DOCSLIB.ORG

Through the Imperial Lens the Role of Portugal in the Nigeria- Biafra War

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Through the Imperial Lens the Role of Portugal in the Nigeria- Biafra War Through the Imperial Lens The Role of Portugal in the Nigeria- Biafra War Arua Oko Omaka Although Portugal played a prominent but controversial role in the Nigeria- Biafra War, its interest remains largely neglected in the historiography of the war. Portugal and some of its colonies in Africa—Guinea- Bissau and São Tomé— provided the principal channels through which Biafra imported arms and supplies. Te Nigerian government and its British ally believed that Portugal not only provided access routes to Biafra but also facilitated the recruitment of mercenaries and the provision of military equipment for Biafra. Tis article aims to fll the gap in the historiography of the Nigeria- Biafra War by arguing that Portugal’s imperial interests in Africa informed its roles in the war. Portugal’s assistance to Biafra helped sustain the confict, thereby diverting the attention of the world community away from its unpopular policies in Africa. Tis research is based on archival documents in the UK, Canada, and the United States that have not been adequately explored in studies of the war. Introduction Te Eastern Region seceded from the Nigerian federation in May 1967 afer the political crises that led to the massacre of members of the Eastern Region Afer teaching at the University of Toronto, Arua Oko Omaka joined the Department of History and Strategic Studies at Federal University, Ndufu Alike Ikwo, Nigeria. His contact address is aruaojum@yahoo .com. © 2019 Association of Global South Studies, Inc. All rights reserved. Journal of Global South Studies Vol. 36, No. 1, 2019, pp. 186–209. ISSN 2476- 1397. 186 The Role of Portugal in the Nigeria- Biafra War 187 living in northern and western Nigeria.1 Leaders of the Eastern Region consid- ered secession to be the only way to guarantee the safety of life and property of their people.2 Te Nigerian government interpreted the secession of Eastern Nigeria (Biafra) as a rebellion and decided to preserve the unity of Nigeria by taking military actions against Biafra.3 Te government’s attempt to crush the Biafran “rebellion” led to the outbreak of a war that lasted from July 1967 to January 1970. Te Nigeria- Biafra War attracted the interest and attention of European and Asian powers for a variety of reasons. Te British were inter- ested in a united Nigeria, for example, because of their huge economic invest- ment in the oil- rich Niger Delta region, while the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) got involved in the confict in order to open a major wedge into the capitalist region of West Africa that had previously been closed to it. France provided both arms and humanitarian aid for Biafra on the grounds that Biafra had the right to self- determination.4 Although France emphasized humanitarian concerns as its reason for supporting Biafra, it also hoped that the independence of Biafra would help weaken British infuence in the West African subregion. China, in contrast, provided Biafrans with arms because they saw them as freedom fghters struggling against imperialism and Russia’s growing infuence in Nigeria.5 Te Scandinavian countries collectively pro- vided humanitarian aid for Biafra but discretely avoided any form of political involvement. Te USSR succeeded in penetrating the Nigerian government by quickly supplying arms and technical expertise to Nigeria. Te efect of the Russian arms intervention in Nigeria was to seal the fate of Biafra, as the western powers believed that they could not aford to allow Russia to come between them and the Nigerian government, regardless of public opinion and the sympathy for Biafra in Britain and America. Britain, which was initially reluctant to supply arms to the Nigerian government, later did so when it became obvious that it was losing its traditional prestige and infuence in Nigeria because of the Soviet arms intervention there. Britain and the United States could have saved Biafra if they wanted, but humanitarian considerations were secondary to Cold War calculations in western diplomacy regarding Africa. Te intersection of the Brit- ish and Soviet interests in the confict led to a massive supply of arms to the Nigerian government. Interestingly, Portugal had no clear interest in the confict. In their seminal article “Te Nigeria- Biafra War: Postcolonial Confict and the Question of 188 Journal of Global South Studies (Spring 2019) Genocide,” Lasse Heerten and A. Dirk Moses argue that the Estado Novo dic- tatorship in Portugal and the South African and Rhodesian apartheid regimes secretly supported Biafra on morally ambiguous