STAR INTERVIEW: Ojukwu in NewsWatch: "Sharia is a Sabotage"

[Mobolaji E. Aluko]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

STAR INTERVIEW: Ojukwu in NewsWatch: "Sharia is a Sabotage"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nigerian Newsatch Vol. 31, No.11 March 30, 2000

Sharia is a Sabotage

Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, one of the leaders of Ohaneze, talks to
Tobs Agbaegbu on the Sharia crisis, national unity and the Igbo question

Newswatch: Let us begin with the controversial Sharia issue in Nigeria
now. As an Igbo leader, could you tell us why the Igbos reacted so sharply
and angrily about the Sharia riot in Kaduna and some other parts of the
North? There was an almost spontaneous reaction in Aba, Umuahia, Owerri
and in Akwa Ibom to an extent, as soon as news spread that many people
were killed in Kaduna.

Ojukwu: There is no way we can talk about civil war, and without at one
paint talking about Biafra. The war which was fought in 1967-1970 was the
biggest national trauma which was fought in 1967-1970 was the biggest
national trauma which Ndigbo have suffered in modern times. At the lend of
the war, certain things happened. Some people claimed victory and ascribed
the position of the vanquished to others. In Igboland, there were two
areas and two sets of people. The first, were those who were of the Zikist
movement. Those who felt that one cannot be free from the existence of
Nigeria and that no matter what happened, no body should question that
existence. People who believed at the end of the war that our later great
leader, the Owelle of Onitsha, Nnamdi Azikiwe was correct. And this was a
rallying area for those also who during the war did not articulate their
grievances but did feel greater loyalty towards Nigeria.

The other two group, perhaps youthful, perhaps exuberant. They believe
that Ojukwu was a hero. They believed he lost the war not because pursued
were wrong but that we lost because of overwhelming odd

In these two groups in Igboland actually, those who considered themselves
the victors laid more emphasis on those who effectively were
collaborationists. They were the first appointees, they were the first
rehabilitated and very soon, particularly in our society which is highly
materialistic, their apparent success became also an indictment to these
Igbos who appeared to be in a sulk over the entire situation. Because we,
Igbos, are very conscious of peer competition. When you see your peers
doing this and that, no matter your policy, after sometime, you start
asking yourself certain questions. So we have that dichotomy within
Igboland.

It was also helped by the idea of no victor, no vanquished. The element of
saboteur that was noticed during the war later resulted into
collaboration, the effect was reduced and it wasn't so much as such.

As you move down, the evolution of Nigerian politics also white washed the
various quite opposing ideologies in Igboland. Very soon, it became clear
that those who intended to follow the youthful ideology which I then
symbolised became true vanguished of the situation. You now find a
situation where all you have to do say is, oh yes, Ojukwu is a very good
man but we know that Nigeria will not accept him. And that was good enough
as a campaign slogan. And all those would have been alright, very good
policy but for one thing, nothing has changed. Marginalisation continued,
underground you find loss of the war are still there, no restitution. What
then happened was that the older ones who collaborated, in a sense of
philosophy got older whereas the youthful ones instead of growing went
down and joined the new generation. So you now have in Igboland a big
tussle, so you find a lot of people with nice titles who by every standard
should be leaders but because of the inhibitions of defeat were no in no
way able to contribute. And you still find it today. Perhaps I missed a
lot by being in exile. But I don't feel any inhibitions at all But a lot
of my colleagues do feel certain inhibitions.

You will notice the way we have taken this crisis. I speak as an Igbo man,
but a lot of people cannot speak because they look upon the situation,
whatever they do, as Igbo-Nigerians. And this creates certain conflict in
their mind. I believe that I can only be a very good Nigerian if I am a
good Igboman, to start with. Some people might not believe this.

Now your question, why is it that it happened this way? What I have given
you is the background to the situation. You find that naturally the youth
grow more and more in ideas. The young shall grow, we all say. They are
now growing. They have none of these inhibitions of war. For example, my
son will certainly not accept that any of his grandfathers properties are
seized. He will do what ever he can to recover. Whereas I might say,
junior, take it easy. Be careful we know what happened. He cannot
understand. All he can say is that he is waiting for me to leave so that
he can do what he wants to do. That is the way in Igboland, over the
years, nobody can explain, why is it that when Igbos quarrel with Yorubas,
Igbos are killed, when Igbos quarrel with Hausas, Igbos are killed, when
Yorubas quarrel with Hausas, Igbos are killed. Eventually, people say
enough is enough, we can't take this.

