§ 2.36 p.m.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations have been made to the Federal Government of Nigeria regarding the bombing of market places and hospitals in Biafra and the repudiations of periods of truce officially declared by General Gowon.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (LORD SHEPHERD)My Lords, my right honourable friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, has seen the Nigerian High Commissioner, and the British High Commissioner in Lagos has seen General Gowon. They have expressed our deep concern over reports of bombing by the Nigerian Air Force of civilian targets.
We are satisfied that the instructions to the Nigerian Air Force pilots are clear and precise, to the effect that they must not bomb any non-military targets and that any gathering of the civilian population must be avoided. We have accepted assurances that the reports of alleged infringements will be investigated as a matter of urgency.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while acknowledging that reply may I ask my noble friend this question? Is 325 he not aware of the wide and deep impatience, and indeed anger, among our own population that this bombing of market places, hospitals and refugee camps should be proceeding? While one accepts (and I had personal experience) what General Gowon has said about this, is it not now clear that his own commanders are defying the instructions about the bombing of civilians and the breaking of the truces which he has declared? Is it not time that Her Majesty's Government did something more than make representations, and stopped the supply of arms to one side in this deplorable conflict?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I share with the noble Lord, as I am sure do all Members of the House who themselves have experienced the savagery of war, the view that this war should be brought to an end and, consequently, with it the bombing of civilians. Our prime purpose is, as it has always been, to help to end the war and not to prolong it. It is against the overriding need for the end of the fighting that the Government must judge whether or not to adopt a particular policy, or a variation of their policy, such as to suspend the supply of arms from this country. As the Prime Minister said in another place during the informal discussions on Nigeria at the time of the Commonwealth Conference:
No arguments were put forward that if our arms policy was different there would be likelihood of shortening the fighting by a single day.My Lords, I share that view.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, would not Her Majesty's Government urge upon the Federal Government of Nigeria that any foreign pilot found guilty of bombing civilian targets in Biafra ought to be dismissed? Would not this go a long way towards restoring confidence in the attitude of General Gowon and his colleagues in Lagos?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, pilots, whether they be Nigerian or expatriate, come, I understand, under the military laws of the Federal Government, and clearly if they break the orders of their superior officers they stand in fear, I suppose, of court-martial and other trial.
§ LORD GLADWYNMy Lords, will Sir Denis Greenhill be able to interrogate the Government of Nigeria on these matters?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I think that the visit of the Permanent Under-Secretary must be treated as confidential, and I certainly would not have thought that the word "interrogate", in the sense it is usually understood, is perhaps the right word to use in connection with a visit of a high official to a friendly country.
§ LORD GARNSWORTHYMy Lords, is the Minister satisfied, while accepting the Federal Government's assurance, that local commanders do in fact permit deliberate bombing of civilian targets?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, in war sometimes local commanders break their instructions; but I cannot help recalling, in view of the pressures that are now on, the allegations of genocide and of atrocities committed by soldiers on Biafran people, all of which were rejected by the international observers. I think I can only judge from my own personal experience, and I saw what was being done by local commanders to help refugees in their areas with food and medicine: they treated the refugees with great humanity. I find it inconceivable that these same military commanders would order deliberate attacks on civilian people in the area.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, would not my noble friend agree that the excuse that is being given, that if we stop giving arms to Nigeria some other Government will do so, is the excuse for any immoral action whatsoever?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I cannot accept that. I have explained the reasons for Her Majesty's Government's policy of support to the Federal Government in Nigeria, and I do not see anything at this stage—because we are still awaiting reports—from which one can really judge whether these attacks are deliberate or otherwise, although I have expressed a personal view to the contrary.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, following the noble Lord's reply to the noble 327 Baroness's last supplementary, could he tell us why the international observers, the summary of whose report we read in today's papers, did not visit Biafra?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am sure that the noble Earl will be aware that the international observers are in the Federal area because they were invited to go there by the Federal Government in view of the allegations of atrocities that had been made by the Biafran authorities. To the best of my knowledge they have never been invited, as such, to visit Biafra. If such an approach were made, I personally would welcome it.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether he is aware that I saw the international observers in Lagos, and that last October I drew his attention to the fact that the international observers had been invited to Biafra? Is he further aware that the international observers, when I saw them in Lagos, said they would need a change in the terms of reference from their Governments if they were to visit Biafra? May they be allowed to go to Biafra and see at the receiving end—as I have seen it—the bombing of market places, hospitals and feeding centres? Will they be allowed to see that at the receiving end, instead of just going to the despatching end, where they will be unable to observe what is being done at all?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I know that my noble friend keeps himself well acquainted with what offers have been made by Colonel Ojukwu. All I can say is that the international observers are in Nigeria; they were invited there by the Nigerian Government; they are there as a body. But I understand that Colonel Ojukwu is seeking to be selective as to which of the international observers should go, and this clearly would be quite contrary to the idea of an international corps.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether or not it is true, as it appears from the Press, that the bombing is being done by Russian planes flown by Egyptians, and that stopping the supply of the type of arms we 328 supply to Nigeria would not stop the bombing?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I think the point that my noble friend has made shows the weakness of the argument that if we ceased to supply small arms it would stop the bombing or bring the war to an end. In my view, it would be a direct encouragement to the Biafran authorities to fight on, and we all know what would be the consequences of that.
§ LORD RAGLANMy Lords, in view of the comments of Mr. Churchill in The Times of February 21, and the leading article on the 28th, are the Government satisfied that they are being kept sufficiently well informed?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, Her Majesty's Government have information available provided by the High Commissioner—and here I would pay high tribute to Sir David Hunt and all his staff for their services during these long and difficult months. We also get information from other bodies such as the international observers, relief workers, missionaries, Members of Parliament, journalists, and many others. With all the propaganda and selective reporting—much of it accepted or presented as fact—it takes time to assess each and every report. In his article in The Times on February 21, Mr. Churchill said that a report of a Federal attack on a Biafran village on February 6 had been dismissed by the British High Commission in Lagos as Biafran propaganda. This charge was repeated in a leading article in The Times of February 28. Mr. Churchill has misrepresented what he was told by the High Commission. Neither the High Commissioner nor any member of his staff has said that this report of the bombing on civilians was simply Biafran propaganda. I understand that Mr. Churchill left Lagos on the morning of the day, that is to say, the 6th, the day on which this raid is said to have taken place, so it is difficult to see how he could have discussed it with the High Commission, or even knew about it, since the first report was on Radio Biafra on the 7th.