§ 8. Mr. Shoreasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he intends to have with the Governments of India and Pakistan about the refugee situation in East Bengal.
§ 24. Mr. Prenticeasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the refugee situation in East Bengal.
§ 27. Mr. Woodhouseasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now initiate a proposal at the United Nations for a United Nations presence in East Parikstan.
§ 44. Sir F. Bennettasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will now initiate a proposal at the United Nations for a United Nations presence in and adjoining East Pakistan.
§ 45. Mr. Wilkinsonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the Governments of India and Pakistan about the proposal to establish United Nations observers in Indian territory adjacent to East Pakistan and within East Pakistan, respectively; and if he will make a statement.
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeThe situation created by the refugees from East Pakistan, who, according to Indian estimates, now number over 7 million, continues to give cause for concern, and the Government support the efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations through the High Commissioner for Refugees to establish conditions under which their return might be effected. The Pakistan Government have already admitted a United Nations presence to East Pakistan, which includes a representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. We have been in close touch with the Indian and Pakistan Governments about the situation, but the question of the repatriation of refugees is one which I believe is best handled through the humanitarian Agencies of the United Nations.
§ Mrs. ShoreRight hon. and hon. Members will be glad to hear that United Nations observers have been allowed in, but, in the light of his own analysis of the causes of the refugee problem, which, as the Foreign Secretary has told the House, is due mainly to the repression carried out by the West Pakistan Army in East Bengal, and given that this repression is continuing and the flow of refugees is increasing, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that other efforts and other representations directly to the Pakistan Government are needed if we are to see some improvement in this dangerous and tragic situation?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeAs I have said to the right hon. Gentleman before, Her Majesty's Government are in contact privately with the Pakistan Government, and I think that this is the best way to conduct our relations. As regards dealing publicly with this matter, the Pakistan Government have accepted that there should be United Nations observers on the spot and that they should help to repatriate refugees. If we can get people on the spot who will help to 1071 repatriate the refugees and see that they are redistributed to their homes without fear, that will be a beginning, at least, of reversing the flow.
§ Mr. PrenticeIn the course of the private contacts to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, will he make inquiries about the safety of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and representations for his release? Will he make clear also the view which I am sure is held by right hon. and hon. Members on both sides, that the only possible peaceful solution of this terrible tragedy lies in a political settlement acceptable to the people of East Bengal, and that the only practical approach to this is by negotiations with Sheikh Mujib and the Awami League, which won such an overwhelming victory in the election?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeAs I have said again and again, the political settlement which is reached in Pakistan—we profoundly hope that it will be reached as soon as possible—must be a matter for the Pakistanis themselves. No other country outside can have any influence on this. I think it better not to discuss the results of private representations which we have made about either Sheikh Mujibur Rahman or other questions.
§ Mr. WoodhouseSince it is now, and has long been, clear that the problems of both restoring stable conditions and dealing with the refugees are beyond the capacity of the present resources available to any single Power, whether Pakistan or any other, is it not time that international action was taken on a much more substantial scale than is represented merely by the presence of United Nations observers?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeWe would hope so. The proposal made by the Commissioner for Refugees is that there should be a substantial number of U.N. personnel who will be responsible for the reception of refugees on the Pakistan side. The hope was also expressed that there might be a similar number of U.N. personnel on the Indian side of the frontier. So far, although there has been no formal communication to this effect, the Indian Government are not attracted by the idea.
§ Sir F. BennettIn view of my right hon. Friends last words, can he confirm 1072 that the only hitch to the successful and effective deployment of the U.N. personnel along that dangerous border is the lack of the same sort of affirmative response from India as there has already been from Pakistan?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeIt must be for the Indian Government to make their own formal representations in the matter. Their public attitude is that they are not attracted by the proposition.
§ Mr. WilkinsonDoes my right hon. Friend agree that it is imperative that India should publicly accept the observers, because many disinterested and objective people around the world feel that the infiltration of unfriendly elements into East Pakistan is hindering the peaceful settlement and stability in the area which all well-intentioned people so heartily long for?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeI have been concerned with rather a different type of U.N. personnel. Observers to watch the frontier would be another matter. The personnel of whom I am talking are to help repatriate the refugees, to receive them on the Pakistan side of the border, and to see that they are safe in their homes.
§ Mr. StonehouseIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that 10,000 to 30,000 refugees are still leaving East Pakistan every day, and that it is necessary for action to be taken on the cause? The cause, as the right hon. Gentleman well knows, is the continuing repression of the population in East Bengal by the Army. Is it not necessary that urgent action should be taken in the Security Council to deal with the cause of the situation, which is the continuing genocide in East Bengal? Is that not the reason why the Security Council and the United Nations were set up? Should not the right hon. Gentleman use that vehicle to deal with the situation?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeAs I think the hon. Gentleman knows, in the case of genocide there must first be an accusation, and that must be dealt with first in the courts in the country concerned. Then it must be dealt with in a court under the auspices of the United Nations; but no such court has been set up. Therefore, any accusations of genocide fall on barren ground.
