it comes to having the resources; you have them. The oil deposits are there; your cocoa is there; your logs or timber are there; your gold mines are there; your iron mines are also there. So, it's a question of having honest men at the head of government who can sort of put all these resources together. And as far as the economy of Nigeria is concerned, I have full confidence in it. AA: Thank you very much. YB: Thank you, Mr. Ademola. You are welcome for any other future interviews that you may have. 17 SUMMARY AND ABSTRACT: Our underdeveloped nations are in a race with time. While they struggle to catch up with northern progress, mankind's oldest enemies do their damage now. Hunger and malnutrition kill 10,000 persons a day—mainly children—for life stunt their bodies and deaden their minds. This happens as a result of misunderstanding and the outbreak of wars. Needless diseases cripple and weaken many more as a result of poor nourishment and medical care. Skyrocketing of bribery, tribalism, nepotism and injustices doom young people and adults to a hopeless cycle of poverty. Suffering mounts. Unrest from power— hungry people spread, and the dream of peace explodes in war and turmoil. INTRODUCTION: All people in the world undoubtedly heard about the terrible Nigerian Civil War, but only the "few" people who were in Nigeria during the war can say what was truth concerning the war. But yet, thousands of different news stories were published in the war newspapers. News articles were contradicting one another. It came to a point that the pro-Biafran factions were giving the news to favor Biafra while the pro-Nigerians were showing the world their angle—Nigeria was fighting the most honest war. Cries of genocide were ramparting all streets all over the world! I am like any other person who never had the opportunity to witness the war, but I depend on newspapers and "from mouth to mouth" news. 1 I left my country, Nigeria, over ten years ago; and I have never been there since. I have to thank Weber State College for introducing this Oral History program in the college, and I will be failing in my duty if I do not express my gratitude to Dr. Richard Sadler, the director of the Oral History program. He has been taking much of his time to direct individual students. I know and realize that he has taken much of his personal time to attend to my call, both in his office and at home in order to guide me in my interview. This program is very advantageous to me in many ways. A few of them are as follows: 1. Academic improvement in general, for example. I have never conducted an interview with anyone before. 2. This interview gave me the opportunity of knowing the facts about the Nigerian Civil War. 3. It gave me the opportunity to know more about my country. Although the interview cost me almost a fortune, (since I had to make my way long distances to meet with those who actually got involved with the war,) I was happy to meet with people like Mr. Nzema Okeke from Eastern Nigeria. He used his talent as a political scientist to answer all my questions beyond my expectations. Baba Baro, from Northern Nigeria, did a wonderful job in my interview with him. And Yara Baba had done his best and as a non-citizen of Nigeria, but a Nigerian resident up until the end of the war, he had done a great job. I would like to thank Livy Owok, as a student at the University of Utah, for his help and co-operation in this interview; I was interested in his views. Now, I would like to extend ray special 2 appreciation to Olufemi Ijatula. Being the only female interviewee, I especially appreciated hearing the feminine side of the story. Her views and opinions were extremely helpful. My thanks to them all. I am happy that people like these were present in Nigeria before, during, and after the war. I am proud and happy to say that this interview had been carefully carried out in a very fair manner without prejudiced mannerisms. I did encourage the participants to feel free to say anything in their mind about what they witnessed. I assured them that whatever they did relate would not be counted against them in any court of law. Once more, I am happy to see that the interview came to a successful end. The included pictures will also speak of themselves: "War is no good" CONCLUSION Where does Nigeria go from here? Any Nigerian and Nigerian friends should be happy to see the end of the terrible Civil War fought in Nigeria in 1967-1970. Through my interview, anyone can realize that the war left behind remarkable and unforgettable events. It became a great concern to human kindness. The war left behind a wound that will take another generation to heal. Those who never lost their lives in Nigeria during the war blamed their creator for making them witness such fearful events. Heaven looked like Golden City to them. No one knew what the next hour had in stock for him, but always they anticipated when the world or the war would end. 3 The war tore down not only Unity and valuable properties, but also valuable lives. All my three interviewees confirmed, emphatically, that the war claimed about two million lives. This figure is more than the first and the second world wars claimed together. The break-up of Nigeria had been a terrible thing. But it is less than that cruel war. Thousands of innocent people were shot, bombed, or seeing their homes and livelihoods destroyed. Millions, including the children of Africa, were starving to death. Through my interview I could realize that nothing could be done about the suffering innocents since starvation was considered a legitimate war weapon against an enemy, and so Nigerians and Biafrans became another Britons and Germans in Hitler's war. All Nigerians should be happy after the war because Nigeria will now have the opportunity to build a strong nation of which every Nigerian- indeed, every African—can be proud. The Nigerian Civil War has much effect on the important progressive events of Nigeria. It has bad effects on: 1. Education and Skill. 2. Investment in Industry. 3. Industries 4. Medical Duty. 5. Agriculture 6. Unity and Friendship 7. Social Life. 4 All of the above effects have, one way or the other, affected the progress of economic stability in Nigeria. To point out how the war affected the above things, let us start from the beginning. 