Deputy Dr. Cruise-O'Brien has given notice of his intention to raise the subject matter of Question No. 37 on the Order Paper of the 8th instant.
Adjournment Debate: Nigeria-Biafra Conflict.
We are raising the question of Biafra on the Adjournment and the question I tabled on that subject as a matter of urgent public importance because we see in Biafra at present a rapidly deteriorating crisis, a crisis which was already grave—I hope I can have the attention of the Minister for External Affairs, thank you—and which has deteriorated very rapidly within the past months. We are very anxious to know what the Government propose to do in this matter which is of very grave concern to many Irish people both in Biafra and here at home.
A United States Senate commission headed by Senator James Goodell reported earlier this year its estimate that 1,500,000 people had probably died in Biafra as a result of the war and blockade there. That commission also estimated that another 2 million might die before the present year is out. Those figures are an adequate index of the gravity of this crisis. And I do not think we need labour them. Subsequent to the Goodell commission report there was for a time a certain improvement in the situation. I was there myself last Easter on a visit as a trustee of the American-Biafra Relief Services Foundation and I had occasion to see on the spot the work that had been done, in particular by the Joint Church Aid people, including Caritas Internationalis and the International Red Cross. They had then got going—through the medium of 25 to 30 flights a night coming in from São Tomé and flights also from other places—an air lift taking in approximately 250 tons of protein foods per night.
I think we have a right to be proud of the part played in this by Irish people and in particular by Irish missionaries on the spot there. I should like to mention the name of Father Anthony Byrne who is mainly responsible in São Tomé for the flights from there. With the aid of those flights the protein famine was brought under control. There remained in the wings— and there still does—the threat mentioned by the Goodell Commission of a further and even more disastrous carbohydrate famine which could not be adequately met by the air lift. This threat still hangs over Biafra but for the moment it has been superseded by a more urgent threat arising from new actions by the Nigerian Government. The opening of this new phase dates approximately from the 5th of last month when the Nigerian Air Force— apparently deliberately—shot down a Red Cross plane. This was followed by a statement by Chief Obafemi Awolowe, Vice-President of the Executive Council of the Nigerian Government, to the effect that starvation was a legitimate weapon of war. He strongly implied that the policy of the Nigerian Government would be to starve out Biafra. This was combined in a most sinister way with the assertion by the Nigerian Government of a claim to control all relief activities in both Nigeria and Biafra, that is to say, that relief activities into Biafra would be controlled by people who are bent on a policy of starving the Biafrans.
This policy has had effect. Red Cross flights seem to have been almost suspended. Joint Church Aid are endeavouring very bravely and creditably to keep up some flow of supplies for at least the hospitals but flights are down from 25 to 30 per cent per night to six. That means that supplies for civilian refugee centres are cut off. The implications of this are, of course, terrible.
The factors which caused the famine in the period before the flights are still there. An area already as densely populated as the Nile valley before the was has received an influex of people approximately doubling its original population and this population is cut off from its main original sources of protein supply. So that the return of famine conditions at a rate even exceeding that anticipated by Senator Goodell is mathematically certain unless relief shipments can be very speedily resumed.
Those were the conditions in which several Deputies tabled questions expressing concern which was very widely and strongly felt throughout this country. The Minister's reply yesterday was, it seemed to me, cautious and noncommittal. By taking a fairly large number of highly specific questions together he avoided giving specific or precise answers to any of them so far. He indicated that it was unreasonable to expect him to commit himself on important questions so soon after taking office. That is fair enough up to a certain point and in relation to certain questions but there are emergencies and great human disasters— and this surely is one of them—in relation to which a man must commit himself rather speedily or his commitment comes too late to be of any use at all. This is such an emergency and such a disaster. It is a disaster that may rank in history with the holocaust of the European Jews. The Times in London has described it as “the greatest crime for which Britain has shared responsibility since the Irish Famine”. Compare the strength of that language with the cool and politic utterances of members of the Irish Government on this subject.
It will not do, we would suggest, to treat this question on a basis of routine. Above all, it will not do, we suggest, to praise the exertions of the Minister's predecessor in the cause of peace in Nigeria-Biafra. It will not do for the reason that there were no such exertions. At least we must presume so, as long as we can get no information about what they were. I put down a question on that subject and got no reply for the reason, I think, that there is none.
