§ Mr. Gaitskell(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister what proposals Her Majesty's Government have received from the United States Government for the despatch of British troops to Thailand and what reply has been sent.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)Her Majesty's Government have, naturally, been in close consultation with the United States Government and other Governments of member states of S.E.A.T.O., including Australia and New Zealand, about the situation in South-East Asia.
As regards Laos, there has been no radical change since my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal made a statement in the House on 15th May. Her Majesty's Government are still continuing their efforts to assist in the formation of a Coalition Government in that country. The United States Government, for their part, are exercising their influence in the same direction.
As the House knows, in response to a request from the Government of Thailand, the United States Government have declared their willingness to send armed forces to Thailand to assist that country against any threat of aggression which may develop. Her Majesty's Government have so far received no formal request for assistance from the Government of Thailand, but they have decided that, in the event of such a request being received in the next few days, they would be prepared to send a contingent. This would probably take the form of fighter units of the Royal Air Force.
We understand that if the Thai Government ask the Governments of Australia and New Zealand for assistance they are also prepared to contribute.
§ Mr. GaitskellCan the Prime Minister say, first, whether there has yet been any collective decision by the S.E.A.T.O. 1531 Council, which, I believe, is now meeting in Bangkok?
Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, at least so far as British forces are concerned—and I hope that he can do it for the American forces, from his knowledge of the situation—they will be used solely for the defence of Thailand in the event of armed aggression against Thailand, and are not intended to be put into Laos?
Thirdly, can he also give an assurance that very special efforts will now be made to persuade Prince Souvanna Phouma to hurry on with the formation of a neutral Government, and that the opposition which has unfortunately existed hitherto from Prince Boun Oum and others will be overruled?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is a meeting of S.E.A.T.O. at present. Its decisions for the time being are confidential.
As for the right hon. Gentleman's second question, if the Thailand Government ask—as they are entitled to ask—for assistance in case they are made the subject of aggression, the question arises whether we and other allies should conform to their request. We have decided that it would be right to do so, and we hope that it will have not a provocative but a stabilising effect on that part of the world, since our whole purpose is to carry out the agreement reached at Geneva—and it is a great thing that agreement was reached there—that the solution should be found by the formation of what might be called a neutral Government representing all the different parties and points of view in Laos, with a view to maintaining it as a neutral State.
Every effort has been made and is continuing to be made to reach that end, and I am glad to know that Prince Souvanna Phouma is about to return to Laos. I am hopeful that, as a result of the continued efforts of all concerned, we shall reach that conclusion. It seems to me to be the only way out if we are to achieve the purpose which the Geneva Conference set itself.
§ Mr. GaitskellThe Prime Minister has referred to the danger that this decision might conceivably be regarded as provocative. To minimise that 1532 danger, will he give the assurance for which I asked, namely, that these troops will not be put into Laos, but are solely for the purpose of defending Thailand, should Thailand be attacked?
§ The Prime MinisterIf this request is received and we put them in, that will be their objective.
§ Mr. WarbeyIn view of the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter under which the S.E.A.T.O. Treaty is alleged to operate, can the Prime Minister say, first, whether any armed attack on Thailand has occurred? Secondly, if the Prime Minister apprehends a breach of peace in this area, why has he not raised the matter in the Security Council of the United Nations? Thirdly, what is his comment on the belligerent action of Thailand, which is sending 2,000 men of the Royal Laotian forces back over the frontier without disarming them in accordance with the International Convention?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not aware of the last point raised by the hon. Member, but I shall take note of it.
As for the general situation, what we surely want to do—and I think that this is the hope of everybody concerned, including the Russians; because they also have an influence—is to carry out what was agreed at Geneva. This has, unhappily, been held up by the inability to get a Government formed consisting of all the different conflicting parties. If we can get that it will be far the best thing that we can do. Meanwhile, there is great anxiety in Thailand owing to the confused situation. I think that our action will have a stablising effect, and may help us to achieve the real purpose, which is the formation of a neutral Government in Laos.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonAre not vital British and Commonwealth interests involved in the peace and stability of South-East Asia. Therefore, are not the prudent and moderate decisions made by Her Majesty's Governments in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand in the best interests of the Commonwealth and in its best traditions?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that this is the right course to take, and I am sure that the whole House will hope, as a result, that we shall be able to 1533 achieve our purpose of setting up a neutral Government and of maintaining Laos as a neutral State.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerHas not Mr. Boun Oum been frustrating the formation of a neutral Government by flagrantly rejecting the advice of the British and American Governments? Will the Prime Minister ensure that supplies of arms to him are cut off until he accepts that advice?
§ The Prime MinisterThe American Government have most loyally carried out their functions under this agreement to try to get this done, and are bringing all possible pressure on their side to achieve it. That should be said, in fairness. This is a quite separate action. It is hoped to stabilise an otherwise dangerous position in Thailand.
§ Mr. WadeI hope that the Geneva Agreement will be carried out, but, if British forces are sent to Thailand or to Laos, can the Prime Minister say under whose command they will operate?
§ The Prime MinisterAll forces will be under national command, but there will be a liaison between different commanders.
