HC Deb 01 April 1993 vol 222 cc497-504 3.30 pm
Dr. David Clark (South Shields)

(by private notice): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the military implications for Britain of the enforcement of the no-fly zone over Bosnia.

The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Mr. Jonathan Aitken)

Following the passing last night of Security Council resolution 816, which calls for the enforcement of the no-fly zone over Bosnia, the Government are actively considering the military implications. Should further violations of the no-fly zone occur, the resolution requires that all necessary measures be taken to secure compliance. It is expected that the United Nations Secretary-General will invite NATO to take on that responsibility.

In principle, the United Kingdom is willing to contribute aircraft for the enforcement task. We are discussing with NATO the nature and scale of the United Kingdom contribution and those of other nations. We hope that, as a result of the passing of the resolution and the steps which we are now taking, violations of the no-fly zone will cease.

Mr. Clark

I assure the Minister that he has the support of Labour Members in the enforcement of the no-fly zone as a symbol of the world's belief in the need to enforce United Nations resolutions and, at the same time, sending a message to the warring factions of the necessity for them to sign a peace accord.

Can the Minister explain the logic behind the intention, as I understand it, of having an Italian air force general in charge of the operation involving planes solely from the United States, the United Kingdom and France? In view of the sensitivity of this high-risk operation and the danger of it escalating, is he satisfied that the chain of command will not lead to confusion, thus placing the whole operation at risk? Does he agree that the enforcement must be completely even-handed, with the Serbs, the Croats and the Muslim supporting planes being treated in exactly the same manner?

Finally, what is the position on helicopters from any party being used for evacuation of injured personnel? Am I right in assuming that such mercy missions are permitted under the United Nations resolution?

Mr. Aitken

I am most grateful for the support which the Opposition have given on this occasion. As the hon. Gentleman rightly says, that support sends a message from all parts of the House that we wish to see the forces of decency and humanity in the ascendant instead of some of the forces of evil which have created such havoc and wickedness in recent days.

The hon. Gentleman asked various questions. First, this is a United Nations operation and, therefore, the decisions on command are a matter for the United Nations and not Her Majesty's Government. In response to the hon. Gentleman's question about chain of command, I can tell him that we shall be under NATO command and control. We are satisfied that that is likely to be an entirely effective chain of command and control.

The hon. Gentleman requested that the no-fly zone should be enforced entirely even-handedly and impartially against all violators. I am sure that the United Nations will operate that policy, as the resolution indicates.

As for his question on evacuation helicopters and mercy flights, the position is difficult because exemptions to the no-fly zone can be made only by people in authority on the ground allowing those exemptions. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the issue needs to be addressed by the United Nations personnel on the ground. It is vital that mercy flights are allowed somehow or other to continue.

Mr. Patrick Cormack (Staffordshire, South)

Will my hon. Friend make it plain that Serbian violation has led to the necessary passing of the resolution? Does he agree that the credibility of the international organisation is at stake because if an internationally recognised state can be extinguished, credibility goes? Does he agree further that the killing must now stop?

Mr. Aitken

I entirely agree with the view expressed by my hon. Friend. The killing must stop and all forces of decency must make every possible effort to ensure that that outcome is achieved. It is probably true that Serbian planes have committed most of the violations of the no-fly zone. However, the situation is a complex and confusing situation and there have been some other violations. So I can answer my hon. Friend's question only on the balance of probabilities, although we believe that the bombing incidents last weekend were probably caused by Serbian aircraft.

Mr. Menzies Campbell (Fife, North-East)

I, too, welcome the Minister's announcement. But does he accept that the declaration of the no-fly zone some months ago, followed by a lack of enforcement until now, has simply served to encourage the Bosnian Serbs to believe that the international community lacks the will and resolve to deal with them? When the hon. Gentleman looks back on those wasted months, during which atrocity has been piled on atrocity, does he feel no sense of regret that more decisive action was not taken before now?

Mr. Aitken

I do not accept the premise of the hon. Gentleman's question that the past few months of careful co-ordination and fine relief efforts have been wasted months. It has been a difficult situation in which certain participants in the conflict have behaved much worse and more wickedly than anyone could have expected. But the will is now there. Last night's decision to enforce the no-fly zone is an important signal which makes it clear that the will exists to deal with the recent developments of unpleasantness.

