§ 48. Mr. Donnellyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now instruct the British representative at the United Nations Assembly to propose that the Chinese People's Government is admitted to the United Nations.
§ Mr. EdenNo, Sir. I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave on this matter to a supplementary question by the hon. Member on 21st January last.
§ Mr. DonnellyDid not the right hon. Gentleman say yesterday in reply to a supplementary question:
… I am not prepared, so long as I am Foreign Secretary of this country, to advocate to the United Nations the recognition of a Government who are in full aggression against the United Nations…. "—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th March, 1953; Vol. 512, c. 2080.]Is not this a direct contradiction in terms of the fact that Her Majesty's Government's policy is still to recognise the Peking Government and negotiate representation between the two Governments?
§ Mr. EdenNo, Sir. The hon. Gentleman must surely be aware that recognition took place before the act of aggression and the act of aggression was condemned by a Resolution of the Assembly itself in February, 1951, during the time of the late Government. I do not see how in those circumstances it could conceivably be thought that I could come forward at this moment when they are still attacking United Nations troops in Korea and advocate their membership of the United Nations.
§ Mr. BeswickDoes not the right hon. Gentleman realise that membership of the United Nations Organisation is not necessarily a reward for good behaviour but is also an opportunity to restrain potential aggressors?
§ Mr. EdenI did not say that it was a reward for good behaviour—that would indeed be a new definition for membership of the United Nations—but this is quite another matter. The late Government themselves refrained from advocating membership of the United Nations once the Resolution was passed, and I think their attitude was absolutely right. Will the hon. Gentleman please recall that only last November peace offers were 30 put forward in the Indian Resolution with the approval of 50 United Nations members and rejected by the Communists, who are still attacking our troops. How, then, can we say that they should be members of the United Nations Organisation?
Miss LeeDo we understand from the Foreign Secretary's reply that Soviet Russia is in no way involved in the fighting in Korea? Does the Foreign Secretary wish to give the impression that open aggression is punished and insidious aggression is not punished? Would it not be better to accept the point already made by my hon. Friend and try to get all the nations represented?
§ Mr. EdenPerhaps I have not made myself clear. As I see it, I am governed by a Resolution passed by the United Nations themselves in February, 1951, during the life of the late Government and endorsed by the late Government, which condemned the Communist Chinese Government for an act of aggression in Korea. While that act is still going on, I consider myself bound by the terms of that Resolution.