Back to the power-house
Sir: 1 do not understand the logic of Mr Waugh's argument in his comments on my letter (8 November) Why would it have been easier for the Nigerians to drive their troops down the `mercy corridor than to drive them up the land route proposed by Colonel Ojukwu? In either case the bridges would have had to be repaired in order to get the relief supplies through. And in either case the supplies would have been handled by the Red Cross which would have precluded any possibility of military activity in the area.
The reasons against the use of the Port Har- court route were that the port was still out of action as the channel into it had been blocked by the rebels when they held it. On the other band, Enugu was open to road and rail trans- portation. Certainly Mr Waugh's arguments do not prove that it is a fact that Colonel Ojukwu is prepared to allow a genuine road passage and General Gowon is not. A fact is something which is known to be true. The truth of Mr Waugh's assumption that Colonel Ojukwu wants a road passage is not proven.
David Russell Galitzine Chant Russell and Partners Ltd, 57 Duke Street, Grosvenor Square, London WI Auberon Waugh writes: Because, as I said in my note, Colonel Ojukwu's proposal was for a demilitarised road.
Previous page