§ Mr. ShinwellIf Thailand should request assistance from the United Kingdom Government for troops from this country, do we understand that the Prime Minister will come to the House, deploy all the facts in relation to the situation and gain the consent of the House before the troops are dispatched? Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House now whether, in the consultations with President Kennedy about the situation in Laos and Thailand, and the apprehensions about Thailand, President Kennedy has requested the United Kingdom Government to support the United States Government in sending troops?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no question of one Government requesting the other. We consult each other very closely. We are all agreed that in this case it is a matter which rests on the Thailand Government to ask for assistance if they think it right to do so.
§ Mr. ShinwellWill the Prime Minister answer my question? If Thailand 1534 asks the United Kingdom Government for assistance, will he gain the consent of the House before giving it?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. I have said that the Government have decided that should they receive this request they will meet it in the way which I have suggested, by the sending of a small force of Royal Air Force fighter units. That decision has been reached. These decisions have to be taken, if they are to be effective, at short notice. I remind the House of other similar problems which we have had to face in Jordan and Kuwait. On the whole, the House has been good enough to support our judgment.
§ Mr. Harold DaviesIs the Prime Minister telling the House that we are contemplating giving assistance simply under the terms of S.E.A.T.O., or are we doing it at the request of Thailand which is a member of S.E.A.T.O.? Can he tell the House whether it is a fact that there is not unanimity at this moment about this intervention by various S.E.A.T.O. Powers?
Is it not true that Averell Harriman, on 24th March, told the Rightist Government in Laos that if hostilities broke out they and they alone would be responsible for what was happening? He said that at Bangkok and the Prime Minister knows it. Therefore, why should Britain imperil her people by this action there?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is quite a separate matter; that is a question of hostilities in Laos. This is a question where an ally—although this is not a formal action on the part of the S.E.A.T.O. Powers as a whole—is involved; and an ally has a right to call upon all her other allies. This is a question whether we should respond to it, and in my view we should, because we believe that this may be helpful to us in achieving our major purpose, which is the restoration of some Government in Laos which can keep it both neutral and peaceful.
§ Sir H. Legge-BourkeCan the Prime Minister tell the House whether it has yet been decided that in the event of our having to send troops we shall also have to send "Ever-readies"?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. What we propose to do, as I have told the 1535 House, if we receive this request, is to send certain units of the Royal Air Force, all the more so because they have only recently returned from an exercise in Thailand and it is not unnatural that they should return to posts where they were not many weeks ago.
§ Mr. GaitskellDid I understand the Prime Minister to say that Australia and New Zealand were adopting precisely the same line as the British Government? Is he aware of any member of S.E.A.T.O. which is taking a different line? If it were so, would it be France? May I ask him whether there has been any consultation with the Malayan Government on this matter?
§ The Prime MinisterI understand that the Prime Minister of Australia has, or is about, to make a statement on almost similar lines to that which I have just made to the House. It is difficult to follow the precise differences in timing, but I think that the Prime Minister of New Zealand has already made such a statement.
Answering the second part of the question, this is a separate operation. Each Government must decide for themselves what they propose to do, although all of them are in close consultation. The Prime Minister of Malaya, the Tunku, has, of course, been consulted and informed.
§ Mr. BrockwayWhile the suggestion is that troops should go to Thailand, is not the real crisis in Laos, and are not both sides responsible for the present situation in Laos? Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether his indication that British troops will be sent to Thailand is not an invitation to the Thailand Government to make that request? Will he accept the proposal which has been made by the Leader of the Opposition that at least British troops should not be moved through Thailand into the Laos area?
§ The Prime MinisterWe are discussing the movement into Thailand if the request is made by the Thai Government. I agree that in the lamentable situation which has developed in Laos there has been a good deal of trouble, partly, of course, as we all know, owing to the rivalries and the division of the 1536 world between the Communists and the non-Communists.
The great success of the Geneva Conference was to get an agreement between the Communist and non-Communist Powers to work for this neutral Government. I think that anyone who has studied it will know that the individuals concerned—Mr. MacDonald, on our side, and Mr. Harriman, on the American side—have worked most loyally towards this. We believe that this will assist in carrying out their purpose.
§ Mr. A. HendersonMay we have an assurance from the Prime Minister that if the situation worsens there will be no hesitation in referring the whole matter to the consideration of the United Nations Security Council?
§ The Prime MinisterI will, of course, consider that, and I will keep the House informed all the time of what is happening.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We cannot debate this matter.
§ Mr. WarbeyOn a point of order—
§ Mr. MendelsonOn a point of order—
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Warbey.
§ Mr. WarbeyOn a point of order. I wish to move the Adjournment—
§ Mr. SpeakerI will give the hon. Member the opportunity to do that later, but this is not the time for it. Did the hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. Mendelson) wish to raise a point of order?
§ Mr. MendelsonIt was the same point of order, Sir.
§ Later—
§ Mr. SpeakerI understand that the Prime Minister wishes to raise a point of order.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. In answering the last supplementary question of the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition, I made a statement about the position of the Prime Minister of Malaya which was not wholly accurate. Malaya is not, in 1537 fact, a signatory of S.E.A.T.O. I said that he had been both consulted and informed. It is not proper that he should be formally consulted, or would wish to be. He has, of course, been informed. I thought that I would correct my statement.