sign in sign up
<<
Home , Albert Okonkwo, Igbo nationalism, Ladoke Akintola, Nigerian Civil War, Philip Effiong, Republic of Benin (1967)

MADMUN XI

Biafra Cabinet

The Nigerian — Biafran War (, 1967- , 1970)

History: How It All Began. The colonization of African nations by imperialist European nations is no new history. By the 1900s, much of Africa had been colonized by seven nations: Britain, , Germany, Belgium, Spain, , and . Britain, though centered in the Southern and Eastern regions of Africa had taken into liking the vast resources and land the soon to be had. In 1914, through the efforts of Sir Frederick Lurgard, the northern and southern protectorates were combined and named Nigeria with as its capital. Named by Lurgard’s wife, Flora Shaw, the name Nigeria pays homage to the discovery of the River . While the British commemorated this new nation, they disregarded the difference in customs, values and policies of these two regions. The effects of their ignorance factored into play during the time of Nigeria’s Independence on October 1, 1960.

Nigeria, though made up of over 50+ entities, consisted mainly of the Igbo who made up 70% of the population in the South-East; the Yoruba who made up 75% of the South-West; and the Hausa-Fulani who made up 65% in the Northern part of Nigeria. With differences in cultural, social, and regional demographics, these ethnicities set out to live different lives in their respective regions: The Yoruba were ruled by the Obas (leaders stemming from the Kingdom) who gave way for . Being the first of all three ethnicities to accept western values and education, the Yorubas had the highest literacy rate with occupation such as: civil servants, lawyers and doctors. The Igbos were led by their Eze’s and Obi’s (tradition rooted in the and Kingdoms), which allowed for both men and women to participate in decision making. The Igbos came second to the Yorubas in western literacy as they too accepted the European values, , religion and education; the wealthy families would send their sons to Britain to continue higher education.They made up the tradesmen and blue-collared workers of Nigeria. Some Igbos spread out to different parts of Nigeria in search of better wages and opportunities. The Hausa-Fulani had an authoritarian system headed by . They were said to be the most underdeveloped tribe as they refuted British and stuck to their conservative values ensued by ancient Hausa-Fulani Kingdoms dating back to the 14th century.

Politically, however, Nigeria became the Federal Republic of Nigeria under a constitution that made room for a parliamentary government and a self-government for three main ethnicities. From 1959-1960, Jaja Wachuku succeeded Sir Fredrick Metcalfe and became the first Nigerian Speaker of the Nigerian Parliament— the House of Representatives. Wachuku received the Freedom Charter on October 1st from Princess Alexandra of Kent, the Queen’s Representative. Though Queen Elizabeth II was monarch of Nigeria and Head of State, legislative power was vested in a bicameral parliament; executive power in a prime minister and cabinets; and judicial authority in a Federal Supreme Court. The Federal government was granted authority in executive powers in defence, foreign policy, relations, commercial and fiscal policy. The Nigerian Parliament comprised of three main parties: The Nigerian People’s Congress (NPC), which took 134 seats in a 312 seat parliament, represented the Hausa and Fulanis of the North, The National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC), representing the Igbo of the South, obtained 89 seats, and the (AG) of the Yoruba westerners captured 73 seats. The remainder of the 16 seats embodied smaller entities within Nigeria, though, not strong enough to form their own coalition.The first national government was formed by the coalition of NCNC and NCP. These two parties widely accepted

and expected that , affluent leader who represented the North, should become the Prime Minister of the new . However, having more interest in his leadership at NPC he nominated Sir who was later on declared the First Prime Minister of Nigeria. The alliance between NCNC and NPC meant the Yoruba AG became the opposing party ruled under the charismatic and well loved .

Not all Yorubas supported this pact. Over time, it became clear that the Yorubas were on the outskirts of political power. A faction within the Action Group under the leadership of argued that the were losing positions in the government to the Igbo due to the alliance with the NPC. Balewa agreed with this and sought out the unification of all three parties, but Awolowo disagreed and replaced Akintola with a favored leader. Akintola’s followers did not support this; hence, the disagreement with both groups led to a massive dispute with violence, anarchy and rigged elections as its products. Enraged by this disruption and difference in political ideals, Balewa arrested Awolowo and his fellow officers for treason, and appointed Akintola as the leader. This gave rise to a small but mighty AG party. In 1963, Nigeria declared itself as the Federal republic of Nigeria with former Governor Nnamdi Azikwe becoming the country’s first president. This proclamation didn’t stop the rise of religious and social tensions as well as discrimination within the nation. Having been occupied by these obstacles, the AG was conspired against and its destruction led to the birth of a new pro-government Yoruba association— The Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP). This partnership became the new found “mistress” of the NPC leaving the NCNC party with nothing but scraps of power.

