§ 3.59 p.m.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, with the leave of the House I shall repeat a Statement on Mrs. Dora Bloch, made in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister of State. The Statement is as follows
"Mr. Speaker, I will, with permission, make a further statement about Mrs. Dora Bloch.
"On 7th July I told the House that we were sending our High Commissioner back to Kampala to discuss Mrs. Bloch's disappearance urgently and fully with the Ugandan Government. Mr. Hennessy saw President Amin on 9th July. On 10th July the Ugandan Government sent Mr. Hennessy a Note which continued to deny knowledge of the whereabouts of Mrs. Bloch and repeated that Israel shouldered the responsibility for her as for all other hostages. As we said at the time, this is totally unacceptable in that Mrs. Bloch was seen by a member of the High Commission staff in hospital well after the Israel operation at Entebbe Airport was over. We are just not satisfied with the results of any inquiries the Ugandans may have made.
"Our High Commissioner in Kampala arrived home this morning. I have had a report personally from him. As a result I deeply regret to have to inform the House that there seems little doubt that Mrs. Bloch was taken from her 32 room in Mulago Hospital at about 9.30 p.m. (local time) on 4th July and that she is no longer alive. We extend our deepest sympathy to all her family. In whatever circumstances Mrs. Bloch's death took place, the Ugandan Government must bring those responsible to justice.
"Her Majesty's Government's overriding concern, particularly in the present confused situation in Uganda, must be for the 500 British citizens who still reside there. We should do nothing which could jeopardise their welfare at this time. In the light of Mr. Hennessy's report, he will remain in London for further consultations, while we consider the future of our relations with Uganda.
"I should like to take the opportunity to put the record straight on misleading Press reports that Her Majesty's Government sent a message of condolence to President Amin about Ugandan soldiers killed during the Israeli raid at Entebbe. In the course of our many contacts with the Ugandan authorities after the hijacking incident, we did, as did other Western Governments represented in Kampala, express sympathy to the families of all the persons killed in the hijacking incident. These were not regrets to President Amin. No personal message was sent either by my right honourable friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary or by any other Ministers. Her Majesty's Ambassador in Israel also conveyed to the Israel Government our commiserations with the families of the Israelis killed in the course of the incident."
My Lords, that is the end of the Statement.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, we thank the noble Lord for having repeated the Statement made in another place. It can only be outrageous that revenge for the successful Israeli operation against the hijackers should apparently have been taken by the murder of an elderly lady who was totally innocent and unconnected with any of these incidents. Whoever removed Mrs. Bloch from hospital, the Ugandan Government must be held responsible for what happened.
33 My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord said that the Press reports about a message from Her Majesty's Government to the Ugandan Government had been misleading; but was it necessary to send any message at all to the Ugandan Government about casualties unless it was clear that Uganda was not assisting the hijackers? At present, the evidence still points to Ugandan troops taking a positive part in guarding the hostages for the hijackers. That means assisting in what can only be described as a diabolical crime. The crime of hijacking is something which, united, every country must surely try to stamp out. But can the noble Lord tell us whether Her Majesty's Government are now certain that the Ugandan troops were not employed in helping the hijackers? I am sure that all on these Benches would wish to be associated with the expression of sympathy extended to the family of Mrs. Bloch.
§ Lord WIGODERMy Lords, we on these Benches are also grateful to the noble Lord for repeating this statement, and we should also like to associate ourselves with the expressions of deep sympathy extended towards the relatives of Mrs. Bloch. May I ask the noble Lord whether Her Majesty's Government will instruct their Representative at the United Nations to state that no credence whatever can be attached by Her Majesty's Government to any explanations given by the Government of Uganda for their behaviour at Entebbe Airport, unless and until they have apprehended and punished the people who are guilty of this barbaric crime?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, may I thank both noble Lords for what they have said. I find it extremely difficult to disagree with anything that has been said. I particularly welcome the assurance that the whole House joins in the utter detestation and condemnation of the infamous crime of hijacking, and of the consequences which inevitably flow from this kind of action. As to our own Permanent Representative's contribution, I can assure the noble Lord, Lord Wigoder, that today, perhaps this afternoon, in the United Nations, he will be speaking on the same lines as the Statement I have given to the House this afternoon; that is to say, to indicate in no uncertain terms that we do not accept the explanations 34 so far proferred by the Ugandan authorities about this terrible incident.
The noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, asked one or two questions. He was grateful for the assurance that no personal message had been sent to President Amin. I repeat that assurance. The noble Lord asked why such an expression of sympathy should have been made at all. I should like to inform the House that our excellent High Commissioner, who has acted with very great understanding and effectiveness in the most trying of circumstances, was present to make absolutely clear in the most forthright terms that any suggestion that Britain or the British Government had foreknowledge of, or any involvement in, the Israeli action was totally untrue. In so saying, he used words to this effect:
"In fact, our attitude is that we deplore and condemn all actions of a hijacking character; we sympathise with those people who suffer as a result whoever they are, from whatever country they are drawn; and we particularly sympathise with the families of those who have been killed as a result". In those circumstances, I think it was perfectly understandable that he should have spoken in those terms, and more than understandable that our Ambassador in Tel Aviv should have repeated that message to the Israeli Government on the spot.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, does my noble friend the Minister realise that all that the Statement does, apart from conveying a message of sympathy to the relatives of Mrs. Bloch on the assumption that she has died, is to call upon President Amin to deal with the culprits who are responsible? But may I ask my noble friend this further question. Let us assume that President Amin takes no further action. What do Her Majesty's Government propose to do? Are we going to rely all along in this matter on the need for diplomacy, on the need to protect British residents in Uganda and on maintaining good relations with President Amin; or are we going to consider what would be a simple act of justice associated with civilisation, and that is to take whatever action is necessary to withdraw from Uganda, lock, stock and barrel? Nothing would be lost by that.
35 Will my noble friend also answer a further question which I ventured to put to him earlier on, namely: What guarantee do the present Government provide to the holders of British passports, British citizens, who may be travelling overseas, and particularly in the Continent of Africa, that they will be afforded protection? What guarantee can be provided? Is it not better now to tell the truth; that is, that we are no longer capable of providing protection? Finally, may I ask this question. In the event of a resolution being moved at the United Nations which is digressive of the action taken by the State of Israel, can we be assured that on this occasion, unlike on previous occasions, the British Government representative will follow the lead of the US representative by condemning Amin and company and supporting the action that Israel in the circumstances was bound to take?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, my noble friend asked three questions. In the first, he somehow seemed to pose two alternatives: whether to protect British residents in Uganda or, as he said, to take the clear step of withdrawing totally from Uganda. As I said, we are discussing with our High Commissioner, who returned from Africa only this morning, our relations with Uganda. I would remind my noble friend and the House that the several hundred British residents still remaining in Uganda, despite the events of the last three years which can hardly have been reassuring to any of them, do so very much of their own volition. It would be extremely difficult to persuade them against their will to return. However, he and I may unite in this: that the message would seem now to be clear, indeed.
My Lords, the second point that he made was to ask what guarantee Her Majesty's Government can give to passport holders that they will be protected from incidents like this. No more and no less than any other Government faced with this kind of behaviour can offer to its own nationals. The third point was whether, in the United Nations debate which is proceeding at this very moment, Her Majesty's Government will act according to how he, my noble friend, thinks it ought to act. This I can tell him. There are two resolutions coming on to the 36 Table—they are not quite there—in relation to this horrifying incident. One is inevitably from the African quarters and as expected, it is a denunciation of Israel. We have taken the lead with other like-minded countries to try to ensure that a fairer basis of debate for this whole incident is available to the United Nations. I think that my noble friend and the House will join with me in hoping that our representative this afternoon will succeed in the task that he has set himself.
