HC Deb 05 March 1956 vol 549 cc1709-15
Mr. Crossman (by Private Notice)

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the provisions of the agreement between this country and Jordan that a number of senior officers should be attached to the Arab Legion, he has any statement to make on the situation arising from the dismissal of Glubb Pasha.

The Prime Minister (Sir Anthony Eden)

The House will have heard with resentment and regret of the summary dismissal of General Glubb and two other senior British officers of the Arab Legion. The lifetime of devoted service which General Glubb has given to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan should have received more generous treatment. It is right to tell the House that the King of Jordan and the Jordan Prime Minister have told Her Majesty's Ambassador that they do not want any change to take place in Anglo-Jordan relations, and that they stand by the Anglo-Jordan Treaty. The Prime Minister has also issued a public statement to this effect in which he said that the Jordan Government "intend to retain British officers now working with the Arab Legion in the work and services which they are carrying out. In their capacity as officers in the service of His Majesty the King they naturally enjoy the same confidence and trust which their fellow officers enjoy."

The Jordan Government have also given assurances as to the maintenance of order and the protection of British lives and property.

Her Majesty's Government have given due weight to the Jordan Government's statement regarding these officers. They feel, however, that in view of the treatment meted out to the British officers who have been dismissed, it would be wrong for British officers in the Arab Legion to he left in an uncertain position. It is with this immediate problem that I propose to deal today.

In our opinion, officers in executive commands cannot be asked to continue in positions of responsibility without authority. We have therefore asked that such officers should be relieved of their commands. Those on the Active List of the British Army—about 15 in number—will be recalled; the future of those on contract with the Jordan Government will be discussed with that Government. Other British officers in the Legion are being asked to continue to carry out their duties for the present.

In this statement I have dealt only with the position of the British officers, which was the question asked by the hon. Member. We are, of course, considering the effect which these events will have on our relations with Jordan, and, indeed, on the whole situation in the Middle East. These are matters which we are discussing with our Allies, but I do not propose to comment on this wider aspect today.

Mr. Crossman

I appreciate the reasons for the Prime Minister's reticence, but may I ask him to clarify one or two points? First, does he agree that, despite all the assurances he has received, the dismissal of Glubb Pasha and four of his leading staff officers is, in fact, an anti-British coup d'état which has created an entirely new situation in Jordan?

Secondly, does he agree that the dismissal of these four officers and the news which he has now given of the resignation of all the others from executive posts with the Legion means that the Legion is now completely free from all British control? Does he not agree that that really endangers the position of our officers and their wives out there, and also of our scattered units in the country of Jordan? What is he going to do about that?

Thirdly, does he agree that the removal of all British control will create the gravest danger of new incidents along the whole of the Israel-Jordan frontier? What is he going to do about that?

The Prime Minister

With regard to the effect upon the Treaty of the dismissal of General Glubb and these officers, under the terms of the Treaty there is no obligation upon the Jordan Government to employ British officers. There is an obligation upon Her Majesty's Government to supply British officers if requested. At the same time, I must add that it is clear that the whole spirit of the Treaty is based upon the need for consultation so as to ensure mutual defence, and in this sense Glubb Pasha's dismissal is against the spirit of the Treaty in the view of Her Majesty's Government.

As to the other points in the Question, I tried to emphasise to the House that these executive officers—about 15 in number—to whom I have referred, were being left in a position of nominal authority without actual authority. It seemed to Her Majesty's Government that that was not a position which we could accept, if only because of the possible international repercussions of such a position. Therefore, we have not removed those officers from any position of authority; what we have done is to ask that, they having been deprived of authority, they shall now be removed from an anomalous position, in which they should never have been put.

As regards the effect of these dismissals upon the international situation and upon Israel, the House must judge—and can judge as well as Her Majesty's Government. As to the effect of the presence or absence of these British officers, I would have thought that many would realise that the effect upon the military value of the Legion would be very serious indeed.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is it not clear that the dismissal of Glubb Pasha and his two colleagues constitutes a major change in our relations with Jordan? Although there may have been no technical breach of the Treaty, is it not quite clear—as the right hon. Gentleman said in replying to my hon. Friend—that in spirit this action is in contradiction of the Treaty? Is it not also clear that this action constitutes a major set-back for British policy in the Middle East—something which we shall have to consider very seriously indeed? Is the Prime Minister aware that we on the Opposition side cannot allow the matter to rest here? We must insist upon a very early debate, either this afternoon or, at any rate, within the next two days. Is the Prime Minister prepared to give an undertaking that we shall have that debate?

The Prime Minister

Yes, certainly. I am not seeking—and my statement does not seek in the slightest degree—to minimise the seriousness of these events. I fully share the sense of gravity with which the right hon. Gentleman spoke. It is certainly right that this House should discuss these events this week, on a day which, perhaps, can be arranged between us.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is it then quite definite that we shall have a debate this week? Have the Government decided the sort of Motion it would be, or is that a matter which has not yet been thought about?

