§ 6. Mr. Emrys Hughesasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence what further information he has received from the United Nations about the air raid by United Nations aeroplanes on two square miles of territory in Korea on 8th May in which 12,000 gallons of napalm were dropped and in which 165 buildings were destroyed; and what steps were taken to warn the civilian population.
§ Mr. BirchI am advised that on 8th May some 450 bomber aircraft attacked supply and vehicle shelters and storage buildings six miles north of the small town of Suan. This target was known to be an active enemy supply point. General purpose bombs, rockets and machine guns were used as well as napalm. About 100 storage buildings and two supply shelters were destroyed. It is not a practical military measure to give warnings of attacks.
§ Mr. HughesCan the hon. Gentleman tell us if, among the 165 buildings, there were any schools or other places which were used by refugees? Is he aware that in a previous raid an orphanage in which 50 children were living was burnt and that every child in the place was burnt? Can he tell us what steps are being taken to safeguard civilians in such circumstances?
§ Mr. BirchThe buildings in this case were a number of derelict gold mines which were being used only for the purpose of the storage of weapons and means of war. I do not know what information the hon. Gentleman has obtained elsewhere, but in this instance the buildings were derelict mines.
§ Mr. StokesAre we to understand from the hon. Gentleman's reply that the whole of the two square miles was regarded as a military target and that there were not supposed to be any civilians there at all?
§ Mr. BirchThe only civilians likely to have been there were those engaged at the supply dumps, and I do not think any steps could be taken about them.
§ Mr. Fenner BrockwayIs the hon. Gentleman aware of the very deep concern widely felt in this country about the use of this weapon? If such a large proportion of prisoners from North Korea do not wish to return to Communist countries, is it not a mistake to make an attack by this method upon large civil populations in North Korea?
§ Mr. BirchI am very well aware of the concern, but I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary the other day. I really do not think it is possible to proceed upon one weapon in this matter.
§ 10. Mr. Stokesasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence if he will now propose to the United Nations that the napalm bomb should not be used against civilian centres of population in Korea.
§ Mr. BirchNo, Sir. As indicated in my reply of 14th May, the napalm bomb is being used against military targets in Korea and is not directed against civilian centres of population.
§ Mr. StokesI know, but, in the light of the facts, that answer is completely unsatisfactory. Have the Minister and his noble Friend studied the reports published in the "Manchester Guardian" on 1st March and 15th May, which make it perfectly clear that, whatever may be the considerations, the bombs are falling on areas which are predominantly civilian? Will he take some steps to see that this is stopped?
§ Mr. BirchThe right hon. Gentleman will have noticed that the reports in the "Manchester Guardian" related to 1950 and 1951 during periods of mobile operations. Much greater care is being taken now in a period of static operations. The area about which I was asked a minute or two ago had been the subject of lengthy 448 reconnaissance to establish that it was a supply dump.
§ Viscount HinchingbrookeIn the case of these weapons, the propaganda counterblast of which greatly exceeds their initial military effect, ought not their continued use to be seriously considered by Her Majesty's Government as a matter of the highest possible policy affecting long-term strategy?
§ Mr. BirchMy noble Friend will realise that a considerable build-up of enemy forces is going on in Korea, and one of the most merciful ways of conducting war is to stop the enemy from getting supplies and ammunition. That is the object of the attacks.
§ Mr. StokesThat is completely unsatisfactory. Is the Minister not aware that in his own reply last week he said this is a bomb which can be used with the utmost precision? How comes it, then, that such an enormous number of civilians are suffering as a direct result of this action?
§ Brigadier MedlicottIs it not a fact that the necessity of the war in Korea was accepted by many people as something in the nature of a crusade to establish international law and order on the highest plane? How can we possibly justify being the first to use a weapon which is repellant to many right thinking people?
§ Mr. BirchAs my hon and gallant Friend knows, and as the right hon. Gentleman knows, all weapons of war produce very terrible results, and those who start wars should reflect upon that before they start them.
§ Mr. StokesI am sorry, but really that is unsatisfactory. Surely the hon. Gentleman's noble and gallant Friend has a very fine reputation in this matter. As any soldier knows, if proper instructions are followed, even with these weapons, greater care can be taken of civilian life than has been shown hitherto.
§ Mr. BirchIt is true that great care is now being taken, but it is difficult in a period of mobile operations, when troops are moving with great rapidity, to see that a bomb gets exactly to the right place.
§ Mr. AlportDoes not my hon. Friend agree that the use of the weapon could 449 be stopped immediately if the Communist negotiators at the truce talks showed good faith in bringing negotiations to a speedy end?
§ Mr. J. HudsonDoes not the hon. Gentleman agree, on the reports now available, that it is clear that this weapon cannot be directed merely for purposes of war but is bound to leave in its train great outrages of suffering among the civilian population if they be anywhere in the neighbourhood? Would he not agree, therefore, that, on the evidence available, the time has come to recommend the entire cessation of the use of this bomb?
§ Mr. BirchIt is true to say of all bombs that one cannot absolutely guarantee that they will not kill civilians. As I said the other day, the point about precision is that, if the bomb is dropped from a height, it buries itself and is therefore ineffective. If properly used, therefore, it should be a very precise weapon.