§ Lord ALPORTMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he will realise that many of us who know Uganda and its past history accept that a major consideration in the mind of Her Majesy's Government at the present time must be the security of the remaining British population within Uganda? Is there any way in which Her Majesty's Government can persuade those who are still there to withdraw? Is it possible to ensure through the Ugandan Government that they will be able to do so in security and is it possible for the High Commission in Uganda to maintain contact with the British residents in Uganda at the present time to ensure that they are not under the very severe pressures and dangers to which they must all be exposed in the present situation in that country?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the High Commission in Kampala extends a valuable service indeed to the 500 or so British nationals who have chosen to remain there. I have indicated the difficulties of persuading them to return. Many of them feel themselves to be as Ugandan as their black neighbours. They have a deep affection for and have contributed substantially to the country. They do not see why they should leave. Neither do we, if reasonable circumstances obtain in that country. However, as I have said, the logic of the situation must be one which they must come to themselves. If, in any way, the High Commission of Her Majesty's Government can assist our fellow nationals in Uganda to come to a decision and to implement it, then we stand ready to consider every possible action that we can take.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I first join in offering deep condolences to the family whom I happen to have known from Brynmawr for the terrible tragedy 37 which has occurred? May I ask my noble friend whether we have now really come to a stage when we must realise that appeasement of terrorists and their accomplices is literally out of the question; that the civilised world as a whole should get together (as I think attempts to do so have already been made in a measure by the EEC) in order to deal with this shocking position where hijacking criminals can not only commit offences but can be received in countries? Uganda is not the first country where the authorities themselves, the President and all the rest of their forces, are accomplices to this and other international crime. In these circumstances, may I ask my noble friend whether, as the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell has already indicated, this can be brought by our Representative forcefully to the deliberations that are and will be taking place in the Security Council and in the Assembly itself? Instead of deviating, as we have been from time to time, by not voting, by abstaining from voting, against attacks on Israel, when it is absolutely obvious that the criminals were getting their way, is it not time that we should, like America, say openly to those committing these crimes that we in the civilised world will not tolerate it? In view of the great concern felt throughout the civilised world at the present time at what has happened and their admiration of the wonderful achievement of Israel, which is an indication of how these criminal acts should be dealt with, will he please see to it as soon as possible that the civilised Governments with whom we are concerned and whom we believe in raise effective action with us to stop this terrible kind of barbarism from happening again?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, certainly it is not within the power of this country alone to persuade the rest of the membership of the United Nations to take concerted action—even against the abominable crime of hijacking. But this country is taking and has taken the lead more than once on this matter in the United Nations. It is taking the lead this afternoon. It is leading the United Nations to a proper consideration of the views involved, all of them. I think that we can trust our Permanent Representative, Sir Ivor Richard, to give a good account not only of himself but of the way in which we in 38 this country view these enormities. I agree with my noble friend when he says that hijacking, in itself, is a dreadful crime, imperilling as it does the totally innocent; and that when an extra dimension of governmental connivance apparently is added to it the international authority must seriously apply its collective mind to finding an answer.
§ The Earl of ONSLOWMy Lords, will the noble Lord answer two questions? First, has he any information on the reported deaths of 250 Kenyans massacred by the Ugandan authorities? If this is true it is just multiplying the horror of Mrs. Bloch by 250, and nobody is more distressed about her fate than I am. Secondly, will the noble Lord ask Her Majesty's Representative at the United Nations to point out that for those of us who take a strongly anti-Southern Rhodesia attitude it is terribly difficult to try to uphold those views when some of the independent African countries, seeming to be led by Uganda, behave in this purely barbaric and horrifying manner?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I have seen reports in the terms that the noble Earl has indicated. I have so far no means of verifying them. If they are true, of course they complicate further an already dreadful and dangerous situation. On the second point, we should have to think carefully as to what steps we should take in that direction; but no doubt the noble Lord and I will have one of our usual discussions about this.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, while recognising the frequent difficulties of Her Majesty's Foreign Office in maintaining strict impartiality between good and evil, may one ask on this occasion whether it is the Government's intention to send a similar message of commiseration to Mr. Arafat and the Government of Palestine in exile on the unfortunate loss that they have suffered among their most highly trained and expensive hijackers? Secondly, may we on this occasion, while recognising as my noble friend has said that we are no longer capable of taking independent action against hijackers, at least give our salute to a spendid achievement by a nation which acted in a way which I wish this nation was still capable of doing?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, regarding the first part of the noble Lord's question—if it was a question—nobody enjoys his ironies more than he does. On the second part of his remarks, of course everybody responded from the heart to the courage and efficiency of the Israeli action. There are other considerations which must be brought into the general scene, as my right honourable friend the Prime Minister presciently reminded the other place the other day. While we are entitled to congratulate our friends the Israelis on their performance, on technical and almost artistic grounds they will be the first to agree that, having done what they saw fit to do, like us and like-minded countries they must look to the future and see that the fabric of basic international rules, law and order, must nevertheless be preserved. I imagine that Israel will have as much to contribute to that—and perhaps more—as many countries, as they have contributed in this specific incident to the freeing of these harassed people.
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I realise that the House feels deeply about this matter, as we all do; but with all respect we have now spent 25 minutes on this Statement and there is another important Statement to be made by my noble friend. I suggest, if it is the wish of the House, that we should now pass on to that.