
Politics
What Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe said about Ojukwu and his role in Biafra
FROM THE ARCHIVES
Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe’s Opinion of the Biafran Leader, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu and his diplomatic roles to resolve the face off between Nigeria and Biafra.
Excerpts from the interview Zik of Africa granted to New Nigerian Newspapers, 1979, as Presidential aspirant under the platform of Nigerian People’s Party.
“Yes. I played a prominent role in Biafra for the unity of the country in order to restore peace and bring about unity of the country. That’s the role I played. I advised Ojukwu. I said well look, you have declared secession.
What we should do is to get the elder statesmen and women of the nation to reconcile you and Gowon. I said by declaring secession, you get so many people who do not believe you to remain there.
You see all of us were interned. As we were interned then, we couldn’t express our own views as we see it because, he made Decree Number 5 which vested absolute powers in himself and if you were against his views, it then constituted an act of subversion and the penalty was death by shooting.
Well, it was a war-time measure and that is understandable. So, I advised him. I said go to the conference table and iron out your differences. Allow elder statesmen and elder stateswomen to bring the two of you to the conference table and settle this matter so that there will no more be civil war and the country may be united. He agreed. But Gowon was advised by the Ministry of External Affairs to insist on pre-conditions .
That is that before he could negotiate with the secessionists, that they must accept certain terms; accept the 12-state structure and all. So, it was quite obvious that the Federal Government wanted Biafra to come to the conference table with their hands tied and their feet tied. But they won’t be free agents.