Sir Geoffrey Johnson Smith (Wealden)

I, too, welcome the statement made by my hon. Friend. When the matter was last discussed in the House, the Government assured us that special steps and contingency plans would be arranged to ensure the continuing safety of British ground troops. Are such plans still in operation?

Mr. Aitken

My hon. Friend can rest assured that contingency plans for the safety of our troops are under careful and constant review. We have formidable such plans because the safety of our troops is paramount.

Mr. John McWilliam (Blaydon)

While welcoming the Minister's statement and fully supporting the intention to enforce the United Nations resolution, may I ask the Minister to give the House at least a view of the rules of engagement for enforcing the no-fly zone, given in particular the technical problem with dealing with most of the incursions, which are by rotary-wing, not fixed-wing, aircraft?

Mr. Aitken

I can tell the House that enforcement action will take a graduated approach depending on the degree to which violations persist. The rules of engagement, which will be drawn up in co-ordination between the United Nations Secretary-General, the United Nations Protection Force and the member states concerned, will reflect some of the technical difficulties to which the hon. Gentleman rightly referred.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)

Can my hon. Friend assure the House that it will be made quite clear to all parties in Bosnia that, were Royal Air Force or Royal Navy aircrew to be missing on missions to enforce the no-fly zone, whether for technical or operational reasons, it would be expected by Her Majesty's Government that they would be returned safe and sound at the earliest possible date, seeing that they are conducting not warlike operations but a peace-enforcing mission on the part of the United Nations? Secondly, can my hon. Friend tell the House whether, if Royal Air Force or Royal Navy aircraft are either shot at by anti-aircraft artillery or missiles, or illuminated by radar controlling such anti-aircraft equipment, Her Majesty's aircraft will be able to take appropriate retaliatory action?

Mr. Aitken

The answer to my hon. Friend's second question is yes, aircraft of the Royal Air Force will be able to take whatever action, evasive or retaliatory, is deemed appropriate. As regards his question about aircraft which may go missing, I entirely accept his point that it is imperative that all people in that area are aware that people missing must be returned safe and sound—in accordance with the normal rules, which, as he rightly points out, are not the rules of war, because we are in a peacekeeping situation.

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)

May I say to the Minister that the tragedy of the dying over recent months and yesterday must rest uneasily on the consciences—

Madam Speaker

Order. I must caution the hon. Gentleman and any other hon. Members who wish to raise questions. This is a very limited question and it concerns the enforcement of the no-fly zone. It is not concerned with what the hon. Gentleman was leading into. I hope that he will restrict his question to the question I have allowed.

Mr. Campbell-Savours

My question relates direct ay to the failure of western Governments to act before now and I feel that I should have the right to put it. Is not the tragedy of the dying over recent months, and in particular yesterday, as reported on British television, something that must rest uneasily on the consciences of the leaders of the western democracies, who in my view have failed miserably to act over the last nine months?

Mr. Aitken

The question is about the military implications of the no-fly zone. The hon. Gentleman seeks to tempt me into political comment, which I think it is right for me not to be drawn into.

Sir Anthony Durant (Reading, West)

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the things that is necessary to keep the aircraft flying is fuel? Is it not one of the problems that fuel is getting through up the Danube and is keeping those aircraft flying?

Mr. Aitken

My hon. Friend is perfectly correct. However, I notice from today's news bulletins that new steps are being taken, particularly on the Danube with patrol boats, to make sure that the embargoes are not broken with the kind of frequency that they have been broken and that the fuel which gets through will be much more limited.

Mr. David Trimble (Upper Bann)

We would all like to see effective international action, not just on the no-fly zone but on other issues in Bosnia as well. Is not the lesson of recent years, however, that there cannot be effective international action without an effective international consensus? That consensus does not exist in the Balkans, or wider. Against that background, is not there the danger that this will be yet another ineffective measure which will be just another cruel deception of the people of Bosnia?