grounds, presumably to weaken Nigeria.6 Nigerian political scientist Josiah Elaigwu has speculated that Portu- gal might have supported Biafra because a fragmented Nigeria would have pro- vided a distraction from the mounting pressure it was experiencing to end its colonial regime in Africa.7 Portugal certainly played a strategic role by provid- ing the main link between Biafra and the outside world. John Stremlau, a prom- inent scholar of the Nigeria-Biafra War, noted that church groups and Biafrans dealt with the Portuguese on a commercial basis.8 Given that there had been no previous relationship between Portugal and the seceding part of Nigeria, it was difcult to explain Portugal’s strange friendship with Biafra and to discern what interest was served by its support for Biafra. Biafrans used Portugal and some of its colonies in Africa— Guinea- Bissau and São Tomé— as organizing centers and supply routes for arms and equipment. Portugal reached an understanding with the Biafran government that enabled it to use Lisbon and Portugal’s colonies in Africa as transit routes. Te Nigerian government, which wanted a quick military victory and to preserve the unity of the country, naturally interpreted Portugal’s agreement with Biafra as an unfriendly act that helped prolong the confict.9 Without Portuguese assistance, Biafra would have capitulated earlier than it did. Te Nigerian government con- sidered reporting Portugal to the United Nations but chose not to do so for politi- cal reasons. Raising Portugal’s complicity with Biafra at the United Nations would have further internationalized the confict, thwarting the chances of achieving the quick military victory the Nigerian government desperately wanted. Tis article advances the discourses and interpretations of the international politics of the Nigeria-Biafra War by arguing that Portuguese imperial policy in Africa largely infuenced its role in the Nigeria-Biafra War. Te war broke out at a time when the entire African continent was undergoing decolonization and Portugal was under pressure to liberalize its unpopular policies in Africa and negotiate a peaceful handover to African leaders. By supporting Biafra, Portu- gal diverted the attention of African leaders away from campaigning against its unpopular policies in Africa. Portugal saw the war as an opportunity to use Afri- cans’ own argument about the primacy of the right to self-determination against them. Portuguese imperial policy in Africa thus provides a window to understanding the international dimension of the Nigeria-Biafra War. Tis The Role of Portugal in the Nigeria- Biafra War 189 article focuses mainly on the British and Nigerian approaches to Portugal’s standpoint. Te reason that this research relies chiefy on documents from British, Canadian, and US archives is that Portugal’s diplomatic archives have not yet declassifed their fles on the Nigeria- Biafra War. A Reassessment of Portuguese Colonial Policy in Africa Portugal has a long history in Africa. It was the frst colonial power in Africa and the last to divest its territories on the continent. Social and political devel- opments in Africa and historical conditions in the global community forced colonial powers to hand over authority to indigenous African leaders. Soon afer World War II, the agitation for political independence among African and Asian countries increased. By the late 1960s, when powerful European countries such as Great Britain, France, and Belgium had completed the decolonization of their former colonies, Portugal, a relatively weak and poor state in industrialized Europe, was still hesitant about the future of its African colonies, which it seman- tically camoufaged as “overseas provinces.”10 Te delay in the decolonization process of Portuguese colonies can be attrib- uted to a number of factors. Portugal was beclouded by a Christian paternal- ism toward Africa and the assumption that its colonial policy was best for its territories.11 Portugal believed that its Roman Catholic tradition and its long contact with diferent cultures and races of the world specially equipped it to maintain good relations with people of all backgrounds. Its leaders ofen argued that they were building a multiracial society in Africa.12 Armindo Monteiro, a Portuguese minister of the colonies in the 1930s and the Portuguese ambassa- dor to Britain in the 1940s, asserted that destiny had entrusted Portugal with the responsibility of raising Africans and their territories to the level the Por- tuguese had attained and that Portugal had successfully created a harmonious society in Brazil without racial hatred.13 Portuguese scholars appeared to have shared this same perspective. For instance, Gilberto Freyre, a famous Brazilian historian and cultural interpreter, formulated