1. Effect on Education and Skill. During the war, many schools and colleges were bombed and broken down. As schools and colleges became the target for bombs and cannons, parents were afraid of allowing their children to go to school. Students who lost their buildings had no other schools to go to. And throughout the wars two years, no school functioned well. That gave Nigerian educational progress a setback. 2. Effect on Investment: Because no one knew how the war would end, the well-todo people refused to invest. So the Nigerian investment ended there. 3. Effect on Industries: Without any doubt, the important industries stopped production as the bombing started. Since management was not sure what the next minute would bring, a bullet or bomb, production was interrupted. Those who could have been working were either in the war front or hiding somewhere in the bush to save their lives. This poor condition forced the industries to close their doors. 4. Effect on Medical Duty: This particular effect extended throughout the country, mostly in the war zone. As bombs shattered the hospitals, doctors and nurses fled for their lives leaving the poor patients who could not get out of their beds. In the hospitals where bombs never dropped, the doctors were assigned to go and help the wounded soldiers in the war front, thereby, leaving the incapable nurses alone in the hospitals. 5 5. Effect on Agricultural Products: This effect was by far the worst. The bombs that rained on the fertile land did a lot of damage to the land and the crops. Food production became short and thousands of people during the war lost their lives as a result of hunger. 6. Effect on Unity and Friendship: Without a doubt, as many people got hurt during the war, so it will take a long time to heal the wound of unity and friendship because the war left behind much mistrust among the people. 7. Effect on Social Life: This effect was remarkable. The evidence of this effect will mainly be on intermarriages among different tribes. I could recollect in 1967 when the war first broke out, some newsmen wrote that the Ibos, who were married to the Northerners, killed their wives and children; while the Hausas married to the Ibos also killed their families. Without any doubt, that event is enough to discourage - intermarriage and other social life. POLITICS AND POOR LEADERSHIP: Now let us talk about politics and the poor management by the leaders. Up until the moment, Nigeria and other African countries still engage in what I can term to be "jungle politics." Any member of the opposition is an enemy of the reigning party. There is always outbreak of fighting during elections. "Turgs" are engaged to fight any opposing members. Freedom of speech is taken from minority. This type of ugly scene happens all the time. 6 For example, over a thousand lives and millions of dollars’ worth of property were lost in the 1963 election in Nigeria. And the same thing happened again in the 1965-66 election before the coup. Now the new style in Africa is the military over-throwing governments. This happens because every man is fighting for power rather than contributing to the progress of the nations in more honorable and honest ways. Stories of molestation of civilians by soldiers fly around every day. Armed robbery by men in uniforms of the Army is always reported. Tea-cup mutinies have been reported in convalescence centers, hospitals and pay offices. For example, Mushin in Lagos in Nigeria was the scene of a real-life tragedy of arson, rape and murder in an incident that featured men in army uniforms. After overthrowing the civilian government, many members of the Nigerian army went on a rampage of looting and rape. There has been continual political interference in the operation of government corporations on the personal level, with "jobs for the boys' playing a dominant role. But at the point where ministerial control should be most important—the point of financial accountability- it has been the most weak. The criminal action against fraudulent public officers in Nigeria is an equally weak reed. In Nigeria and any other parts of Africa, the opposition parties are either weak or non-existent; and it is plainly senseless to think that the ruling parties will expose their own corruption. For example, in 1960, in a very rare demonstration of independence, 7 Nigerian newspapers attacked the Minister of Aviation, Mbadiwe, for a particularly corrupt transaction. He was never prosecuted. Instead, the then Prime Minister Balewa permitted him to retain his ministerial posset, but made him return the plot to the land issue to the government. In the same government, when the Commission of Enquiry into trade malpractices reported fraud and profiteering by high government officials, the report was rewritten by a cabinet committee before it was released to the public. All these types of misuse of government power have done a great damage to our nation. We need better law to protect the innocent people from these greedy political leaders so that there will be no internal war. We still have a long way to go unless there is a stop to all these ugly circumstances. To come to the last section of my conclusion, may I suggest that to succeed in reaching the mountain top of our national goal, Nigeria and even other parts of Africa must do the following things: 1. Search and empower the dedicated, modest, honest, and devoted leaders who submerge themselves in service to their nation and mankind. Leaders who abhor greed and detest vanity with great and outstanding integrity. 2. Learn, study, and understand the causes of our civil war. 3. Draw lessons from our difficulties. 4. Set on the task of solution to the problems. 5. Our political parties must adhere to truly national aspiration. 6. There must be substantial constitution to guard the innocents from the greedy and army officers. 8 More money must be spent on education and the system must be changed and great emphasis must be laid on vocational and technical aspects. 1. Foreign investors must be encouraged and exploitation must be discouraged. 2. Our agricultural policy should aim at self-sufficiency, thus giving our people an independent livelihood. And to achieve this we must have agriculture in our school and university curricula. Agricultural engineering should be introduced and strengthen our co-operative farming system. 3. More hospitals should be built and government provision for more doctors for the needed hospitals. All the hospitals should be fully equipped. 4. The government should pass laws prohibiting army takeover. 9