Supply of Arms

HC Deb 22 February 1956 vol 549 cc355-60

21. Mr. Janner

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state what principles and factors are being taken into consideration by the parties to the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 in arriving at decisions as to whether the balance of arms in the Middle East is being maintained and, in particular, in regard to the possibilities which are to be afforded to a State to defend itself in the event of an attack by a neighbouring State.

23. Mr. Younger

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what consultations take place between the three signatories of the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 before any of the signatories delivers arms to the Middle East.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

Her Majesty's Government are in constant and close consultation on the supply of arms to Middle East countries with their cosignatories of the Tripartite Declaration.

In considering requests for arms from Middle East countries their policy is governed by the principles expressed in the Tripartite Declaration itself, and in particular by their desire to avoid an arms race. The Tripartite Declaration specifically acknowledges the right of a State to acquire arms for legitimate self-defence.

Mr. Janner

May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman two questions arising out of his reply? First, are the same considerations being given in so far as the supply of arms to the Middle East is concerned as we have regard to when we are making arms or obtaining arms for the purpose of defending ourselves against attack? Secondly, does he not think that it is a useful thing for a courageous people, prepared to defend themselves without asking anybody else to make sacrifices on their behalf, to be given an opportunity of defending themselves against attack, as is the case with regard to Israel?

Mr. Lloyd

All I can say to the hon. Gentleman is what I have said before. We are trying to act in the letter and the spirit of the Tripartite Declaration, and I think that up to date a balance has been kept.

Mr. Younger

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman satisfied that at the present time each of the three partners of the Tripartite Declaration has information about what is being supplied or about to be supplied by the other two?

Mr. Lloyd

I think that the exchange of information takes place in good faith, and I should say that on the whole it is adequate.

Mr. A. Henderson

May I ask the Foreign Secretary whether he can clear up the mystery about the application of the Government of Israel for arms to the value of 50 million dollars? The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs said that Her Majesty's Government had no knowledge of such an application. Is it or is it not within the knowledge of the Government that such an application has been made to the United States Government?

Mr. Lloyd

I should be grateful if the right hon. and learned Gentleman would put down a Question about that.

Mr. Shinwell

Was there any consultation between Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government about the supply of arms to Saudi Arabia, which is one of the Arab States, more particularly in view of the fact that we are apparently engaged in a dispute—

Mr. Ellis Smith

They are all after the oil.

Mr. Shinwell

—with Saudi Arabia at the present time? Is it appropriate, on the part of one of the signatories to the Tripartite Agreement, to send tanks to a country where there is a dispute?

Mr. Lloyd

I think there is another Question down on the Order Paper relating to that point.

Mr. Usborne

Rather than oblige either party, or to help both sides to attempt to defend themselves by arms, would it not be better to try to contrive some kind of international police force which could take care of the border, particularly if both sides would move back a kilometre?

Mr. Lloyd

The hon. Gentleman will know that that is an idea which I put forward in the House on 24th January, and we are still awaiting the considered views of the Secretary-General of the United Nations on that matter. Whether he calls it a police force, observers or a United Nations delegation does not matter much, so long as they are people who would help to keep the peace; but we must wait for what is said by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the matter.

22. Mr. Younger

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will arrange that the recent shipment of eighteen United States tanks to Saudi Arabia is taken into account at the next meeting of the signatories of the Tripartite Declaration in considering the implementation of the Declaration.

24. Mr. Janner

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will arrange that the recent supply of tanks to Saudi Arabia by the United States of America should be taken into consideration when the signatories to the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 make future plans for the implementation of the Declaration; and whether Her Majesty's Government will now be prepared to supply Israel with suitable arms to protect themselves against any attack by a neighbouring country.

25. Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will place the supply of eighteen light tanks by the United States of America to Saudi Arabia upon the agenda for the next meeting of the Tripartite Declaration Powers, summoned to discuss the implementation of the Declaration.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

Specific items are taken into account in the regular consultations on paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Tripartite Declaration which take place between the signatories. This item was no exception to the rule.

Mr. Younger

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that it is a little difficult for the public to believe in effective coordination in the delivery of arms by the three partners when they read of events such as occurred in New York last week, when a decision to ship eighteen tanks to Saudi Arabia was first made, then suspended and then reaffirmed, all within a space of about forty-eight hours? Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whether, in fact, there was any consultation in regard to these switches of decision by the United States?

Mr. Lloyd

This process of consultation is quite voluntary as between the three parties, and each of the three parties retains its rights as a sovereign independent State. What we seek to do is to exchange information and try to achieve a common policy. I am certainly not going to be drawn into discussing or into disclosing the attitude of the States concerned on individual items. I think that would destroy the benefit of these consultations and would make the continuance of them on a confidential basis quite impossible.

Mr. Janner

Will not the right hon. and learned Gentleman take into consideration the fact that Saudi Arabia has expressed her intention, together with other Arab States, of attacking Israel? Will he not realise at this stage that the Israeli people are prepared to defend themselves without endangering the life of any person in this country or in any other country, if they are given the opportunity to defend themselves? What is he prepared to do about it?

Mr. Lloyd

The hon. Gentleman did not pay regard to the statement of his hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, East (Mr. Crossman) on 24th January, in which he said that in his opinion the Israeli forces were well capable of coping with any forces which the Arab States could bring against them. I would remind the hon. Gentleman that similar statements have been made before. We are satisfied that up to date a balance has been kept.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

In view of reports that dollars spent in Saudi Arabia were used for fomenting anti-British and anti-American riots in Jordan, is it not foolish to send arms to Saudi Arabia as well? Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman think that will help to preserve the peace in the Buraimi Oasis or other places nearby?

Mr. Lloyd

Her Majesty's Government are not sending arms to Saudi Arabia.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

But our Allies are.

Mr. Shinwell

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman be good enough to explain why there was no consultation between our Government and the United States Government about sending arms to Saudi Arabia at a time when there is a dispute between Saudi Arabia and this country? Was it not a most improper action to take in the circumstances?

Mr. Lloyd

The right hon. Gentleman has misunderstood me. I said there was consultation about specific items and that this was no exception to the rule.

Mr. Shinwell

If there was consultation, did the right hon. and learned Gentleman make any protest against the action of the United States Government?

Mr. Lloyd

The right hon. Gentleman did not listen to my previous Answer. I said that I would not be drawn into disclosing the attitude of the Government on particular items, because that would prevent consultation.

Mr. Amery

Can my right hon. and learned Friend assure us that he is satisfied that these tanks will not be used against our Allies? Will he bear in mind the importance of maintaining the balance in the Persian Gulf as well as in the Eastern Mediterranean?

Mr. Lloyd

Regarding the first part my hon. Friend's supplementary question, there are certain logistic difficulties which would make it impractical for them to be used for that purpose. The other question is a matter which we have in mind, and it has guided our attitude on this sort of item.

Mr. Shinwell

A very unsatisfactory reply.

Mr. Ellis Smith

They are all after the oil.