HC Deb 25 February 1948 vol 447 cc1931-3
17. Mr. Blackburn

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will indicate the intention of His Majesty's Government to refer to the Security Council their dispute with the Governments of Argentina and Chile if the present line of action by those Governments is continued.

Mr. Bevin

No, Sir. The policy of His Majesty's Government is that the question of rival claims in the Falkland Islands Dependencies should, in the first instance, be brought before the International Court of Justice. This is based on our belief that international discussions could scarcely be profitable until the question of title has been subjected to international legal examination. This, of course, in no way precludes the possibility of discussions at a later stage.

It has been suggested from the Chilean side that our offer to accept the opinion of the Court was not a fair one because we were asking the other parties to appear as plaintiffs. I wish to point out that the sole reason for presenting the matter in this form was that neither Argentina nor Chile had accepted the Optional Clause of the Statute of the International Court of justice and that consequently it is impossible at present for His Majesty's Government to bring this dispute before the Court by themselves proceeding as plaintiffs. His Majesty's Government desire, however, to reaffirm that if the Argentine and Chilean Governments are willing to make an agreement with us under which the Court shall pronounce upon the title to these territories, we shall be glad to collaborate in the negotiation of such an agreement.

The President of Chile has now returned to his own country after his visit to the South Shetlands and has made certain declarations. The Argentine fleet carrying five Admirals is now, I understand, off Deception Island. His Majesty's representative in Buenos Aires has been assured by the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs that these vessels have been sent with no intention of asserting any rights or taking possession of any territory but merely to carry out routine exercises in that area.

In the opinion of His Majesty's Government these expeditions and the declarations which accompany them in no way affect the question of title and sovereignty in these areas. They are gestures by the parties concerned in support of their claims, which of course are not recognised by the other parties. In so far as they create excitement and ill-feeling they appear to His Majesty's Government highly regrettable.

Mr. Blackburn

While I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement, may I ask him if he is aware that one of these declarations by the President of Chile contained the accusation that we are violating the principles of the United Nations? Will the Foreign Secretary, therefore, make it plain that in the last resort we shall be perfectly willing to have this matter submitted to the Security Council, if it should become necessary to do so?

Mr. Bevin

I must really get this title business settled. People cannot go on interfering with British territory over which we are exercising sovereignty and then, as a result of kicking up a row, expect us to go to the Security Council. I have offered, in this case and others, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, to have the legal title settled in the International Court of Justice, and until that title is settled, I am not prepared to take any other steps.

Mr. Eden

While endorsing what the right hon. Gentleman has said in reference to The Hague Court, which I thought was indisputable in any country which accepts international law, may I ask him also whether the landing and settling of foreigners in these Islands is not, in fact, contrary to the domestic legislation of the Falkland Islands and, if so, should not a protest have been made on that account at some time?

Mr. Bevin

I would like to look into that. The right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the administration of the Falkland Islands is under another Department; I have only been dealing with it from the Foreign Office point of view. I will look into that matter.

Mr. Henry Usborne

Is it not rather ludicrous to talk about an International Court when it is apparently impossible to bring a dispute before that Court?

Mr. Bevin

That is not correct. There are cases before the Court now, which are being dealt with. But really it is no use people talking about the United Nations unless we are willing to utilise the International Court which is a part of it.

Mr. Eden

While I accept what the right hon. Gentleman said about domestic law, may I put this to him? I assume that His Majesty's Government could not agree to any squatters' rights from foreigners who happen to settle in these territories?

Mr. Bevin

No, but I think the squatters would probably get so cold, they might go of their own volition.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm the Press reports that the President of Chile has purported to issue a proclamation annexing certain of this territory to Chile? If this is confirmed, what action will the right hon. Gentleman take?

Mr. Bevin

I must have notice of these questions. Where international legal matters are concerned, I do not like answering supplementary questions.

Forward to