§ 12. Mr. Waltersasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will report on progress towards a comprehensive peace settlement in the middle east.
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweThe lack of progress towards a comprehensive settlement is deeply disappointing. We believe that President Reagan's proposals of September 1982 still offer a realistic basis for negotiation.
The parties directly concerned have the primary responsibility for reaching a settlement, but we shall continue to play an active role in urging them to settle their differences by negotiation. Real determination on the part of all those concerned to achieve that in the Lebanon would make an important contribution.
§ Mr. WaltersDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that one of the most effective ways of defusing the present highly dangerous situation in the middle east would be for the European Community to sponsor a 313 conference at which all the relevant parties, including the United States and the Soviet Union, would participate? Will he do something to persuade our American friends that that is a reality?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweI take note of my hon. Friend's suggestion, because it is important that every possible alternative should be carefully examined. However, I am not sure that his suggestion would be the easiest way of making progress.
§ Mr. CartwrightDoes the Secretary of State still believe that there can be no lasting peace in the middle east unless it is recognised that the Palestinians have the same right to a homeland as any other people on this earth? If that is still the Government's policy, what steps is he taking to try to secure self-determination for the Palestinians?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweWe have always acknowledged that the Palestinian people must play a full part in negotiations on their future. We still believe that they should do so. It would be a serious mistake if they were to turn their backs on the possibility of a peaceful solution as a result of the recent upheavals. In addition, they should be prepared to accept the right of Israel to exist in peace and should renounce terrorism in unambiguous terms.
§ Mr. Temple-MorrisIs my right hon. and learned Friend aware that many of us in this House, and even those who number themselves as being among America's greatest friends and allies, have serious reservations about her policy and its application in the middle east? Does he think that that policy, and the actions that are furthering it, make it easier for Western-Arab allies in that difficult area?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweI understand my hon. Friend's point and respect the moderation with which he made it. Clearly, it is important for the United States to understand the anxieties that were expressed in this House on Monday. Those have been drawn to their attention. Today I saw the President's special envoy in the middle east, Mr. Rumsfeld, and tonight and tomorrow in Brussels I should be meeting Secretary of State Shultz and the other Foreign Secretaries concerned in the multinational force and NATO.
§ Mr. FauldsIn view of its likely effects on the prospects for peace in the middle east and on long-term Western interests in the area, may I ask whether the Government were consulted before the conclusion of the Israeli-American strategic agreement?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweThe recent discussions between the Israeli Government and the United States concerned the bilateral relations between those two countries. There was no specific consultation with us about that.
§ Mr. DorrellWhile the House must be concerned with the safety of British military personnel in the Lebanon, and while there is plenty of room for doubt about the wisdom of deepening American involvement in the internal affairs of that country, does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that by far the most important priority of this House is to defend the main British interests and the continuing strength of the Western Alliance, bedded on our alliance with the United States?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweI am grateful to my hon. Friend. Even though there may be differences between members 314 of the Alliance, it is crucial that we do not forget the fundamental importance of the Alliance to the West and to this country. There are many matters on which we must hold discussions. We have done so and will continue.
§ Mr. HealeyDoes the Foreign Secretary agree that the United States Administration have a certain obligation to respect the importance of the unity of the Alliance in the decisions that they take on issues in other parts of the world? Does he agree also that President Reagan torpedoed his own proposals for a Palestinian settlement, which he made in September 1982, by making, the other day, with the Israeli Government what their Prime Minister described as a "military alliance", and by using military force against Syria in the Lebanon in pursuance of Presidential directive 111, which was signed on 29 October? Does he agree that the excuse that was given the other day by the Minister of State in the House that the Americans were acting in self-defence is blown out of the water by the many reports in the American press from officials in the American Administration that the military action was decided on long before the reconnaissance aircraft were fired on in the Bekaa valley?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweIt is important for all partners to an alliance to recognise the importance of that alliance and to conduct themselves accordingly. It is important also for all the participants in the multinational force to play their part in that force in a fashion that is consistent with their original objectives. The explanation for the American action in the Lebanon is something for the Americans to give. My hon. Friend presented the House with the position as he understood it on Monday, and he did so correctly and accurately. It is important for all concerned to recognise that the objective of the multinational force's presence is to promote the process of reconciliation to secure better prospects for the sovereign independence of the Lebanon.
§ Mr. HealeyDoes the right hon. and learned Gentleman recognise that he was led up the garden path by the American Administration in respect of the Lebanon as he was led up it on Grenada? Unless he is prepared to stand up for British interests within the Alliance, the Alliance will founder.
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweThe right hon. Gentleman scarcely ever misses an opportunity of doing what he can to attack the United States in respect of the Alliance.
§ Mr. HealeyWhat about answering the question?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweI shall answer the question fairly. The right hon. Gentleman is too often tempted by the simple attraction of denouncing the United States. It is my role—it is one that I am happy to fulfil and one that I shall fulfil — to ensure that Britain's views on these matters are fully and accurately represented to our partners in the multinational force. I shall do just that.