HL Deb 01 March 1995 vol 561 cc1475-7

2.48 p.m.

Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether two offers for a complete cease-fire both officially made by the PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) were rejected in 1994 by the Turkish Government and, if so, whether they know the reason why.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey)

My Lords, we are aware that the PKK leadership made two references to starting a cease-fire in 1994. On both occasions their violence continued. The Turkish Government have said that they will not negotiate with terrorists; nor should they.

Lord Hylton

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her Answer. However, will Her Majesty's Government, with their experience of accepting cease-fires in Northern Ireland, use every possible means to convince Turkey to adopt non-violent conflict resolution after a war which has lasted 10 years, displaced 2 million people, killed 15,000 people and nearly destroyed the Turkish economy by inflation?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey

My Lords, I understand the noble Lord's great concern for Turkey. But there is no getting away from it: the PKK is a terrorist organisation. We condemn all acts of terrorism. However, we also condemn atrocities and human rights abuses carried out by both sides of the conflict. The noble Lord has asked the Government to convince the Turkish Government to adopt non-violent conflict resolution. I believe that Prime Minister Ciller is indeed seeking to do so. That is exactly what she and her new Foreign Minister Karayalcin have said. They want to get constitutional reform through and they want to bring a peace. But there are no short cuts when there are terrorists involved.

Baroness Blackstone

My Lords, can the Minister comment on reports from human rights organisations that the incidence of torture being used against the Kurds by the Turkish authorities is again on the increase, especially in the south-east part of Turkey? Can the Minister also give us an assurance that the Turkish Government will be left in no doubt that their application for membership of the European Union will not be accepted until their human rights record improves?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey

My Lords, the answer to the noble Baroness's third question is: of course that is so; indeed, it has been made quite clear. However, I should tell the noble Baroness that there are a number of ways in which we have to continue to express our deep concern about human rights. It always forms a major part of our dialogue with members of the Turkish Government, both bilaterally and with our partners in the European Union—most recently, less than a month ago. I also believe that it is most important that Turkey's western orientation should be maintained. That is why we seek to keep all channels of communication open with Turkey. We particularly believe that the Customs union between the European Union and Turkey would play an important part in the process. That is a major objective, not only for us but for all members of the European Union.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that constitutional reform is impossible to achieve in a country where any discussion of devolution, autonomy or other such arrangements is illegal under Article 125 of the Turkish constitution, which makes any act or words which threaten the indivisible integrity of the Turkish state, republic and people an offence punishable by death? Does the noble Baroness not agree that by imprisoning the Members of Parliament belonging to the Democracy Party, by destroying that party, by killing and imprisoning human rights activists, lawyers and political workers throughout the south east the state has driven the whole of the people of the south east into the arms of the PKK? Does she not agree that, as a solution is being reached by negotiation between the governments and the armed oppositions in EI Salvador, Guatemala, Angola, Georgia and Azerbaijan, it is likely that some progress could be made if the Turkish Government would agree at least to sit down at the negotiating table?

Noble Lords

Speech! Order!

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey

My Lords, most noble Lords in this House will know that we take every opportunity to make known to the Turkish Government our concern not only at their human rights performance overall but also about the need for constitutional reform, of which I spoke earlier. We have expressed our concern to the Turkish Government about almost all the issues which the noble Lord mentioned. However, giving any comfort to PKK terrorists does not assist in getting the government to change.

Lord Glenamara

My Lords, do the Government accept that the only long-term solution to the Kurdish problem in Turkey, Iraq and Iran is an independent Kurdish state?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey

My Lords, no. The noble Lord should not confuse the situation regarding the PKK terrorists with the natural aspirations of Turkish Kurds, whom the Turkish constitution safeguards.

Lord Rea

My Lords, in view of the human rights violations by the Turkish Government about which we have heard at Question Time over and over again, what is the Government's position regarding arms exports to that country? If Turkey's membership of NATO is a problem in that respect and prevents us from banning the sale of arms, should the continued membership of NATO by Turkey be reconsidered?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey

My Lords, the answer to the noble Lord's last question is genuinely no. Turkey has a need, as all NATO members have, for external defence. All arms sales are considered on a case-by-case basis. We take into account all the normal arms export criteria, including the country's human rights record and the likely end use of the equipment concerned. If arms are applied for which could be used for internal repression, licences are not granted.