The Irony of Nzegwu Kaduna: A Different perspective from a Younger Generation Northerner

By Muhammad Kabir Yusuf

“He was a man full of life, and he obviously wanted to live a full life; but he saw no contradiction in denying others theirs when according to him, they stood in the way of national progress. That was the irony….” Obasonjo

Nzegwu Kaduna Chukwuma

Nzegwu Kaduna Chukwuma was the young military officer who permanently changed the cause of the political history of Nigeria. The guy is being remembered in the East as a hero for an attempt on an abortive coup d'etat which favors the Igbo people.


In Northern part of Nigeria Nzegwu’s name is synonym to betrayal, remembered for having assassinated the northern premier, the Sardauna of Sokoto, Sir Ahmadu Bello, the then Governor of the Northern Region who stood to the northerners as the statue of the very core essence of the progress of the North.

In between the two extreme ends of the continuum, with Nzegwu the hero at one end and Nzegwu the villain at the other lie a lot of contradictions and confusions that make Nzegwu’s actions of 15^th January 1966 a recurring theme for 44 years now and may continue to be so throughout the future of the Nigerian history. The same is the reason why the topic will always stir up emotions, feelings and comments from different viewpoints and perspectives.

The Nzegwu of Obasonjo and the Rest of them...

When I read the last line in the book Nzegwu authored by OlusegunObasonjo former military president (1972-1979) and first published in 1986, the first question that came to my mind is the reason why Obasonjo had to document the biography of that “enigmatic” young man. It is difficult to establish that Obasonjo wrote as the fellow citizen of Nigeria who has the most comprehensive information about Nzegwu the fellow countrymen need to know. It is though not clear whether he was compelled by indebtedness to his citizenship or to his friendship to write about Nzegwu, but very important in understanding the limits of the emotions involved not in stating the facts but in analyzing them and putting them in a proper perspective for the young generation of Nigerians to fully appreciate the cause of events that shape their today’s life and future history.

The truth of the matter is that elements of both indebtednesses are evident with varying degreesof prominence from the pages, lines and between the lines of Obasonjo’s Nzegwu. From time to time, Obasonjo slips from his track of stating the facts about Nzegwu into eulogizing him which sometimes makes him sound like a friend trying to appease the ghost of his friend.

In fact, after Obasojo stated all his facts to the point of Nzegwu’s burial, he seems to dedicate several pages in Nzegwu’s praise singing; something that can easily pass in today’s Nigerian literature as Obasonjo’s Anthology in Eulogizing Nzegwu.

In the quest to fully appreciate what good will Obasonjo’s book contribute in younger generation’s understanding of the past history of their nation and which has a direct bearing on their today’s situation and their future history we look at Obasonjo’sNzegwu and this is what we come up with as his analysis of the inner workings of the person fondly reffered to as "enigma": “Chukwuma was not by nature a violent man. He subordinated his life to his profession. It was this ability to suppress sentiment and his tremendous will power that determined the course of action which he knew as obviously dangerous. But he was prepared to go through the danger in his determination to rescue Nigeria from drift and divisive politics. He played for high stake and gambled with his own future and eventually his life”.

It is not a sin for a person to sing as melodiously as Obasonjo sounded in the above quotation for a deceased friend. But in the case of Nzegwu about whom every single word especially in relation to the last two years of his life is of national interest and importance one needs to down play his emotions and produce the intelligent and coherent account of what one believed happened and lead to other happenings in the way they will help in the general understanding of events.

What Nzegwu Called “Revolution”

What Nzegwu called "revolution” was the first conceived and executed coup d'etat in Nigeria. Several Nigerians of high standing lost their lives. These include among others; Sir Abubakar TafawaBalewa, the Prime Minister, Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Governor of Northern Region; the Sardauna of Sokoto and his wife, Brigadier Ademulegun and his wife and Colonel Shodende.

Going by the then recently concluded Congo Operation under the auspice of the United Nations Peace Keeping Army in which Nzegwu –the master minder of the coup-  came face-to-face with the realities that made him to develop Pan-Africanism, put together with his addiction to reading revolution materials such as The Rise and Fall of Mongolian Empire, Kama Sutra: A People’s War, UK Battle Group Précis, the mention of some of which appeared more than once in his letters while in Prison, so also his known personality traits,  youthful exuberance, the respect Nzegwu commands in the Army as fuelled by the divisive direction the then political scene in the country, all these might had contributed to Nzegwu’s conception of a possible "revolution".

As once described by a senior officer in a report, Nzegwu “is young officer in a hurry”. This might had clouded his understanding the fact that the country and the people were not ready for revolution. Not even in 2010 when things are what they are Nigerians show any sign or readiness for revolution. If there is any lesson to learn from Nzegwu’s action in relation to revolution, is the fact that revolution is never possible with the help of friends with whom one shares the same common goals and differs in the details of the execution and purpose, but with loyalists whom one made to have faith in one’s goals and train on the details and purpose of the execution. And that exactly what Nzegwu failed to understand.

