§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Nicholas Ridley)With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on Belize.
Following the recent ministerial talks in London between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Guatemala, at which the Premier of Belize and two of his Cabinet colleagues were present, heads of agreement were signed on 11 March on the basis of which a full settlement is to be negotiated between the United Kingdom and Guatemala. This settlement will end the controversy that has existed between the two countries for well over 100 years over the territory of Belize.
The heads of agreement, which were published last night, represent a significant advance. They provide a framework for a solution to this long-standing problem that all concerned can regard as just and honourable. Settlement of the controversy will bring great benefits to Belize, the safeguarding of whose interests has been our concern throughout the negotiations. Under the terms of the treaties, which we shall now negotiate, the Guatemalan territorial claim will be ended and Belize's future security will therefore be assured. Guatemala will recognise the independent State of Belize within its existing frontiers on the day of independence.
Guatemala will also benefit. It will be assured permanent and unimpeded access to the Caribbean; the use and enjoyment of the Ranguana and Sapodilla cays, the two southernmost groups of very small islands on the Belizean barrier reef; and rights in areas of the sea adjacent to the cays, as may be agreed. Other provisions will be mutually beneficial. They include free port facilities for Guatemala in Belize and for Belize in Guatemala, completion of roads, facilities for oil pipelines, agreements on pollution control, navigation and fishing, joint exploration and exploitation of minerals in areas of the sea bed and continental shelf to be agreed, and development projects and security co-operation. A copy of the full text will be circulated in the Official Report.
The heads of agreement represent a commitment on all sides to negotiate in good faith the legal instruments that will provide for a full, honourable and permanent settlement. I pay tribute to the imagination and flexibility shown by the Belizean delegation as well as the Guatemalan Government in the talks, which have enabled us to take this major step forward. I am confident that, with continuing good will and understanding, a final settlement can be negotiated successfully over the coming months.
§ Mr. Giles Radice (Chester-le-Street)Is the Minister aware that the Opposition welcome the heads of agreement in the hope that this will end the long-running dispute between Britain and Guatemala over Belize and enable Belize at last to take its place as an independent nation? At this crucial stage, before the joint commission has met to work out the fine print of the heads of agreement, it would be wrong to make any detailed comment, but I should like to ask the Minister some questions about the outline settlement.
First, does the freedom of transit given to Guatemala on the two roads through Belize to the Guatemalan frontier apply to military transport? Secondly, how many British troops, if any, will be stationed in Belize when that country becomes independent? Lastly, does the Minister 201 accept that in any final settlement between this very small parliamentary democracy and the much larger military regime of Guatemala—a settlement in which both sides, Belize quite as much as Guatemala, will have to make concessions—the proof of the pudding will very much lie in the eating?
§ Mr. RidleyI am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he says. I am also grateful to the Opposition for consistently supporting our efforts to achieve this agreement over a long period, with, I think, an all-party approach to the problem. The freedom of transit across the two roads to which the hon. Member drew attention is for commercial traffic only. There is no concession for military traffic along those roads. In relation to post-independence arrangements for security, I think the House will agree that it is a little premature to decide these matters. They will be discussed at the constitutional conference that is shortly to come. We shall certainly do whatever is necessary. The point that I should like to make is that what will be necessary if there is a settlement with Guatemala will be vastly different from what will be necessary if there is not a settlement. On the last point, about which the hon. Gentleman will perhaps remind me—
§ Mr. RadiceThe proof of the pudding lies in the eating.
§ Mr. RidleyI agree with the hon. Gentleman. These are only a heads of agreement. Difficulties may still arise in negotiating the final settlement.
§ Mr. Robin Maxwell-Hyslop (Tiverton)In view of the fact that, at any rate up to the time of Her Majesty's visit to Mexico, the Mexican Government expressed a continuing interest in the locus standi of Guatemala and Belize—indeed, at one stage, there was a Mexican claim to northern Belize—may we take it that this arrangement has been discussed informally with the Mexican Government so that it receives their good will, that being an important ingredient in any settlement in that region?
§ Mr. RidleyWe have kept in close touch with the Mexican Government throughout the negotiations, and I can assure my hon. Friend that the Mexican Government are extremely happy with the heads of agreement. There is no question of Mexico's pressing any claim against Belize.