Given the north’s authoritarian reputation, the government was adverse with malpractices, corruption and unfair elections. This despotism served as a catalyst for the first coup on January 15, 1966 by the Young Major (mostly Igbos) under the leadership of Major Patrick Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu. The majority of senior military and political officers killed were from the north and west thus this paucity of leadership led to the collapse of the first republic. Infuriated by the supposed conspiracy of the easterners trying to take away power, the Northerners started out their plan for a counter coup. General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi succeeded (former President of the Senate and acting ) making him the first acting military president of Nigeria. Aguiyi-Ironsi failed to appease the northerners as they felt justice wasn’t executed thus further igniting the resentment the Hausa-Fulanis had for the Igbos.

On July 29, 1966, a counter coup staged by Northern military officers aimed at two goals: vengeance and the break up of an already collapsed republic. General succeeded Aguiyi-Ironsi after he and other eastern officers were killed. The coup did not only target political officers but Igbo civilians as well. An estimate of 100,000 easterners were murdered on northern soil, and their goods and properties looted. All seemed to be going well for the Northerners. The Federal Republic of Nigeria was restored on August 31, 1966; however, more sentiment grew for a secessionist Igbo state as it became clear that the Igbo were going to remain marginalized, seeing as all Gowon did was address the Igbo massacres as “reckless” and “irresponsible” with no affirmation that justice will be sought. Enough was enough and on , 1967, the called it quits: General Chukwuemeka Odumegwe Ojukwu announced the of the eastern Region. Welcome to the Republic of .

Current Situation

❖ Domestic Affairs On May 30th, 1967 a new flag was hoisted over the city of . For on this day, the city became the capital of a new state; the Republic of Biafra. For the next three years, this small Igbo state in southeastern Nigeria would wage a war that grabbed the international attention of a world gripped by proxy conflicts, social unrest, and the ever-looming threat of nuclear annihilation. The military junta that ruled over Biafra would beat back the forces of the rest of Nigeria, and would almost accomplish the impossible by conquering the nation’s capital city of Lagos. Almost. The defeat of the Midwest Invasion in the first year of the Biafran War was apparently already the beginning of the end for the Biafran fight for independence, and eventually the dream of an independent Igbo state was squashed following the short-lived republic’s ultimate defeat in the Biafran War on January, 15th 1970.

But as a member of the Biafran military junta in the spring of 1967, the fall of your government has yet to happen. The fate of the Igbo people is up in the air and can fall wherever you want it to. Under your influence, the Republic of Biafra can win its war for independence, can become the newest nation on the African continent, and can successfully wield the chaotic geopolitics of the to its advantage. But for any of this to happen, a functioning internal government is absolutely paramount. Historically, infighting between the stratocrats that ruled over Biafra contributed to the republic’s defeat, so ensuring that all of our compatriots stand in solidarity with one another in the war effort against our Nigerian oppressors would be within our best interests. Of course, time and time again, history has proven that military juntas aren’t exactly known for their stable internal leadership.

First, let’s understand the political structure of the Republic of Biafra. While the Biafran declaration of independence did mention that “the object of government is the good of the ​ governed and the will of the people its ultimate sanction,” it was very blatant (including in the very same declaration of independence that apparently gave lip service to a democratic government) that the Republic of Biafra was officially a military junta led by General-turned-President Chukwuemeka Odumegwe Ojukwu. As the autocrat of Biafra, ​ ​ ​ Ojukwu clearly holds much authority over the fledgling republic, but his authority is far from absolute. After all, just about every delegate within this government holds some degree or another of influence over military forces. Therefore, Ojukwu will require the approval of his fellow Biafrans to implement any policies and for both Ojukwu’s establishment and any potential opposition, purges, coups, and other means of extrajudicial manipulation are all on the table. General Ojukwu may be president, but for how long will that be the case?

It is also worth pointing out that the Republic of Biafra does not necessarily have to remain a military dictatorship. After all, our declaration of independence clearly uses language that offers some verbal support for a Biafran , so reforming the republic is certainly on the table. If that is the case, the reformation of Biafra raises a number of questions? How much should we democratize? What happens to the military junta? Should we federalize? What specific government model should we implement? On the flipside, if we want to make things interesting, the historical Igbo , elements of which survived up until 1911 and the most ​ ​ recent independent nation of the Igbo people to exist, was an elective monarchy, which would certainly be a unique system of government to implement in the 20th Century. As a junta, it is likely not in the best personal interest of any of its military officers for Biafra to liberalize. But at the end of the day, we did not secede to accomplish what is best for ourselves, but instead to accomplish what is best for the Igbo people.

Speaking of which, as a predominantly Igbo state that was formed in retaliation to the Nigerian oppression of the Igbo people, a prominent ideology that will permeate throughout the Republic of Biafra, regardless of the political structure, is Igbo . Defined in some circles as the ​ ​ pursuit of self-determination for the Igbo people and defined in others as the preservation and revival of , this ideology is arguably inherent to the Republic of Biafra, especially as secession is just taking off. As a consequence, you certainly won’t be fighting for the overthrow of the Nigerian government and the installation of Ojukwu as the federation’s president anytime soon. At the end of the day, regardless of our views on the rest of Nigeria and how the nation ought to be restructured, secession is our ultimate goal.