Nzegwu conceived a revolution which was badly and tribalistically executed. In his words, Nzegwu captured this reality: “Tribal considerations were completely out of our mind at this stage (conceptual stage). But we had a setback in the execution. Both of us in the North (himself and Major T. C. Onwutuegwu) did our best. But the other three who were stationed in the South failed because of incompetency and misguided (tribal) considerations in the eleventh hour. The most senior among them (Major Emmanuel Ifeajuna) was in charge of a whole brigade and had all the excuse and the opportunity in the world to mobilize his troops anywhere, anyhow and anytime. He did it badly, in Lagos, even allowing for one or two genuine mistakes. The job was badly done. The Mid-West was ever a big problem. But in the East, our major target, nothing practically was done. He and the others let us down”.

That was what happened according to Nzegwu and there seem no difference between Nzegwu’s claim and the reality in the ground. What Nzegwu probably, didn’t mention is the way in which the senior military opportunists officers used the opportunity of his abortive ill-conceived and ill-executed “revolution” as a fertile ground to tear Nigeria apart through tribalistic appointments, coups and counter coups, attempted secession and cling to the name of Nzegwu using the name as a scapegoat.

Changing Positions

Nzegwu died on the 29^th July 1967 fighting at the side of the Biafran army.  Known for his nationalistic sentiments and quoting his statement in an interview in 1967, in which he said: “Personally, I don’t like secession. And if this country disintegrates, I shall pack up my thing and go”, fairness demands that we assume that it is not very clear why Nzegwu joined the Biafran Army in fighting against the national Army. Until today, there is no any intelligent and coherent account given to us which will reconcile between Nzegwu’s nationalistic sentiments in one hand, and his joining the ranks with Ojwuku to fight the cause of Biafra in the other . This I suppose is what we need to hear from the eye witnesses of Nzegwu’s life; people like Obasonjo, instead of just creating a hero or a villain out of Nzegwu.

Whereas the young generation is denied that information and all they got to hear is the fact that Nzegwu is an “enigma”, this necessitates making deductions using the facts that are crystal clear to arrive at the ones that are not.

When Nzegwu died on 29^th July and was declared missing, very little or no effort was made by the Biafran troops to trace his corps for which reason the body lied there for two days and began to decompose.  This action of the Biafran troops towards his corps is loud enough a voice to communicate something. Equally loud enough is the action of the national troops when they traced the corps in a slight state of decomposition on 31^st July two days after his death. In the following lines, Obasonjo briefed us on what happened: “The federal troops in full appreciation of Chukwuma’s well-known nationalistic feelings recovered his body, took it to Kaduna and buried him at military cemetery there. For some time, news of his death was concealed from his family, especially his mother by the Biafran officials, who regularly brought presents to the family in his name. The family was told not believe Radio Kaduna report of Chukwuma’s death. No formal information of his death was given to any member of his family and his mother only presumed him death when he failed to turn up at the end of the war”.

When Nzegwu was buried in Kaduna in August 1967, the Biafran army, within the ranks of whom Nzegwu was fighting, was still considered rebel. The Biafran army didn’t surrender until some 28 months later. Giving Nzegwu a befitting burial in military terms and by the federal troops was either contradictory to the fact that he was one of the rebels and was the assassin of Sardauna or else the atmosphere in the federal troops at that time was not ethnically charged as it is being presented to us today. Apparently, Nzegwu was up to that time considered by the federal troops then dominated by the northerners as a hero; an exact opposite of what was the case in the East, at least, among top officials of the Igbo Biafran people. It is also a possibility that the East tried to get rid of him or even actually did given the hostility between him and Ojukwu few days before the civil war due to Nzegu’s refusal to dance to Ojukwu’s tune. It is also a possibility that he himself sensed the gravity of the danger surrounding him for which he wrote to Obasonjo on 17^th June 1967 (only 12 days to his death) telling him that the only reason why he was not imprisoned again by Ojukwu was because Ojwukwu was afraid of the repercussion.

This is all in one hand. On the other hand, the question goes as follows; from what time does the Northern Nigeria begin to remember Nzegwu as a villain and at what time doest the East began to remember him as a hero and why?  Who orchestrated the whole thing? Whose interest is being served by dividing Nigerians along ethnic line over a person who happened to be a participant in one of the stations of the historical development of our nation?  What is the connection of the second republic politicians in this divide and rule game? What is the connection of Nzegwu’s opportunists contemporaries who survived the course of events and continue to benefit from the whole thing to date? 

To put it straight, Nzegwu assassinated Sardauna in January 1966 and himself died in July 1967 barely a year and few months later. Both were and are still national icons. Why should Nigerians be made to continue to hate one another in a claim to depend the past national icons? Is it not yet time to realize that dividing Nigerians along this tribalistic line in the name of Nzegwu and Sardauna is much less important (if it is important at all) than the cause of the national progress of Nigeria?

Poor Sardauna and other victims, that they were sacrificed for an imaginary better Nigeria. Poor Nzegwu that none of his dreams become true and that he is continuosly being used as a scapegoat, poor Nigeria, that after being hijacked and raped by the opportunists, the truth is never told to the young generation.