I must say this, you now get the youths of Igboland quite impatient. I
have had meetings with a lot of people the last few days. I told them
quite bluntly, What happened in Aba, and Owerri is a revolt against the
leadership of the older ones. We have been speaking grammar and they
said, shut up, stop speaking your long grammar, that is not the answer to
the problems of Igboland. We the youths, we are going to find the
solution to the problem. It is not a revolt against the federal
government but a revolt against the older Igbo leaders.

They are freeing themselves from the yoke of the aged. They don't see
reason why they must be shackled.

I don't support violence. I look upon it as the last recourse. In my
younger days, there was even a distinction between mindless violence and
revolutionary violence. And it was justifiable then to indulge in
revolutionary violence. I can't accept that now. I believe that everythin
g can better be resolved round the conference table.

What happened on the Sharia issue is also the frustration which the youths
have. They just can't understand the apparent Igbophobia in Nigeria.

Newswatch: How do we situate the action taken by people in Akwa-Ibom on
the Sharia issue?

Ojukwu: It is the name. People always as me about minorities in our
neighbourhood. Our fate has been interwoven for so long. The first public
execution on Carter bridge in Lagos during the 1966 massacre was Major
Ekandem. He had been called to the headquarters for discussion. On his
way from Apapa to the headquarters in Ikoyi, he was slaughtered on the
basis that he was an Igboman, and on the basis that there was no real
distinction between the Igbos and the minorities. We fought the war
together. Don't forget that there was a studied attempt to maintain a
balance between them and the Igbos in my government. My chief secretary
was Akwa Ibom, Ntioyong Akpan. A number of the greatest fighters we had
in Biafra came from Akwa Ibom and Cross River. We had such field heroes as
Nsudoh, Philip Effiong, my deputy, and one Archibong.

Now, you find that your brothers are retreating when the enemy is around.

Although you are at liberty to insist that you are Biafran, all that you
needed to do for your safety is to look for a flag, green white green.
What the Akwa Ibom and Cross River people did when the enemy took over
their territory was survival reflex.

Naturally, this creates a burden of guilt. Do you know what has happened?
They know exactly their various positions, but at the end of the day, they
expect you to understand. They make a policy of it. They say, No, No, we
don't agree with them. We don't expect it to work.

But we gave them the opportunity of testing the other husband. Having
tested the other husband, there is a feeling now among many of them that
if we have to do it again, we will stick with the first husband. I want
to see a brilliant Hausa man who can make a clear distinction between an
Igboman and an Ibibio man. It is not possible. They see all of us as
Nyamiri (Hausa word for Igbos). And there is no way, given the passion of
the moment, the low-level Northerners who are perpetrating the atrocities
will find the difference between an Igbo man, a Rivers man and Akwa Ibom
man. Wee are the same, we suffer the same. If the Igboman is not a
brother to Akwa Ibom man, I don't see how a Sokoto man can be.

Newswatch: Why do you think the Northerners are now pushing for Sharia?

Ojukwu: I have been very much worried by this phenomenon. It appears to
me that the problem is coming up now for two reasons. The first is that a
Muslim is not ruling Nigeria, at the same time, as it has appeared quite
clearly that power has shifted to the South. Whenever either a Southerner
and non-Muslim had ruled, that southerner had been a lackey of Islam, a
lackey of the North. It appears to me that quite suddenly, the powers that
be realised that President Obasanjo cannot be a lackey. It became clear
that power really has shifted. When we also look at the tenet of Islam,
it says that a true Muslim shall not be ruled by a non-Muslim. It also
says it is the duty of a true Muslim to pull down such ruler if he happens
to be there. This is why I say it is political. It will appear that the
sight of Obasanjo on the seat of power is like an affront. The mere fact
that he is sitting there annoys a true Muslim. Otherwise why now?

Then, I must say that on the whole thing, I also see the hand of God.
Because the line is now clearly drawn in Nigeria. Those who did not
clearly understand the virulence of the Islamic position vis-a-vis the
rest, are now beginning to see clearly what is happening. Why should
somebody get up in Nigeria and declare a Sharia, effectively altering the
penal code of Nigeria? Telling you in no uncertain terms that one area is
different from another in Nigeria. What they are telling you is to move
away if you don't like it. But in the union that is Nigeria, nobody
should contemplate your moving away. It is part of the sovereign territory
of which you are a citizen. You cannot deprive somebody of a livelihood
for a private affair like Sharia religion.