But while our reintegration into Nigeria is off the table, varying philosophies regarding offer a number of different paths for the Republic of Biafra to take. For instance, the Igbo people are not the only group to call southeastern Nigeria their home, so the question arises on what our policy regarding multiculturalism should be. Should Biafra enforce Igbo culture and norms upon the entirety of Biafra or should it treat everyone who resides within our territory equally, regardless of cultural or ethnic background? Is federalization or autonomy to internal groups necessary? Furthermore, if Biafra is to emerge victorious in its fight for independence anytime within the near future, we will have to decide what to do with regards to occupied territory. Should we annex any land at all? If not, to what institution said land should be handed over will be necessary to answer. If we do in fact annex land which is not inhabited by the Igbo people, the question of how to treat other ethnic groups under the rule of Enugu will arise yet again. Nigeria is an incredibly diverse nation, and any state that annexes Nigerian territory will have to confront this reality. Historically, the Igbo nationalism of Biafra was what caused a number of neighboring minority groups to side with Lagos, so perhaps a multiculturalist approach is within our best interest, both for the sake of internal and external affairs.

An issue that was immediately addressed by the historical Republic of Biafra was its economy. One of the earliest institutions of the Biafran government was the Bank of Biafra, which was ​ ​ formed by “Decree No. 3 of 1967.” The bank would become responsible for carrying out all central banking functions, such as the administration of foreign exchange (pretty important when

your effort is reliant on foreign equipment) and the management of the Biafran public debt. During the outbreak of the Biafra War, the bank would utilize foreign exchange in order to finance the war effort, especially once it was announced by Nigeria that its national currency would no longer be accepted as legal tender in order to make way for a new currency. For the first few months of its existence, the Nigerian pound would actually be utilized as the national currency of the Republic of Biafra, however, on January 28th, 1968 the Biafran pound was made public as a new means of exchange for the secessionist republic and would stay in use until the defeat of Biafra in 1970.

Upon the formation of the Republic of Biafra in May 1967, the establishment of a sovereign economy is paramount. A national bank will have to be formed, as will a means to finance the war effort, be it through domestic production or foreign investment. The organization of the domestic economy, both during and (should we emerge victorious) after our war for independence, will also be an important subject for the Biafran military junta to address. It should be noted that much of Nigeria’s oil supply is concentrated either within or around Biafra, which means that we can potentially leverage the national abundance in black gold to our advantage. However, there are many ways for the Biafran government to go about manipulating the regional oil industry to its advantage. Perhaps Biafra shall use it to attract investors from around the world to fund our cause, or perhaps shall realize the domestic benefits of oil and nationalize the industry. Either way, do not underestimate the usefulness of Biafra’s national resources.

In the end, the fate of the Republic of Biafra is up to you. Through manipulation, skillful diplomacy, coalition building, a clear understanding of circumstances, and maybe even a hint of luck, anyone can rise to the top of this secessionist movement and lead the Igbo people to victory. But while the soldiers of the Biafran armed forces shall emerge victorious with their ammunation, the members of the central Biafran government shall emerge victorious by drafting and passing directives or by seizing power via extrajudicial means in the form of backroom notes, which are to be kept confidential from the prying eyes of political opponents. The internal politics of the Republic of Biafra are as chaotic as the dynamics of the war it is engaged in, but in the end, there can only be one Biafran state. The question, therefore, is who will construct this new nation?

❖ War Effort If any of the dreams of an independent Igbo state are to ever be accomplished, the Biafran Armed Forces and its allies must emerge victorious in its war for independence. Historically, the Biafran War was a messy affair, as what were effectively two military juntas clashed for control over the territory of the breakaway Republic of Biafra. In the initial onset of the conflict, the enemy would declare “total war” upon our fledgling republic, which therefore meant that all resources and tactics, regardless of the harm they inflicted upon civilians, was on the table for the Nigerians. Without significant intervention by the international community, it is very likely that this policy will be the reality of the situation that our cabinet is presented with. Therefore, for better or for worse, the Biafran War will be a game of chess in which all resources, technology, and people of

Nigeria and Biafra are the pieces that the players shall move. If we are to declare checkmate, we must manipulate our pawns decisively and vanquish the king that is General Gowon.

First, let’s rundown some important terminology to understand as the drums of war are beginning to be beaten. In all likelihood, your position will be one in which you find yourself as a military officer of some kind, which means you as an individual, as well as the government of Biafra as a whole, will be able to wield varying degrees of authority over military units of the Biafran ​ Armed Forces (BAF). Historically, the Biafran Army was made up of five divisions (a military ​ unit that consists of 10,000 to 25,000 soldiers and is commanded by a major general), with these divisions being numbered the 11th, 12th, 13th (historically later renumbered to the 15th), 14th, and 101st. On top of these five divisions, the Biafran Army consisted of two brigades, a military unit consisting of 1,000 to 5,500 soldiers. These brigades are the S Brigade, the personal guard for our President C. Odumegwu Ojukwu, and the 4th Commando Brigade, which is more or less a volunteer army led and trained by foreign . Overall, the Biafran Army started out with approximately 3,000 soldiers and wound up with 30,000 soldiers by the time of the republic’s demise at the hands of Nigeria.

