§ 9. Mr. Hooleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence how many troops the Government intend to maintain in Kuwait and Bahrein up to 1970 to fulfil the commitments laid down in the Defence White Paper; and what is the estimated cost in each financial year from 1967–68 to 1970–71.
§ 34. Mr. Dickensasked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future size and cost of British forces in the Persian Gulf.
§ Mr. HealeyI would refer to my replies to the hon. Member for Hampstead (Mr. Whitaker) on 10th November, and to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) on 14th December, 1966.
§ Mr. HooleyWould the Minister care to explain what is the point of the policy of dismantling expensive and long standing military installations in Southern Arabia in order to build up installations in the Persian Gulf?
§ Mr. HealeyI can explain that very well to my hon. Friend. The point is to ensure the continued stability of the Gulf until countries in the area are capable of maintaining stability on their own. We do not regard a base in Aden as being necessary for that purpose. But consequent on leaving Aden, we feel it necessary to make a small increase in our forces in the Persian Gulf to maintain our obligations.
§ Mr. DickensIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the official policy of the Labour Party is how to secure the withdrawal from the Persian Gulf, from Malaysia and Singapore, of all British forces by 1970? Would he bear this in mind in his forward planning in the Persian Gulf and generally east of Suez?
§ Mr. HealeyI will certainly bear all relevant considerations in mind at all times.
§ Mr. Stratton MillsWhat report has the right hon. Gentleman received from Her Majesty's representatives in the Gulf about the reaction to the British withdrawal from Aden?
§ Mr. HealeyI cay say that Her Majesty's representatives in the Gulf report the local Governments as being very satisfied with the steps which are proposed and to which I have just referred.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingDoes the right hon. Gentleman know that there are strong rumours that there is escalation of costs in the increase of numbers and facilities in the Persion Gulf? Would it not be wiser to restrict service in this area to unaccompanied service of short duration and not to build a complicated support mechanism in an area which is totally unsuitable for women and children.
§ Mr. HealeyI can assure the hon. Member that we have no intention of 404 building married quarters in those parts of the Gulf where we are developing substantial new facilities. I do not know what reports he has heard, but I can also tell him that there is no indication of escalation in the cost of the building programme.
§ Mr. SandysDid I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that he did not consider that a British military presence in South Arabia was necessary for the stability of that area? Does he not realise that by withdrawing prematurely we are going to leave a power vacuum in that area which can only result in invasion or subversion organised by Egypt?
§ Mr. HealeyThe House will be aware that we have debated this matter on many occasions, and we will no doubt debate it again in a few weeks' time. I referred to the stability of the Gulf, and I said that a base in Aden was not necessary in order to maintain our obligations to the States in the Gulf.
§ Mr. HefferWill the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that our presence in these areas may be a provocation and that it means the opposite to what he suggested in his reply? Would he not think again about this matter; otherwise we may be there for ever?
§ Mr. HealeyI am grateful to my hon. Friend for making a point which is of great weight. The great question which the Government have to ask themselves continually is whether the presence of British forces in a given area is likely to contribute to the stability or is likely to derogate from the stability of the area. I am quite satisfied that the presence of British forces in the Gulf is a contribution towards stability.