Mr. Aitken

The hon. Gentleman perhaps underestimates the significance of the fact that there has been a great international consensus behind these United Nations resolutions and particularly this enforcement resolution, which for the first time, as I understand it, has been given the full support of the Russian Government in taking part in what looks like being a NATO-controlled operation. The entire international community is rallying in horror against the atrocities that have been committed and is showing a new will and resolve. I hope that the message goes clearly to the malefactors.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)

Does my hon. Friend accept that the last two supplementary questions have perhaps been the most relevant? While I fully support the statement that he made to the House, as I believe the whole House overwhelmingly does, without total international consensus on not only the no-fly zone but the trade sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro which are being flagrantly breached even by members of the European Community—I refer particularly to Greece—the no-fly zone is a fraud. Will he work with his colleagues in Government and other countries throughout the world to ensure that there is total consensus so that the sanctions and the no-fly zone work together and are totally effective?

Mr. Aitken

I agree with my hon. Friend that the greater the strengthening of international consensus, the better. However, he underestimates the increasing effectiveness of the sanctions. The entire world underestimates the degree of revulsion and horror that all civilised nations are feeling, and as a result the consensus behind last night's United Nations resolution is more formidable and united than ever before.

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West)

When were the Government persuaded to support the enforcement of the no-fly zone? If it is found to be ineffective, and the Serbians refuse to support the Vance-Owen peace plan, how much longer will the people of Bosnia have to wait for the necessary arms to defend their state against aggression sponsored by Serbia and to stop the murders, rape and ethnic cleansing?

Mr. Aitken

First, let me make it clear that the Government have no intention of relaxing the arms embargo in favour of any of the participants. In answer to the hon. Gentleman's first question, the Government have always been ready to enforce the no-fly zone, which has been in place since October. Once the evidence was clear that the no-fly zone was being violated, we and our partners in the United Nations were willing to go ahead with the enforcement resolution which was passed last night.

Mr. David Lidington (Aylesbury)

Can my hon. Friend assure my constituents at RAF Strike Command and their families that any actions asked of British service men will be within international law and that those service men will be given military objectives which are both clearly defined and attainable?

Mr. Aitken

I am glad to give my hon. Friend and his constituents that assurance.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Does the Minister agree that what has been said today shows that the British Government are getting deeper into the war zone? Does he accept that one reason why he said what he did today was to safeguard the British troops who some people said would have to be safeguarded if we went in? Does he accept that the contending armies and forces on the ground for whom the no-fly zone has been implemented are using arms, artillery and weapons mainly, but not entirely, from Common Market countries? Does he accept that Croatia gets most of its arms from Germany? Much of it is from east Germany and is channelled through west Germany because a hell of a lot of artillery is going spare there—millions of pounds worth. British forces are now supposed to try and keep the peace and are getting more deeply involved while those fighting on the ground are being assisted by Common Market countries. The truth is that the new world order which they talked about grandly three years ago at the end of the Gulf war is nowhere to be found because some Common Market countries, led by Germany, are ensuring that Croatia is armed to the teeth.

Mr. Aitken

I believe that the hon. Gentleman's comments are misguided and in sharp contrast to the constructive contribution made by the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark). Of course, it is true that this enforcement action involves some risks. On the radio this morning the hon. Member for South Shields described it as a calculated risk. It is a calculation made in the interests of humanity, decency and upholding the right and proper standards of the international consensus against the forces of evil.

Mr. Mark Wolfson (Sevenoaks)

Will my hon. Friend go a little further in confirming that the command and control structure under which our military forces will be operating is a NATO one? Does he agree that that clearly demonstrates the importance of the training given in NATO to working together and that it will increase the safety of our men in these operations?

Mr. Aitken

I agree and confirm the point made by my hon. Friend. As I said in my main answer to the private notice question, we expect that the Secretary-General will invite NATO to take on the enforcement responsibility. In that situation, it will be NATO's tried and trusted command and control systems which will operate the enforcement of the no-fly zone.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

Is the Minister aware that the imposition of a no-fly zone should be but a minimum step by the international community, under the authority of the United Nations, to protect those most at risk from continued Serbian aggression and crimes, which are almost at the level of the sort of crimes committed in Yugoslavia during the second world war? Is the Minister further aware that if such crimes and atrocities that he has spoken about—and rightly deplored—continue, the international community will be expected to do more? We cannot wash our hands of the terrible things that are happening which are crimes against humanity. This country has a responsibility, as does the United Nations.

