Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T23:13:31.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The American Response to the Nigerian Conflict, 1968

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2019

Roy M. Melbourne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When the American electorate opted for withdrawal from Vietnam in 1968, the United States crossed an international policy watershed whose dimensions have not yet been fully assessed. The outlines of this policy have since been given the rubric of the Nixon Doctrine. In 1968, however, a substantial number of American citizens (including many vociferous critics of our presence in Vietnam) failed to grasp the significance of the change in Administration thinking as they energetically and often from the purest of motives sought American intervention through humanitarian actions in the Nigerian civil war. To point out to these Americans the contradictions in their behavior only served to irritate them. Other important segments of the public had long held a distorted image of American actions abroad. They continued to view America as the conscience of the world, exercising a kind of police power where such power might be safely exercised.

Type
Research Article
Information
African Issues , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Summer 1973 , pp. 33 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 1973 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Footnotes

1 Baltimore Sun, 1 June 1967.

2 Statement of Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Joseph Palmer II, before the Foreign Operations Subcommittee, House Appropriations Committee, 13 May 1968.

3 Dates and events unless otherwise stated are from the excellent chronology prepared by the Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service. Two of these documents cover the period: (1) “Biafra: A Chronology of Developments Attending the Secession of the Eastern Region of Nigeria” (15 January 1966-15 November 1968), DT700-F33, 22 November 1968; (2) “Biafra: A Chronology of Developments, November 15, 1968-February 15, 1969,” DT700-F358, 26 February 1969.

4 Open Doors, 1969, Annual Report of Institute of International Education, p. 22.

5 Three Catholic bishops in Western Nigeria were said to have protested to the Vatican that the activity of some church elements, interpreted as pro-Biafran, was adversely affecting their work.

6 Washington Post, 19 January 1969.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 New York Times, 12 September 1968.

10 An unpublicized aspect of the international effort was the view of both combatants that the supplies were dutiable as a right of sovereignty. Biafra arranged to have duties paid overseas in foreign currency, including also costs of international relief operating expenses within its territory. This netted a good sum for Biafran external use.

11 See Appendix B, “Report of the Observer Team to Nigeria,” Report of Special Factfinding Mission to Nigeria, 7-20 February 1969, Hon. Charles C. Diggs, Chairman for the Committee on Foreign Affairs (Washington, GPO, 1969), pp. 27-46.

12 Ibid , pp. 34-35.

13 Nigerian-Biafran Relief Situation. Hearing Before Subcommittee on African Affairs of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 4 October1968 (Washington: GPO, 1968), p. 12. Cited as McCarthy Hearing.

14 Statements of the United States Government on the Problem of Nigeriaias of 5 December 1968), State Department Office of Public Affairs. Cited as USG Statements, as of 5 December 1968.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid.

17 State Department Press Release No. 206, 12 September 1968.

18 New York Times, 10 September 1968.

19 Letter of 17 September 1968 from Senator Edward W. Brooke to The Honorable Richard M. Nixon.

20 New York Times, 12 January 1969.

21 Ibid., 26 July and 31 October 1968.

22 Ibid., 8, 12 and 13 January 1969.

23 McCarthy Hearing, p 3.

24 Ibid, pp. 4-9.

25 Ibod., pp. 9-10.

26 Ibod, pp. 11-23, 28-32.

27 Ibid, p. 30.

28 Ibid, p. 35.

29 Ibid, p. 54.

30 Ibid, 23-26.

31 Ibid., pp. 55-57.

32 Congressional Record, Vol. 114, Part 23, 90th Cong. 2nd Sess., 9 October 1968 (Washington, GPO), p. 30153-5.

33 New York Times, 17 November 1968.

34 Baltimore Sun, 9 January 1969.

35 USG Statements, as of 5 December 1968.

36 Ibid.

37 Statements of the United States Government on the Problem of Nigeria (6-31 December 1968), State Department Office of Public Affairs, 21 December.

38 Ibid.

39 Washington Post, 31 December 1968.

40 Ibid., and New York Times, 1 January 1969.

41 Biatra Mail, undated, prepared by the Office of Public Affairs.

42 Information in State Department congressional letter responses, mid-January 1969.

43 Congressional Record, Vol. 115, Part 2, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., 22 January 1969 (Washington, GPO); Senate Concurrent Resolutions Relating th the Nigeria-Biafra Tragedy, p. 1471. House Concurrent Resolution 97, p. 1580. See also Statements of the U.S. Government on the Problem of Nigeria (20 January -1 April 1969), State Department Office of Public Affairs, 23 January (cited as USG Statements, 1969), and Baltimore Sun, 9 January.

44 USG Statements, 1969.

45 Washington Post, 13 February 1969.

46 New York Times, 23 February 1969.

47 USG Statements, 1969.

48 New York Times and Washington Post, 23 February 1969.