the theory of Lusotropicalism, whereby he argued that people of Portuguese background were preordained to lead the world toward racial harmony and to build a global empire that would be made up of people of various colors, religions, and languages.14 Te Portuguese believed that successful colonization must be based on union with the indigenous people; this is why they did not support the principle of 190 Journal of Global South Studies (Spring 2019) racial prejudice. Portugal’s Organic Charter of the Colonies and Overseas Administrative Reform of 1933 empowered white settlers in Africa to act as protectors of the “Natives.”15 As protectors, they had the duty of promoting the preservation and development of the indigenous people.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com09/27/2021 03:14:16PM Via Free Access 88 Anthony
    Journal of African Military History 2 (2018) 87–118 brill.com/jamh “What Are They Observing?” The Accomplishments and Missed Opportunities of Observer Missions in the Nigerian Civil War Douglas Anthony* Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster PA [email protected] Abstract Three separate observer missions operated in Nigeria during the country’s 1967–1970 war against Biafran secession, charged with investigating allegations that Nigeria was engaged in genocide against Biafrans. Operating alongside UN and OAU missions, the four-country international observer group was best positioned to respond authorita- tively to those allegations, but problems with the composition of the group and its failure to extend the geographical scope of its operations beyond Nigerian-held terri- tory rendered its findings of limited value. This paper argues that the observer missions offer useful windows on several aspects of the war and almost certainly delivered some benefits to Biafrans, but also effectively abdicated their responsibility to Biafrans and the international community by allowing procedural politics to come before commit- ment to the spirit of the Genocide Convention. Keywords Biafra – genocide – Igbo – international observers – military observers – OAU – Nige- rian Civil War – United Nations * The author wishes to thank Jeffrey Kempler, whose initial foray into the United Nations archive seeded the research central to this article; the Franklin & Marshall College Hackman Fellows program; and Franklin & Marshall College for support for faculty research. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/24680966-00202001Downloaded from Brill.com09/27/2021 03:14:16PM via free access 88 anthony 1 Introduction Three separate observer missions monitored Nigerian military operations dur- ing that country’s 1967–1970 war against the secessionist Republic of Biafra, a conflict remembered by some as the Nigerian Civil War and others as the Nigeria-Biafra War.
    [Show full text]
  • War Prevention Works 50 Stories of People Resolving Conflict by Dylan Mathews War Prevention OXFORD • RESEARCH • Groupworks 50 Stories of People Resolving Conflict
    OXFORD • RESEARCH • GROUP war prevention works 50 stories of people resolving conflict by Dylan Mathews war prevention works OXFORD • RESEARCH • GROUP 50 stories of people resolving conflict Oxford Research Group is a small independent team of Oxford Research Group was Written and researched by researchers and support staff concentrating on nuclear established in 1982. It is a public Dylan Mathews company limited by guarantee with weapons decision-making and the prevention of war. Produced by charitable status, governed by a We aim to assist in the building of a more secure world Scilla Elworthy Board of Directors and supported with Robin McAfee without nuclear weapons and to promote non-violent by a Council of Advisers. The and Simone Schaupp solutions to conflict. Group enjoys a strong reputation Design and illustrations by for objective and effective Paul V Vernon Our work involves: We bring policy-makers – senior research, and attracts the support • Researching how policy government officials, the military, of foundations, charities and The front and back cover features the painting ‘Lightness in Dark’ scientists, weapons designers and private individuals, many of decisions are made and who from a series of nine paintings by makes them. strategists – together with Quaker origin, in Britain, Gabrielle Rifkind • Promoting accountability independent experts Europe and the and transparency. to develop ways In this United States. It • Providing information on current past the new millennium, has no political OXFORD • RESEARCH • GROUP decisions so that public debate obstacles to human beings are faced with affiliations. can take place. nuclear challenges of planetary survival 51 Plantation Road, • Fostering dialogue between disarmament.
