The Chairman of the Forum of Former Members of the Enugu State House of Assembly and former Southeast Spokesman to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Denge Josef Onoh, has issued a detailed, fact-based rebuttal to recent claims by Gen. Yakubu Gowon regarding the Aburi Accord and the events leading to the Nigerian Civil War.

In a statement made available to journalists, Onoh challenged Gen. Gowon’s portrayal of the late Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu as the party that frustrated peace efforts and undermined the Aburi Accord of January 4-5, 1967.

He argued that the narrative unfairly casts Gowon as the reasonable unifier while depicting Ojukwu as intransigent.

Drawing from over a decade of deep, personal discussions with his late brother-in-law, Ojukwu, in his private residence and office, as well as his personal interactions with late Col. Achuzie and particularly his 1998–1999 conversations with late Maj. Gen. Philip Effiong, Onoh said his narrative is a firsthand account of the events.

He stated that the Aburi meeting, mediated by Ghana’s Gen. Joseph Ankrah, produced clear agreements on critical issues, including:

Greater regional autonomy

A decentralized military command structure, with regional governors exercising significant control over forces in their areas

Unanimous decision-making in the Supreme Military Council

Commitments to avoid the use of force

“The atmosphere was cordial, with both leaders actively participating. Upon his return, Ojukwu publicly broadcast the accords and adopted the position ‘On Aburi We Stand’.”

According to Onoh, trouble began immediately after the meeting. Upon returning to Lagos, Gowon faced strong opposition from federal permanent secretaries and advisers who believed he had conceded too much in the direction of confederation.

“This led to the issuance of Decree No. 8 in March 1967, which Ojukwu and the Eastern Region viewed as a dilution and mockery of the Aburi spirit — particularly regarding emergency powers, military control, and the balance between the regions and the federal centre.

“Ojukwu warned that non-implementation of the accord would leave the East with no choice but ‘self-help.’ Historical records, including declassified documents and eyewitness accounts such as Prince Akenzua’s memos, support the position that the federal side backtracked on core understandings reached in Ghana.”

Onoh emphasized that Ojukwu did not frustrate peace moves but attended Aburi in good faith and honoured the process. The failure, he said, stemmed primarily from divergent interpretations and the federal government’s reluctance to implement a looser federation capable of protecting regional — especially Eastern — interests in the wake of the 1966 pogroms and deep-seated mistrust.

Onoh recalled Ojukwu’s deep disillusionment, quoting him as referring to “my friend Gowon turned bandit” in response to what he saw as betrayal following the massacres of Easterners and the failure to honour Aburi.

“This sentiment was echoed by Maj. Gen. Philip Effiong. Ojukwu, an Oxford-educated officer with a history degree and a more senior Sandhurst-trained contemporary to Gowon in the pre-coup army, later documented his perspective in his book ‘Because I Am Involved’.”

Onoh while acknowledging respect for Gen. Gowon as an elder statesman — particularly for his post-war “No Victor, No Vanquished” policy that aided reintegration — Onoh expressed concern that Gowon’s detailed memoir and statements now risk reopening old wounds.

He noted that Ojukwu spoke and wrote extensively while alive, while Gowon maintained relative silence for decades before issuing a post-mortem narrative.

“A true statesman prioritises national healing over vindication, especially on wounds that are still healing slowly more than 50 years later,” Onoh said.

In conclusion, Onoh urged Nigerians to rely on documentary evidence, tape recordings of the Aburi proceedings, contemporary broadcasts, and balanced scholarship rather than one-sided memoirs issued when the other principal can no longer respond.

“History thrives on truth that unites, not narratives that divide. Let us learn from Aburi’s failure: genuine dialogue and faithful implementation matter far more than signed agreements in an atmosphere of mistrust,” Onoh said. (Vanguard)

Update news