Britain and Biafra
Sir: The letter from Mr E. S. James (20 September) illustrates the problems faced by the BBC External Services when covering a tragic conflict such as the civil war in Nigeria. Both sides feel deeply about their cause and the very impartiality of the BBC often results in allegations of bias from both sides. The Middle East war, the India/ Pakistan conflict in 1965 and the situation in Northern Ireland are other examples.
Referring to specific points mentioned by Mr James. He picks out one report from Radio Newsreel, which is broadcast five times only, quoting figures of people killed in the massacres that took place before the civil war began. At that time almost all edi- tions of Radio Newsreel carried reports from Nigeria giving coverage of develop- ments as the seriousness of the situation made its impact on the outside world. It is understandable that Mr James was not able to give either the date or time at which he heard this one broadcast among the hun- dreds transmitted. Therefore it has not been possible to check his specific quote, but as
Mr James knows well, the true figures of people killed in the massacres are still un- known and it has only been possible to re- flect the different assessments which have been made. This the mac has done.
As to the reasons why Peter Stewart was expelled, these were made quite clear in Chief Anthony Enahoro's statement to a press conference in Lagos on 21 June. This listed a number of specific, though unfounded, complaints about his reporting.
Whatever the Sunday Times- might have inferred in its introduction to Mr Forsyth's
article, the truth is that complaints from the Commonwealth Relations Office and the Federal Nigerian government were not fac-
tors in decisions taken by the BBC about Mr Forsyth's future after his return from Biafra. Finally, the BBC External Services are not subsidised by the UK government `to present
its point of view'. One wonders whether Mr James has considered what the opposition
political parties would have to say if this were the case. The essence of the con- stitutional position is simply this: the Government of the day decides which langu- ages shall be used in the External Services and the amount of time which shall be devoted to them; thereafter it is left to the BBC to conduct its services and the Corpora- tion has complete responsibility for content. In the case of the Nigerian civil war this responsibility has been heavy and presented the BEK' and other sections of the British press with a difficult task. In spite of this, a strictly impartial attitude has been maintained and all coverage in news bulletins and pro- grammes has been treated with as much objectivity as is humanly possible. Mr James will be interested to know that only last week the Federal Nigerian government again criticised the BBC for its news coverage of the Nigerian civil war.
J. F. Wilkinson Head of African Service. mu-, Bush House, Strand, London wc2 Sir: Bill Grundy (6 September) is right to deplore the absence of ncws of the actual fighting in Nigeria. Many of us ho so-nt our working life in Eastern Nigeria II was in the Nigerian Administrative Service from 1925-51 and at lbadan University from 1954-63) have been doing what we can to bring the true facts of the situation to the notice of the Government, the Opposition and to President Nixon on the occasion of his recent call at Mildenhall. A few months ago, when the media brought reports and pictures of the fighting and its effects on the civilian population to the notice of the public we felt we were able to make some impact on the ignorance of MPS and even on the deplorable posture of the Government.
We get regular reports from a former colleague of ours who remained with General Ojukwu's government, which has a more secure legal basis than that of General Gowon, and who is responsible for the distribution and application of such medical and food supplies as are still get- ting through. Surely it must be clear that the lbos have by now proved their claim to be a nation. We, who know them so well, are not in the least surprised that this modern David is more than a match for the lumbering Nigerian Goliath. Any in- formed person must surely concede that they have made their point and are entitled to receive recognition as a separate community.
The concept of 'one Nigeria' is a myth which was exploded nearly three years ago. The lbo will never accept any form of control from Lagos. What is now needed is continued factual reporting from Biafra and the areas of the East now in Federal control. Then we might hope for conditions
where an enlightened British public can insist that enough is enough, that an un- conditional cease-fire be agreed and con- ditions created for the holding of a plebiscite in the lbo and former minority areas.
That the Federals have no prospect of achieving a military solution against the ingenious Ibo is shown by two 'instances from a recent (25 July) letter from the colleague referred to above: (a) Restora- tion of electricity and water was achieved in a matter of days after the recapture of Owerri by Biafran forces, and (b) Trans- port is hampered, not by shortage of petrol but of drums to store it in. For many months the Biafrans have been producing petrol from crude in 'bush' refineries.
If Mr Stewart still believes that he is in a position to influence Federal policy now is the time to show it. Ojukwu has an entire, though rapidly dwindling, nation behind him. Can General Gowon claim the same? L. T. Chubb Stellawood, 14 Grange Road, Broadstone, Dorset
Previous page
