Nigeria’s Unfinished Civil War Reckoning: Nwafor Demands Recognition For Victims & Veterans
By NWAFOR AZINGE
A Call to Remember Every Victim
A 75-year-old Nigerian Civil War veteran, Sasa Ugwumba Kalu Nwoke, popularly known as Corporal Nwafor, has called for the establishment of a Biafra Remembrance Day to honour victims and veterans of the 30-month conflict.
Nwoke made the appeal in Umuahia, Abia State, against the backdrop of the 59th anniversary commemoration of the Asaba massacre, which former President Olusegun Obasanjo chaired.
Although he welcomed the growing recognition of the killings in Asaba, the veteran argued that remembrance should extend beyond one community to include other victims of the war across the former Biafran territory.
He maintained that a broader commemoration would create an opportunity for Nigerians to confront the painful experiences of the conflict, acknowledge the suffering of affected communities and learn from the mistakes that contributed to the tragedy.
For Nwoke, remembering the dead should not be treated as an attempt to reopen old wounds. Rather, he believes that honest engagement with the past is necessary to build a more inclusive society.
He questioned why Nigeria could commemorate atrocities in other parts of the world while remaining reluctant to establish a dedicated day for remembering the victims of the civil war.
According to him, the Asaba memorial should become the starting point for a wider process of historical recognition, including the experiences of people killed in Aba and other communities affected by the conflict.
From Remembrance to National Reconciliation
Nwoke argued that the country could not achieve meaningful reconciliation by avoiding difficult questions about the war.
He maintained that Nigerians should be willing to examine the circumstances that led to the conflict, the atrocities committed during it and the consequences for communities on different sides of the fighting.
He also welcomed the fact that the Asaba massacre was receiving renewed public attention, describing it as an opportunity to begin a broader conversation about the war.
However, he warned against limiting remembrance to occasional ceremonies without a sustained commitment to documenting other experiences and acknowledging historical grievances.
His proposed approach would involve successive steps towards recognising the different communities affected by the conflict. In his view, a comprehensive remembrance programme could help Nigerians understand the scale of the suffering and create room for reconciliation.
Such a process would require historical documentation, public discussion and the participation of survivors, veterans, researchers and affected families. It would also need to distinguish between established evidence, personal testimony and contested interpretations of events.
The objective, Nwoke argued, should be to create an honest account of the past rather than suppress experiences that remain painful or politically sensitive.
A War Whose Purpose Still Raises Questions
The veteran also criticised the decision to fight the civil war, describing it as unnecessary and questioning whether its immense human cost could be justified by the objective of preserving Nigeria’s unity.
He argued that the deaths of thousands of people, including civilians and combatants, demanded serious reflection on the decisions that led the country into conflict.
In his assessment, the military outcome did not resolve the deeper questions surrounding national unity, citizenship and the treatment of communities that experienced the war.
Nwoke therefore called for Nigerians to examine the conflict’s origins and consequences rather than celebrate military victory without considering the human suffering that accompanied it.
His position reflects a broader debate about how countries remember civil wars. Military victory may determine which side controls the state, but it does not automatically settle disputes over justice, belonging or historical responsibility.
For Nigeria, an honest examination of the war would require attention to its political background, the humanitarian crisis, civilian deaths, displacement and the experiences of people who survived the fighting.
It would also require careful historical inquiry rather than relying exclusively on the accounts of one side.
Nwoke said the country should use the lessons of the conflict to identify past mistakes and avoid repeating them.
History Must Reach the Younger Generation
Beyond the proposed remembrance day, Nwoke accused successive governments of failing to give younger Nigerians sufficient access to the country’s history.
He expressed concern that many young people know little about the civil war, the circumstances surrounding it or the contributions of prominent historical figures.
The veteran cited the limited awareness he encountered among young Nigerians about leaders such as Nnamdi Azikiwe and other national figures as evidence of what he considers a wider problem in historical education.
He contrasted that situation with countries where historical landmarks and public institutions help citizens learn about their national experiences.
In his view, Nigeria should do more to preserve historical records, teach the country’s political development and encourage young people to understand the events that shaped their society.
Such efforts would help students examine both the achievements and failures of previous generations. They could also provide a foundation for informed discussions about citizenship, national identity and the responsibilities of leadership.
Historical education, however, must be more than the memorisation of names and dates. It should introduce learners to multiple perspectives, documented evidence and the complex circumstances surrounding major national events.
