Before The Coups: Gowon’s Account Of An Alleged Plot To Tilt Nigeria’s 1964 Political Deadlock
New Memoir Claims Military Officers Considered Intervention During Nigeria’s 1964 Political Crisis
A Revelation from Nigeria’s First Republic
FRESH excerpts from the memoir of former Head of State, Yakubu Gowon, have reopened historical discussions surrounding the political crisis that followed Nigeria’s disputed 1964 federal elections.
In My Life of Duty and Allegiance, Gowon recounts what he describes as an encounter with senior military officers who were allegedly considering ways to intervene in the bitter political confrontation between President Nnamdi Azikiwe and Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa.
The episode, as narrated by Gowon, occurred at a time when Nigeria’s young democracy was struggling under the weight of intense regional rivalries, constitutional uncertainty and mounting political distrust.
The Political Deadlock of 1964
The crisis followed the federal elections of December 1964, one of the most contentious electoral contests in Nigeria’s early history.
Political tensions escalated when disagreements emerged over the formation of government and the constitutional responsibilities of the president and prime minister. The dispute quickly evolved into a broader contest for political influence between powerful regional blocs represented by Azikiwe and Balewa.
According to Gowon’s account, concerns over the growing deadlock prompted discussions among some military officers about whether the armed forces should play a role in resolving the crisis.
He specifically identified Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, Colonel Victor Banjo and Lieutenant Colonel David Ejoor as participants in a conversation that allegedly explored possible military involvement.
Gowon’s Account of the Meeting
Gowon recalled unexpectedly entering Ojukwu’s office while searching for Ejoor on official military business.
What initially appeared to be an ordinary visit soon evolved into a discussion about the deteriorating political situation in the country.
According to the memoir, Ojukwu and Banjo argued that the military might eventually be blamed if it remained passive while the constitutional crisis deepened.
Gowon interpreted the discussion as an attempt to build support for military action that would favour Azikiwe in the unfolding political contest.
The former military leader suggested that those involved may have been seeking a coalition of officers representing Nigeria’s major regions to create the appearance of a broad-based national intervention.
As a northern officer, Gowon believed his participation would have provided crucial legitimacy to such an effort.
Loyalty, Constitutional Order and Military Tradition
A central theme running through Gowon’s recollection is his insistence that the military should remain subordinate to constitutional authority.
He argued that any intervention designed to strengthen Azikiwe’s position would have represented a departure from accepted military principles.
In Gowon’s interpretation, the parliamentary system operating at the time clearly recognised Balewa as the substantive head of government, while Azikiwe occupied a largely ceremonial presidency.
For that reason, he said he viewed any proposed intervention in favour of the president as constitutionally questionable.
More importantly, he feared that what appeared to be support for a civilian political figure could ultimately mask broader military ambitions.
The question he posed in hindsight was whether the proposal represented genuine support for Azikiwe or the early contours of a military coup.
Revisiting the Road to Military Rule
The significance of Gowon’s revelation extends beyond the individuals involved.
Historians have long debated the extent to which sections of the military became politically engaged before the January 1966 coup that ended the First Republic.
The memoir contributes to that debate by suggesting that discussions about military intervention may have emerged months before the collapse of civilian rule.
Whether interpreted as preventive action, political activism or constitutional guardianship, such conversations reflected the growing frustration within sections of the armed forces as Nigeria’s political crisis deepened.
A Historical Debate Rekindled
The publication of Gowon’s memoir has renewed interest in one of the most consequential periods in Nigerian history.
Supporters of Gowon’s interpretation may view the account as evidence of his commitment to constitutional order, while critics are likely to question aspects of the narrative and compare it with other historical records from the period.
What remains undeniable is that the events of 1964 helped shape the trajectory of modern Nigeria, setting the stage for military intervention, political instability and eventually the Nigerian Civil War.
More than six decades later, competing memories of those turbulent years continue to shape debates about power, nationhood and the unfinished story of Nigeria’s First Republic.
