The Nigerian Civil War, fought between 6 July 1967 and 15 January 1970, remains one of Africa’s most tragic conflicts. The war also known as the Biafran War arose from a complex mix of colonial legacies, ethnic rivalry, political instability, and contested federal authority. By its end, between 500,000 and three million people had died, many from famine and disease rather than battle.
EXPLORE NOW: Biographies & Cultural Icons of Nigeria
The origins of the conflict trace back to 1914, when British colonial authorities amalgamated the Northern and Southern Protectorates to form a single colony. This merger created a multi-ethnic state without a shared national identity. Britain’s policy of indirect rule entrenched ethnic and regional differences, producing uneven educational and administrative development between the North and South.
Ethnic Politics and Early Tensions
Nigeria gained independence on 1 October 1960 under a parliamentary federal system that recognised three major regions: Northern, Western, and Eastern. Each was dominated by a major ethnic group and its political party the Northern People’s Congress (NPC) led by the Hausa-Fulani elite, the Action Group (AG), dominated by the Yoruba, and the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC) led by the Igbo.
While federalism provided a structure for coexistence, regional competition over resources and political influence deepened ethnic suspicion. Rather than building national cohesion, political elites often appealed to ethnic sentiment to secure power.
The 1962–63 crisis in the Western Region, marked by the rivalry between Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Samuel Akintola, led to the infamous “Operation Wetie,” a wave of violent unrest that exposed how fragile national unity had become. The 1964 general elections were marred by intimidation, rigging, and boycotts, especially in the Eastern Region. This undermined confidence in the federal process and further polarised the country.
The 1966 Coup, Counter-Coup, and the Collapse of Trust
On 15 January 1966, a group of mainly young officers, many of whom were of southern origin, attempted to overthrow the government, citing corruption and electoral malpractice. Prime Minister Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Northern Premier Sir Ahmadu Bello, and Western Premier Chief Akintola were killed. Although the coup was not ethnically motivated in conception, its execution led many Northerners to perceive it as an Igbo-dominated plot.
Major-General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, an Igbo officer and the highest-ranking surviving military leader, assumed control. To stabilise the country, he introduced Decree No. 34 in May 1966, which unified the regional civil services and removed several layers of regional autonomy. While the decree maintained the name “Federal Republic of Nigeria”, it was widely viewed as an attempt to centralise power in Lagos and thus to entrench Igbo dominance.
Northern resentment intensified, culminating in a wave of anti-Igbo violence in May and September 1966. In several northern cities, thousands of Igbos were killed, and tens of thousands fled to the Eastern Region. Estimates of deaths range between 8,000 and 30,000, though precise figures remain uncertain.
In July 1966, a counter-coup by northern officers overthrew Ironsi’s regime. Ironsi was killed in Ibadan, and Lieutenant-Colonel Yakubu Gowon emerged as Head of State. The mutual killings deepened ethnic hostility and shattered any remaining trust between North and East.
Aburi Accord and the Failure of Negotiation
To prevent open war, military leaders met in Aburi, Ghana, in January 1967. The Aburi Conference produced resolutions later known as the Aburi Accord, designed to preserve unity through a loose confederation. However, the wording of the agreement was ambiguous, and subsequent interpretations diverged sharply.
In March 1967, Gowon promulgated Decree No. 8, which he described as implementing the Aburi resolutions. Yet, Eastern leaders, led by Lt-Col Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, accused the federal government of violating the spirit of Aburi by retaining extensive central authority, particularly over military command and revenue allocation.
When Gowon announced the creation of twelve new states in May 1967, dividing the Eastern Region into three smaller units, Ojukwu viewed it as a deliberate attempt to weaken the East politically and economically. On 30 May 1967, he declared the Republic of Biafra, citing the massacres of Easterners in the North and the failure of federal negotiations as justification for secession.
The Outbreak of War
The Federal Government rejected secession and imposed an economic blockade on the Eastern Region. On 6 July 1967, federal troops advanced into Biafran territory, officially marking the start of the Nigerian Civil War.
The conflict quickly became a humanitarian catastrophe. Federal forces gradually regained territory, while Biafra struggled under intense blockades. Famine and disease claimed far more lives than combat. Relief agencies, including the Red Cross and Catholic missions, drew global attention to images of starving Biafran children, which became enduring symbols of the tragedy.
By the time hostilities ended in January 1970, between 500,000 and three million people, mostly civilians, had died. The war’s devastation extended far beyond the battlefield, destroying infrastructure and tearing communities apart.
International Dimensions
Nigeria’s internal war drew external involvement. The United Kingdom, Nigeria’s former colonial ruler, and the Soviet Union supplied arms and diplomatic support to the federal side. France and several African states expressed sympathy for Biafra, while humanitarian groups pressured both sides to allow food aid. The international community’s response was complicated by Cold War politics, oil interests, and colonial legacies.
Aftermath and Legacy
The war ended with Ojukwu’s exile and Biafra’s surrender on 15 January 1970. General Gowon declared a policy of “No Victor, No Vanquished”, seeking reconciliation through reconstruction, reintegration, and rehabilitation.
Nevertheless, the scars of the war endured. Many returning Easterners faced discrimination and property losses under “abandoned property” policies. National rebuilding was slow, and the trauma of war left deep ethnic mistrust.
In the decades since, the memory of Biafra has continued to shape Nigerian politics. Calls for restructuring, fiscal federalism, and regional autonomy reflect ongoing tensions rooted in the same questions the war raised: how a multi-ethnic state can achieve equity, representation, and unity without domination by any single region.
READ MORE: Ancient & Pre-Colonial Nigeria
Author’s Note
The Nigerian Civil War was not an explosion but the culmination of long-standing structural weaknesses. Colonial amalgamation without integration, regionalised politics, and ethnic suspicion combined to produce a federation too fragile to withstand crisis.
Though fought more than fifty years ago, its echoes persist in debates about power sharing, national identity, and governance. Remembering its causes is essential not only for historical understanding but also for preventing future divisions in Africa’s most populous nation.
References
- Falola, Toyin and Heaton, Matthew. A History of Nigeria, Cambridge University Press, 2008.
- Marquette University, Nigerian-Biafran War Archival Project, 2023.