Then that takes us to another point which I keep warning. Any act that
undermines moral differences is another way of saying you don't want
Nigeria. Because Nigeria is a place where you open up your arms and
accommodate every Nigerian citizen. This is why I don't support giving VA
T (Value added tax) from sale of beer to those Sharia states that don't
support sale of alcohol.

What we want are those things that pull Nigeria together. But if you now
decide that your concept of your Islam makes it impossible for you to be a
Nigerian, declare it and we go round the table like Czechoslovakia, and
decide what to do, quietly. Our position is clear today. Enough is enough.
If the answer is whenever you feel frustrated, you now kill Ndigbo, we now
tell you, you are making the greatest mistake in your life because Ndigbo
of today are not Ndigbo of yesterday. And there is nothing actually wrong
with vengeance. It is the national policy of Israel you know, ours cannot
be different. We are human beings.

Newswatch: Is it true that you said no religion has the monopoly of
violence?

Ojukwu: It is true. I said it. After all, I am a Roman Catholic. Every
time, you hear Muslims say we want jihad, we want jihad. When did Jihad
start frightening Christians? Christians have gone on crusades. Go through
history, you will see how Muslims suffered during crusades. They did not
win. Jihad did not subdue Christian crusades. Then you talk about Sharia,
and people are horrified about hands being chopped off. In the primitive
days of Christianity, we had inquisition. And it was for more cruel than
anything that Sharia can think of. It's just that we have evolved over th
e years. We have shelved our primitive garb and become modern, civilised
people. In fact we are more worried about our Muslim brothers and sisters
than anything else. We fell they denigrate their Nigerianness to subject
them to purely primitive methods.

Newswatch: What is your reaction to the position of the governors from
five Igbo speaking areas? They talked tough and the impression is now
given that Igbo have a policy of asking for "an eye for an eye, fire f or
fire?"

Ojukwu: I want to congratulate the five governors for their ability in
acting fast to control the situation. If they had just failed for one
day, that would have set Nigeria ablaze. The real heroes of today are the
five governors. The ability of governor Uzor Orji Kalu of Abia State to
halt the boys and they were going further than Aba. The ability of Achike
Udenwa of Imo State, Chinwoke Mbadinuju of Anambra, Sam Egwu of Ebonyi and
Chimaroke Nnamani, are wonderful and commendable. Even in Enugu today,
refugees are being fed from public coffers. I doff my heart for those
young men.

And when hey now tell you the truth, because they know their people, and
having been working with them, that they will be uncontrollable next time
if Igbos are attacked better take them serious. Day before yesterday, I
left here by 9 O'clock in the morning and came back past midnight, going
from place to place calming people down. What the governors said was only
a more reflection of depth of passion and disappointment in their hands.
They are not saying that they won't try to control the people when next
such things occur, they will try but what they say is that it would not
work. It would be anarchy next time. That is what they are trying to
avoid.

Newswatch: I would want to believe that you read about a statement
credited to Umaru Dikko, accusing you of being behind the Kaduna riot of
last month. How true is it?

Ojukwu: I have read it. For Umaru Dikko, if at any stage NEPA goes off,
because there is darkness, he would say it is Ojukwu's fault.
Notwithstanding the fact that he might be in a box (age) he will still
call it Ojukwu's fault, because there is darkness it must be Ojukwu. Tha
t is the man. A man that came back all that he has been doing is to find
relevance. Even yesterday (7/3/2000) when they had a protest in Sokoto,
it also must be Ojukwu. The only thing I want to say to my friend Umaru
Dikko, I know that during the war, I loomed than life, now I am an
ordinary Nigerian. His concept that I am larger than life is unfounded.
According to Dikko, Ojukwu is magic. When Ojukwu makes speech, the world
changes.

Newswatch: The allegation is that you went to Kaduna and spoke to a number
of Igbo leaders. And that you also gave a lecture, all of which led to
the way the Christians reacted against Sharia.