§ Mr. Edward Rowlands (Merthyr Tydfil)As one who has been involved in the protracted negotiations, may I add my congratulations on the settlement that is about to happen? In particular, may I offer my best wishes to Premier Price and the people of Belize, who have fought a long campaign on behalf of their aspirations to become an independent State, against considerable Guatemalan intransigence?
I wish to put two points to the Minister. First, I think that it would be a good idea for the troops to withdraw slowly, to ensure that the settlement will stick, and so that the volatile Guatemalan political scene will not affect the result. The second point relates to the cays and the negotiations that are to take place. Will my hon. Friend be able to give the same assurances that he has just given about transit to the Belize on ports, and can he confirm that there will be no question of a Guatemalan military presence on the cays in any subequent negotiations?
§ Mr. RidleyI thank the hon. Gentleman for what he said, and I pay tribute to the sterling efforts that he has made in this dispute over many years. I believe that he helped to lay the foundation of the agreement that has now been reached. I join him in congratulating Premier Price on what I believe has been a good settlement, but one that was hard-fought, particularly on his side, and I wish the Government of Belize all success in the future.
I hesitate to answer the hon. Gentleman's first question, for the reason that I gave the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Radice)—it is still too soon to say what the effects will be. We shall need to discuss the matter with Belize before making precise predictions about troop strengths.
Secondly, the types of use of the cays that are to be agreed between Belize and Guatemala have not yet been settled. That is one of the items that still have to be finalised in the negotiations leading up to the treaty.
§ Mr. Robert Atkins (Preston, North)I wish to press my hon. Friend on two matters that concern security. First, it was clear to a number of hon. Members of both parties who recently visited Belize under the leadership of the right hon. Member for Mansfield (Mr. Concannon) that most of the people of Belize wished to retain British troops there, if for no other reason than that the money has to be spent in some way, and that is an excellent way for the troops to get jungle training, while enhancing the security of Belize. I accept that my hon. Friend will not he able to give me any details now, but will he consider the matter?
Secondly, what help ought to be given to the Belize defence forces, which at present have one or two British permanent instructors? 'What equipment or further assistance can we give them after independence?
§ Mr. RidleyThe views that were expressed about British troops on my hon. Friend's visit to Belize were expressed before settlement was reached. If settlement is finally achieved, I hope that it will allay the fears of the people to Belize to a large extent. I can confirm that whatever happens we shall help the Belize defence force to improve its capability, with training and equipment, so that it can become a credible force in the defence of Belize.
§ Mr. Russell Johnston (Inverness)Is the Minister aware that, in view of the fact that he is often criticised in other parts of Latin America, he deserves our congratulations on achieving this agreement? Is he prepared to guarantee the agreement in security terms?
§ Mr. RidleyI am not quite sure what the hon. Gentleman meant in the first part of his question. In answer to the second part, we shall do whatever is necessary in the circumstances. Clearly, I cannot go as far as to guarantee anything in a country that is soon to become independent. We shall keep in close touch with the Government of Belize and help them with any problems that may arise.
§ Dr. M. S. Miller (East Kilbride)I congratulate the Minister on the settlement, which certainly seems better than what we had been led to believe previously, but are not congratulations somewhat premature, considering that we are dealing with a dictator whose country is aimed to the teeth? The situation in Belize has remained calm because of the presence of British troops there, to whom congratulations and credit are due. In such a situation, where there is to be a big constitutional change, surely the 203 people of Belize should be consulted. Would it not be a good idea to hold a referendum, with impartial supervision, to ascertain the views of the people?
§ Mr. RidleyIt is only 13 months since the Government of Belize were re-elected, extremely convincingly, on a full mandate to proceed to independence, come what may. If a settlement is reached, that mandate will be reinforced. I accept that we are still not at the end of the road, and that things may go wrong, but surely the hon. Gentleman will agree that if an agreement is reached with Guatemala, it will be by far the best way to bring about a good relationship between Guatemala and Belize. It must, by definition, be infinitely better than having independence without such an agreement.
I join the hon. Gentleman in congratulating the troops on the magnificent job that they have done in Belize. They deserve the admiration of all hon. Members.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I propose to call those hon. Gentlemen who have been rising from the beginning of supplementary questions on the statement.