That was the diplomatic mistake on the part of the Federal Government. So, when they did that, then Lt- Col. Ojukwu told me, “How can I go to the conference table based on these ultimatums?”
Still I advised Ojukwu to go to the OAU and ask them to use their good offices to settle the dispute and that we should avoid loss of lives. He accepted my advice in good faith.
Then he said, ‘Now, you have some heads of state in Africa who are your friends, would you mind going to appeal to them to use their good offices so that the Nigerian civil war could be an item on the agenda for OAU summit in Kinshasa?’ I said I would gladly go. So he sent me to Monrovia as a peace envoy.
I went there and met my friend, President Tubman. Tubman expressed his willingness to use his good offices. He told me he would see another mutual friend, the late Haile Sellassie, Emperor of Ethiopia, and both of them would see that the civil war was placed as first item on the agenda of the OAU Summit in Kinshasa.
I returned and broke the news to Ojukwu. He was very pleased.
Then, when the OAU summit opened, Chief Awolowo, as Vice-Chairman of the Federal Executive Council and Commissioner for Finance, led a strong Nigerian delegation to Kinshasa and raised a very strong objective on the Nigerian civil war being placed as an item on the agenda on the grounds that according to the OAU Charter, this was a domestic affairs and member states were precluded from interfering in the domestic affairs of each other, which was really sound according to international law.
But we wanted to solve it in the African way, to use mediation and conciliation to bring two warring brothers together.
The OAU accepted the submission of Chief Awolowo and so it was not put into the agenda. Well, history will show now between Chief Awolowo and myself, who actually accentuated the war. I was trying to get the OAU to settle the dispute so they could go to the conference table and he was thinking of legalism, that it would amount to interference in the domestic affairs of a member-state.
But meanwhile here you have two brothers killing each other.Well, Ojukwu told me, I have done my best. You see, Nigeria was relying on law and we are relying on humanity.
What’s next? I said why not try other heads of states and see what could be done to bring about peace? He then said he left the initiative with me. I suggested going to some heads of state and see what can be done. But his advisers led by Dr. Nwakama Okoro suggested recognition.
That if we can get other states to recognize Biafra, maybe the hands of Nigeria may be forced to go to the conference table.
Well, I thought that was a sound idea and I placed my services at their disposal so as to meet my friends.
We had in mind President Senghor of Senegal, President Houphouet Boigny of Ivory Coast, President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, President Milton Obote of Uganda, President Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia and of course Francois Bongo, he is now Omar. He now has become a Muslim. He was then a Christian.
The long and short of it all was that I and these great African statesmen agreed that if Gowon persisted with pre-conditions, then they would accord recognition to force the hands of Gowon to go to the conference table and bring about peace.
That was one.
Two, Gowon had already predicted that the war would end on March 31 and as far as these African statesmen were concerned, these killings and atrocities did not do any credit to the image of Africa and as such what should be done was to stop it as soon as possible.
Therefore if the war didn’t end by March 31, then the propaganda of ‘Biafra’ that it was an act of genocide would be justified. And they didn’t want to accept that.
I went on this mission and succeeded in persuading these heads of state to agree to give recognition just to force the hands of Nigeria, diplomatically speaking, to the conference table.
President Senghor said he couldn’t because the majority of his supporters were Muslims and rightly or wrongly they felt it was a religious war. And he said well, if he granted recognition, then his government would fall.
But he supported the idea of forcing the hands of Nigeria to the conference table. Houphouet Boigny was prepared, provided his people backed him. Ditto for the others except Milton Obote who told us that Prince Mutesa and the Bagandans wanted to secede and he couldn’t support secession when his own state was confronted with similar problems. It left four of them.
That is, President Nyerere, Houphouet Boigny, Kaunda and Bongo. They agreed on the understanding that the war did not end by March 31, 1968 and pre-conditions would be removed to make it easy for both Ojukwu and Gowon to go to conference table.
So they granted recognition and it worked like magic because immediately after this, Dr. Okoi Arikpo, who must be presumed to be responsible for this diplomatic blunder (he was the Commissioner for External Affairs]—a good man no doubt, but he is a very poor diplomat in my own humble opinion – announced to the outside world that Nigeria would no longer insist on pre-conditions and that he was prepared for conference table but the war did not end on March 31 and so, they left the impression, you see, that Nigeria wanted to annihilate the Ibos.
You noticed the Soviets gave Nigeria more arms and Nigeria used those arms to destroy the secessionists. Here, I came in again and I advised Ojukwu. I said look since Gowon has withdrawn the pre-conditions, go to the conference table and argue the points so as to pave way for a peace conference.
It was agreed that they should meet in Niamey. I advised Ojukwu to go. Again Gowon was ill-advised so he couldn’t come.
At Niamey here was Ojukwu. I was on his side. Gowon wasn’t there but Haile Sellassie, Hamani Diori, Tubman and General Akran were there representing OAU. So, I told Ojukwu, I said now you have an upper hand.
These respected leaders of the OAU were there. I had briefed Ojukwu. I said ‘look your line of approach is to express appreciation for what the OAU was doing in order to maintain peace in Africa but you were prepared to co-operate and you are leaving the whole matter in the hands of the OAU to see what could be done to bring an earlier cessation of hostilities.
I said just say that and thank them and sit down.Now Gowon didn’t attend. He sent a junior man, I think Alhaji Femi Okunnu or so, to represent him. And they didn’t even attend this conference at which the four heads of state presided. It was only the Biafran side.
So Ojukwu won a diplomatic victory and you know Ojukwu is a very good speaker if you give him all the facts. He was a good public relations expert and he won. He said, ‘well if Gowon was sincere why did he spite such great men and didn’t attend?’ That worked.
They agreed that Nigeria could be contacted so that we have a peace conference in Addis Ababa. It was a diplomatic victory for Biafra and so we returned to Biafra highly elated. And Ojukwu insisted that I should accompany him to Addis Ababa.
Then something happened. Some of his advisers felt that I was becoming a victim of compromise and that I was a bad influence. That all I was trying to do was to make Biafra impotent. They told Ojukwu that Biafra was holding its own militarily. And why should we want a peace conference?
That he should be very, very careful with me, especially as an Onitsha man because they thought that I was using him as a means to give publicity for myself internationally and that time will come when people will look more to me than to himself.
Well, as a young man, human, he fell for such flattery. I don’t want to mention all the names, but particularly influential in swinging his opinion at that material time was Mr. C. C. Mojekwu, who was based in Lisbon. Then Mr. Matthew Mbu was our Commissioner for External Affairs and he himself did as much as possible, but then he realized that he was having someone who has power of life and death over everybody.
So, we went to Addis Ababa and on the night before the conference, Matthew came to my bedroom at about 10 in the night. He said, “Do you know that all we have done, this man is going to undo them tomorrow?’ I said ‘No’. Then he brought out a printed version of a long speech.
The world press said it lasted for 90 minutes.
He [Ojukwu] went back on everything we discussed. He attacked the United Kingdom, the United States, the Soviet Union – all the nations of the world and the OAU, and said that they were misleading us and that the sovereignty of ‘Biafra’ was not negotiable.
We went to the conference. I sat next to him. I thought that he was going to speak in accordance with the spirit of Niamey. But he spoke for 90 minutes and he just got the whole place upside down.
Naturally, Tony Enahoro – he led the Nigerian delegation – replied in kind and so we were back to square one. So, when we returned, I advised him. I told him that I was surprised at what he did but it was not late. He said, ‘The sovereignty of Biafra is not negotiable and if anybody should try to compromise that sovereignty, then it will be an act of subversion.’
Well, that was quite clear to me so I said, ‘Your Excellency, you still have Port Harcourt and you can still bargain from position of strength – after all, the main issue in the civil war is oil and they say that in international politics, oil is combustible and as you have a combustible situation you can begin from the position of strength’. He said, ‘No, Port Harcourt is impregnable.’ ‘Very well, Your Excellency,’ I said. I went back to Nekede where I had been in protective custody since February, 1968. Two weeks later, Port Harcourt fell.
He sent for me. I said, ‘Well, Your Excellency, I did warn you. You cannot now negotiate from a position of strength but having received recognition from four states, we can still use them to see what we can do to appeal to the outside world.’ He said, ‘Very well, I think you should go to the United Nations to seek for recognition.’ I said, ‘Your Excellency, let us wait until after OAU summit in Algiers and find out what Africa thinks.’ In the meantime, I went to Tunisia to see my friend Habeeb Bourguiba of Tunisia. He wasn’t quite well, so we moved from Carthage to Hermit where he stayed. Ojukwu had always said the civil war would be won on the battlefield and not on the conference table, and Bourguiba didn’t take kindly to that. He said don’t you people advise this young man? I explained to him that I have done everything I could to advise him, but he insists on going to the battle field.
So we crossed our fingers awaiting the verdict of Algiers. You know it was decided by 33 to 4 in favour of Nigeria. I advised Ojukwu that to go to the United Nations to seek recognition would be unrealistic since Africa had decided by 33 to 4 in favour of Nigeria. I said Nigerian envoys, the Nigerian delegations, would just percolate the membership of the United Nations and they would frown at the whole thing. He insisted. I was then in Paris. I wrote him a letter. I said,
‘Since you refuse to go to the conference table to negotiate for peace, since you prefer that the civil war should end on the battle field and not on the conference table; since you said that the sovereignty of Biafra is not negotiable, I am afraid I cannot continue as a peace envoy because you have destroyed all the vestiges of any optimism for peace.
Therefore I am relieving myself of my services as a peace envoy. I cannot continue as a peace envoy. I cannot continue as a peace envoy because you have let me down. You left me under the impression that if I succeeded in getting recognition you will go to the conference table. You got four recognitions; you did not go to the conference table. I am therefore going to London on exile.’
I went to London in voluntary exile and the British government granted me asylum. I do not see how anybody could say that I ran away from my country.
I crossed the Atlantic 46 times, trying to negotiate with various heads of state so that they could grant recognition or make OAU to settle the dispute. How could the head of state turn round now and accuse all those who were politicians in pre-1966 and post-1966 as being responsible for the downfall of the republic?
I did my best to preserve the unity of Nigeria and also to preserve the lives of old men, able-bodied men and women and children but I failed. What could I do? I went on free exile and they keep saying that I was among those responsible for the downfall of the republic. I plead not guilty”.

