§ 39. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give an assurance that the Government will seek to settle the question of communications with Berlin, after the end of May, on the basis of the treaty obligations of the United Nations Charter.
§ Mr. ProfumoIf the hon. Member is asking whether Her Majesty's Government will act in accordance with the aims and principles of the Charter of the United Nations I can certainly give him the assurance which he seeks. I trust that the Soviet Government will do likewise.
§ Mr. ZilliacusSurely the hon. Gentleman realises that what I asked was whether the Government were prepared to observe the obligations of the Charter for the settlement of disputes by pacific means and refraining from resort to force on one's own view of one's rights? Are the Government prepared to uphold that idea?
§ 40. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will propose to the United States, French, and Soviet Governments that, failing agreement before the end of May on the status of Berlin, they should join with Her Majesty's Government in requesting the Security Council, under Article 38 of the Charter, to make recommendations for the pacific settlement of the dispute and, also, under Article 40, to propose provisional measures to prevent an aggravation of the situation, pending a settlement.
§ Mr. ProfumoThis is a hypothetical Question and I am not prepared to say what proposals Her Majesty's Government might make.
§ Mr. ZilliacusWould the hon. Gentleman not say something to dispel the impression that the Government are so busy preparing for a military showdown in three months that they have no time left to work out a method of peaceful settlement?
§ Mr. ProfumoIt is very much the hon. Gentleman and some like him who are creating this impression rather than Her Majesty's Government.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Bromley-DavenportWas the last supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Gorton (Mr. Zilliacus) helpful or unhelpful to Her Majesty's potential enemies?
§ Mr. ProfumoI think that that is even more hypothetical than the hon. Member's Question.
§ 41. Mr. Brockwayasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in 27 view of the statement in the recent British note to the Soviet Government as to the alleged danger to world peace inherent in the latter's initiative in respect of Berlin, he will now bring the matter to the attention of the Security Council under Articles 34 and 35 of the Charter, as constituting a situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, and the continuance of which might endanger the maintenance of peace.
§ Mr. ProfumoNo, Sir.
§ Mr. BrockwayWhile it is desirable to have a summit conference at the earliest possible moment, has it not been indicated that that would be in association with the United Nations and is it not desirable that in the background there should be the influence not only of our Government but also of the neutral Governments of the world to secure peace?
§ Mr. ProfumoWe are certainly not excluding the possibility of reference to the United Nations, if that seemed appropriate.
§ Mr. ShinwellCan the hon. Member say whether the latest reports coming from Moscow do not indicate that the Soviet Government are ready to agree to a Foreign Minister's conference on the subject of Berlin?
§ Mr. ProfumoIf the right hon. Gentleman does not mind, it would be very much wiser if we awaited the return of the Prime Minister and let him state the position more fully than some of the newspapers have stated it.
§ Mr. YoungerHave the Government noted that in one of the official notes of the Soviet Union two or three weeks ago reference was made to the possibility of the United Nations having a rôle to play in the settlement of Berlin? Is not this something which one would previously have expected the Soviet Government to exclude? Should we not regard it as an encouraging sign? May we take it that, despite the hon. Member's rather discouraging replies, the Government are seriously considering the part which the United Nations may take in this matter?
§ Mr. ProfumoI had not meant to be discouraging and I am grateful to the right hon. Member for his intervention. We must take some sort of encouragement from the statement to which he referred.
§ 42. Mr. Rankinasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make available to the House the full text of the statement to the Press made in Washington on 6th February by Her Majesty's Ambassador, Sir Harold Caccia; and whether he will give particulars of the detailed military planning to meet emergencies arising in connection with Berlin mentioned in that statement.
§ 43. Mr. Swinglerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the nature of inter-Allied military planning on communications with Berlin, referred to by Her Majesty's Ambassador in Washington in a Press statement on 6th February, and on the parallel political planning on ways and means of affecting a peaceful settlement of the Berlin question according to procedures prescribed by the United Nations Charter.
§ Mr. ProfumoHer Majesty's Ambassador gave an informal Press Conference. No written statement was issued.
As regards the second parts of both Questions, the answer is "No, Sir."
§ Mr. RankinIn view of the fact that no military planning was envisaged in this visit, will the hon. Member take note of the advice offered him this morning by the noble Lord the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke) in a letter to The Times in which he said that we should declare that we will not use tanks to get into Berlin but that we will use Berlin to reunify Germany and at the same time give Russia the assurance that, having achieved reunification, we will not use it to wage war upon her?
§ Mr. ProfumoThe Government always pay the closest attention to what my noble Friend says or writes, but I fail to see what that has to do with Her Majesty's Ambassador in Washington.
§ Mr. SwinglerIs it not a fact that the British Ambassador in Washington said that a senior officer had been sent to Washington for the purpose of military planning? Will the hon. Member not state—because the people of Britain and the world are entitled to know—for what purpose the officer was engaging in these discussions, under what circumstances the use of military force was contemplated and what political procedures Her 29 Majesty's Government intend to undertake before contemplating the use of military force?
§ Mr. ProfumoThe Question refers to a Press conference. The purpose of the conference was to draw attention to speculative Press reports, about secret talks, which inaccurately represented the British attitude.