HC Deb 10 February 1964 vol 689 cc17-9
21. Mr. Biggs-Davison

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps have been taken in the United Nations Security Council to further a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute.

Mr. Mathew

The Kashmir dispute has been before the Security Council since 1948. Copies of the numerous resolutions to which it has given rise are available in the Library of the House. There were further debates in the Security Council in 1962 and the matter is again before the Council at present.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Is it not disturbing that the Indian Government, despite Mr. Nehru's past assurances that the Kashmir people would be able to choose their own future eventually, are integrating Kashmir progressively and unilaterally into the Indian Union? Will Her Majesty's Government maintain the position in the Security Council and the Commonwealth that they will not recognise any unilateral action in denial of self-determination in Kashmir?

Mr. Mathew

Her Majesty's Government have always believed that it is for the Governments of India and Pakistan to settle the Kashmir dispute by mutual agreement between them, thus giving effect to the relevant United Nations resolutions. I do not think that I should go any further while this delicate and difficult matter is before the Security Council.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Does my hon. Friend think that the action of the Indian Government in integrating Kashmir in the Indian Union is in conformity with what has been laid down by the United Nations?

Mr. Mathew

I do not think that I can go any further I do not think it would be helpful for me to express any opinion either way while this matter is sub judice before the Security Council.

Mr. P. Noel-Baker

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the dispute could be settled on the basis of the Security Council resolutions in 1948 which were adopted after public debate, that there is no point in continually urging the Indians and Pakistanis to go on discussing this in private, and that it is really throwing over the whole procedure of the United Nations?

Mr. Mathew

I think it would be better to see what transpires in the Security Council as a result of the discussions there. Moreover, I think that the attitude of Her Majesty's Government is the right one towards two countries who are members of the Commonwealth, namely, that disputes of that sort should, if possible, be settled by mutual agreement between the two countries.

Mr. Noel-Baker

While I agree that such disputes should, if possible, be settled by mutual agreement, may I ask if the hon. Gentleman is aware that the two countries are full members of the United Nations and of the Commonwealth? I had the honour of representing Her Majesty's Government at the Security Council in 1948. What I am suggesting is that there is a much better hope of settlement if we employ the proper methods of the United Nations.

Forward to