Politics
Dr. David Olofu Emerges ADC Senatorial Candidate for Benue South Ahead of 2027 Elections
OTUKPO – Former Benue State Commissioner for Finance, Dr. David Olofu, has emerged as the African Democratic Congress senatorial flagbearer for Benue South Senatorial District ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Dr. Olofu emerged as the consensus candidate of the party following primaries conducted across the nine local government areas of the district. His candidature was formally affirmed in Otukpo on Sunday.
Declaring the result, the ADC Returning Officer, Barr. Ogah Ekwu, said Dr. Olofu satisfied all constitutional requirements of the party and was unanimously endorsed across the zone.

“Dr. Olofu, having met all the requirements of the constitution of the party, is hereby returned as the sole candidate and duly elected ADC senatorial candidate for Benue South,” Ekwu stated.
In his acceptance remarks, Dr. Olofu described his emergence as a collective victory for the people of Benue South. He pledged to run an inclusive leadership that accommodates every interest and stakeholder in the district.

He stated that representation for the zone “shall no longer be a one-man show,” and announced plans to establish a “Benue South People’s Assembly” and a “Benue South People’s Council” to deepen consultation, unity, and collective decision-making.

The former commissioner said the protection of lives and communities would be his top priority if elected, noting that insecurity had continued to cripple the agricultural strength and economic potential of the district.
“As outlined in my blueprint, my first charge shall be the protection of our people. This will begin with restoring security to our communities and unlocking the full potential of our agricultural economy,” he said.
Dr. Olofu outlined his vision as building “a secure Benue South where lives and livelihoods are protected, a productive economy where agriculture and enterprise thrive, a strong educational system that prepares our children for the future, infrastructure that connects our communities and unlocks opportunities, and a government that is accountable, responsive, and people-centred.”
He assured party faithful that no bloc would be sidelined and stressed that unity, inclusion, and purposeful representation would define his senatorial ambition.
The declaration was witnessed by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission, security agencies, and members of the press.

