HC Deb 14 July 1960 vol 626 cc1602-6
Mr. Gaitskell

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about the Resolution of the United Nations Security Council regarding the situation in the Congo.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

Yes, Sir. The Security Council today adopted the following Resolution: The Security Council Considering the report of the Secretary General on a request for United Nations action in relation to the Republic of the Congo, Considering the request for military assistance addressed to the Secretary General by the President and the Prime Minister of the Republic of the Congo, Calls upon the Government of Belgium to withdraw their troops from the territory of the Republic of the Congo. Decides to authorise the Secretary Genera/ to take the necessary steps, in consultation with the Government of the Republic of the Congo, to provide the Government with such military assistance as may be necessary, until, through the efforts of the Congolese Government with the technical assistance of the United Nations, the National Security Forces may be able in the opinion of the Government to meet fully their tasks. Requests the Secretary General to report to the Security Council as appropriate. Before the vote the Council rejected three Soviet amendments. The first called for a condemnation of Belgium for armed aggression against the Republic of Congo; the second called for the immediate withdrawal of Belgian troops from the Congo; and the third amendment specified that the military assistance should be supplied by African States.

Our representative in the Security Council voted against all the Soviet amendments and abstained on the final Resolution. In his explanation of his abstention Mr. Beeley, who is the Acting Head of the United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations, said that Her Majesty's Government were entirely in favour of the Resolution except the part which called for the withdrawal of Belgian troops. Her Majesty's Government did not feel that it would be right in the present state of knowledge of the situation in the Congo to call for Belgian troops to withdraw without any qualification.

Nevertheless, so far as the action by the Secretary-General authorised by the Resolution is concerned, Her Majesty's Government, are informing the Secretary General that they will give him full support.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Prime Minister aware that on this side of the House we warmly welcome the decision of the Security Council and, in particular, the proposal that United Nations forces should assist in the maintenance of law and order in the Congo? May I ask him whether, although it may be desirable that British troops should not be used for this purpose, all possible facilities will nevertheless be made available to the United Nations and, if it is necessary, food will also be provided and sent to that territory? May I also ask him whether he will firmly oppose any other intervention now that the United Nations has taken over in the Congo?

The Prime Minister

We feel that by 'far the best way of helping the situation is the United Nations method. We have also made our view clear that it would be desirable that any United Nations force should consist of forces from a number of different countries and should exclude forces from the five permanent members of the Security Council. We think that that would be wiser.

It is now for the Secretary-General to try to organise this rather difficult arrangement in a very difficult country with huge communications. We will give all the facilities that he may ask us to give. The reason why we took our line —I think it is a reasonable one—is that it would be terrible if the Belgian troops withdrew and left a complete vacuum before the arrival of some other organised force to do the job. That was the only point of distinction between us.

We shall act in the spirit of helping in every way. We have been in communication with the Secretary-General and have told him that we will do what it is possible for us to do outside the contributing, as we think it better not to do, of actual forces of our own British Government.

Mr. Grimond

Does not everything that the Prime Minister has said point to the need for having a United Nations force in being which can act quickly in this sort of situation? May we take it that the policy of Her Majesty's Government is now to press for the creation of such a permanent and enlarged United Nations force?

The Prime Minister

It is for that reason that British Foreign Secretaries have consistently, year after year, pressed for the creation of such a force of the United Nations, but, alas, they have done so without great results.

Mr. Wall

Can my right hon. Friend say how long it is expected before the United Nations force will be available, and who the United Nations expect to maintain law and order in the Congo until that force arrives?

The Prime Minister

It is a very complicated situation. Almost endless communications went on during most of the night. Owing to the unfortunate time arrangements by which we are always asleep when they are working, it is really quite difficult to keep track of exactly what is happening. I think that the Security Council met at what was, by our time, about three o'clock in the morning. We have been in communication since. They have gone to bed and now we are communicating with them 'again. It is not very easy to keep absolute track of the precise situation at every moment. What we have managed to do is to get through in the course of today to say that we will give all the help which the Secretary-General thinks right having regard to our views about the participation that we ought to give.

Mr. Healey

Can the Prime Minister answer the last part of my right hon. Friend's question, which was whether he would use his utmost influence to prevent any intervention by the troops of other countries outside that by the United Nations? In particular, will the right hon. Gentleman take note of the very threatening speech made by Sir Roy Welensky the day after he had himself made a statement to the contrary in this House?

The Prime Minister

I do not think that that is very helpful. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] There are a number of people who would like to take part. What we are trying to do, whether it is the Republic of Ghana or anybody else, is to try to organise that any action that they can take to help should be under the auspices and the control of a United Nations commander.

Mr. Kershaw

Are we to understand that the intervention of the United Nations troops will be reserved for the restoring of law and order and will not be used to forward the political purposes of the central Government of the Congo in attempting to suppress the freely elected provincial Governments who are in peaceful control of such areas as there may be?

The Prime Minister

Just as I came into the Chamber I saw a declaration by the Secretary-General—I have not got the precise words of it—the effect of which was that he regarded as his duty the restoration of order and not intervention in the internal affairs of the country.

Mr. Wigg

Is the Prime Minister aware that three battalions of the Ghanaian Republic Army are officered by British warrant officers and non-commissioned officers? What will their position be if the Ghana Government place those battalions at the disposal of the Congolese Government?

The Prime Minister

Those officers and non-commissioned officers are, of course, serving in the Ghanaian Army. That really emphasises the importance of ensuring that anything that is done is done under the direction and control of the commanding officer appointed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Mr. Fell

Can the Prime Minister give us an assurance that in the intervening time between now and when the United Nations force has effectively restored law and order, which may take some time, we shall reserve the right if any British lives are in danger to use British forces to protect those lives?

The Prime Minister

At present, such reports as we have are on the whole rather satisfactory. We do not quite know how many British subjects have left the Congo, but there are considerable numbers. According to our reports from our representatives at Leopoldville and Elizabethville—I should like to pay a tribute to the work of our representatives there—the great majority of the British subjects are not in any danger. There are some small groups at numerous points throughout the Congo, in particular at a place called Stanleyville, and I have authorised arrangements to be made, if it is necessary, to rescue them from any danger.

Mr. Brockway

Can the Prime Minister inform the House what Governments supported the attitude of the United Kingdom in abstaining from voting on the important Resolution in the Security Council?

The Prime Minister

We and the French abstained, and also China. I wish to emphasise that we have our own responsibilities. I think that to call for the removal of Belgian troops before any other force is ready to take their place is wrong, and we said so. However, the Resolution has been passed and our object now is to accelerate in every way we can and assist in every way we can the arrival of the United Nations force.

Several Hon. Members rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. I do not think that we can properly pursue this subject further now.