Why, Deputies may ask, should Ireland in particular be expected to do anything? For several reasons. First of all because we share in the general human responsibility to do everything in our power to avert a great human disaster. Secondly, because we are involved already as a people through the efforts of our missionaries and the contributions of so many thousands of ordinary people. We are, I believe, as a country, the highest per capita contributor in the world to relief in Biafra. The Government should at last, we think, begin to reflect the concern of the people about this matter. Thirdly, because we have very close relations with the power, Great Britain, which shares with the Soviet Union the responsibility for what is being done to Biafra and Biafrans by the Nigerian Government which is armed to the teeth by Britain and the Soviet Union.
If it is accepted that we ought to try to do something, and I think most Deputies here will feel that and the country feels it, what can we do? It is a rapidly changing situation, changing at present for the worse, and our opportunities will be changing too. What is needed is the will to take advantage of such opportunities. That will has been lacking hitherto. I hope —I hope very much—that it will very soon become evident in the new Minister for External Affairs, Dr. Hillery. We do not wish to judge him on his reply of yesterday, but we look forward with great interest to his reply this evening.
Specific suggestions may be made. I made one of them about the possibility of using an Irish ship—and there is an Irish ship in those waters—to bring a shipment of supplies to Biafra up river, up the Cross river, and that, I think, might be technically feasible and I hope it will be explored. I do not think the Biafrans would put an obstacle in the way of that and I believe the Government should try to overcome any objections the Nigerians may have.
Also—this is, perhaps, the most urgent suggestion I would make, and I hope it will be taken up—there are, I understand, supplies of food in large quantities at Liberville in Gabon. Africa Concern and Caritas Internationalis are aware of this situation. They are anxious to fly that material in and they could fly it in. They are still taking the risk of these flights from Liberville. Now, the only obstacle to that is money and I hope the Minister will cut any red tape there may be and see that the money is made available for those flights. I am sure if there is need for any facilities from this House in that matter, we unanimously would be prepared to support that to help him to have that food brought in. I believe at the moment we contribute only to the International Red Cross— I speak subject to correction—and I think we should also contribute to Africa Concern and Joint Church Aid so that as this situation changes whichever body is prepared and able to get the food and the medical supplies in, would have the financial means of doing so. That certainly is one point on which I hope very much the Minister will meet us this evening.
More generally, a serious manifestation of our concern would help those in Britain—and there are a good many of them—who are trying to work for peace and whose concern has been expressed by The Times and many other papers. What I suggest above all is that the Minister should look into the situation on the spot, and now, to see for himself how we can best help. The Minister knows—he has shown that he knows—that there are times in which it is not enough just to work through the regular routine departmental channels. He has shown this by his decision to visit the EEC capitals instead of just replying on our ambassadors' reports. He should do the same I think a fortiori for Nigeria and Biafra.
I believe he should go there himself, to Biafra as well as Nigeria, and not just to Lagos as Mr. Wilson did, as his predecessor once, to his credit, went to the Congo, including Katanga.
I should mention here, and it is important, that we are at the moment represented on just one side in this war. We have a representative, an ambassador, in Lagos. We had a representative or consular also in Biafra. I met him there in September, 1967, on my own first visit there—Eamon O'Toole who was doing an excellent job there. When the Americans and the British withdrew their representatives after the fall of Enugu in October, 1967, we, it goes without saying, withdrew our representative too, which followed automatically, as has been the picture all along.
It is quite true that whatever weight in it may be too late, or our weight in the scale may be too small, to avert utter disaster. That is quite possible. The Minister cannot be blamed if he tries and fails but the essential surely, a Cheann Comhairle, is to try. That is what the Government have not yet done in more than two years that this horrible war has lasted. We hope that we are about to learn from the Minister that he seriously intends to try. I am not asking him at this stage to commit himself to one side or another. I can well see that there is force in the argument that, for example, recognition by us of the Biafran Government at this stage might do harm to our people in other parts of Nigeria and might weaken our position as a possible mediator. I am not, therefore, recommending that step at this stage.
I am asking him to do something which a new Minister can reasonably be asked to do, that is, to find out for himself what he can do. If he really wants to find out, I suggest that he must go there or send a personal representative if he wishes or, if he likes, a Parliamentary delegation but, at any rate, do something to lift it out of the present level of stately exchanges through channels while people continue to die. There is no use in relying on reports from Lagos and still less use in these background briefings in London, the only purpose of which is to put as much blame as possible for the tragedy on to the shoulders of the Biafrans themselves. We have heard too much of that.