Politics
Imo North chooses experience: Araraume’s primary election win and what it means, By Sufuyan Ojeifo
In politics, some victories are wins. Others are reaffirmations.
Senator Ifeanyi Araraume’s decisive victory in the APC senatorial primary for Imo North, winning across all 54 wards, falls in the second category. At a time when political loyalties shift quickly, the outcome sent a message beyond party mechanics: some structures aren’t built for one election cycle. They’re built over decades through relationships, consistency, and a real grassroots presence.
For his supporters, the ticket was secondary. The vote reaffirmed a political force whose relevance has survived changing governments, shifting alliances, and repeated attempts to sideline him.
In Imo politics, Araraume has become rare: a politician whose staying power doesn’t depend solely on holding office. He has remained visible and active across Imo North, not as the campaign-only candidate who vanishes after elections. His machinery endures because it was built outside electoral convenience.
That durability rests on three pillars: deep grassroots networks, institutional experience, and strategic calculation.
Those foundations first brought him national prominence when he was elected to the Senate in 1999 under the PDP and re-elected in 2003. In the Senate, he chaired the Committee on Power and Steel, served as Vice Chairman of the Niger Delta and Culture and Tourism committees, and led the Southern Senators Forum. His tenure produced tangible projects, including the transmission line from Alaoji to Okigwe and the inclusion of Imo and Abia in the Niger Delta Development Commission.

His influence extended beyond the National Assembly. As a Commissioner at the Nigerian Communications Commission, he was part of the team that oversaw Nigeria’s telecoms liberalisation. Later, as Non-Executive Chairman of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited under President Muhammadu Buhari, he reinforced his standing in national policy circles.
But his core base remains the grassroots. Across Imo North, Araraume has maintained a structure that has survived multiple party configurations. While many politicians rely on incumbency, his influence has repeatedly shown it can survive outside office.
That resilience was tested in 2007. After winning the PDP governorship primary, he was excluded from the ballot. He challenged it in court and won at the Supreme Court, an outcome that cemented his reputation as a politician who doesn’t yield easily. To many supporters, he became a symbol of endurance.
He has remained a recurring force since. His 2019 governorship run under APGA again forced opponents to recalibrate. Political observers have predicted his decline for years, yet each cycle returns him to the centre of the conversation.
Rumours that he had stepped down from the senatorial race collapsed when APC party members voted. For many in Imo North, his emergence felt less like an upset than the restoration of a familiar order.
Araraume’s style aids his longevity. He’s not a flamboyant populist. His approach is measured, strategic, and focused on timing and structure. Those who mistake his composure for weakness often underestimate a veteran tactician.
Beyond Imo State, his likely return to the National Assembly is seen as a boost for experienced legislative engagement. Supporters argue his years in national politics and his network position him to play a stabilising role as Nigeria’s governance landscape evolves.
For Imo North, the calculation is simpler: they see a familiar figure with the experience and connections to attract federal attention and development to the zone. That expectation explains why his influence has endured.
In a system where relevance often fades quickly, Araraume has remained. Others rise and vanish. He stays.
With this primary election win, Imo North has signalled that experience and structure still command respect in Nigerian politics. After decades in the arena, Araraume retains the rare ability to return to the centre of relevance when many assume the story is over.
■ Sufuyan Ojeifo is a journalist and publisher.

Politics
PDP suspends Enugu Guber Aspirant over alleged anti-party activities
A governorship aspirant on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Samson Chukwu Nnamani has been suspended by the party.
The Advocate reports that his suspension, endorsed by all the members of the State Working Committee, SWC, was announced in a report dated May 22, 2026.
The development leaves former minister, Chief Uche Nnaji as the sole aspirant for the party’s ticket in Enugu State.
Nnamani, popularly known as Odera was accused of launching unwarranted attacks against party leaders, as well as other anti-party activities.
He was earlier disqualified from participating in the PDP primaries.
Nnamani is being accused of conduct considered detrimental to the unity, image and integrity of the party.

