HC Deb 19 March 1956 vol 550 cc805-7
9. Dr. Bennett

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether in view of the damaging effects of the apparent rivalry between British and United States oil interests in the Persian Gulf, he will hold discussions with the United States Government with a view to co-operating to protect our common interests in that area.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

I do not believe that any special discussions on this topic are necessary. It is not the fact that rivalry between British and United States oil interests is damaging our common interests in the Persian Gulf. The participation of American oil companies in the concessions in the Persian Gulf States is about the same as that of British companies. Our interests in this respect therefore do not conflict.

Dr. Bennett

Can my right hon. and learned Friend tell me to what extent ambitions about oil have played a part in the precipitation of the Buraimi dispute?

Mr. Lloyd

Oil has not been found in these areas, nor do I anticipate that it will be found.

Mr. Robens

Is the Foreign Secretary seriously telling this House that oil rivalries in the Middle East have nothing to do with the problems with which we are now faced there? If he says that, it is obvious that he knows little about the case.

Mr. Lloyd

I would say to the right hon. Gentleman that his view that oil rivalry at the present time is affecting the situation in the Middle East shows that he is completely uninformed about the facts.

Mr. Robens

May I ask the Foreign Secretary whether or not he discussed this matter with President Eisenhower when he went to the United States with the Prime Minister to discuss other matters?

Mr. Lloyd

I think that the view which I have expressed is shared by the United States Administration.

Mr. Robens

Does that mean that President Eisenhower agreed with the right hon. and learned Gentleman that oil interests were not causing difficulties in the Middle East?

Mr. Lloyd

The discussions between President Eisenhower and the Prime Minister were confidential, and it would not be right for me to go beyond the terms of the communiqué, but I repeat that my view—which I think is shared by the United States Administration—is that rivalry between oil interests is not at present an important factor in the Middle East.

Mr. Dugdale

Was not it at least unfortunate that moneys obtained in royalties from the oil companies in Arabia were used to foment recent disturbances in Jordan against the Bagdad Pact, in which the Foreign Secretary is such a firm believer?

Mr. Lloyd

The revenues which the Government of Saudi Arabia received are their own property after they have been received, although I certainly resent the use which is being made of them.

Mr. Brooman-White

Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, as there is no proposal that oil from Arabia should be confiscated, it has to be paid for, and it is extremely difficult, after it has been paid for, to supervise the use of the money by the Saudi Arabian Government?

Mr. Lloyd

indicated assent.

Mr. Crossman

Does not the Foreign Secretary agree that we made the most earnest representations to the American President and the Secretary of State about the use of those moneys for the Saudi Arabian cause, and we got no reply because the American oil interests would not let President Eisenhower give any reply?

Mr. Lloyd

I do not think that that is correct. Hon. Members opposite are always talking about the freedom and independence of the States concerned. When this money has been received for the oil it is the business of the Government concerned how it is used, and the suggestion that oil interests can affect the use to which the money is put is a complete misconception.