South Africa (Hansard, 24 July 1985)

§ 10. Mr. Cartwright
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the current state of British relations with South Africa.

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
We are seriously concerned at the deterioration of the internal situation in South Africa and especially the imposition of a state of emergency. This underlines the urgent need for the rapid opening of a dialogue between the present South African Government and the genuine representatives of the non-white community. These grave developments inevitably have an effect on our bilateral relations.

§ Mr. Cartwright
Since the South African authorities clearly take little or no notice of representations from Her Majesty's Government, will the Foreign Secretary now open negotiations with our European partners with a view to establishing an EEC-wide ban on new investment in South Africa? Does the Foreign Secretary accept that such 1033 a policy would be neither disinvestment nor disengagement, but a worthwhile and effective way of securing the sort of changes that we all want to see in South Africa?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to the value of approaching these questions in consultation with our partners in the European Community, which is why we issued the statement that we did on behalf of all the Foreign Ministers on Monday. He has not succeeded in persuading me that the proposal that he has in mind would be of value.

§ Mr. John Carlisle
Will my right hon. and learned Friend accept that, faced with the increasing tide of black violence in South Africa, which includes murder, torture and alleged cannibalism, the South African Government had no choice but to bring in these emergency powers to protect innocent black lives? Will he also accept that the intervention of EC Foreign Ministers and of well-meaning Anglican bishops does nothing to encourage South Africa towards peaceful change?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I can understand that Governments of all sorts must consider what action is necessary to check violence and disorder. However, I do not find it easy to conclude that the measures taken by the South African Government at the weekend represent the best way of achieving the sort of progress that we want in South Africa. Nor is it right to conclude that we should refrain from commenting and pronouncing upon the aspects of the South African regime which we believe are unhelpful to the future of all people of that country.

§ Mr. Winnick
Leaving aside the disgraceful remarks of apologists for South Africa that we have just heard, are not the present events in South Africa the inevitable result of the policies that have been pursued in that country since 1948? When will its rulers recognise that while the majority of people in that country are denied political and human rights there will never be peace? Is it the Foreign Secretary's intention to recall the British ambassador? Would that not be the most appropriate step to take at this time?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
We have long made clear our view that the policy of apartheid on which the South African Government rest their case is misconceived, unjust, inappropriate and indefensible. Having said that, we think that the least helpful thing that we could do would be to withdraw our ambassador. One reason why we have an ambassador in post is precisely so that we can make clear to the South African Government the views of this Government.

Several Hon. Members
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I remind the House that there is a statement on this matter later. I shall allow a short run of questions, but those who are fortunate enough to catch my eye now may not find it so easy later.

§ Mr. Simon Hughes
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not think that there is to be a statement.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have it wrong, and I apologise.

§ Sir Peter Blaker
While the actions of the South African Government are very much to be deplored, will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that all the so-called front-line states of central and southern Africa are 1034 trading vigorously with South Africa? Does he know of any proposal from any of those countries to impose economic sanctions?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
My right hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the fact that a number of the front-line states have said that their relationship with South Africa would prevent them from complying with any recommendation for economic sanctions.

§ Mr. Steel
Will the Foreign Secretary make it quite clear to the South African Government that our Government believe that an imaginative and humanitarian gesture, such as the release of Nelson Mandela, would do far more to calm the position in South Africa than the introduction of all the instruments of oppression that have occurred during the last few days?
If that is the right hon. and learned Gentleman's view, what concrete steps is he prepared to take other than spilling out the adjectives of condemnation on South Africa? Will he take a lead from the American Congress and at least consider selective sanctions?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I and the Government have made it plain on many occasions that the South African Government need to take bold action to restore the possibility of dialogue, including the step mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman. That does not lead me to conclude that they are likely to be encouraged in that direction by the imposition of sanctions. I well understand why those who deplore the policies of the South African Government as much as I do would like to see something being done. It is only after the most careful judgment that we have reached the plain conclusion that sanctions are likely to have the opposite effect to that desired.