    [Show full text]
  • International Conference on Development in Honor of Professor Kwabena Gyimah-Brempong
    International Conference on Development in Honor of Professor Kwabena Gyimah-Brempong March 18 and 19, 2016 Day 1: Friday, March 18, 2016 Time Event 8:15-8.45 Registration Room: ISA Atrium 8:45-9:30 Opening Ceremony-Welcome Statements Room: ISA 1061 John Karikari US Government Accountability Office, Washington D.C Donna J Petersen Professor and Dean of the College of Public Health, Senior Associate Vice President, USF Health University of South Florida, Tampa Elizabeth Asiedu Professor, University of Kansas, Lawrence President, Association for the Advancement of African Woman Economists (AAAWE) Akua Agyen Research Associate, AAAWE 9:30-10:15 Keynote Address Room: ISA 1061 Kaye Husbands Fealing Professor and Chair, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia Title: Governance and Growth: When Does Policy Matter? 10:15-10:30 Coffee Break Concurrent Sessions 10:30-12:30 Session 1: Room: ISA 3048 Session 2: Room: ISA 3051 Chair: Belinda Archibong Chair: Tewodaj Mogues Foreign Aid and FDI Gender Issues in Developing Countries Paper S1.1: The impact of the sectoral Paper S2.1: Reducing the gender gap in education: allocation of foreign aid on gender inequality Female teachers as Role Models Lynda Pickbourn, Hampshire College, Neepa Gaekwad Babulal, AAAWE and University of Amherst Kansas, Lawrence 10:30-12:30 Paper S1.2: A synthesis of market size, Paper S2.2: Female managers, attitudes toward women remittances and FDI flows to Sub-Sahara and the gender wage-gap: An empirical study of three Africa Sub-Saharan countries William
    [Show full text]
  • Civil War 1968-1970
    Copyright by Roy Samuel Doron 2011 The Dissertation Committee for Roy Samuel Doron Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Forging a Nation while losing a Country: Igbo Nationalism, Ethnicity and Propaganda in the Nigerian Civil War 1968-1970 Committee: Toyin Falola, Supervisor Okpeh Okpeh Catherine Boone Juliet Walker H.W. Brands Forging a Nation while losing a Country: Igbo Nationalism, Ethnicity and Propaganda in the Nigerian Civil War 1968-1970 by Roy Samuel Doron B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2011 Forging a Nation while losing a Country: Igbo Nationalism, Ethnicity and Propaganda in the Nigerian Civil War 1968-1970 Roy Samuel Doron, PhD The University of Texas at Austin, 2011 Supervisor: Toyin Falola This project looks at the ways the Biafran Government maintained their war machine in spite of the hopeless situation that emerged in the summer of 1968. Ojukwu’s government looked certain to topple at the beginning of the summer of 1968, yet Biafra held on and did not capitulate until nearly two years later, on 15 January 1970. The Ojukwu regime found itself in a serious predicament; how to maintain support for a war that was increasingly costly to the Igbo people, both in military terms and in the menacing face of the starvation of the civilian population. Further, the Biafran government had to not only mobilize a global public opinion campaign against the “genocidal” campaign waged against them, but also convince the world that the only option for Igbo survival was an independent Biafra.
    [Show full text]
  • African Warrior Culture
    African Warrior Culture: The Symbolism and Integration of the Avtomat Kalashnikova throughout Continental Africa By Kevin Andrew Laurell Senior Thesis in History California State Polytechnic University, Pomona June 10, 2014 Grade: Advisor: Dr. Amanda Podany Laurell 1 "I'm proud of my invention, but I'm sad that it is used by terrorists… I would prefer to have invented a machine that people could use and that would help farmers with their work - for example a lawnmower."- Mikhail Kalashnikov The Automatic Kalashnikov is undoubtedly the most recognizable and iconic of all weapon systems over the past sixty-seven years. Commonly referred to as the AK or AK-47, the rifle is a symbol of both oppression and revolution in war-torn parts of the world today. Most major conflicts over the past forty years throughout Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South America have been fought with Kalashnikov rifles. The global saturation of Kalashnikov weaponry finds its roots in the Cold War mentalities of both the Soviet Union and Western powers vying for ideological footholds and powerful spheres of influence. Oftentimes the fiercest Cold War conflicts took place in continental Africa, with both Moscow and Washington interfering with local politics and providing assistance to one group or another. While Communist-Socialist and Western Capitalist ideologies proved unsuccessful in many regions in Africa, the AK-47 remained the surviving victor. From what we know of the Cold War, millions of Automatic Kalashnikovs (as well as the patents to the weapons) were sent to countries that were willing to discourage the threat of Western influence.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright by Brian Edward Mcneil 2014
