HL Deb 19 January 1978 vol 388 cc204-7

3.17 p.m.

Lord BROCKWAY

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 what progress has been made in the talks between Western members of the UN Security Council and representatives of the Republic of South Africa regarding the future of Namibia.

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, the talks between representatives of the five Western members of the Security Council and the South African Government have made considerable progress towards an internationally acceptable settlement in Namibia. There are, however, still a number of difficult problems to be resolved and the five Powers hope to hold further talks in the near future with the parties primarily involved.

Lord BROCKWAY

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply, but may I ask whether time is not now very short? Is there not the danger that the Republic of South Africa may proceed unilaterally with its tribal constitution and its early election under the intimidation of its own troops? Can the Minister say whether the difference of opinion as to the date of the New York conference has now been resolved so that there may be discussions both with the Republic and with SWAPO?

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, in answer to the first part of my noble friend's question, if, indeed, any State were to proceed on the lines he has indicated and if South Africa, for instance, were to do what he fears it may do, then it would be in direct contravention of Resolution 385 of the United Nations Security Council. That Resolution enjoins upon the five Powers, and others principally involved, to move to early independence in Namibia based on the removal of South African troops, the release of detainees, the restoration of complete democratic equality among all parties in that country and other provisions, which I would say are as mandatory as anything on South Africa and every other country.

Lord CARRINGTON

My Lords, would the noble Lord explain to the House why the Western five are discussing the future of Namibia in New York with the Republic of South Africa and with the representatives of external SWAPO, and are excluding the representatives of the political Parties in Namibia itself which have as much right to be consulted as SWAPO?

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, I think that the choice of New York as a locale arises from practical considerations as to who can get to such a meeting with reasonable safety and celerity. As to the inclusion of other political Parties, I am most grateful to the noble Lord for drawing my attention to this matter. I would agree with him that it is imperative that the Five should consult all substantial political elements in Namibia.

Lord AVEBURY

My Lords, has the noble Lord seen reports of the report published yesterday by Amnesty International which shows that torture is practised as an instrument of policy on a widespread and horrifying scale by the South African Government? How can political Parties be expected to function freely in Namibia when an atmosphere of terror prevails in that country? Will the noble Lord seek the advice of Amnesty International, as a matter of urgency, to ascertain the extent to which this report applies in the territory of Namibia; and, if it does, raise the matter in the United Nations?

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, the whole purpose of the five-Power initiative, which has the blessing—indeed, the encouragement—of the United Nations through the resolution that I have quoted, is to avoid developments of that sort; to negotiate independence not in an atmosphere of repression, terrorism and torture, but in one of free democratic exchange of views, bringing in all elements in Namibia itself, as the noble Lord has just said. As to the truth of the allegations of torture, I have not yet seen this report by Amnesty International, but I most certainly shall read it, as I read everything published by Amnesty.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

My Lords, may we take it from my noble friend's first Answer that, as between the available alternatives, Her Majesty's Government prefer to see the defence of Namibia managed by the Soviet Union than by the Republic of South Africa?

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, I should be very hard put to it to agree twice on the same day with my noble friend, and I am afraid that I cannot oblige him. Quite frankly, and with great affection and respect, I do not quite see the sequentiality of his later remarks.

Lord BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is rue, as reported in the Guardian this morning, that the five Western Powers have prepared their own alternative scheme to that of the Republic of South Africa? May I ask, constructively, could not the difficulty about the presence of South African troops during the transition period be met by asking them to be a fragment of the proposed United Nations peace force?

Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS

My Lords, I very much welcome the second part of my noble friend's supplementary question. It is a constructive suggestion and I think it is being considered. We are by no means ruling out the possibility of a United Nations force, whether civil or other, appropriate to the needs of this situation. What my noble friend has said bears very much on an actively considered possibility.

As to the other part of his question, whether the Five have yet evolved a full alternative system, certainly they have gone a long way towards doing so. But as to the position or status of any papers they have prepared, I could not say. It is a progressively moving negotiation. As I said in my first Answer, we are making very good progress.