§ 8. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the recent discussions in the Security Council on the Suez problem.
§ 20. Mr. Jannerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what was the result of the consideration by the Security Council of the question of free passage for ships of all nationalities through the Suez Canal; and whether Egypt has yet given an assurance to the Security Council that she will comply with the request made upon her in 1951 to lift restrictions on all ships passing through the Suez Canal.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydDiscussions took place in the Security Council on 20th and 21st May. It was the virtually unanimous view that the present Egyptian Declaration could not constitute a final settlement. Continuing responsibility of the United Nations was clearly emphasised. The French and United Kingdom delegates, with others, formulated a number of specific questions about the Egyptian Declaration. These points were taken up and developed by the United States representative in his summing up from the Chair. The Egyptian delegate did not go further in his assurances about freedom of passage through the Canal than the terms of the Declaration of 24th April itself.
The debate showed once again the weight of international opinion upon this matter. As I have said before, it is in the interest of Egypt herself that the system for operating the Canal should command the confidence of the users. It is now for 7 the Egyptian Government to state their position in answer to the questions put in the Security Council debates of April and last week.
§ Mr. HendersonWould the Foreign Secretary say whether the question of Israeli shipping using the Suez Canal peacefully is likely to be considered by the Security Council as part of the Suez problem?
§ Mr. LloydThe position in regard to that is that the Egyptian Government have said in their declaration that
It remains the unaltered policy and firm purpose of the Government of Egypt to respect the terms and spirit of the Constantinople Convention of 1888 and the rights and obligations arising therefrom.Our view is that under that Convention Israeli ships are entitled to go through the Canal.
§ Mr. JannerIn addition to the Convention, to which the Foreign Secretary has referred, is it not a fact that under Article 25 of the Charter Egypt is under an obligation to accept the declaration of the Security Council in respect of passage of Israeli ships through the Canal? Will he and those who are interested with him continue to emphasise the fact that Egypt has no right whatsoever to go behind that Article?
§ Mr. LloydI agree that the argument is reinforced by that point. We should start again from the Declaration of 24th April this year by the Egyptian Government, which I think, covers the point.