By Benprince Ezeh

PROFESSOR Hope Eghagha, head of Department of English, University of Lagos, has said that Nigeria has to revisit the Nigeria-Biafra civil war the same way it dealt with June 12 for their to be genuine reconciliation in the land.

Recalling his experience during the war at the launch of the the book: The Nigeria Civil War, 50 Years After … Reflections of a Younger Generation, Eghagha said he saw how men were lined up and shot by the Nigerian armed forces simply because they were Igbos, asking: “who fights a war like that”.

Eghagha, who said he was in Sapele when the war started stated this while reviewing the book in Lagos, on Wednesday. He added that the book holds that the story of the war cannot be told without genuine effort to reconcile all sides as propaganda can make one hate their neighbour.

He said that civil liberties were suspended during the war as both the Nigerian Forces and their Biafran counterpart committed atrocities, advising Nigerians to avoid any violent act that will lead to war again after the bitter experience of the Nigeria-Biafra war which that started in 1967 and ended January 15, 1970.

According to him, the authors of the book – Esho Abure and Agbose Akinwole – set out to challenge existing notions of nomenclature, dating and reflections of the people who still have fond recollections of the events leading up to and after the war. “By nomenclature, the authors contend that rather than the appellation ‘Nigeria-Biafra war’ it is actually the Nigeria Civil war as Biafra was never at any time recognised by Nigeria. It then explores historical and political ramblings of governance in Nigeria after the war some fifty years later.”

“The fiftieth year anniversary of the war should be fifty years when the war officially ended rather than when it started. Whether the dating and nomemclature is contested, what is evident is that the war is a momentus event in the political history of Nigeria whose story cannot be effectively discussed without attempts at genuine reconcilliation and healing of past wrongs done in the attempt to keep Nigeria as one indivisible entity,” he said.

According to him, “The authors subjectively input opinions, either of themselves, or others, but they also try to balance the arguments emanating from across the political divides regarding the outcome of the civil war. Drawing on opinions rather than facts is usually subjective depending on who is projecting the narrative. The victors in any war have tales of victory and triumph while the victims and the victims have tales of woes and destruction. What cannot be denied, however, is that both the victor and the victim all suffer enormous casualities during the course of the war. As much as possible, the author(s) attempt to refute many claims in public discurse by Igbo ethnic group, as victims of the war, who were on the receiving end of the brutality of the war.

“The narrative that the igbo ethnic group continues to suffer the consequences of the war after fifthy years continue to cause disharmony among other Nigerians. Therefore, they counter the various arguments that as much as possible, other tribes have been more accommodating to the igbos than they are of other tribes. For instance, in repudiating some claims, the author(s) put on a subjective opinion where they are equally guilty of the same bias.

He said that the authors bias showed when they stated that  “‘While most tribes are tolerant and accommodating of them as Nigerians, they the Igbos are not as tolerant of others in Igboland. And the abrasiveness and insensitivities of Igbo communities to indigenous customs and tradition outside Igbo land is usually a source of friction”, adding that “This assertion cannot in any way be justified as it only fuels errorneous conception about a group of people whose offense is agitation for self-governance during a period when they are perceived as targets.”

Eghagha said that like many other narratives on the Nigerian Civil war, eye-witness accounts, fictionalised depictions of the horrors of the war, the book also contends that the story of the war cannot be fully told without attempt at reconcilliation on all sides.

“If we want truth, justice and genuine reconcilliation in Nigeria, the whole story of the war must be told including breaches and infractions of the rules of war by the Nigeria and Biafran troops who were no saints in their conduct in the Midwest and within the minority of the Southeast,” he quoted the authors as saying.

The Biafra civil war has always been described as the deadliest of its type in Africa, having taken the lives of more than two million people.

According to Eghagha, “the civil war was not a pleasant experience as codes of interpersonal behaviour were suspended. Anyone who has gone through a war cannot hope for another, kids in war zone lose their childhood”

Chris Ogiemwonyi, chairman of the occasion,  described the book as a proof that war should never be an option of settling national differences.

According to Ogiemwonyi, “There is a Benin proverb that translates to ‘War is never beautiful’. Those asking for war or the country’s separation should always remember that proverb. We should never pray for war regardless of any situation we find ourselves.”

He said that “various accounts of the Nigeria civil war from warlords, politicians and eye-witnesses was read by us. I was also a witness to the civil war as a form three student in 1967.

“The book mentioned a time in Nigeria when tribalism was not there. This was when a Delta man will run for Kano state House of Representatives as well as a River state man running for Kaduna House of Representative,” he said.

In his remark, Abure, who urged all Nigerian to read the book as well as give feedbacks, added that the sole objective of the book is to create a better Nigeria in unity.