On top of our ground forces, the BAF also consisted of a navy and air force. While the former was never anything to gawk at, ultimately consisting of seven boats (three of which were tugboats and four of which were either lost or sunk throughout the duration of the Biafran War), the Biafran Air Force was historically an impressive branch of the improvised Biafran military. The BAF managed to acquire a number of effective foreign airplanes, including a makeshift bomber made from a WWII-era airliner. Many of these planes were piloted by experienced foreign mercenaries, who will be pivotal to our victory in the sky. It is therefore within the interest of the Republic of Biafra that we hunt down the most skilled pilots and deadly aircraft for our cause, and these individuals and equipment can potentially be brought to Biafra to fight on our behalf for a number of reasons, be it economic, ideological, geopolitical, or otherwise. If our cabinet can live up to its historical counterpart and rule the sky, perhaps victory can be within reach.

To win the Biafran War, however, we must not only understand our own situation, but must also understand the situation of our opponent, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and its leader, General ​ Yakubu Gowon. Recently becoming Nigeria’s youngest military chief at the age of thirty-one, ​ General Gowon rose to the top of a nation torn apart by coups and secessionism due to a strange set of circumstances that ultimately thrust the young officer into a pivotal position in West African history. Gowon is first and foremost a career soldier who, upon being selected to lead the junta installed following the 1966 counter coup, had no previous experience in politicking. Yakubu Gowon seems to have instead been chosen due to his unusual background as a northerner of neither Hausa nor Fulani ancestry, which made him a relatively safe head of state to lead a nation whose stability was defined by internal relations between its numerous regions, cultures, and religions. It was believed that with Gowon sitting atop the Nigerian stratocracy, the threat of secession would be, at least for the time being, averted. Of course, our government’s recent declaration of independence has proven that this belief was misguided.

Following the breakdown of 1967 negotiations between Gowon and Ojukwu, any attempt at confederating Nigeria dissipated, thus making the secession of the Republic of Biafra inevitable. Our government can look to the historical Biafran War and how Nigeria won to understand how we can turn the tides and, this time around, make General Gowon lose. With Nigeria estimated to have approximately 150,000 in 1967 as opposed to Biafra’s 100,000, victory for the Republic of Biafra is certainly possible, but we must repel Nigerian incursions if we are to do so. During the outbreak of the Biafran Civil War, the command consisted of two brigades, one of which invaded from the north starting on July 2nd to conduct Operation UNICORD and ​ ​ ultimately emerged victorious to the point that the Republic of Biafra was forced to relocate its capital from Enugu down south to as a consequence.

Perhaps a better allocation of manpower and resources on our part could deter UNICORD, however, doing so may be a double-edged sword. This is because a successful defense of the south may require diverting efforts away from the Midwest Invasion, which was historically a ​ ​ Biafran offensive towards the Nigerian capital of Lagos led by General Victor Banjo. Occurring from August 9th to September 20th, 1967, the Midwest Invasion was ultimately defeated by the Nigerians due to, among other things, delays caused by disputes between Ojukwu and Banjo, internal resistance by ethnic groups under Biafran military occupation within the Nigerian Midwest, and a decisive Nigerian victory at Ore. While aid to General Banjo’s Midwest Invasion is crucial for its success, far more than throwing more ammunition out west is necessary for the Biafran flag to fly over Lagos. Efficient, cooperative, and decisive coordination within the Biafran high command is crucial to averting the historically detrimental delay, and ensuring that the numerous ethnic groups within the Nigerian Midwest are on our side, or at the very least pacified to enough to not wage guerrilla warfare is key. But the historical losses in both the north and the Midwest raise an important question; what kind of war shall we wage? Will we play it safe and hold out defensively against Nigerian incursions, will we take a risk and charge for Lagos, or will we seek a middle ground approach to both of these strategies? The choice, which will likely determine the fate of not just the Biafran independence movement, but the history of as a whole in the 20th Century, is yours to make.

Speaking of the Midwestern ethnic groups, during the historical eastward retreat, General Ojukwu would temporarily declare the (note that the present-day nation of Benin was ​ ​ still officially named Dahomey in the ), which only lasted for two days before both its defeat and the end of the Midwestern Invasion at the hands of the Nigerians. The historical Republic of Benin was established too little too late to make much of an impact in the Biafran War beyond being an interesting footnote thrown into the dustbin of history, however, its existence sought to address a problem that Biafra faced during the entirety of the time it occupied Nigerian territory. The land occupied by the Biafran Army during its push for Lagos was incredibly diverse, and as a consequence many feared that the victory of Biafra would result in their annexation by an Igbo-ruled nation. This led to many members of these occupied groups waging guerrilla campaigns against the Biafran war effort.