Ojukwu: I was invited by the Christian Association of Nigeria. I was
invited to speak to their congress which was held in Kaduna. I attended
and spoke to them, I left. I told you about Umaru Dikko, he thinks the
name Ojukwu is magic. That s why I like him because he seems to be the
only one that understands how powerful I am. As far as he is concerned,
when Ojukwu makes a speech, the world changes. But the speech was recorded
and reflected in the newspapers. If it was a dangerous statement I made,
I am sure the security of the nation would have called me to order. I said
in Kaduna that there is nothing that I will say to a Muslim that would
make him bend down, apologise to me and become a Christian. The same that
nothing a Muslim will say or do to make me apologise to him and then
become a Muslim. That is the danger in a religious conflict. I did also
say and believe, that as far as we are concerned as Christians, we must
protect our God-given right. What we should be looking at is how to
prepared in our own home. That is it. There is danger as I can see.
People are declaring Sharia and people are keeping quiet and saying
nothing. Nobody is telling you whether it is constitutional or not. So I
said, your prime duty before God is to protect yourself. But of course, to
Dikko, my friend, the word of Ojukwu, carried with it the flames of fire,
inflaming the hearts of everybody. But nobody about clandestine meetings
he has been attending, and the quasi spontencity reaction. And nobody has
paid attention to the fact that it was Muslims that did their
demonstration first and Christians later did their own demonstration which
was peaceful from beginning to end, and while they were having some
refreshments, mayhem was unleashed on the defenceless Christians. Nothing
was said about it and it meant nothing to my good friend Dikko. I suppose
Dikko would wish I was not a Nigerian.

Newswatch: Why is he attacking you? Some people say two of you are
political enemies.

Ojukwu: No. I was the first person to embrace him at the Constitutional
Conference. I ran down from my seat and embraced him, so there is nothing
between us. During my 1983 campaign for the senate, he was a good
contributor to my campaign fund. He also gave me rice to distribute and
made five vehicles available for my campaigns. Why should we be political
enemies? Look at also the situation when a newspaper reported that I got
angry with him and slapped him and we fought during the constitutional
conference. We met and thought of issuing joint statements, denying the
report. We decided against it because this is the kind of things papers
write to generate sales. It was even in my house at Apo village, Abuja. We
are not political enemies. Why?

Now talking about political enemity, one of those who were said to be my
enemies was General Gowon. But he is not. I believe he was doing what he
was doing during the war with a strong conviction that he was doing his
best. I respect him for that. He was doing his duties. He is not my
political enemy.

Newswatch: In assessing the federal government handling of the situation,
there is this criticism that the federal government failed by not acting
decisively on time to prevent the eruption of the riot. What is your
position?

Ojukwu: We are all beneficiaries of hindsight. There is nothing you can
present without the benefit of hindsight. I know a few voices were
raised, asking the government to take action as the events were unfolding.
I believe that it is good, once you have chosen a leader, you give him
benefit of the doubt. I don't think the ruler, or leader should be led
from various sitting rooms across the land. However, the fact is that we
felt on this side, that the whole question of Sharia demands urgent
attention.

The people of core-northern states believe that the whole concept of
Sharia deserves an applause. Our friends on the western side fill today
we do not know what they believe or what they think. The silence from
that side is so disheartening that I say to myself, are they not alive to
what is going on. They have not made any concerted statement. We don't
know where they stand. Now, in a such situation where vibrant minority
voices have been raised, what does a leader do? Obviously, to conduct
certain enquiries. But the situation was not actually waiting for him over
the years, one thing has happened to Nigeria to give what we acquired as a
military reflex. It is so much so that now that there is no military
government, we still want all government to act s though they are
military. And this is one of our problems today.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the federal government of
Olusegun Obasanjo for his success in putting a lid on the situation and
for listening to the complaint coming essentially from this part of the
country and for suspending the Sharia. They did very well. I only hope
this is the very first step, and eventually it will become clear to
everybody that no country can survive with two penal codes in action.

Newswatch: What do you think about recent statements credited to Shehu
Shagari and Mohammadu Buhari, two Muslim, former heads of state. They
supported Sharia and condemned action taken by government.

Ojukwu: Once we are all retired, one thing is clear, we have other
considerations different from the responsibility of ruling. If what my
friends Alhaji Shehu Shagari and Muhammadu Buhari said are correct, I feel
disappointed. I don't think that their own way can lead Nigeria in
cementing her ways. In any case, what else have they got in stock for
Nigeria? What is the alternative? Are they saying that Islam is better
than keeping Nigeria one? If the prize of nationhood is regular
bloodletting, then let us not be a nation.