The official British position on this is very much that of Edmund Spenser at the time of a not dissimilar event, the Desmond Rebellion in this country in the Elizabethan period, when he described the hideous suffering of the rebels who were starved into submission at that time and added complacently at the end: "They died of the extremity of famine which they themselves had wrought." Up to now that, or something like it, has not only been the British position but essentially, I am ashamed to say our official position also.
I imagine the new Minister must at least have some doubts about that. I am glad to hear that he is going to see the representatives of our missionary organisations and I believe that what they say is likely to increase his doubts. There is only one effective way of setting these doubts to rest and that is to go there or at least send somebody there, somebody of leading position. If anything effective is to be done, a Cheann Comhairle, to avert the extremity of famine and disaster there may not be much time left. I hope the Minister, in his reply, will show above all, a sense of urgency.
The Minister to conclude. The Minister has ten minutes in which to reply. The debate is confined to 30 minutes.
I should like merely to support the authoritative and moving plea made by Deputy Dr. Cruise-O'Brien from our side of the House and to say that he spoke, I think, for all the people of Ireland.
I should like to thank the Deputy for agreeing to the postponement of this debate until tonight because the adjournment yesterday took place at a time when I could not be here. I could not be here because I was in the first of the discussions I mentioned at Question Time with people involved in this affair. It would have been difficult if he had insisted on having this adjournment debate yesterday.
I regret too, the brevity of my reply to the questions yesterday. I felt that a new Government were entitled—even with continuing personnel—to have a review of all policies, to examine what you are doing, to review events and decide whether this is the way you want to do it in this Government. For that reason I took the line that I personally would go about making the examination which would guide me in advising the Government on how Ireland should behave in this situation of the Nigerian war.
This is not to be taken, as some Deputies took it, as being too deliberate and too delaying. We have already a policy which has been decided by the Government. It is not the policy of Deputy Aiken. This is a Government policy, decided on after full examination of all the information the Government could gather together and the Government decided on it. It was not a personal policy of Deputy Aiken's. It was Government policy. If I had time —ten minutes is not a lot for this complex problem—I would explain the position more fully.
There were two main considerations in forming Government policy. One was the belief that the development of new African countries should take place along lines of peaceful evolution, that as far as possible there would not be any further intervention in their affairs by outsiders.
Does that apply to the sale of arms by Britain?
I do not know if I will be able to give a fair account of our attitude in ten minutes. I undertake to discuss this problem at any time. I know this cuts across tribes and, perhaps, natural boundaries and so on but we did hope that negotiation and peaceful ways of forming new countries would be the way and that there would not be a succession of cruel civil wars to decide what natural boundaries would arise in the African Continent.
The other consideration was our concern to safeguard in every way the excellent relations which have always obtained between this country and Nigeria particularly, I think the House will appreciate, with a view to making it possible for our missionaries and medicals to continue in the future the excellent work they are doing in all parts of Nigeria.
As I said, the Government have a right to decide on their own policy and, as I indicated, I have already begun the task of examining this situation with a fresh mind, an open mind. I had my first meeting with these people yesterday and the days to the end of this week are filled with appointments with, I think, seven or eight representatives of organisations, missionaries, Red Cross and the two sides of the civil war if you like. This will take up my time for the next few days. I have no intention, I must say, of making a hasty change in policy. This policy has been thought out, examined by the Government, and the only reason why I would make a change would be if an examination of the situation, a thorough examination by me, indicated a need to change the policy.
Is the Minister prepared to examine it on the spot?
I am prepared to go anywhere, meet anyone, if there is any help I can give in this situation. I will make that decision myself. As I told Deputy Dr. Cruise-O'Brien yesterday, when I make examinations, each examination will probably suggest to me something further I should do and I will follow these examinations with the one intention that, if there is any help whatever that Ireland can give in this tragic conflict, I will see that we give it. The only real solution for the tragic human suffering that the war entails is the cessation of the war. However, as long at the war continues we have to take every action open to us to see to the humanitarian relief of the people involved.