The Republic of Benin was created as a last-ditch effort to solve this crisis by serving as both a buffer state against the Nigerian onslaught and granting locals their own independent state (within, of course, the Biafran sphere of influence), with its leader Albert Onkonkwo declaring that Benin was created to uphold the region’s antebellum support for the confederalization of Nigeria. If we are to pursue a path of rapid westward expansion, perhaps it would be within the interest of the Biafran government to outpace historical developments and forge a number of independent allied republics from occupied Nigerian territory. With the right tactics, resource distribution, and understanding of the people who are both fighting on our behalf and in our opposition, the fate of the Republic of Biafra can be rewritten. Not only can we emerge victorious against the tyrannical forces of Yakubu Gowon, but our ambition can revolutionize all of Nigeria and replace the centralized state with a of regional states. The Biafran War is a game of chess, and with enough skill anyone can proclaim a checkmate.

❖ Foreign Relation The Republic of Biafra finds itself fledgling for freedom in the midst of the Cold War, a geopolitical struggle that has defined world affairs since the end of World War II. The last of the colonial empires of old are dying off and their dominance on the international stage has long since been replaced by the of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the rival superpowers of the 20th Century. Armed with enough nuclear weapons to end all life on Earth multiple times over, the geopolitics of the post-WWII status are not defined by direct confrontation between the major powers, as modern spheres of influence are now formed via, among other things, proxy wars, international alliances, coups, and foreign investment. Simply put, the old powers wielded colonialist imperialism whereas the new powers wield informal imperialism.

While the Cold War is often generalized as a purely ideological confrontation, the reality of the situation is far more complicated. Perhaps there is no better example of this reality than the Biafra War. Historically having been enemies since British intervention in the Russian Civil War on behalf of the White Army, the and the were in fact both allies to the Nigerian government during the Biafran War. Conversely, Biafra was backed by France and the People’s Republic of , which, while not as integrated into the Cold War as they had once been due to the French exit from NATO and the Sino-Soviet Split respectively, were still far from residing on the same side of the . The United States of America, while having ​ ​ strategic interests that align with Nigeria, historically remained neutral throughout the Biafran War. That isn’t to say, however, that this simulation has to go down the same path. On the one hand, American strategic interests could incentivize the global superpower to turn its arsenal upon Biafra. On the other hand, there is a presidential election coming up next year, and historically Richard Nixon, the victor of the fateful 1968 election, personally supported the Republic of Biafra. Maybe, just maybe, the former vice president can turn the tides of our war for liberation?

Of course, by July 1967, American intervention on either side in the Biafran War is far from certain. Far more pressing is the involvement of other major powers, many of which have

geostrategic interests that our junta can take advantage of. The United Kingdom of Great ​ Britain and Northern Ireland, which decolonized Nigeria less than a decade ago and retains ties ​ to the Federal Republic of Nigeria through the , officially backed the Nigerians starting on July 25th, 1967 over maintaining their supply of cheap oil from the region. Of course, as of the Biafran declaration of independence, historical British intervention is still a few weeks away, but the reliance of the United Kingdom on Nigerian oil, rising oil export prices from the Middle East due to the Six Day War breaking out a week after the Biafran War, and anticipation that Nigeria would ultimately emerge victorious all make it very likely that the UK will be one of our greatest foreign adversaries in a matter of time. If some of these factors can be quickly eliminated, however, there’s a slim chance that Great Britain will maintain neutrality, or better yet, intervene on our behalf. Key to British policy regarding the Biafran War is the Shell-BP Petroleum Development Company, which controls 84% of Nigerian barrels of oil per day. If we are to keep London on our good side, we must first keep Shell-BP on our good side and ensure, through rapid military might over the Nigerians or otherwise, that we are more of a worthwhile business partner than the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

One great power that we will likely have to combat regardless of political maneuvering is the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Even prior to Nigerian independence, the Soviet Union has ​ long tried to establish a sphere of influence in West Africa to no avail, particularly in the historically pro-West Nigeria, so the Biafran War provides a unique opportunity for Moscow. The recent military coups Nigeria faced in 1966 brought with it the fall of a liberal democracy celebrated by the Western powers, which has caused Soviet-Nigerian relations to improve. When Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwa became calling for the decentralization of Nigeria, the USSR lambasted our calls for liberation as being protected by “Western imperialism.” The Soviet and Nigerian governments would subsequently sign an arms deal on March 28th, 1967. Historically, Nigerian delegations would begin meeting with their Soviet counterparts to negotiate arms deals as early as July 1967, which culminated in the distribution of much-needed aircraft to the Federal Military Government by the Soviet Union starting in the following August. Moscow cannot realistically be persuaded to align with our cause. At best, perhaps quick and witty manipulation of neutral Western powers to actively intervene can deter Soviet arms deals with Lagos, but in all likelihood we will have to sooner or later confront the Red Menace and it would therefore be in our best interest to look for a foreign force that can counter Soviet involvement.

