§ 46. Mr. Brockwayasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what restrictions are placed on Governments associated with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, South East Asia Treaty Organisation and the Bagdad Pact in the use of military equipment supplied by the United Kingdom and the United States of America in connection with these defensive alliances.
§ The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. D. Ormsby-Gore)Her Majesty's Government do not impose restrictions on the use of military equipment supplied to foreign Governments, 28 whether members of these defence organisations or not. I cannot give any information about agreements between the United States Government and member Governments of these, defence organisations other than Her Majesty's Government. However, the conditions governing the supply of United States material to the United Kingdom are set out in the Mutual Defence Assistance Agreement of 1950 as amended. The Agreement was published as Command 7894.
§ Mr. BrockwayDoes not that answer open up very serious possibilities? Did not the French Government recently use American bombers contributed towards N.A.T.O. forces for the bombing of Sakiet? Would it be possible, for example, for Pakistan to use supplies in Kashmir or for S.E.A.T.O. Governments to use them against Formosa and Indonesia? All these problems arise.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThe hon. Member asks about the use of American equipment by French forces against a target in Tunisia. That is really no responsibility whatever of Her Majesty's Government.
§ Mr. BevanDo I correctly understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that no restriction whatsoever was placed by Her Majesty's Government on the use of military equipment supplied to any one of the three organisations or any nation belonging to any one of the three organisations?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreWhen it is decided to send military equipment to any of the nations which are members of any of these organisations, we do not add any stipulations as to restrictions on the use of the equipment.
§ Mr. BevanThat is a very serious reply. Do we understand that any military equipment that we supply, for example, to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, can easily become a common possession of the Bagdad Pact countries and of the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation? Is not that, by implication, a violation of our obligation under the United Nations Charter?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreNo, Sir. Of course, before we ever decide to send any equipment we take the precaution to find 29 out that it is for the use of the Government to whom we are sending the equipment. If there were any question of our thinking that the equipment was being ordered to be exported to third countries, we should make various inquiries and should expect certain assurances.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonWould it not be quite wrong for Her Majesty's Government to seek to impose limitations on the sovereignty of our allies?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThe House will recall how hon. Members opposite were very insistent when we supplied a small quantity of arms to Tunisia that it should be without strings, for otherwise it would be an interference with the independence of the Tunisian Government.
§ Mr. BevanPerhaps I may be allowed to put a further supplementary question. I apologise to the House, but this is the first time that we have been informed of this matter. Was not a statement made by the Russians in a recent letter in which they took exception to too close an association between these various organisations which, while they may be allowed under the Charter for limited regional purposes, could not he joined together in any way, either by treaty or by behaviour, without challenging the authority of the United Nations?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThis is getting on to a very much wider subject, but I do not accept what the right hon. Gentleman has just said.
§ Mr. FellMay I have an assurance that the arms we supply to Tunisia could not be used by Algeria, could not be supplied through Tunisia to Algeria, and could not be used by Tunisia against the French?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreWe may be quite clear——
§ Mr. SpeakerThe supplementary question is outside the scope of the Question. Mr. Shinwell.
§ Mr. FellOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I asked a supplementary question which I thought was not completely out of line with the questions which had previously been asked and answered, and immediately after I had asked it the Minister rose to reply, but you intervened by calling a right hon. Gentleman opposite.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am anxious that we should not get into a general discussion remote from the Question on the Order Paper. If the Minister desires to answer what has been asked, he is at liberty to do so.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI was merely about to say that in that case, because of the conditions of the time, we asked for an assurance that the arms were for the use of the Tunisian Government alone, and they gave us that assurance.
§ Mr. ShinwellDo I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's answer that when arms are supplied by the United Kingdom to the Government of Iraq, a member of the Bagdad Pact, there is no stipulation that the arms should not be used against any of Iraq's neighbours, in particular the State of Israel?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI wish the House would appreciate the point that all countries are bound by the articles of the United Nations, and when arms are supplied to certain countries—which all Governments in this country have done—where those countries are independent sovereign countries it is not possible to stipulate specifically when and under what conditions the arms should he used.
§ Mr. BrockwayIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I will seek to raise the matter again at the earliest opportunity.