    Copyright by Brian Edward McNeil 2014 The Dissertation Committee for Brian Edward McNeil certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Frontiers of Need: Humanitarianism and the American Involvement in the Nigerian Civil War, 1967-1970 Committee: Mark Atwood Lawrence, Supervisor Toyin Falola Jeremi Suri H.W. Brands Thomas Borstelmann Frontiers of Need: Humanitarianism and the American Involvement in the Nigerian Civil War, 1967-1970 by Brian Edward McNeil, B.A.; M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2014 Who will rise up for me against the wicked? Who will take a stand for me against evildoers? Psalm 94:16 For Noelle Acknowledgements No one ever told me that dissertations are built upon debts and broken promises. When I first entered the University of Texas at Austin in 2007 to begin my doctoral studies, I had a clear plan for finishing. I knew that I wanted to write on the United States and the Nigerian Civil War, which, as it turns out, was a good start. I promised my wife it would take five years to finish. Seven years later, I have completed my degree. Part of the reason for the delay was that I discovered that the Nigerian Civil War was a much larger event with much more import than scholars have realized. My dissertation required research on three continents and numerous cities: from Los Angeles, to London, to Lagos.
    [Show full text]
  • Nigeria Relations in Historical Perspective
    Journal of Political Science Volume 25 Number 1 Article 3 November 1997 U.S. - Nigeria Relations in Historical Perspective Elizabeth L. Normandy Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Normandy, Elizabeth L. (1997) "U.S. - Nigeria Relations in Historical Perspective," Journal of Political Science: Vol. 25 : No. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops/vol25/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Politics at CCU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Political Science by an authorized editor of CCU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. U.S.-NIGERIA RELATIONS IN IDSTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Elizabeth L. Normandy , The University of North Carolina at Pembroke Introduction United States' relations with Nigeria have alternated between periods of close or special relations and periods of indifference, neglect, and hostility. Major developments in the relationship include a period of cordial relations from 1960 to 1966, strained relations from the first Nigerian coup through the civil war 1966-1970, and a growing rapprochement from 1970 to 1979 due to mutual economic interests and the election of Jimmy Carter . The policies of the Reagan administration caused strains in the relationship. The Nigerian civil war and Angolan independence were events which led to low points in the relationship . In the post-Cold War period, U.S.-Nigeria relations have reached a new low point due to the changed priorities of U.S . foreign policy, the continuing turmoil in Nigeria's political system, and the deteriorating state of Nigeria's economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining the International Relations of Secessionist Conflicts
    Explaining the International Relations of Secessionist Conflicts: Vulnerability Versus Ethnic Ties Stephen M. Saideman Introduction With the end of the Cold War, many observers expected that international conflict would be less likely to occur and easier to manage. Given the successful resolution of the Gulf War and the European Community’s (EC) efforts to develop a common foreign policy, observers expected international cooperation to manage the few con- flicts that might break out. Instead, the disintegration of Yugoslavia contradicted these expectations. Rather than developing a common foreign policy, European states were divided over how to deal with Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia. Germany pushed for relatively quick recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, whereas other members of the EC wanted to go slower. Some observers expected Russia to fall in line with the West because of its need for investment and trade, but instead it supported Serbia. It is puzzling that Europe failed to cooperate regardless of whether greater international cooperation could have managed this conflict. How can we make sense of the inter- national relations of Yugoslavia’s demise? Since secession is not a new phenomenon, we should study previous secessionist conflicts to determine if they share certain dynamics, and we should consider applying to Yugoslavia the arguments developed to understand such conflicts. When studying secessionist conflicts, analysts have frequently argued that states vulnerable to secession do not support separatist movements in other states. This argument serves as the foundation for many analyses of the international relations of ethnic conflict. If this were true, the last few years would have been much more peaceful.