Perhaps that counter is the French Republic. Under the leadership of President Charles de ​ ​ Gaulle, France was historically one of Biafra’s closest and most crucial allies. The Nigerian war against the Igbo people was described by the French as a and, much more importantly, France would supply the Biafran military effort with weapons, fighters, and equipment, including much-needed aircraft. French intervention on our behalf was due to a number of factors, perhaps most notably from a geopolitical perspective the strategy of Françafrique, in which France seeks to maintain a sphere of influence over its former colonial empire in Africa. This of course means that the French have a particularly vested interest in maintaining influence over West Africa, and the former British colony of Nigeria is a thorn in the side of an otherwise predominantly French-aligned region. For this reason, backing our war for

independence and therefore carving an ally out of Nigeria is of great interest to Paris. France’s aid to Biafra historically came much later than British and Soviet aid to Nigeria, with the bulk of French equipment not being deployed until 1969, so the faster we can win over the government of the better. Furthermore, Françafrique means that Paris already extends a sphere of influence over much of Sub-Saharan Africa, including Côte d'Ivoire and , so it is ​ entirely possible for skillful diplomacy to build up a large French-backed coalition of African states rallying to our cause. It is very unlikely that we need to worry about France not intervening on behalf of Biafra, so it would be in the best interest of this government to instead pursue the reinforcement of Franco-Biafran relations. The French Republic never officially recognized our independence, which could be crucial to our legitimacy on the international stage. It should also be noted that France is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, and a mutually beneficial alliance with Paris could turn its presence on the international stage into a very useful asset.

As the old world order gives way to the new, great world powers are far from restricted to the . After decades of instability, imperialist exploitation, warlordism, and civil war, the world’s most populated nation has been painted in a crimson hue. The People’s Republic of ​ China, while far from the superpower status it would historically achieve in the 21st Century, is a ​ force to truly be reckoned with under the leadership of Chairman . As it emerges from the brutally violent , China is proving itself to be a new titan of the coming decades, as the PRC has recently tested its first thermonuclear device circa June 1967. The post-Stalinist world that ushered in the Sino-Soviet Split is crucial to understanding Beijing’s foreign policy in this time period, and Chinese involvement in the Biafran War is no exception to this. China views intervention on our behalf through a uniquely ideological rather than pragmatic lens, declaring that our Nigerian oppressors are supported by “Anglo-American imperialism and Soviet revisionism.” Historically, Chinese support for the Republic of Biafra came later into the war due to China not officially announcing said support until September 1968. After this major announcement, the People’s Republic of China would aid via arms deals that went through , with China supplying arms worth approximately two million dollars from 1968 to 1969. When it comes to the PRC, like France, it would be in our government’s best interest to try and encourage earlier intervention on our behalf. Maybe our government will attempt to distance itself from NATO and the in order to cozy up to Chinese influence. Maybe we’ll reinforce ties with East Africa to ensure that there is an easier way for Beijing to provide us with aid. Either way, the People’s Republic of China is an ally of great potential that cannot be overlooked by any means.

As the forces of Nigeria and Biafra mobilize against each other, we will need all the help we can get. Without substantial deviation from historical developments, the Biafran War will not be as cleanly cut between East and West as other wars in this time period, such as Korea and Vietnam. Nations from opposite sides of the Iron Curtain will be allies and nations with a longstanding history of cooperation will be enemies. It will be our job to manipulate the great powers, regardless of their historical stance, to benefit the cause of Biafra, and this means getting typical rivals to potentially work together. In other words, the Biafran War is a war of conflicting

interests, ideologies, and influence. If, and only if, we accomplish our independence from the tyranny of Lagos will the time come for us to partake in the game of global chess that is the Cold War. Will we decide that we are better dead than red? Will we seek solidarity with our Marxist-Leninist comrades? Or will we chart a third path, independent of the Washington and Moscow elite alike? The decision, which may be a matter of life or death for the Republic of Biafra, is in your hands.

❖ , Blockade and Aid Biafra has declared independence and she seems to be doing well for a newly secessionist state. Though very few have acknowledged her autonomy, Biafra appears to be sustainable, as a large portion of her land supplies oil to nations, providing Biafra with a source of income and revenue. After much deliberation with the Shell-BP Petroleum Development Company, the Biafrans have been able to obtain royalties worth 250,000 pounds for their oil. This turnover induces the creation of the Bank of Biafra, with its own currency, under Decree No. 3 of 1967. An envious Nigerian government, aware of the untapped resources in Biafra, declares war on Biafra without warning. And on July 6, 1967, Biafra’s premature victory comes to a halt as the Federal Military Government imposes a blockade, with its first column occupying oil blocs in . This blockade is adjoined with shipping bans on oil from Biafra territory and termination of any transactions between Biafra and nations or organizations including Shell-BP and , it’s main protein (dried fish) supplier.

The Biafrans hold their ground, but things aren’t looking too well for them. With the gradual encirclement of their land by the Nigerian government, little to no goods and services are being transported into Biafra. This military exertion leads to undesirable results as much of Biafra’s nutrition becomes almost 100% starched based, leading to a wide-spread diagnosis of malnutrition and Kwashiorkor. It is estimated that an average of 1000 children per day are starving to death. Famine or genocide, it is clear that this blockade is a strategic move for the Nigerian Government. Though Gowon publicly denounces the allegations of a blockade in Biafra, his military counterparts appear to contradict him as an FMG representative declares that “Starvation is a legitimate weapon of war, and (they) have every intention of using it.” Be as it may, it is this atrocity that sparks world wide outrage and demand for justice in Biafra. Some would say it is the first they’ve seen since the bombings in Vietnam. Because of Biafra’s effective public awareness, the US Government, which initially was more supportive of the Nigerian government, decides to provide some aid to Biafra.