According to the report, “The disciplinary process leading to his suspension began with a formal petition dated 20th May 2026 written by Hon. Edeh Peter Chibuike, a former Councillor representing Ward 3 Akpugo in Nkanu West Local Government Area of Enugu State. In the petition addressed to the Chairman of the PDP in Enugu State, the petitioner accused Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani of engaging in actions capable of bringing the party into disrepute, hatred and public contempt contrary to the provisions of the PDP Constitution 2017 (as amended).
“Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani allegedly made and widely circulated negative publications against fellow PDP governorship aspirant, Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji. The petitioner further alleged that the publications not only attacked Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji personally but also criticized the party for clearing him to contest on the platform of the PDP. The petitioner stated that the publications were circulated to notable party members including the South East Zonal Secretary of the PDP, Hon. Ahumibe Michael C., and Hon. Obiora Ugwu among others.
“The petition maintained that the actions of Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani contravened Sections 58(1)(b), (f) and (h) of the PDP Constitution 2017 (as amended), which deal with acts capable of undermining the party, creating disaffection within the party and exposing the party to ridicule and hatred. The petitioner therefore urged the party leadership to suspend Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani and refer him to the appropriate disciplinary organs of the party for further sanctions.
“Following the receipt of the petition, the PDP Enugu State Chapter convened an Expanded Emergency State Working Committee meeting and formally invited Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani to appear before the committee to defend himself against the allegations contained in the petition.
“In a letter dated 21st May 2026 and signed by the State Secretary of the party, Hon. Chukwunonye Okereke, Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani was invited to attend the emergency meeting scheduled for Friday, 22nd May 2026 at the residence of the State Chairman of the party, Hon. Vitus Okechi, located at Okechi Estate opposite ANAMCO, Emene, Enugu.
“The invitation letter stated clearly that the purpose of the meeting was to give him the opportunity to respond to the allegations leveled against him by Hon. Peter Chibuike Edeh. A copy of the petition was attached to the invitation letter for his attention and response.
“However, during the meeting held on 22nd May 2026, the Expanded Emergency State Working Committee noted that Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani failed to honour the invitation despite evidence showing that the letter had been successfully delivered to him through a courier service company.
“After deliberations and preliminary hearing on the matter, the committee resolved that the publications and actions of Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani were made in bad faith and were intended to portray the PDP negatively before the public while creating internal division within the party ahead of the 2027 governorship election in Enugu State.
“The committee further held that his refusal to appear before the party to defend himself amounted to acceptance of the allegations contained in the petition and demonstrated disregard for the authority and disciplinary structures of the party.
Consequently, the Expanded State Working Committee resolved as follows:
“That the publications made and circulated by Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani against fellow governorship aspirant, Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji, were capable of bringing the party into hatred, contempt and disrepute.
“That his conduct contravened Sections 58(1)(a), (b), (f) and (h) of the PDP Constitution 2017 (as amended). 3. That his refusal to honour the invitation extended to him by the party despite confirmed proof of delivery was condemnable and amounted to an admission of the allegations against him.
“That in line with Section 57(3) of the PDP Constitution 2017 (as amended), Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani be suspended from the party for a period of one month with effect from 22nd May 2026.
“That he be referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the party for further investigation and necessary disciplinary measures in accordance with Sections 57(4) and 57(5) of the PDP Constitution 2017 (as amended).
“Following the resolution, the PDP Enugu State Chapter inaugurated a seven-man disciplinary committee headed by Barr. Emeka Abah to further investigate the allegations against Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani and recommend additional disciplinary actions where necessary. The party leadership emphasized that the decision was taken in the interest of party discipline, unity, internal democracy and the protection of the integrity of the PDP in Enugu State as preparations intensify ahead of the 2027 governorship election.
“The suspension of Chief Samson Chukwu Nnamani has since generated political reactions within the state, with many party faithful viewing the action a strong signal by the PDP leadership that acts capable of causing division, disunity and public embarrassment within the party would not be tolerated irrespective of the status of those involved.”

-
News3 days agoSupreme Court restrains FG from controlling waterfront lands in states, voids parts of NIWA Act
-
News3 days agoDISCLAIMER: NDC disowns John Paul Anih
-
International2 days agoSuspect killed after firing shots near White House security checkpoint in US, Secret Service says
-
News3 days agoNigeria receives 497 migrants evacuated from Niger
-
News15 hours agoTinubu congratulates Rangers International after ninth NPFL title win
-
News2 days agoHow Businessman Lucky Adimike was stabbed to death by his son – Sources
-
News15 hours agoAkani Landlords in Enugu raise alarm over alleged encroachment, urge buyers to exercise caution
-
Uncategorized1 day agoTerrorists kidnap 10, raid police station, raze Kwara emir’s palace


