HC Deb 18 December 1961 vol 651 cc947-53
The Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. Duncan Sandys)

As the House knows, during the course of last night, Indian armed forces entered the Portuguese territories of Goa, Diu and Daman.

We have long understood the natural desire of the Indian people to incorporate these territories in the Republic of India and their feelings of impatience that the Portuguese Government have not felt disposed to follow the example of Britain and France. Nevertheless, I must make it plain that Her Majesty's Government deeply deplore the decision of the Government of India to use military force to achieve its political objectives.

The attitude of Her Majesty's Government on this matter has been clearly explained to the Indian Government from time to time, and last week, when the situation reached a critical stage, we made a strong appeal to Mr. Nehru to refrain from a resort to force. Other countries which are friendly to India made similar appeals.

In addition, the Secretary-General of the United Nations strongly urged that the matter should at once be brought before the United Nations with a view to averting hostilities. We greatly regret that these various appeals should have proved unavailing.

The Portuguese Government have informed us this morning that they have asked for an immediate meeting of the Security Council to consider the situation.

In view of what has happened, we have to consider our responsibilities for the safety of the small number of United Kingdom citizens in Goa. Her Majesty's frigate, "Rhyl", which is at present about 900 miles away, has accordingly been ordered to proceed at once towards Goa, so as to be on hand to evacuate British residents should this prove necessary.

The House will realise that the outbreak of hostilities between a fellow member of the Commonwealth and a country bound to us by close ties of alliance places Her Majesty's Government in a most painful position. In addition, we are particularly concerned about the wider repercussions which the action taken in this case may have upon other problems which face the world today.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Secretary of State aware that while we on this side of the House regard the continued existence of a Portuguese colony on the mainland of India as an anchronism which should have been abandoned some time ago, in pursuit of the example set by Britain and France, nevertheless we cannot but profoundly regret that the Government of India should have found it necessary to solve this problem by force? Is he further aware that those of us who have admired Mr. Nehru's staunch support in the past for the Charter of the United Nations, and his great efforts for peace, should all the more regret what has now been done?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman just one question? Was any attempt made to secure what one might describe as a combined Commonwealth approach to Mr. Nehru before this action was taken, and can the right hon. Gentleman say rather more precisely what efforts were made to induce the Portuguese Government to follow the example that France and Britain set so far as their Indian possessions are concerned?

Mr. Sandys

I do not think that it is a case where it would have been suitable to try, so to speak, to get a "ganging up" of all the Commonwealth members. I think that this was essentially a case when each Commonwealth Government expressed their views to the Indian Government. We were not the only one who did so.

We have made our views known—I do not wish to go into it at this stage—to the Portuguese Government on a number of occasions; and, of course, apart from the broader issue, we have, very recently indeed, urged them to avoid any action in Goa which could be regarded as provocative.

Mr. Gaitskell

May I press the right hon. Gentleman a little further? He said that Her Majesty's Government had made their views known to the Portuguese Government. Do I take it from that that they did, in fact, in so many words, say that the Portuguese Government should follow the example of Britain and France in respect of their possessions in India?

Mr. Sandys

I thought that I had answered that. We have made our views known to the Portuguese Government.

Sir G. Nicholson

I shall shortly be asking your leave, Mr. Speaker, to move the Adjournment of the House so that we can discuss this question. In the meantime, may I ask my right hon. Friend, in the light of what has already been said, to express the deep grief of this country, which has such a profound affection for the Indian people, about what has happened?

Mr. Wigg

When the Minister reflects on the powerlessness of this country to influence events in either Katanga or Goa, does he realise his own personal responsibility for the situation arising from his tenure of office as Minister of Defence?

Mr. Sandys

I am not aware of what the hon. Member is referring to.

Mr. Wyatt

Why have the Government taken such a lofty view about Mr. Nehru's action in Goa? Why do the Government suppose that he would place any more reliance on the ability of United Nations to secure Indian rights in Goa than did Her Majesty's Government themselves place on the United Nations in the case of either Suez or Katanga? Why does the right hon. Gentleman suppose that there is any other way in which India could secure the liberty of many thousands of oppressed Goans? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I will repeat. Do not the Government know that many thousands of Goans are in gaol today because they have been appealing for the independence of their country? What else do the Government think that Mr. Nehru could do than use force?