In response to the world wide outcry for justice, the first appeal for aid is announced in November 1967 by the Nigerian Red Cross with a committee to coordinate the work of voluntary agencies. And a month later, the USAID authorizes the Catholic Relief Services to make the first allocation of food assistance. Things seem to be taking a new turn as church-funded groups and approximately 30 NGOs become the most outspoken of the international supporters. Relief aid began arriving by land, air and sea. Instances of food poisoning by the Nigerian government are detected after a few civilians were killed; however this didn’t stop the continuous efforts of Joint

Church Aid (JCA) and other organizations involved. The French Republic seems to be our greatest ally as she has been providing humanitarian aid to the Biafrans. In addition, a group of French doctors working in Biafra decide that a new aid organization would prioritize welfare of victims irregardless of the national or religious boundaries. Relief flights ramp up after the blockade becomes total in June of 1968. These flights are mainly under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) with Norchurchaid being a major donor. After seeing the effectiveness of the aid given to Biafra, a green-eyed Nigerian government decides to ban into Biafra. The ICRC defies these regulations but not for long. When an ICRC aircraft is shot down by the Nigerian forces, a once dominant force in the aid for Biafra adopts the ban and refuses to participate in any international publicity concerning Biafra regardless of the large dispute and criticism it receives for its compliance. To combat this lack of leadership, the JCA establishes its own relief flights operating out of Sao Tome, becoming what is known as the Biafran .

Calm before the storm indeed! It seems that much of the efforts to sustain Biafra aren’t doing much and things seem to be going downhill. Even with the aid from multiple organizations, the disruption in masses of Easteners have grown in scale as a result of the blockade. Biafra’s lack of world wide acknowledgment comes into play as many nations express reluctance to becoming involved in what they deem as an internal affair. Canada, facing its own internal separatist threat from the Quebec Sovereignty Movement, is also hesitant to extend aid to Biafra as it would be seen as a betrayal toward Nigeria, a fellow Commonwealth member. In all, a vast majority of government officials remained uninvolved or, as they euphemized it, “neutral.” The UN also seems to be turning a blind eye towards the blockade as Secretary General, U Thant, refuses to support the airlift. The Organization of Africa Unity also drinks the betrayal kool aid as they too choose not to intervene in order to support the nation-state boundaries during the colonial era. It appears that the european imperialisation still has a much stronger grip than anticipated. Speaking of, the ruling Labor Party of the UK and USSR continue to supply arms to the Nigerian Military while dismissing reports of famine as “enemy ”

It appears what had seemed to be a successful secessionist takeover turned out to be nothing but a pool of bloodshed, famine and cowardice. But fear not generals! There is still time, and what the future of Biafra may uphold lay in your hands. Will it be infiltrating the Nigerian military? Larceny? Migrating kids out of Biafra? Gaining public sympathy? The ball is in your court now. But be careful not to put all your eggs in one basket; the failed success thus far is proof of that plus, you never know who’s listening.

Leaders of Biafra and their Roles ❖ President of Biafra- C. Odumegwu Ojukwu ❖ Biafran Vice President and Chief of General Staff- ❖ Brigade Commander -Ejike Obumneme Aghanya ❖ Commander of the Biafra Air Force - ❖ Commander of the Navy- Winifred Anuku ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 7th Battalion- Alexander Madiebo ​ ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 8th Battalion- Ogbuago Kalu ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 60th Brigade- Azam Asoya ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 63rd Brigade- Lambert Ogbonna Ihenacho ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 12th Battalion- Mike Inveso ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 54 Brigade- Godfrey Nebo ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of the 4th Commando Brigade- Rolf Steiner ❖ Lieutenant Colonel of Biafran Army/ Electrical and Mechanical Engineer Victor Banjo ❖ 11th Division Major- Joseph Achuzie ❖ Biafran Army Major-Timothy Onwuatuegwu ❖ Biafran Army Major- Emmanuel Ifeajuna ❖ Biafran Army Medical Corps Major- ❖ Professional Mercenary and Major- Taffy Williams ❖ CRS Executive of the Joint Church Aid- Edward Kinney ❖ USAID Disaster Relief Coordinator- Stephen Tripp ❖ USAID Coordinator in Nigeria- Ed Marks