    [Show full text]
  • Higher Education for a Soviet–Third World Alliance, 1960–91†
    Journal of Global History (2019), 14: 2, 281–300 doi:10.1017/S174002281900007X ARTICLE The Lumumba University in Moscow: higher education for a Soviet–Third World alliance, 1960–91† Constantin Katsakioris Bayreuth Academy of Advanced African Studies, Hugo-Rüdel-Str. 10, 95445 Bayreuth, Germany Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract Founded in Moscow in 1960 for students from Third World countries, the Peoples’ Friendship University ‘Patrice Lumumba’ was the most important venture in international higher education during the Cold War and a flagship of Soviet internationalism. It aimed to educate a Soviet-friendly intelligentsia and foster a Soviet–Third World alliance. This article retraces the history of this school, often criticized for its Third World concept, recruitment, and training policies. It recalls the forgotten French initiative to create a uni- versity for the underdeveloped countries, situates Lumumba University in the global Cold War, and compares it with mainstream Soviet schools. Soon after its creation, Lumumba University underwent important changes, but departed from its initial educational concept. Consequently, arguments justifying the existence of a special university disappeared. Third World countries, moreover, never agreed with the university’s concept. Despite its educational accomplishments, Lumumba University became the Achilles’ heel of Soviet cultural policy. Keywords: Cold War; education; Patrice Lumumba University; Soviet Union; Third World As Asian and African countries made the transition to independence after the Second World War, the development of education and the training of their elites were widely recognized as indispens- able preconditions for building prosperous nation-states. The specific link between education and development was steadily reinforced after the Second World War as various actors invested their hopes and interests in the achievement of these twin goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Propaganda in Civil War: the Biafra Experience. 1
    USE OF PROPAGANDA IN CIVIL WAR: THE BIAFRA EXPERIENCE. PATRICK EDIOMI DAVIES A Thesis in the Department of International Relations The London School of Economics and Political Science Submitted to the University of London for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) June 1995 1 UMI Number: U105277 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U105277 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 IH eS£ F 71 L\~L\-lo DC hOOrUftH- USE OF PROPAGANDA IN CIVIL WAR: THE BIAFRA EXPERIENCE. ABSTRACT This study examines the effect of propaganda in the Biaffan war. Nigeria, the show case of British colonial rule and Empire, and transfer to independence, was at the point of disintegration in 1967. A section of the country, the Eastern region had dared to do the unthinkable at that time, to secede. The British and Nigerian governments were determined that it would not happen. The break away region, which called itself Biafra was blockaded by land, air and sea, and starved of weapons and the means of livelihood.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Policy in the Nigerian Civil War
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 8-1-1975 United States Policy in the Nigerian Civil War C. Onokata Idisi Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the International Law Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Idisi, C. Onokata, "United States Policy in the Nigerian Civil War" (1975). Master's Theses. 2474. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2474 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNITED STATES POLICY IN THE NIGERIAN CIVIL WAR by C. Onokata I d is i A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College in partial fulfillment o f the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1, 1975 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. I INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nigerian Civil War, 1967-1970: a Revolution?
    African Journal of Political Science and International Relations Vol. 5(3), pp. 120-124, March 2011 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/ajpsir ISSN 1996-0832 ©2011 Academic Journals Review Paper The Nigerian civil war, 1967-1970: A revolution? Falode Adewunmi James Department of History and International Studies, Lagos State University, Ojo, Lagos State, Nigeria. E-mail: [email protected]. Tel: +2340833332355 Accepted 22 February, 2011 The paper seeks to cast the Nigerian civil war of 1967 to 1970 within the mould of a revolution. In achieving this aim, the paper necessarily explores the theory of revolution and at the same time carries- out a comparative analysis of civil wars that later morphed into revolutions within the international political system. The Nigerian civil war has never been referred to as a revolution. Rather, the military coup d’état of January 15, 1966, a first in Nigeria’s history, has been erroneously referred to as the closest thing to a revolution in Nigeria. This paper will not only correct the misrepresentation, it will also establish the theoretical line that separate a revolution from a coup d’état. Thus, the central thrust of the paper is that as a revolution, the Nigerian civil war was meant to be a means to an end for Nigeria; the end being the attainment of nationhood for Nigeria. This conclusion is arrived at after careful and critical evaluation of the significant role revolution played in the formative years of some of the most successful nations within the international environment .The countries used in the course of the analyzes include the United States of America, France and Spain.
    [Show full text]