§ Mr. William Shelton (Streatham)Will my hon. Friend accept my congratulations for having moved the affair thus far? May I also pay tribute to the good sense of the Guatemalan Government and the representatives of Belize? Will my hon. Friend tell us what is the present cost of her Majesty's forces stationed in Belize, and whether that cost will be reduced or will increase in the next year or two?
§ Mr. RidleyI am extremely grateful for what my hon. Friend said. I echo the tribute that he paid to the other parties in this round of negotiations. It is difficult to give accurate figures for the cost of troops, because it depends on whether one takes the absolute cost of the troops, plus their equipment, or includes the extra cost of having them in Belize rather than in the United Kingdom. I believe that the former figure is between £25 million and £30 million a year, and the latter figure is about £3½ million a year. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence will confirm those figures.
§ Mr. Eric Ogden (Liverpool, West Derby)Will the Minister accept my congratulations on the patient but—I gather—determined fight that he played in the negotiations? Will he confirm that agreement was reached at 8.30 last Wednesday morning? If it proves nothing else, it proves that the Minister has more control over leaks in his Department than is the case in other Departments. What part, if any, will the British Government play in the further negotiations on the clarification of the heads of agreement with Belize and Guatemala? Will they be between Belize and Guatemala, or shall we have some part to play in the negotiations?
§ Mr. RidleyI am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I must disclaim having sat all night on Tuesday. We concluded our discussions at 7 pm on Tuesday and merely returned to sign at 8.30 am on Wednesday. I confirm that we shall play a part in the further rounds of negotiations with representatives from the Belize and Guatemalan Governments. There will be further tripartite negotiations.
§ Mr. Peter Bottomley (Woolwich, West)I hope that my hon. Friend will find this experience useful when dealing with other settlements and disputes in the 204 neighbourhood. Is the draft agreement in line with United Nations resolutions on the subject? What is the attitude of the Opposition party in Belize to the draft agreement?
§ Mr. RidleyThe heads of agreement comply entirely with the United Nations resolution of last autumn. There is no derogation of sovereignty and no impairment of Belize's traditional frontiers.
To my knowledge, the Opposition in Belize have not commented since they heard the details of the settlement. As it was announced only last night, no comment has so far reached me. Any comments made before they knew the terms of the settlement might need to be revised. I am waiting to hear what the Opposition in Belize have to say.
§ Mr. Robert C. Brown (Newcastle upon Tyne, West)Does the Minister agree that Belize is probably the best example of a truly multi-racial democracy? We all wish to congratulate the Minister on the progress so far. Is he aware that we are all determined that Belize should be able to maintain its independence? Does he agree that it is no part of the job of a former colonial Power to guarantee independence by military means? Since there is such unanimity in the United Nations on the question of independence for Belize, will the Minister seek the United Nations guarantees for the independence of Belize in future?
§ Mr. RidleyI am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I confirm that Belize is a multi-racial democracy of an exemplary rectitude, despite its small size. We want it to remain so. I do not believe that that can be achieved by a United Nations guarantee. There is no precedent for that. The biggest contribution that can be made to security is to have a treaty of settlement with Guatemala. After that it is difficult to see who the enemy could be. That is the best guarantee for the future.
§ Mr. Christopher Murphy (Welwyn and Hatfield)In view of the increasing Cuban threat to democracy in Central America, does my hon. Friend agree that to assure Belize's independence some form of military guarantee may have to be made by Britain?
§ Mr. RidleyThe mere fact that Belize goes independent and becomes a member of the United Nations and, we hope, the Organisation of American States, will in itself be a major guarantee of its security. Her Majesty's Government will take whatever steps seem necessary to reinforce that independence and that security in the light of events at the time when Belize achieves independence.
§ Mr. Stanley Newens (Harlow)Since, in the past, the United States has had a policy that has not always coincided with that of Britain, can the Minister assure the House that the present American Administration will give full backing to the settlement and will in no circumstances back any future Guatemalan Administration who seek to revive Guatemala's claim?
§ Mr. RidleyI am happy to pay tribute to both the present and the past American Administrations. The last Administration supported the United Nations resolution. President Reagan's Administration have already sent messages to the Guatemalan and Belizean Governments congratulating them on a just and honourable agreement.
§ Mr. John Sever (Birmingham, Ladywood)Is the Minister aware that the statement will be welcomed, particularly by hon. Members who recently visited Belize?
