HL Deb 04 July 1972 vol 332 cc1276-81

2.38 p.m.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government for what purpose our representative voted in favour of the recent resolution of the Security Council in condemnation of Israel on the Lebanon issue.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)

My Lords, we voted for the Security Council resolution because, however provocative various incidents may have been upon the Israel/Lebanon Border, recent Israeli actions appeared to have gone beyond the right of self-defence.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness whether it is not remarkable that on hardly a single occasion when similar matters have emerged before the Security Council has our representative, or for that matter the Foreign Secretary, ever uttered a word in condemnation of the terrorists' actions—and there have been disgraceful actions recently—while at the same time they have displayed a remarkable anxiety, indeed have been falling over themselves, to condemn Israel? And is it not rather remarkable—and this is very difficult for me to understand—that the noble Baroness, for whom we all have the highest regard, can associate herself with this disgraceful attitude?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I think we have to make a distinction between Governments and guerrilla activities, or what the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, referred to as terrorist activities. The Security Council resolution about which he asked was in fact addressed to Governments. Of course we have always deplored any terrorist activities and asked the Lebanese Government to do their best to control them.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness, why adopt this one-sided attitude, this attitude of bias and prejudice towards Israel, in spite of the terrorists' aggression that has been prevalent for quite a long time? Why act in this disgraceful fashion? May I ask the noble Baroness whether she would say a word in condemnation of the terrorists who have been operating from the Lebanon?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, the Security Council resolution to which this particular Question refers expressly deplored all acts of violence, from wherever they came, and this expression Her Majesty's Government of course supported. In this particular instance the guerrillas, I understand, on June 20 made a bazooka attack on a civilian bus when two civilians were killed, and the reason the resolution condemned the Israelis in this instance was that they bombed Hasbaiya and abducted visiting Syrian military personnel and also Lebanese.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that this is a state of war; that the Arabs, including the guerrillas, have declared war against Israel? In a state of war, is it exceptional to find that civilians are sometimes killed? Does she not recollect the last war and the First War and many other wars, when civilians were either accidentally or deliberately killed?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I quite agree with the noble Lord that we must all regret the bombing or the killing of civilians. But in this particular case the Security Council resolution was addressed to Governments.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness whether the instructions to our representative to support a condemnation of Israel did not simultaneously include instructions to support a resolution, and indeed actively seek to achieve a resolution, of a similar condemnatory character of the Lebanon, who, according to reports, started the troubles?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, the resolution condemned, while profoundly deploring all acts of violence, the repeated attacks of Israeli forces on Lebanese territory in violation of the Charter, et cetera, and expressed the strong desire that appropriate steps would lead, as an immediate consequence, to the release in the shortest possible time of all those abducted. I shall not read the resolution in full. I should like to return to what I said earlier: there is a distinction between guerrilla activities, which the Lebanon have been asked to try to control, and the acts of Government.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, could the noble Baroness describe a little further the difference between terrorists and guerrillas? According to our Press both are credited equally with violent actions which should be condemned.

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I would think they were both the same.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, I should like to ask why the Government, who are without a single record of success in the field of foreign affairs during the whole of their two years of rule, are now driving some of their most ardent supporters into depths of despair? Are they aware that a leader in the Daily Telegraph of June 28 denounced the Government's action as short-sighted and dishonest and the proceedings of the United Nations as a shabby farce? Why do the Government persist in lending their support to these discreditable proceedings?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, from reading the terms of the resolution I think the Government were quite right, because they are in fact supporting the ideas behind Resolution 242, which, as the noble Lord will recall, seeks to try to produce peace in the Middle East. On the first part of his question, I must say that I entirely disagree with the noble Lord.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, in view of the happy outcome of direct talks between Pakistan and India and in spite of all the efforts of the United Nations to achieve a settlement over the issue of Kashmir, why are the Government now doing their utmost to make the calling of a summit conference on the Middle East more remote than ever?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I cannot accept that. We have always done our best to support the mission of Ambassador Jarring, and we shall continue to do so.

LORD HANKEY

My Lords, would the Government consider that these guerrilla and terrorist activities are necessarily carried on from someone's territory, and that if they are not restrained, either at the request of the United Nations or otherwise, there is always a danger of increased incidents of this sort by way of Israeli retaliation? Will the Government bear in mind that if the situation is not brought under better control the precarious peace in the Middle East may really be endangered?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I entirely agree with what the noble Lord has said, and it is for that reason that we, together with 12 others, supported the Security Council resolution. No one voted against and there were only two abstentions.

LORD ROBBINS

My Lords, would the noble Baroness not agree that the power of the Security Council to control these disgraceful activities amounts to zero, and that for that reason any retaliatory action which may be taken by the Israeli Government in self-defence is perhaps excusable?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, no one questions the right, under the Charter of the United Nations, to act in self-defence, but we said, as I sought to explain to the House earlier, that the abduction of certain Syrian and Lebanese personnel to Israeli territory and also the bombing of the village of Hasbaiya was really beyond the act of self-defence.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, many of us have some sympathy with the attempts of the Government to tread an even path through this thorny minefield, and without wishing to say whether we believe that this path is successfully trodden I should like to ask the noble Baroness whether she is aware that many people will feel that one of the main things is to keep the Middle Eastern war out of this country—a subject we shall come to in a later Question.

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

Yes, my Lords, and I would thank the noble Lord for his remarks.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, I should like to ask the noble Baroness whether, in the circumstances, she would ask her right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary to make a further declaration in another place at the earliest available date in condemnation of guerrilla action in the Middle East.

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has constantly condemned terrorist activities, and not least what took place at Lod airport.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, would the noble Baroness confirm that 30 innocent civilians were killed and 80 wounded in the Israeli retaliatory raid and that therefore it is perfectly reasonable to condemn this over-reaction on the part of the Israelis?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I understand that 15 persons were killed and 18 wounded on June 21.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, will the Government accept the view in to-day's leader in The Times that past interventions by outside Powers to pacify the sub-continent of India have always proved fruitless? When will they begin to apply this lesson to the Middle East?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, I think the position still stands in relation to the Security Council Resolution 242, which I am sure is familiar to the noble Lord and which has been constantly supported by my right honourable friend.