Mr. Sandys

I have no doubt that the hon. Member's words will be favourably received in Delhi.

Mr. Wyatt

Good.

Mr. Sandys

So far as the United Nations is concerned, I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that in the case of Suez, to which he alluded, we referred the matter to the United Nations and patiently discussed it there for many months.

Mr. John Hall

In view of the fact that this is only the latest in a series of acts of aggression by India, and particularly in view of the last question, may we now assume that Mr. Nehru has completely lost faith in the ability of the United Nations to solve any international problem, and anticipate that India will be leaving the United Nations?

Mr. Sandys

I hope that hon. Member will not say things which will unduly exacerbate an already very delicate situation.

Mr. Grimond

Will the Minister make clear to the Indian Government that whatever the precedents and whatever the reasons for the action, it is an action which has profoundly shocked the many friends of India in this country? May we ask the Government whether any steps have been taken to propose a ceasefire, and, also, whether they are either taking any action, or have had any request for action either from members of the United Nations or from the Commonwealth as allies of Portugal?

Mr. Sandys

I think that I explained in my original statement that the Portuguese Government have asked for an immediate meeting of the Security Council.

Mr. Wyatt

Which side will the right hon. Gentleman vote for?

Mr. Sandys

We shall, naturally, support that request and that will be the occasion to consider whether or not it is possible or appropriate for there to be a cease-fire.

Mr. Rees-Davies

Does not my right hon. Friend think that this country owes a duty both to Portugal and India to ensure that the rule of law is observed in this area and that, therefore, whatever may be the outcome of the fighting, we should tell India that we shall take the necessary steps to ensure that this matter is decided in the proper way, by reference to an international tribunal and that this act of hypocritical piracy by Mr. Nehru is something which cannot be tolerated by a democratic set of nations?

Mr. Sandys

As I explained, this matter is being referred to an international body, namely, the Security Council of the United Nations.

Mr. Dugdale

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain a little more clearly what he meant by a rather curious phrase he used in answer to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition about discussions between Commonwealth Ministers being "ganging up"?

Mr. Sandys

I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman was sufficiently in touch with the vulgar tongue to understand what I meant.

Mr. Wise

As the dependency of Goa has been in existence for over 400 years, longer than the country of India, and in view of my right hon. Friend's statement that we have been putting our views to the Portuguese Government about abandoning this bit of the mainland of India, could my right hon. Friend now seek a declaration from Mr. Nehru as to where he thinks the mainland of India ends?

Mr. Sandys

I am not expressing a view on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, but I have no doubt that Mr. Nehru would say that it ends where the sea begins.

Mr. J. Hynd

While gladly dissociating myself from the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. Wyatt), as I think that every hon. Member on this side would, and associating myself with the Leader of the Opposition in deploring this aggression, may I ask whether the Minister will be able to tell the House what effect this situation has on our existing alliance with Portugal? If Portugal suggests that Goa is part of Portuguese territory, will this involve the alliance in any way and, if so, what response would there be to an application for our assistance?

Mr. Sandys

I think that it is worth making it known to the House that we made it clear to the Portuguese Government as long ago as 1954 that it would be impossible for Britain to engage in hostilities against a fellow member of the Commonwealth.

Sir G. Nicholson

On a point of order.

Mr. Speaker

Do I understand that the hon. Member wishes to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House?

Sir G. Nicholson

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Speaker

I shall hear the hon. Member in due course, but that time is not yet.

Later—

Sir G. Nicholson

On a point of order. I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, to direct attention to the situation in Goa. That this matter is definite is, alas, too obvious. That it is urgent is quite clear, and that it is of public importance needs no stressing, for it affects not only the future of that part of India but the future of the Commonwealth and the United Nations. I submit that this covers the responsibilities of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. It is for these reasons that I wish to move the Adjournment.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Baronet asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, to direct attention to the situation in Goa. I cannot accept the Motion. It does not deal with a definite matter and there is no direct administrative responsibility for the Government here.

Sir G. Nicholson

Further to that point of order, Sir. As I have always believed that it is wrong to contest a decision of the Chair in these matters, I bow to your Ruling.

Mr. Speaker

I am obliged to the hon. Baronet for the graceful way in which he sits down.