This is why I have continued to call for a sovereign national conference.
We should sit down to clarify certain things about Nigeria and about our
Nigerianness. Fortunately, some voices are coming from the North now
supporting the Conference. If that is the answer, why not? Even the
Sharianization of Nigeria, we have to talk about it.

Newswatch: Critics of a sovereign national conference oppose it on the
ground that the national assembly is now in place. As representatives of
their people, they say whatever you want to say at the congress should be
channelled through them. Don't you think it should be so?

Ojukwu: Nobody can be serious about that. There are so many things to be
discussed that are beyond the national assembly. Don't forget that the
fact that we gave them mandate to represent us does not mean that we gave
them the sovereignty over us. There are points that we, the masters, might
wish to be discussed by us. We voted them in,(voting in quotes) but we
have not resigned our fate to them.

Newswatch: We want to revisit the position of Ohaneze. At one point they
ask about reparation. At another point, its marginalisation or calls for
confederation. I don't know whether I have summed up well the case being
put up by Ohaneze.

Ojukwu: Its not actually. Far from it, the position of Ohaneze has been
very consistent. Permit me to say we, the Ohaneze, believe very strongly
that the Oputa panel which is still in session gives us the nearest
approximation to a peace conference that we can have in Nigeria after the
civil war. It is because of our belief in dialogue that we sat down and
produced the document and petitioned to the human rights Commission. Of
all the things within that document, people have focused only on the
reparation, on the money involved incidentally. Having complained only
about the money demanded as reparation, it means they accept that every
other issue there is okay. They are quarrelling about the N8.3 trillion
demanded. Supposing it is N83 trillion? As far as I am concerned, it
doesn't pay for the death of one Igboman. This is because one single brai
n you have cut down in the prime of life could be the seed that can
blossom out a nation full of virility.

Whatever we demanded is symbolic Ohaneze is giving you a symbolic way of
pulling back from precipice.

You talked about confederation. I don't think Ohaneze has ever requested
for confederation. But it is not incompatible. If you say let us go to a
conference, you should be open-minded enough to accept whatever comes out
of that conference. Confederation, that was the Northern position in the
crisis that led to Biafra. In the ad hoc Constitutional Conference, that
was the northern position. Confederation, for the past three or four
years, that has been the western position. There is nothing inconsistent
about it. What is happening now is that we are all now getting close, in
the same direction.

Then there is the case of marginalisation. It is still there. We ended
the war in steel iron cases. Today, we are now in glass cases. You can see
me, I can see you but we are still in cage, we can't get out.

If you want peace, you have to make certain sacrifices. You must make
restitution. You must also acknowledge the wrongs you have done. And by
making restitution, it is a way of saying that you will not willingly do
the wrongs again. Having said so, the worst thing you can do is to leave
the scars of war visible and expect the people who suffered those scare
not to have bitterness at all. The first thing to do is to heal the wounds
and later obliterate the scars.

The leadership of the National Security has not been taken over by an
Igboman since the war. You start wondering why. Suddenly, you discover
that no Igboman has been minister for defence. You ask why. And if you
combine it with the fact that no Igbo man has ever since the war emerged
head of state, you raise many more questions. These are the problems of
our togetherness. If you want to have us, and want to have us in peace,
then don't have us under a cloud of suspicion, let us come into Nigeria
and give to you our best. This is not a boast, I have people in Nigeria
today who will make us certainly talk with other big countries in the
world about rocketry. By the end of the war, Biafra had big rockets, we
were going 6 miles and getting on to targets. Can you imagine what the
situation would have been today? There are many people we have. We are the
first and perhaps the only people in Black Africa that depended and
entirely on their resources and did not import to live. Do you realise
what that means in Africa today?

The point is that since the end of the war, some people are still
foolishly expecting slaves to work for them. And Ndigbo said, we cannot
be slaves, that is all. Free us and we will give out our own, our
internal resources to Nigeria. And I don't have to tell anybody, it is so
obvious. You cannot distribute your fuel, free us, every states
headquarters will have a refinery. Free us, every state headquarters will
have its landing air strip. Free us, we will cut down on importation of
soap, buttons, etc, all the things that are being imported. Free us, we
will show you how to keep a population well fed. We will show you that
government should be involved not in luxury items but in staples.