For the civil war, that means examining the political tensions preceding the conflict, the experiences of civilians, the actions of military leaders and the long-term consequences for communities across Nigeria.
Veterans & the Cost of Being Forgotten
Nwoke also lamented what he described as the neglect of former Biafran combatants, arguing that many veterans had lived and died in poverty without adequate recognition.
He said the absence of meaningful support had left some former fighters feeling abandoned after surviving a conflict that profoundly shaped their lives.
His complaint raises questions about the treatment of veterans whose service does not fit neatly into official narratives of national history. It also highlights the distinction between commemorating a war and providing practical support to those who survived it.
For Nwoke, remembrance should include identifying surviving veterans, documenting their experiences and considering appropriate forms of recognition and welfare assistance.
He also challenged the Igbo community to take greater responsibility for preserving its own history and honouring prominent figures associated with the region’s political and social development. Among those he mentioned were former Biafran leader Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, educationist and statesman Akanu Ibiam, and former Imo State governor Sam Mbakwe.
His appeal suggests that historical preservation should not depend entirely on the Federal Government. Communities, educational institutions, cultural organisations and families can also help protect records and recognise the contributions of their historical figures.
Nevertheless, community-led initiatives need not replace national responsibility. A comprehensive approach could combine public archives, educational programmes, oral-history projects and appropriate support for surviving veterans.
Recalling the Battles Around Umuahia
Reflecting on his wartime experience, Nwoke identified the Uzuakoli sector as one of the fiercest battlefronts he encountered. He recalled that the fighting lasted approximately seven weeks, with two battles reportedly taking place each day.
He also offered his personal assessment of the defence of Umuahia, claiming that three Biafran officers played leading roles in preventing the town from falling during the fighting.
According to his account, Colonel Emeka Ananaba was responsible for 30 per cent of the defence, Colonel Joe Achuzie accounted for 20 per cent, while he himself claimed to have contributed 50 per cent.
The figures represent Nwoke’s own recollection and assessment of his wartime role; they should not be treated as an independently verified military breakdown.
His account nevertheless illustrates the importance of preserving veterans’ testimonies before they are lost. Personal recollections can provide valuable details about military operations, local experiences and the conditions under which combatants fought.
At the same time, researchers need to compare such accounts with archival records, other eyewitness testimony and available military documentation. This process can preserve individual experiences while helping establish a more reliable historical record.
Nwoke also referred to the book Tragedy of Victory, saying its title captured what he regarded as the paradox of the Federal Government’s military victory.
For him, the central question is whether the outcome achieved the national cohesion that the war was intended to preserve.
The Moral Purpose of War
Nwoke argued that any decision to wage war should be based on a clearly defined and morally defensible purpose. He questioned whether the human cost of the Nigerian Civil War had been justified by the stated objective of keeping the country united.
He maintained that nation-building should involve protecting lives, respecting communities and creating conditions in which citizens can coexist, rather than relying on force alone.
His argument does not settle the complex historical debate over the causes of the war or the decisions made by the parties involved. It does, however, underscore the importance of examining the relationship between military objectives and their humanitarian consequences.
A serious national conversation would need to consider the circumstances that led to the conflict, the experiences of victims and veterans, and the political choices that shaped its aftermath.
It would also require Nigerians to recognise that historical responsibility can be examined without assigning collective guilt to present-day communities or descendants of those involved.
Building a More Inclusive Memory
Nwoke’s proposal for a Biafra Remembrance Day presents a question that extends beyond the choice of a date: how should Nigeria remember a civil war whose consequences continue to shape personal and collective memories?
A national remembrance programme could create opportunities to document civilian suffering, preserve veterans’ testimonies, recognise affected communities and teach younger generations about the conflict. Whether through a dedicated day or a broader national initiative, such efforts would require credible historical research and inclusive participation.
The Asaba massacre commemoration has already provided a platform for renewed discussion of wartime atrocities and reconciliation. Nwoke believes that the process should continue until other affected communities also receive meaningful recognition.
Ultimately, remembering the civil war should not be reduced to a contest over whose suffering matters most. Nor should remembrance become an instrument for perpetuating hostility.
Instead, Nigeria can use historical inquiry to recognise victims, understand the decisions that led to violence and strengthen safeguards against future abuses.
For Nwoke, the central message is that the country cannot learn from a history it refuses to examine. Honouring the dead, recognising veterans and teaching younger Nigerians about the war could help turn painful memories into a foundation for greater understanding and a more inclusive national future.