§ Mr. Nelson
Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that it should be no part of British Government policy, nor would it be in British interests, to add fuel to any fire in South Africa? Will he continue to resist the siren voices of those who suggest that disinvestment would be in the interests of faster progress? That would surely be ineffective, unworkable and least in the interests of those whom it was designed to assist.

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I have a great deal of sympathy with my hon. Friend's point. It was very well put by Mrs. Helen Suzman in Europe the other day, when she said: Such action in fact blunts the only weapon that Blacks have, or are in the process of acquiring—the economic muscle that accompanies upward mobility on the economic ladder by virtue of greater skills and increased consumer power.

§ Mr. Robert Hughes
While major differences remain between some of us and the Secretary of State, will he accept that many of us warmly endorse his call for bold steps to be taken by South Africa, such as the ending of detention, the release of people detained without trial and the unconditional release of Nelson Mandela? Having said that, may I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman why his speech yesterday was bereft of even the most timid proposal to try to make South Africa implement steps to carry out the policies that he has apparently vigorously demanded?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
Because after careful consideration, despite the unanimity of views about objectives, we share the view expressed, for example, by Mr. Alan Paton, that those who would pay most grievously for disinvestment would be the black workers in South Africa.

§ Mr. Ian Lloyd
I urge my right hon. and learned Friend to continue to pay attention to the wisdom of people such as Alan Paton and Helen Suzman, both of whom are friends of mine, the chairman of the Anglo-American Corporation, Mr. Harry Oppenheimer, and Chief Buthelezi, among many others, who have given a thorough, far-reaching and impressive analysis of the reasons why disinvestment would be a disastrous course of action. If Her Majesty's Government and the Foreign Ministers of the Ten are now to feel both obliged and entitled to interfere in the domestic affairs of another state, may I ask on what grounds we do not feel both entitled and obliged to proscribe to the Indian Government what they should do about civil violence in Ahmedabad, to the Singhalese Government what they should do about the civil and racial violence in Ceylon, and to many others? Are we not creating the most dangerous precedent?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
My hon. Friend overlooks a crucial central fact, which is the extent to which the apartheid regime in South Africa is uniquely built on foundations of racial discrimination.

§ Mr. Healey
Will the Foreign Secretary also agree that the South African Government, since they were given an uncovenanted diplomatic triumph by the British Prime Minister a year ago, have invaded two neighbouring countries and have sabotaged their solemn commitment to facilitate independence in Namibia? If the right hon. and learned Gentleman believes that sanctions are always counter-productive, why did he support sanctions against Poland, why is he now supporting American sanctions against Nicaragua, secret details of which were revealed by a recent document leaked by a civil servant in a Government Department? Does he not agree that financial sanctions against Iran were instrumental in securing the release of the America hostages?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The right hon. Gentleman has posed a long catalogue of questions. We have always taken a profoundly sceptical view of the value of sanctions anywhere——

§ Mr. Healey
What about Poland and Nicaragua?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
—and many of the points implied in his question are not justified by the facts. As a result of the meeting between President Botha, Mr. Botha the Prime Minister, and myself, there have been a number of significant steps, although not large enough, in the direction of reform in South Africa. The tragedy is that they have been blunted and frustrated by the other actions taken at the same time by the South African Government.

§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton
Will my right hon. and learned Friend accept that perhaps the most constructive attitude that could be adopted by Her Majesty's Government would be to encourage South Africa to return to the radical reforms that it was undertaking before the latest violence occurred? Will the British Government do that and, in doing it, support the approach of Bishop Tutu in deploring the violence in the black townships? Will my right hon. and learned Friend outline some of the initiatives which he and the Government will encourage President Botha and his Government to introduce in the Republic of South Africa?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
My hon. Friend is right to say that we should encourage the South African Government to take further the process of reform that had been under way 1036 in recent months. None of those steps go far enough, but they are a start. It is right also to endorse the message from Bishop Tutu that violence of any kind from either side can play only a destructive role in southern Africa.