MILITARY EQUIPMENT (EL SALVADOR) (Hansard, 9 January 1978)

§ Mr. Newens

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the proposal to sell £850,000 worth of military equipment to E1 Salvador. I apologise, Mr. Speaker, for failing to give you notice before 12 o'clock today, but unfortunately I was unable to confirm certain facts before 2 o'clock this afternoon. I notified you of my intention to raise this matter at that stage. The issue is obviously specific in so far as it relates to a specific consignment of arms and it is urgent since, as I understand it, shipment of these arms is due to take place this coming weekend or as soon thereafter as the ship, the "Suzanna Vinnen", can be loaded at Sheerness and put to sea.

Before Parliament went into recess the matter was raised in the House in a number of parliamentary Questions. My reason for raising this issue now is that the information provided by my right hon. and hon. Friends who replied to these Questions does not conform to the facts which have come to light since. I can only assume that my right hon. and hon. Friends must have been misled.

Parliamentary Questions were tabled by myself, by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, Central (Mr. McNamara) and the hon. Members for Colne Valley (Mr. Wainwright) and Reading, North (Mr. Durant), asking whether the military equipment could be used by El Salvador in support of Guatemalan claims on Belize, thus involving, possibly, its use against British troops stationed there. It was also asked whether the equipment could be used in suppressing the legitimate aspirations of the El Salvador population in relation to policies on human rights which have been approved by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. There were also two Early-Day Motions, supported by hon. Members on both sides of the House, including the hon. Member for Essex, South-East (Sir B. Braine). My hon. Friend the Member for Oxford (Mr. Luard), the Under-Secretary of State for 1265 Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in a ministerial Answer to the hon. Member for Reading, North on 16th December said: in the case of the contract for the sale of arms to El Salvador a specific assurance was demanded and received that the vehicles would not be used against British Armed Forces in Belize.'—[Official Report, 16th December 1977, Vol. 941, c. 482.] A national newspaper in El Salvador, E1 Diario de Hoy, had already published a story on 22nd November headlined El Salvador does not accept London's conditions. It went on to say: El Salvador will not submit itself to the criteria of any foreign power with respect to the purchase of military equipment or anything else. The same story was carried on 30th November by La Nacion, one of the national newspapers in Guatemala.

It might have been thought that these declarations had been overridden by statements made by my right hon. and hon. Friends. In the recess, however, it has come to light that this is not so and that El Salvador does not accept Britain's conditions. The Foreign Minister of El Salvador, Snr. Alvaro Ernesto Martinez, was reported in The Guardian on 3rd January—based on a United Press internal cable report—as saying that: El Salvador was not interested in buying British arms if Britain makes the sale conditional on the formal promise not to use them against Belize. It is obviously an extremely important matter if arms are to be shipped to a country which could use them against British troops. It is an urgent matter of which we in this House should take urgent cognisance.

There is no doubt about El Salvador's attitude to Guatemalan claims against Belize. The Government there have repeatedly expressed their support for Guatemala and demonstrated it in the United Nations. President Romero of El Salvador has clearly been associated with this viewpoint. If it were possible that arms could be sold to a power which could use them against British forces, it seems that there are few more important and vital issues which we should be discussing as a matter of urgency.

1266 There is an additional reason why this issue should be discussed. Ministers who have replied to Questions have stated—I believe that I am correct in saying this—that the consignment consists of Saladin armoured cars. But there is a report in Defence and Foreign Affairs Digest of last month which also lists rifles and radio equipment. This report could be false or misinformed, but it is vital that we should know the facts before the issue is allowed to rest.

This subject was raised in the House of Lords on 8th December by Lord Chitnis. My noble Friend, Lord Goronwy-Roberts said that he shared the concern about human rights and felt that President Romero had already: given proof of his desire to engage in internal reforms and to moderate tensions."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 8th December 1977; Vol. 387, c. 1746–7.] If the information which has been given to Members of this House and the other place on the question of the possible use of arms against Belize is incorrect, may it not also be false on the question of the attitude of President Romero towards human rights? Much information exists to suggest that President Romero's regime is not taking human rights into cognisance as we in this House and my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary would wish.

For all these reasons, I believe that this is an important and urgent issue which should be discussed by the House. I believe that in the long run lives could be at stake. We in this House cannot lightly dismiss issues involving arms.