205 I am grateful to the Minister for having placed on record the thanks of the Government for the work that British troops have been doing in Belize, in what must be one of the most unacceptable and difficult postings abroad. When the Minister considers the negotiations further, will he bear in mind that the situation within Belize is difficult in relation to some local administration and infrastructure? Will he bear in mind the difficulties that might be occasioned to a newly independent State and make provision for and give assistance in terms of the infrastructure and similar matters at independence?
§ Mr. RidleyI agree with what the hon. Gentleman says. I repeat my tribute to the troops and to the RAF personnel who have served in Belize. The development of the infrastructure is important, and we shall play our part. My hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development hopes to discuss that later this afternoon. The fact that there has been a settlement will bring help from many other countries—including the United States of America—which are pleased that this has happened. We are conscious of the need.
§ Mr. Edward Lyons (Bradford, West)I congratulate the Minister on the progress that he has made towards the independence of Britain's last colony in the Western hemisphere. Will he bear in mind that the reason why Guatemala has been so obdurate is that it enshrined the claim to Belize in its 1946 constitution? In the negotiations, has there been any promise to remove the assertion of sovereignty over Belize from the Guatemalan constitution? If there has not been such a move, there could be trouble in the future.
§ Mr. RidleyI am sorry to have tell the hon. and learned Gentleman that Britain still has 13 dependencies in the Western hemisphere, including Belize. The Guatemalan constitution is a matter for the Guatemalan Government. However, by signing the heads of agreement they have implied that they wish to recognise an independent Belize and to drop their claim against us for that territory. How they regularise that internally is a matter for them.
§ Following is the text:
§ Heads of Agreement
§ The United Kingdom and Guatemala, in order to settle the controversy between them over the territory of Belize, have reached agreement on the following points.
§ 1. The United Kingdom and Guatemala shall recognise the independent State of Belize as an integral part of Central America, and respect its sovereignty and territorial integrity in accordance with its existing and traditional frontiers subject, in the case of Guatemala, to the completion of the treaty or treaties necessary to give effect to these Heads of Agreement.
§ 2. Guatemala shall be accorded such territorial seas as shall ensure permanent and unimpeded access to the high seas, together with rights over the seabed there-under.
§ 3. Guatemala shall have the use and enjoyment of the Ranguana and Sapodilla cays, and rights in those areas of the sea adjacent to the cays, as may be agreed.
§ 4. Guatemala shall be entitled to free port facilities in Belize City and Punta Gorda.,
§ 5. The road from Belize City to the Guatemalan frontier shall be improved; a road from Punta Gorda to the Guatemalan frontier shall be completed. Guatemala shall have freedom of transit on these roads.
§ 6. Belize shall facilitate the construction of oil pipelines between Guatemala and Belize City, Dangriga and Punta Gorda.
§ 7. In areas to be agreed an agreement shall be concluded between Belize and Guatemala for purposes concerned with the control of pollution, navigation and fishing.
§ 8. There shall be areas of the seabed and the continental shelf to be agreed for the joint exploration and exploitation of minerals and hydrocarbons.
206§ 9. Belize and Guatemala shall agree upon certain developmental projects of mutual benefit.
§ 10. Belize shall be entitled to any free port facilities in Guatemala to match similar facilities provided to Guatemala in Belize.
§ 11. Belize and Guatemala shall sign a treaty of co-operation in matters of security of mutual concern, and neither shall permit its territory to be used to support subversion against the other.
§ 12. Except as foreseen in these Heads of Agreement, nothing in these provisions shall prejudice any rights or interests of Belize or of the Belizean people.
§ 13. The United Kingdom and Guatemala shall enter into agreements designed to re-establish full and normal relations between them.
§ 14. The United Kingdom and Guatemala shall take the necessary action to sponsor the membership of Belize in the United Nations, the Organisation of American States, Central American organisations and other international organisations.
§ 15. A Joint Commission shall be established between Belize, Guatemala and the United Kingdom to work out details to give effect to the above provisions. It will prepare a treaty or treaties for signature by the Signatories to these Heads of Agreement.
§ 16. The controversy between the United Kingdom and Guatemala over the territory of Belize shall therefore be honourably and finally terminated.
Signed at London, the 11th day of March 1981, in the English and the Spanish language, both texts being equally authentic.