Mr. Aitken

The Secretary-General of the United Nations will be reporting by 22 April on one part of the hon. Gentleman's question. In terms of the overall situation, we believe that the no-fly zone enforcement will send an important signal to those who have been perpetrating the greatest evil and wickedness. In addition, it will stop some of the aerial bombing, which has been another miserable feature of this wretched conflict.

Mr. David Tredinnick (Bosworth)

Because of the close bonds between the Slavic peoples, and in particular between Serbia and Russia, does my hon. Friend agree that it is essential to keep Russia supportive and that failure to do so would make enforcement almost impossible? Does he further agree that there-are dangerous implications for Russian domestic politics, because if we have a NATO conflict with Serbia, it could encourage the hard-liners in Russia and undo all the work that has been done on reforms?

Mr. Aitken

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that Russian support for the international consensus is of very great importance. As I said a few moments ago, I welcome the support of Russia for this enforcement resolution. It is also important that Russia, through diplomatic channels, continues to keep up pressure on the Serbian leadership. I am pleased to be able to report that the Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, Mr. Churkin, is in Belgrade and I hope that he is urging a more humanitarian and sensible line on the Serbian leadership.

Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East)

In an ethnic conflict, is not it important that any involvement we have should be even-handed, particularly for those people in Serbia who are opposed to what their forces are doing? Their position would be advanced in Serbia if it was seen that action was also levelled against excesses by Croats and Muslims.

Mr. Aitken

The hon. Gentleman makes an entirely valid point. Several different parties and combatants are involved in the confused situation. There is a difference between some elements of the Serb leadership, who seem to on the side of the appalling atrocities and ethnic cleansing, and the large number—perhaps a majority—of decent Serbian people who thoroughly oppose what some of the leaders and soldiers are doing. The hon. Gentleman's distinction is well taken.

Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North)

Are there any plans to send more British troops to the area at present? Will Britain alone be responsible for financing its part in the operation, or will that cost be spread among others, which would show a more international involvement in the important operation?

Mr. Aitken

The cost-sharing burdens, which are still to be worked out, are likely to be on a United Nations basis. To answer my hon. Friend's first question, no plans and no decisions have been made about the possibility of sending additional British troops to former Yugoslavia.

Mr. George Stevenson (Stoke-on-Trent, South)

While welcoming the United Nations resolution on the enforcement of the no-fly zone, I understand that it is the first time that the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation has been involved in that way. Given that the British are in command of the rapid reaction force under NATO, what are the implications for the rapid reaction force of the resolution and decision? Does the Minister rule out the involvement of that force in the conflict in former Yugoslavia?

Mr. Aitken

I do not think that it is wise to be drawn into hypothetical and contingency ideas. There are certainly no immediate implications for the rapid reaction force, but the sort of planning that we currently envisage involves a NATO command 'and control structure and a Royal Air Force contribution to the force of aircraft that will patrol and enforce the no-fly zone.

Mr. John Bowis (Battersea)

Does my hon. Friend agree that, as we rightly raise the stakes to tackle aggression, so we raise the risks faced daily by our aid workers and the British soldiers who support them? Does he agree that those who accuse this country of doing nothing should reflect deeply on the volumes of aid that have reached the people in Bosnia and former Yugoslavia as a result of the courage and commitment of British aid workers and British forces, which is why they should be paramount in our British policy?

Mr. Aitken

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. Britain has made a remarkable success of its humanitarian operations—both of the humanitarian aid workers and of the convoys escorted by our forces. Our battalion group has escorted 403 convoys carrying 32,000 tonnes of aid. Those escorting duties have involved considerable risks, which may increase as a result of the no-fly zone enforcement action that has now been taken, although we are making contingency plans to protect our troops against escalation of those risks as far as possible. My hon. Friend is right to emphasise the courage and devotion of our aid workers, who have done so well in an impossibly difficult situation.