§ 31. Mr. F. M. Bennettasked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, in view of the support given by Her Majesty's Government at the Security Council to the Resolution on Kashmir of 30th March, 1951, what representations he 1446 has received from the Pakistan Government consequent upon recent declarations of the Kashmir Constituent Assembly on the state's political future.
§ Lord John HopeI am afraid that I cannot divulge the nature of confidential communications with another Commonwealth Government.
§ Mr. BennettWhile I appreciate that point of view, may I ask whether my hon. Friend would be prepared at least to give an undertaking that Her Majesty's Government stands by all outstanding Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council as to the future of this State, and in particular the Resolution of 30th March, 1951, in which it is expressly laid down that the so-called Constituent Assembly of Kashmir has no right whatsoever by any method whatsoever to attempt to decide the future disposition of the State?
§ Lord John HopeYes, Sir. Her Majesty's Government stand by their support of that Resolution of 30th March I take it that the affirmation to which my hon. Friend refers is that which affirms
that the convening of a Constituent Assembly recommended by the General Council of the All-Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and any action that the Assembly might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or any part thereof would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above principle.The principle is, of course, that referring to the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsIn view of the fact that this Question concerning India has emanated from the Government side of the House, may I ask whether it is the desire of Her Majesty's Government that India should stay within the Commonwealth?
§ Lord John HopeThe Answer, Sir, is "Yes".
§ 32. Major Beamishasked the Under. Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the terms of all United Nations Resolutions or recommendations regarding the future status of Kashmir; and whether Her Majesty's Government's representative in the United Nations will continue to press for the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir, and, in particular, 1447 for the consent of the Indian Government to the presence of United Nations observers in Kashmir during the forthcoming elections.
§ Lord John HopeThe United Nations Resolutions on Kashmir have been published in the records of the United Nations and are available in the Library of the House. The most important are those of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan of 13th August, 1948, and 5th January, 1949, which were accepted by both sides and which provide for a settlement through a plebiscite under United Nations auspices. These Resolutions gave the plebiscite administrator authority to appoint observers. Her Majesty's Government have always hoped that this dispute would be settled by agreement between the two countries. That is still their hope. Meanwhile Her Majesty's Government will continue to support efforts to reach agreement which would give effect to the Resolutions of the United Nations.
§ Major BeamishIs my hon. Friend aware that many people find it very difficult indeed to reconcile Mr. Nehru's attitude to certain foreign problems with his repeated rejection of United Nations Resolutions on Kashmir? May I specifically ask my hon. Friend to be good enough to comment on some recent authorative reports that in the forthcoming elections in Kashmir in the spring, no party which wants union with Pakistan, or which even wants independence, is to be allowed to take part?
§ Lord John HopeI cannot comment on the last remarks of my hon. and gallant Friend, but I think that it would be most unjustified for the House to assume that Mr. Nehru will, in fact, go back on any undertaking which he has given. The Prime Minister of India did say, in the Council of States on 18th May, 1954, when talking about the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954:
Every assurance we have given, or every international commitment we have made in regard to Kashmir, holds good and stands.
§ Mr. BottomleyIs the Under-Secretary aware that we welcome the statement that Her Majesty's Government will do all possible to bring about an amicable settlement of this problem?
§ 34. Mr. F. M. Bennettasked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether, in view of Pandit Nehru's forthcoming return visit to London on his way back from the United States of America to India he will take this opportunity to meet him to discuss implementation of outstanding Resolutions of the United Nations in regard to Kashmir.
§ Lord John HopeMy right hon. Friend the Prime Minister expects to meet Mr. Nehru when he returns to this country on 24th December. I cannot, however, say what will be the subject of their conversation.
§ Mr. BennettWould the Minister at least suggest to his right hon. Friend that, at a time when this country has been under particularly heavy fire, rightly or wrongly, for not promptly complying with United Nations Resolutions, it would not be a bad idea if one of the chief protagonists were to set an example and practise just a little of what he preaches? While it may be wrong to assume that Mr. Nehru does not intend to stand by United Nations Resolutions, is it not, nevertheless, a fact which no one in any quarter of this House can deny that at this moment Mr. Nehru stands in default of precisely six United Nations Resolutions?
§ Mr. Ellis SmithOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not, in accordance with the past practice of this House, wrong for hon. Members to make serious reflections of that kind upon a gentleman who is to visit this country especially to meet the Prime Minister?
§ Mr. SpeakerThis Question was addressed to the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. I presume that there is some Ministerial responsibility in the matter, otherwise it would not have been accepted by that Department.
§ Mr. Ellis SmithFurther to that point of order. What I say, Mr. Speaker, is based on past practice; that, apart from Ministerial responsibility, it has been considered ill-advised, and has been deprecated by previous Speakers, that reflections of that character should be made upon a representative gentleman—who is the Prime Minister of India—visiting this country.
§ Mr. BennettBefore you reply, Mr. Speaker, may I ask whether it is not a fact that all I have done is to point out the absolutely truthful fact that, at this moment, India stands in default of no less than six Resolutions of the United Nations? I made no reflection on any statesman or country, but simply stated the truth. During the last few weeks, we have often enough been told that we stand in default of Resolutions, so why is it not right to draw attention to others who are in default?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I hope that we shall not have a debate on this. I have myself checked before what I considered to be an undesirable reflection upon this gentleman and I should do so again, but it is very hard to draw the line between what is allowable and what is not. I think that the form of the original Question, asking if the Prime Minister would discuss this matter with Mr. Nehru, was quite in order.
§ Mr. BottomleyDoes not the Minister think it a little difficult for the Prime Minister to raise this matter with the Indian Prime Minister, when our own hands are not clean in respect of the United Nations?
§ Lord John HopeThe answer to the right hon. Gentleman is that we have observed all our obligations so far as Resolutions are concerned. But perhaps I might ask the House to let me rest on the reply which I gave to the Question, which asked me what the Prime Minister and Mr. Nehru were going to talk about when Mr. Nehru came to see my right hon. Friend. I have not the slightest idea what they will talk about. That is what I was asked, and I would very much rather leave the matter there.
§ 35. Mr. E. Johnsonasked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations when the situation in Kashmir was last discussed by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations; what decisions were taken; and what instructions have been given to our representative at the United Nations about ensuring that these decisions are carried out.
§ Lord John HopeKashmir was last discussed by the Security Council of the United Nations in December, 1952, when a Resolution was passed urging the two 1450 Governments to enter into further negotiations about the specific number of forces to remain on either side of the cease-fire line in Kashmir at the end of the demilitarisation period. These negotiations, which unfortunately were unsuccessful, took place on the subject with Dr. Graham, the United Nations representative for India and Pakistan, as intermediary. The result is set out in detail in his fifth Report, which is available in the Library. This Report has not yet been considered by the Security Council, since the Kashmir dispute then became the subject of a series of direct discussions between the Prime Ministers of the two countries, and neither party has yet formally asked the Security Council to resume its consideration of the dispute.
§ Mr. JohnsonMay I ask my hon. Friend if he is aware that people in this country who recall India's act of aggression against Hyderabad would think more highly of that Government if they took some notice of the Resolutions of the United Nations with respect to Kashmir?
§ Mr. HobsonCould the hon. Gentleman state whether Her Majesty's Government are going to take the occasion of the discussion at the United Nations of this question of Kashmir to raise the question of the imprisonment of Sheik Abdullah, who has been imprisoned for nearly four years without any charges even being preferred?
§ Lord John HopeThat is a different question, and I should be obliged if the hon. Gentleman would put it down.
§ Mr. SpeakerI rather think that that is the responsibility of the Indian Government and not of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.