We want to help. We start off with this attitude. I listened to the Deputy and I think I have more information than I had before I started but my attitude is still what it was yesterday. I want to help. I want this country to do what is exactly right for this country to do. As far as Deputy Aiken is concerned, I should like to say that since the emergency appeal was first made by the International Committee of the Red Cross over a year ago, when the relief situation became critical, Deputy Aiken got the Government to contribute over £100,000. I do not know whether I am right in saying this but I think we were one of the first in to help there. Deputy Aiken, whatever anyone says about him, is a man respected all over the world. He is a man respected all over the world because of his continued efforts for peace. He got our Government to contribute £100,000 to the Irish Red Cross for the despatch of food and medicine for the civilian victims of the war particularly in the distressed eastern and south-eastern areas.
In addition, through Deputy Aiken again, our Government pledged £25,000 for any Irish Red Cross medical team going to either side in Nigeria. The second such team is now working in Abakaliki and additional personnel arrived in Lagos today from Ireland on their way to strengthen that team and I understand further personnel will be joining them shortly. I would add, too, that the Government are considering, again on the initiative of Deputy Aiken, making a special contribution to the UNICEF Programme for Nigeria-Biafra. The House knows, of course, that these official contributions or donations by the Government are additional to the very generous donations made by the Irish people through the various voluntary agencies for the same purposes.
As regards the serious difficulties encountered in recent weeks by the relief agencies I can say that certain actions had been taken, before I became Minister, under Deputy Aiken. After the shooting down of the Red Cross plane on 5th June, the ambassador in Lagos, on instructions, made a démarche to the Federal Government strongly supporting the Red Cross demand for respect for mercy flights. After that statement by the Federal Republic on the 30th June, a further démarche was made through the Embassy in Lagos and I quote:
—to express the Minister's concern at the interruption of the relief work of the ICRC on both sides of the fighting line not only in view of the possible effect of such interruption on the organisation and procurement of immediate relief supplies for Nigeria but also for its long-term effects in securing help for reconstruction and on the recognised role of the ICRC in war situations generally.
We fully support the mission, headed by the President of the ICRC, which is now in Lagos trying to find means to continue their work of mercy.
I want to see the war in Nigeria over. I think everyone in this House wants that. My predecessor—as I said in the Dáil yesterday and I think most of the Eighteenth Dáil know—exerted every effort to this end and the various moves which he undertook to encourage a peaceful settlement are known to those who want to know them. Before the conflict began he counselled both sides, as a man of international standing; he asked them to try to solve their difficulties otherwise than by force. Since the conflict began he took every opportunity — both personally dealing with Ministers and through diplomatic contacts as well—of urging the need to have a negotiated ceasefire and a peace settlement that would recognise and support the rights of people in all parts of Nigeria.
We all feel badly about Nigeria. We feel badly about this idea of people starving. We want to help. To give the Deputy his due, he did not bring in any insuperable difficulties and I must confess I did expect a certain amount of opposition for opposition's sake.
He was very reasonable.
That is what I am saying.
That does not surprise the Minister, does it?
I am never surprised I am sometimes amazed.
We are.
I should like to quote from a statement issued by the Irish Catholic missionary bodies in December, 1968. It says:
The corporate concern of the missionaries must be for the people on both sides. At present there are 600 Irish missionaries working there —of whom 500 are in the area under effective federal control. All of these are working with complete freedom and with the respect and protection of the authorities concerned. As missionaries, it is neither our wish nor our function to pass judgment on a political situation which is complex and delicate.
As I say, the Deputy did not ask me to get into the difficult complex political situation. This brings me back to what I attempted to do in the Dáil yesterday. I attempted to establish my right as a member of a new Government to examine the situation on which a thorough examination had been done, on which the former Minister had exerted every effort. As I say, I am willing to meet anyone, go anywhere, if I can help. My right is to examine it and make my own decision and recommend it to the Government.
I must confess again that this seems to be the attitude I met this evening. I will continue my meetings over the next few days. The appointments have been made. My free time is filled with appointments with people who are interested in this matter. I have an open mind but I would not like to give the impression that coming into this office I reject what was partially my decision because I was a member of the previous Government. This was not Deputy Aiken's policy. It was Government policy. It was formed in the full knowledge that we could glean. If there is anything this Government can do I will go any place and meet anyone to help the sorry situation in that tragic country.
I should like, if I may, to say a few sentences welcoming some new and positive elements in what the Minister has said—a certain change in emphasis—and welcoming in particular his assurance that we will have other opportunities to discuss this question.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 15th July, 1969.