Committee Structure Now that you understand the history of the Biafran War and the topics to consider, how will this committee be structured? Simply put, the Biafran War will run as a hybrid that mixes elements of crisis and traditional MUN together. For example, there will be topics to discuss, but there will also be a number of crises to actively respond to in real time via directives. Many of you have likely participated in either crisis or hybrid committees before, but for those who haven’t (congratulations on making it to your first crisis committee!), here’s a quick overview of how that differs from typical MUN committees: ❖ Instead of writing large resolutions to address large overarching issues, you will be writing numerous small papers called directives, which are usually quick “mini-resolutions” that address ​ ​ one issue. For example, instead of writing a resolution that addresses how to manage the entirety of the Biafran economy, you might want to write one directive that only nationalizes Biafran oil fields and write another directive that establishes a national bank. The nice thing about directives is that, while it is often great to have a bloc to write and vote in tandem on them with, they’re

often small and niche enough that one person can single-handedly write a directive that addresses an issue they are passionate about. ❖ Another very important element of crisis committees is the need and ability to respond to crises in real time, which will be presented to you in the form of something called crisis updates. You ​ ​ may have experienced something similar in traditional committees when your chairs would give you an update on the affairs of the world, but in a crisis committee this is much more constant and is much more easy to address due to the speedier nature of directives as opposed to resolutions. In the context of this committee, a lot of crisis updates will likely focus on the Biafran war effort, such as victories or defeats at certain battles. Because crisis committees can better respond to crisis updates than traditional committees, you will be able to very clearly see the impact of action (or lack thereof) undertaken by delegates to address said updates. ❖ On top writing directives, you will also have the ability to write something called backroom ​ notes, which are basically actions that delegates undertake without getting approval from the rest ​ of their committee beforehand. Maybe you want to leak internal government policy to the public. Maybe you want to start a smear campaign against a political opponent in the press. Maybe you want to coordinate a rebellion in a foreign city. As long as you make your plans clear, address a backroom note to someone, and justify why the individual you represent would be able to pull off your plans, the possibilities of backroom notes are practically endless and oftentimes legally dubious. Just keep in mind that the rest of your committee may not be all that supportive of what you’re conducting with your backroom notes, so remember to keep them confidential and have a means to hide your actions from investigation by your fellow delegates. The reason why this otherwise very crisis-esque committee is being considered a “hybrid committee” is that there will be a handful of elements adopted from traditional MUN committees. The most notable example of this hybridization and the one that you should be the most aware of beforehand is that background topics will still be a thing. You’ll have to write one position paper, which should touch on ​ ​ points of importance from the following topics: ❖ Domestic affairs ❖ War effort ❖ Foreign affairs ❖ Famine, blockade, and aid We already have a general synopsis of each of these topics outlined in the background guide to serve as a start to your research, but remember to look into your historical individual’s policies and background as well to ensure that your policies are accurate. Your position paper should be in the following format: ❖ Lists your name, your school’s name, the topic, and the name of your historical individual at the top ❖ Is written with the Times New Roman font ❖ Has a font size of eleven ❖ Has a line spacing of 1.15 ❖ Is no greater than one page in length ❖ Has a bibliography listing your sources at the bottom (this is the only part of the position paper that you can ignore the “no greater than one page” rule) We know that the work you will do in advance may seem like a lot, especially given the unprecedented nature of MADMUN given the COVID-19 pandemic this year, but don’t worry! MADMUN is supposed

to be fun, so both of your chairs are here to respond to any and all questions and concerns regarding the Biafran War committee. You can contact us via the following gmail addresses: ❖ Angela Abongwa- [email protected] ​ ❖ Joe Kyle- [email protected] ​

Visuals

Map of the Republic of Biafra upon its declaration of independence from the Federal Republic of Nigeria, circa May 1967

Flag of the Republic of Biafra

Location of the short-lived Republic of Biafra in West Africa, circa September 1967

Flag of the Republic of Benin (1967)

Reorganized states of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, from 1967 to 1976

Map of the Midwest Invasion of 1967

Newspaper announcing the end of the Biafran War, circa January 1967

Bibliography ● https://adst.org/2014/05/the-famine-in-biafra-usaids-response-to-the-nigerian-civil-war/ ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biafran_airlift ● https://theafricanhistorian.com/2018/10/08/10-facts-about-the-biafran-war-nigerian-civil- war/ ● https://nigerianfinder.com/history-of-nigerian-civil-war/ ● https://www.pulse.ng/news/local/pulse-list-five-little-known-facts-about-the-nigerian-civi l-war/feq9z45 ● https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/civil-war-in-nigeria ● https://www.legit.ng/629644-10-things-need-know-biafra-biafran-war.html#629644%C2 %A0 ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Civil_War#Control_over_oil_production ● https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Humanitarian+action%3A+the+Joint+Church+Aid+and+ health+care...-a0397264694 ● https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1969/2/25/who-cares-about-biafra-anyway-pithis/ ● Karl DeRouen & U. K. Heo (2007). Civil wars of the world: Major conflicts since World War II. Tomo I. Santa Bárbara: ABC CLIO, pp. 569. ISBN 978-1-85109-919-1. ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Civil_War#Biafran_offensive ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_UNICORD ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Benin_(1967) ● https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teachi ng-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/through-the-lens-of-history-biafra-nigeria-the-west-an d-the-world/the-republic-of-biafra/biafran-declaration-of-independence ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igbo_nationalism ● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Nri ● https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/dwindling-international-interest-nigerias-onshore-o il-fields