§ 12. Mr. Donnellyasked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a further statement on British policy at the United Nations towards the Kashmir problem, in view of the fact that the resolution supported by Her Majesty's Government has now been vetoed in the Security Council.
§ Mr. AlportThe hon. Member is incorrect in stating that the resolution has been vetoed, as no vote has yet been taken in the Security Council. Yesterday, the representative of Sweden put forward an amendment to the resolution, which will no doubt be discussed in the Security Council perhaps within a matter of hours. It remains the desire of Her Majesty's Government to support any proposal which may lead towards the peaceful solution of the Kashmir situation. If, after a full study of the terms of the Swedish representative's proposals, they prove likely to achieve this end, they will receive our support.
§ Mr. DonnellyIs the hon. Gentleman aware that the veto point is a pure technicality because the Soviet delegate said he would vote against it if, indeed, the resolution were ever called? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that what 1259 I am really seeking to know is the Government's policy in this matter? Would he address himself to the question I asked—why is it necessary for the British Government to take a specific position in a dispute between two Commonwealth partners, which they are scrupulously careful to avoid doing in connection with the issue of South African affairs when they are introduced in the United Nations?
§ Mr. AlportThe Kashmir dispute is one before the Security Council of which we are a member, and, therefore, we are under an obligation to co-operate with other members of the Security Council to try to achieve a peaceful solution of this problem.
§ Mr. DonnellyOn a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.