98. Telegram 2773 From the Mission to the European Office of the United Nations to the Department of State1 2
Subj:
- Nigeria Daylight Flights
1. Ferguson had working lunch 2-1/2 hours with Naville, Freymond, Bignami and Bassett present. Following report grouped by subject matter since at lunch often two or more these being discussed simultaneously.
ICRC note to FMG/Biafran authorities
1. As previously reported ICRC not delivered to Kolo for FMG and at 13:00 Friday to Cookey/Obi for Biafrans. Cookey/Obi accepted for their side and promised Freymond to transmit to Owerri Friday night. Same statement by Cookey made to Ferguson Friday night. Geneva 2749. ICRC has in preparation a second note “the technical plan” when, after final ICRC approval today, will be transmitted to sides in Geneva. ICRC prefers not to divulge contents until after approval. Freymond indicated, however, simply “nuts and bolts” - number of planes, id numbers, designation of bases from which depart, destination manifests, altitudes, etc. does not call for touchdown in Lagos.
2. Canadians have volunteered 30 inspector/observers for duty on [Page 2] airlift. Volunteers put at disposal of airlift.
3. Freymond has indications seven nations will attend meeting Monday 6:00 p.m. to express reactions to Friday meeting.
4. Freymond asked reaction of USG. Ferguson informed that USG could support in principle subject to two considerations: (a) ICRC convincingly made clear it had put FMG position to Biafrans and proposition rejected flatly, and (b) details in second note of technical plan conformed to “reasonable” requirement referred to in first note. Ferguson further indicated that, of course, USG would not itself offer observers or inspectors.
5. Ferguson inquired what results ICRC anticipated. Naville, Freymond and Bassett all indicatfd they expected FMG to reject. Naville/Freymond expressed view FMG decided on policy no relief and as soon as they can acquire night fighters fully expect attacks on JCA. Both believe French Red Cross will not be attacked. Freymond asserted “they (FMG) know French will react strongly even though they maintain relations with Lagos.” Ferguson, reading comment as directed at USG, replied he had made same assertion to Lebel in Paris and Lebel had denied French had or thought they had any special immunity.
ICRC internal politics.
6. Freymond indicated severe division within committee, but all agreed that ICRC will pull out Nigeria between August 15 and end September 3 except for “statutory duties”, i.e. care of [garble], civilian detainees and true refugees. Committee divided on function other side. Freymond stated there is considerable support for proposition that ICRC must become revolutionary humanitarians in new style revolutionary conflict if ICRC is to survive, i.e. if convinced that one side out to commit genocide then ICRC authorized to go beyond conventions in order to perform humanitarian task. Naville added: “with FMG matter is only question now of proof that FMG has adopted policy on relief which will have same effect as intentional genocide.” Freymond indicated supporters of this view in committee prepared to put this position to meeting in Istanbul and then, if approved, operate humanitarian blockade breaking operation.” Further, “if not approved, these supporters prepared to create new international [Page 3] organization prepared to conduct revolutionary humanitarian operations.” Freymond Did not identify supporters or opponents, but in context another part discussi0n turned to Naville and said in French: “you remember my note to you on function of committee in revolutionary warfare.”
7. Ferguson inquired position members of committee who opposed new concept. Freymond replied “balance is shifting—we will see before Istanbul.” (See Geneva 2759). Comment: Departure of Frey from staff, who believes ICRC should pull out if cannot get agreement, may be first indication of “shift in balance.” End comment. The opponents, according to Freymond/Naville, prefer turning over all operations in Nigeria to NRC and in Biafra to French Red Cross. Entire committee agreed nothing should be turned over to Licross as such.
[Page 4]Turnover negotiations.
8. Bignami asked for view on use LSMʼs. Ferguson replied that from legal position ICRC has charter, but that he is sure that USG would look with disfavor on any commercial operation of LSMʼs. Bignami interjected “even if charter fees are earned and put in trust for relief center.” Ferguson replied that LSMʼs acquired primarily for relief on Cross River but understanding with ICRC that ships could be used in coastal relief lifts until Cross River opened but certainly did not contemplate any commercial use of ship on either front hauls or back hauls. Bignami indicated he under impression certain elements USG would not object to commercial use of vessel on otherwise empty runs. Ferguson indicated he fairly sure USG would have adverse reaction to SHC carriage. Stated that USG could not justify such use while obvious foot-dragging on Cross River going on. Ferguson indicated his personal preference which he said communicated to Department that if ships used should be used relief only preferably to a point beyond Calabar to make FMG demonstrate to SE state that ships are legitimate relief vessels.
[Page 5]9. Freymond indicated he is working on turnover plan based on premise that ICRC has duty to see that existing resources used for relief, stated, e.g. “situation in SE state stinks so can be smelled in Geneva.” Further, donors who have promised, but not yet delivered must be consulted since many may not give to operation conducted by FMG. In this connection, Naville and Freymond indicated that promised Swiss August donation to ICRC of cash may be given to JCA and they have no way of stopping it.
10. Comments: Appears Thursday meeting of ICRC was crucial as Lindt predicted. (A) Freymond clearly has upper hand and in complete control. e.g. Freymond stated he requested committee not to give definitive construction of Articles 3, 22 and 23 of conventions in order to leave “bargaining room” and committee agreed. (B) Naville fully supporting Freymondʼs position. In Ferguson view, no doubt that Freymond is author of “revolutionary concept” and prepared to push ICRC in that direction or create an organization which will act like JCA. Several times Freymond/ Naville opined that ordinary man in Switzerland and elsewhere does not and does not want to understand legalistic positions—wants results—must feed starving. Both indicated that once ICRC took on new function of relief it became impossible to turn back. (C) No one in committee expects ICRC note to produce with FMG. Apparently, entire committee at Thursday meeting convinced FMG responsible for current impasse. This attitude may be result of spadework done by Lindt and Freymond prior to committee meeting.
- Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, POL 27–9 Biafra-Nigeria. Secret; Limdis; Immediate. Repeated priority to Lagos. Also repeated to Libreville, Addis Ababa, The Hague, London, Paris, and USUN.↩
- The Mission reported on Special Coordinator Clyde Fergusonʼs meeting with International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) officials, who expected the Federal Military Government (FMG) to reject its plan. They also anticipated attacks on Joint Church Aid U.S.A., Inc. (JCA) flights when night fighter planes were acquired. There was severe division within the committee but all agreed the ICRC would leave Nigeria between August 15 and September 3. There was considerable support for the ICRCʼs becoming “revolutionary humanitarians” if it was to survive.↩