Let me also mention the marginalisation of the minorities. Until the
Sharia came up, marginalisation was the problem of the moment. Those who
were sitting on our resources found it impossible to understand why they
should be the most debased. And they started shouting. Perhaps, we should
ask my friend Umaru Dikko when Ojukwu also gave the speech that enraged
the minorities of the south.

These are reasons why it is not sufficient to say the government will look
into this. Governments have been looking into it but they are not doing it
well. There has been so many governments, military and civilian, and yet
they could not do anything about marginalisation. It means the foundation
of the country is wrong. As an elder, let me say that Nigeria has really
never had a constitution. We have rather, certain rules and regulations
which are always imposed. The British brought a constitution into a
federation that had clear imbalances. To workout that situation, it led to
a civil war. And there has been several tinkering at Constitutional level.

For a Constitution to be workable, it has to be acceptable by the people.
It is not an accident that every major structural change in Nigeria,
except the creation of mid-western region were made by the military.
Nigeria has therefore been placed in a military strait jacket. Until we
are ready to part with that strait jacket, we will not succeed. Each time
you create a new constitution, you create a new opposition. That is why
they don't want constitutional conferences. How can a nation that
believes so much in freedom think that the brains of yesterday has
mortgaged the entire nation in future? If a constitution is alright, it
should be reviewed because many new brains are coming up and I believe in
better brains too. USA said, for 200 years, we have been trying to make
the union move perfect. Stupidly, we believe that the union imposed onus
is already perfect. What could be more neo-colonialist than that? What I
am saying is, let us have a Nigerian Union, on African Union that can do
us proud. The time has come for us to take our destiny into our own hands.
Let me put it blunt, if in reorganising Nigeria, we get some understanding
with out neighbours in Benin Republic, why not? In the years of conflict
when 3rd world war led astray by the Marxist concept about nationalities
ethnicity became a swear word. If you want to curse somebody, you call him
ethnic bigot. Today actually, ethnicity is a word of pride.

Newswatch: Professor Nwabueze said recently that the new document Ohaneze
is coming out with on the Constitution was made in collaboration with
Afenifere, he Yoruba Cultural group.

Ojukwu: When last I made a statement on the document, I told people to
expect a bombshell. The Ohaneze document for the human rights Commission
was Ohaneze's. But today, 40 years after, we found it necessary to come
out in the open.

With Afenifere led by the group known as the patriots, Ohaneze has evolved
a common position on the Nigerian Constitution and it is a major
breakthrough with Afenifere. That is the second document.

Newswatch: Can you let us into the two documents. Let us see what they
contain.

Ojukwu: I would not be doing it public. I know that very shortly it will
be made public. I presented it to the governors two days ago. And the
greatest thing is that for the first time, east and west could be said to
be saying the same thing. Let us hold on for now.

Newswatch: What things would you want to be changed in the Constitution?

Ojukwu: I think you cannot decide on the nature of the constitution by not
being clear on as to what Nigeria is. We should be clear about residual
powers also. I think personally that residual powers should be with the
federating units. In the context of Nigeria, we should decide on what
federating units are. It is not clear yet. Originally, it led with three
regions, later four and now many states. We must also find out what
Nigerians want.

The highest function of government has been to protect lives and
properties. Life, we have and it should be protected. But what is proper
in the Nigerian context? How does somebody from Nnewi own the groundnuts
in Kano? There must be certain processes of owning a property. You have to
consider what price is too much for being part of the federation.
Certainly, I will not want to be part of a federation that makes me a
Moslem. There are other things to talk about. Somebody might say you
cannot take my God-given resource and expect us to be part of that
exploitative federation. Anything that is rigid is wrong. What do I mean
by that? If we cannot jointly man our security properly, we can split it
and let us have a constant conference as it were, a defence committee
where everybody as a group will be represented. I have said it before
that there is something wrong with a Nigeria where perhaps somebody who in
his entire life has not seen an expanse of water except a well becomes the
head of the Nigerian Navy. How do you tell him what a wave is? Sooner or
later, we will have to discuss eyeball to eyeball.

Newswatch: Do you support regional army and state police?

Ojukwu: Everything I postulated actually in 1967 as a result of deep
thought about the Nigerian polity. I took that position in 1967 though we
have not argued it too. If I cannot have access to the control of a joint
security, then let the security not be joint rather than I be
discriminated against.

