Middle East (Hansard, 6 April 1970)

§ 2. Mr. Marten
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the situation in the Middle East, so far as British policy and interests are concerned.

§ 23. Mr. Cronin
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on recent events in the Middle East, so far as British interests and policy are involved.

§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Evan Luard)
Our policy and our prime interest in the Middle East is to see peace restored. We continue to play an active part in the four Power talks and hope that these will soon provide fresh guidance for Dr. Jarring, the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General.

§ Mr. Marten
Could the Minister say what his Department has been doing in the last six to nine months about the British ships that are just rusting away in the Suez Canal?

§ Mr. Speaker
There is a Question on that matter on the Order Paper.

§ Mr. Marten
Could I, then, ask another supplementary?

§ Mr. Speaker
Yes.

§ Mr. Marten
Could the Minister explain what is the Government's policy towards Muscat and Oman?

§ Mr. Luard
That is an entirely separate Question.

§ Mr. Hooley
Does my hon. Friend think that it might perhaps be useful if the four Powers asked Dr. Jarring to publish a definitive report of his findings on his conversations so far with both sides, so that the world at large can form a better judgment as to where the possibilities of peaceful settlement might lie?

§ Mr. Luard
That is one possibility which could be considered, but, as my hon. Friend will know, it is still the aim of the four Powers that they will be able to reach agreement in New York on new guidelines to enable Dr. Jarring to resume his mission. Until it has been made clear whether or not that is possible, it would be premature to take the kind of step my hon. Friend recommends.

§ Mr. Lambton
Could the hon. Gentleman say why Oman is not in the Middle East? Is it true that Egyptian pilots and Soviet instructors were used in the raid on Aba Island by the Sudanese?

§ Mr. Luard
I have no information with which to answer the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. On the first part, I took it—and I think that the House will agree with me—that the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten) was referring to the Arab-Israel dispute.

§ Mr. Shinwell
Is it not remarkable that one of the four Powers, the Soviet Union, already has 15,000 technicians in Egypt and Syria? Does my hon. Friend think that that is making a contribution to peace? Have the Government made any protest against the presence of Soviet advisers and technicians in Egypt?

§ Mr. Luard
Many different estimates have been made of the number of Soviet technicians in the U.A.R. and Syria. I would not necessarily accept the figure which my right hon. Friend has given.

§ Mr. Shinwell
It is true.

§ Mr. Luard
It would not be open to Her Majesty's Government to make a protest either to the U.A.R. or Syria, or 6 to the Soviet Union, on the question which my right hon. Friend has raised, because these are questions within the sovereign jurisdiction of each State.

§ 15. Mr. Moonman
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the extent of his representations to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in attempting to secure an arms embargo in the Middle East.

§ Mr. Luard
In his reply to Mr. Kosygin's letter of the 2nd of February, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister emphasised our willingness to work for a general agreement on arms limitation in the Middle East even in advance of a political settlement. Mr. Kosygin has not yet replied. We hope that the Soviet Government will ultimately agree to cooperate with us on arms limitation.

§ Mr. Moonman
I hope that my hon. Friend will continue his efforts. Does he agree that the present situation hardly meets the natural anxieties of Israel, a fact which is shared by every fair-minded person in this country? While we continue to temper Israeli action, there is no such restraint placed on the Russian side.

§ Mr. Luard
As I said in my reply, the Government are concerned to bring about an agreement on the limitation of arms supplies to the Middle East. Such an agreement would cover all the countries concerned at present in the supply of arms to the area. I am sure that my hon. Friend will share with me the satisfaction that some recent decisions have perhaps opened the way to restraint in the supply of arms to all countries in the Middle East.

§ Mr. Henig
As the Soviet Union and France, two of the four great Powers, are sending a continuing and unceasing flow of arms to the Arab side in this dispute, is not any policy by the British Government of trying to keep a balance in arms supplies ludicrous and meaningless, and in itself a grave threat to Israeli security?

§ Mr. Luard
I do not understand the logic of my hon. Friend's question. Obviously in considering the balance of arms in the area we take into account the supplies which go from such countries as the Soviet Union and France, 7 and it is in the light of our knowledge about those supplies that we take our own decisions.

§ 36. Mr. Bryant Godman Irvine
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if, following his consultations with European allies on the possibility of a European guarantee of Middle Eastern frontiers, he will now make proposals to France and other European Powers on this matter.

§ Mr. Luard
On the evidence at present available, we are not convinced of the merits of a purely European solution to the problem of guaranteeing Middle Eastern frontiers. No European country has put forward proposals for a purely European initiative of the kind suggested. Nor do I have reason to believe that such a proposal would be considered a satisfactory solution by the countries concerned in the area.

§ Mr. Godman Irvine
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I was not asking him to pronounce on the merits but to bear in mind that time is not on his side? The two parties discussing the matter at the moment are both clearly identified with one side or the other. Should not any initiative be taken, however small the chances of success?

§ Mr. Luard
The hon. Gentleman asked the Government to make proposals to France. This involves making a pronouncement or decision on the merits. I have given reasons why an initiative of this kind would not be valuable, one of the most important being that none of the countries in the region seem to wish for a guarantee in this form.

Mr. Colin Jackson
If there is any settlement involving a United Nations police force in the area, obviously some of the countries contributing to that force would be European nations. In view of that, should not they be consulted in advance?

§ Mr. Luard
That is a different question. It is our view that one element of a settlement will probably be the stationing of United Nations forces in the area. The Question refers to a guarantee, which is rather different. It is not our view that a guarantee provided by European Governments alone 8 would make a useful contribution to a settlement.