The Prime Minister

The Government have not yet decided upon that. Perhaps we can discuss that matter.

Mr. Shinwell

I should like to put a question which is somewhat urgent. Have any steps been taken to afford protection to our units in Jordan other than those associated with the Arab Legion? What protection is to be afforded to our air bases in Jordan?

The Prime Minister

Careful consideration has been given to both these matters. Our units in Jordan are either at the two air bases, which the right hon. Gentleman knows about, or at Aqaba. I should not like to say anything more at the moment in public except that we have naturally taken into consideration all that and also that we should take into account the assurance in this respect which the Jordanian Government have repeatedly made—[Interruption.] I think we should, because they have been our Allies for many years, whatever the differences are now—not only in respect of our Forces but of the Arab Legion and those attached to it.

Mr. Amery

While accepting that it may have been necessary to withdraw the executive officers from Jordan, would not my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister agree that this is exactly what the more extreme nationalists in Jordan want to see done? Without asking my right hon. Friend to give us any details, could he at least assure us that we are not going to accept these reverses lying down and that something will be done to restore the general position in the Middle East?

The Prime Minister

What I have dealt with quite clearly in my answer is the immediate problem, which we had to consider over the weekend, of these officers. I believe the decision we have taken is the right one, and indeed the only possible one in the circumstances with which we are faced. As I said, I do not want to go beyond, and deal with general topics today. I cannot do it.

Mr. H. Morrison

Can the Prime Minister not give a rather more definite answer and assurance to my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) about the security of the scattered British forces that still exist in Jordan and which must cause a considerable amount of anxiety, in view of the excitement which exists in that country? Does he not think that this indicates another important incident which rather reflects the growing collapse of British policy in the Middle East? [HON. MEMBERS: "Abadan."] Hon. Gentlemen say "Abadan," but I would point out that Her Majesty's Government have pursued the policy of the Labour Government on that matter. Can the Prime Minister form any estimate of what the Conservative Party would have said if these things had happened under a Labour Government?

The Prime Minister

As regards the position of British Forces in Jordan, I have already said in reply to the right hon. Gentleman that those forces consist of three elements: two aerodromes, of which the right hon. Gentleman will have been informed, and one British armoured force at Akaba. Those are the British forces there. As regards other matters, I can only assure the House that the general security of British populations, which are large in Jordan, is quite apart from anything connected with the military at all. I do not think I can add to anything I have said. I do not think we shall be wise to say anything which will make their position more difficult than it is at the present moment.

Mr. Patrick Maitland

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very widespread anxiety and indignation about this matter and that there is a clamour, to put it no higher than that at the moment, for an emphatic reassertion of British interests in this area?

Mr. Wigg

Will the Prime Minister bear in mind, despite the pressure he may get from his own wild men, that his prime duty and consideration at this moment must be the safety and security of British forces abroad?

Mr. Harold Davies

Has the Prime Minister been approached recently by the Jordan Government to revise the 1948 Treaty, and is it not correct that when we were approached to revise it the Jordan Government were told that it could not be revised for 15 years; and that the Government did not make use of the escape clause in that Treaty which would have enabled negotiations some months ago when we were approached?

The Prime Minister

I do not think so, but I would like details. I am afraid I have not the detailed information on that point to give without notice. My impression is that we have been asked several times, there have been several discussions, about revising the 1948 Treaty and that could certainly have been discussed. It is only fair to add that, so far as our records go, at no time in connection with that was there any question of Glubb Pasha's future. I ought to confirm what I know to be the fact, that only the day before these events Glubb Pasha had a long and intimate talk with the King and on the day before that our Ambassador did the same, and that there was not the slightest indication of any of these criticisms which have since been ventilated.

Mr. S. Silverman

In view of the fact that this area is probably the most insecure danger spot in the world, does the Prime Minister realise that the opportunity should now be taken for working out a more realistic British policy for the whole of the Middle East?

Major Legge-Bourke

While deploring what has happened, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether it may not be that the decision taken by the King of Jordan was the lesser of two evils and may be the responsibility of another State altogether? Can we have an assurance that, in examining this problem, Her Majesty's Government will bear in mind that the real culprit in this matter may well be Egypt?

Mr. E. Fletcher

What is the attitude of Her Majesty's Government, in view of the dismissal of Glubb Pasha, with regard to the very large subsidies which this country is at present giving to the Government of Jordan?

The Prime Minister

I said at the conclusion of my answer that I was dealing immediately with the question of the officers. I added that we are, of course, considering the effect that these events will have on our relations with Jordan. I would ask the House to accept the fact that I cannot be expected to go beyond that today, the more so since we have readily offered the debate for which the Opposition ask.

Mr. Speaker

This is reasonable.