§ 2. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the United States of America has joined the Bagdad Pact Anti-Subversion Committee as well as the Military Committee; and to what extent, in return for the United States of America associating itself with British military obligations under the Bagdad Pact, he has accepted any reciprocal and similar obligation to associate the forces of this country with United States military action under the Eisenhower doctrine.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThe United States Government joined the Counter-Subversion Committee of the Bagdad Pact a year ago. In regard to the second part of the Question, action under President Eisenhower's Middle East proposals is a matter for the United States' Government, and Her Majesty's Government have no obligation in this connection.
§ Mr. ZilliacusI express gratification at the last part of the rely, but does the first part mean that the United States have also accepted the obligation to take military action against anything alleged to be Communist subversion by any ruler of a Middle Eastern country?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI think that that is the hon. Member's next Question.
§ 3. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent United States forces may now be expected to assist British forces to discharge the obligations assumed by the Government under the Bagdad Pact to put down any popular rising alleged by the ruler of a Bagdad Pact country to be Communist subversion against which he requires military assistance.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreHer Majesty's Government have assumed no obligations under the Bagdad Pact to put down popular risings in Bagdad Pact countries. The hon. Member appears to be confusing the Bagdad Pact with the Warsaw Pact.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIs not the confusion very easy to make, in view of the fact that on 27th February, in reply to Questions by myself and my hon. Friend the Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S. Silverman), the Minister of Defence definitely said that under paragraph 5 of the final communiqué of the Bagdad Pact Council of November, 1955, Her Majesty's Government considered themselves bound to take military action when asked to do so by a ruler of a Bagdad Pact country alleging that a popular rising was Communist subversion against which he needed military protection?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI do not accept what the hon. Member has said. Countering subversion does not necessarily mean taking military action. There are many other ways of countering subversion.
§ Mr. ZilliacusDoes it exclude military action?