Newswatch: We understand that there is going to be a special anniversary
of Biafra in May.

Ojukwu: No. Well I know what you are talking about. It does not matter
actually what you call it. I feel particularly that we have not done
honour to the dead. Nobody is preventing us from doing it. It's just
that with the process of survival, we have tried to censor ourselves and I
believe that we are censoring ourselves out of life. In my culture, Igbo
culture, there is usually death, burial and mourning. We are aware of the
dead. When we don't know where somebody is buried, then there is a
symbolic burial a. Mourning can also come at any time too. In my culture,
if you have not laid the dead to rest, their ghosts will be floating. I,
inspite of my Oxford training, am coming to believe that a lot of problems
Igbos are encountering evolve primarily from the fact that many of our
martyred dead have not been shown the gratitude of the living and have not
been accorded a befitting repose. Today, we have a democratic rule and we
feel it is a duty incumbent onus and so we are saying that on a certain
day, we shall all jointly bring for the repose of our dead and jointly
think of how to immortalize those who made the supreme sacrifice. The
organisation of Ndigbo in America, Germany, Britain, etc have all
signified that they will go along with an international Matyres day, where
we will pray for the repose of the martyrs and then of course try to build
monuments and so on to immortalize them. The tentative date is in May.

Newswatch: Is it not the same as what the federal government and the army
do under armed forces remembrance day on January 15 of every year?

Ojukwu: We have not been ever remembered before.

Newswatch: We want you to do an assessment of the regime of President
Olusegun Obasanjo. He has almost spent one year in office

Ojukwu: I don't believe that I am the right person to give a confidential
report to Chief Obasanjo's government. I tell you that because I don't
feel really that I know enough. And it is possible also that my judgement
could be jaundiced. I feel also that the depth for which anybody has to
pull Nigerians out is much much deeper than many people realise.

Having said all these, I believe also that we have acquired a military
reflex in our society. If I am to answer your question, then I would say
that Chief Obasanjo would appear to have the best of good intention, but
he has to realise that Nigerians are not expecting to be patient with him
eternally. You will see their reaction in everything.

For a long time, I refused to talk about this government because I think
it should be given the benefit of the doubt. But the level of hunger,
poverty around in the societies here are appealing. I expect that for
somebody who has ruled this country before, that he owes us certain magic
which would justify his extra-ordinary choice of himself as the leader.
What I find is that his interaction with the legislature appears to be
heavy-handed. Mind you, in saying that I think that the legislature could
also do a little more. It is interesting tome that you said why didn't
the president act earlier on the issue of Sharia? I say to you why didn't
the legislature put in a bill earlier? In fact, we should ask what the
legislature has been doing? How many of the bills have they generated on
their one except those the executive sent to them? They should initiate
some of these bills.

You asked abut the Obasanjo regime anyway. Let me tell you that the
experiment of democracy is more important than who is at the head of that
democracy. Nigeria has turned its back on military dictatorship. Obasanjo
has not been perfect, he has not delivered to us the Golden Fleece but we
applaud his effort. All we want to see is that he acts quicker, move
decisively in certain areas and certainly, we want to see the effect of
his government felt over the population. One thing we must remember also
is that ever since he became head of state, to say the least, his control
of the Southern periphery of the country has been tenuous. The question of
national security is very important and we must demand of him that he
should indicate quickly now that he is going to solve that problem. The
way we are going, I think, we are involved in a creeping revolution.

Newswatch: Indeed, the crisis has been much: look at Aguleri-Umuleri, Odi,
Ijaw-Itsekeri, Shagamu, Ketu, Mushin, etc. Do you think some people want
to sabotage the new regime in Nigeria?

Ojukwu: What is sabotage? It means that we agreed on a line, of action and
somebody is trying quietly to halt it. I think it is not a question of
sabotage. I think most of the problems are inherited. The one that is
sabotage I think is Sharia. What else are others saying, for example what
is OPC saying that it did not say before the election? What we have now
is the cumulative of unsolved problems in Nigeria. Nigeria was placed in
a kind of pressure cooker. We came to a point where the pressure inside
the cooker will be so hot that it will blow the lead up. That is the case
with Nigeria.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

-++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe akwa-cross-net" to majo...@lists.stanford.edu