§ Q5. Mr. Molloyasked the Prime Minister if he will now consider sponsoring a meeting between the President of the United States of America, the Prime Minister of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and U Thant to consider ending the war in Vietnam.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer I gave to a supplementary question by him on 12th March.—[Vol. 760, c. 1181–2.]
§ Mr. MolloyI was hoping that my right hon. Friend would have reconsidered that reply. As he has said that this war will not be resolved by a military adventure, may I ask whether he thinks that, as this is a cancer which can affect all mankind, the steps for which I am asking are fully justified to try to end this war?
§ The Prime MinisterI have said that this war will not be solved by an imposed military solution, and the same thought found its way into the communiqué issued in Moscow when I was there. I have discussed this very fully with Mr. Kosygin, with President Johnson, and with others, and I have kept in close touch with both the Soviet Union and the United States Governments since I left those two countries.
§ Mr. BlakerIs it not significant that the Question does not propose that the conference should be attended by the Prime Minister himself?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not know what satisfaction the hon. Gentleman gets out of that question. I have no doubt that he gets a great deal out of it. I know that we have our responsibility as co-Chairman in this matter. We have not hesitated throughout the period of this fighting, and particularly since the bombing of the North began, to press our fellow co-Chairman to take the lead in calling a conference. We understand their reasons for not doing this. We have therefore sought a number of other means in direct discussions with the Heads of Governments to get the parties to the conference table.
§ Mrs. Renée ShortBut now that the people of this country are being asked to bear considerable economic burdens to bolster up the dollar, does my right hon. Friend not think that it is time that we had a quid pro quo, and that he now asked the United States President to get out of Vietnam and to stop the enormous waste of American resources on this frightful war?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend's question is something of an oversimplification of the worldwide financial and monetary storm which was the subject of the discussions in Washington this weekend. Nor would it be right to say that we were bolstering the dollar. 246 What all of us and our representatives in Washington were trying to do last Saturday and Sunday was to bring some common sense and reason into the situation which had been created by the gold speculators, so that we could have some stability of monetary values and a chance for the extension of world trade.
§ Mr. Eldon GriffithsReverting to the Question on the Order Paper, would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the President and the Soviet Prime Minister have ample contacts without his sponsorship? Will he also confirm that the resignation of the right hon. Member for Belper (Mr. George Brown) does not involve any change in his policy of generally supporting the United States in Vietnam?
§ The Prime MinisterOn the first part of that Question, there have, of course, been direct talks between President Johnson and Prime Minister Kosygin last June in the United States, but both sides have been very anxious to discuss with me and with the British Government what we can do to help secure that the parties concerned go to the conference table. Therefore, the first part of the Question is wrong. In view of the line consistently taken by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary on these matters, which is well within the recollection of the House, I do not think that the second part needs an answer.