§ Mr. JesselHas there been any reduction in the rate of outflow of refugees from Pakistan into India over the past month?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeI think that it is fair to say that there has been a reduction but that there are still considerable numbers moving across the frontier.
§ Mrs. HealeyIs the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary aware that we appreciate the extremely delicate situation with which he is dealing, and recognise the constructive efforts he has made to alleviate some of the problems? But many of us on both sides of the House are deeply apprehensive that during the next month or two what has been for the United Nations primarily a humanitarian problem, the relief of an unprecedented number of refugees who have left their country to go into surrounding Indian territories, may turn into a political problem and a threat to peace. Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he has not closed his mind to the possibility of raising the matter at the United Nations as a political and security problem? Does he not agree that another war on the sub-continent would be a tragedy of unimaginable proportions for all concerned?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeThe right hon. Gentleman has expressed an anxiety that we share. I do not know whether a meeting of the Security Council would assist. I think that first it must be for the Governments of India or Pakistan to decide, and neither has yet decided to make a move to go to the Security Council. It is a situation that we must watch with great care, in full knowledge of the dangers that the right hon. Gentleman has pointed out.
§ Mr. HealeyMight I press the right hon. Gentleman on this? Many of us on both sides feel that it is unfair and perhaps unjust to put the responsibility for raising the matter at the Security Council on the Government of either India or Pakistan, given their past relations with one another. It is of deep concern to the whole of mankind that there should not be another war on the sub-continent, and, therefore, this may be a case where a third party is better placed to take the initiative than either of the two Governments on the sub-continent.
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeI shall bear in mind what the right hon. Gentleman says, because the situation could be very grave. At present I am not sure that the cause of peace between the two countries would be served by an exercise in the Security Council.
§ 19. Mr. Kilfedderasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will consider seeking to pay an official visit to Pakistan and India in the near future.
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeI have no plans at present to visit India or Pakistan.
§ Mr. KilfedderWill my right hon. Friend consider paying a visit as soon as possible to India and Pakistan in view of the danger of war breaking out on the sub-continent, a danger which was pointed out in the leading article in today's Financial Times? I am sure he recognises the need, as does the President of Pakistan, for a return to normality as soon as possible in East Pakistan so that the refugees can return there. Would he not agree that the activities of the Pakistan army and the return of the army to its cantonments depends on the cessation of Bangla Desh guerrilla forces? Will he persuade the Indian Government to stop the activity of those forces?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeMy hon. Friend refers to a visit by myself. I have often been to India and Pakistan, and I would go again if I thought that that could contribute anything to a peaceful solution. I will bear my hon. Friend's proposal in mind, but the timing would be very important.
§ Mr. Frank AllaunWould the right hon. Gentleman consider expressing to Mrs. Gandhi our deep appreciation of the tremendous sacrifices made by India in helping 7 million refugees, but at the same time urging her to resist the voices clamouring for military action, as that would make the situation of the refugees even more calamitous than it is today, thanks to the activities of the West Pakistan Government?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeThe Prime Minister of India would be the first to recognise the great dangers of any military action, and I am sure that the President of Pakistan recognises them, too. The hon. Gentleman may be 1075 assured that we shall do everything we can to try to help in what is a very difficult situation.
§ Mr. BraineWould my right hon. Friend agree that one does not have to pay an official visit to India and Pakistan to be aware of the extreme gravity of the position? Does he still adhere to the view which he expressed in the House some weeks ago that, on top of the abject misery in the many refugee camps, there may well be major famine in both East and West Bengal by October? Is he satisfied with the present state of international contingency planning on that score?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeAs my hon. Friend knows, a short time ago we gave £1 million to help refugees in East Pakistan. The United Nations is now taking steps to put United Nations personnel into East Pakistan, and their recommendations will be carefully taken into account. So far as any international machine is ever ready, I think that further help could be injected at comparatively short notice if the situation should deteriorate.
§ Mr. TinnIs the Foreign Secretary aware that hon. Members talked in East Pakistan with members of the regular Indian armed forces taken prisoner inside Pakistan and saw arms of Indian manufacture? Would not the proposed visit enable my right hon. Friend to make representations to India against such interference, which must hold back the day when normality may be restored and refugees enabled to return in confidence?
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeI think that everyone will agree in urging restraint on any kind of military intervention from either side of the frontier. It could bring disastrous consequences.