Iran (Hansard, 1 July 1987)

§ 3. Mr. Grylls
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's response to Iran's failure to respect diplomatic immunity.

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
As I told the House on 26 June, our firm response to Iran's failure to respect Mr. Chaplin's full diplomatic immunity was designed to bring home to the Iranians the seriousness with which we, and indeed the whole international community, viewed their action. Regrettably, the Iranians responded in a severe and unjustified manner.
This crisis in relations was not of our making. We are prepared to rebuild a constructive relationship. However, we are interested in the substance of relations between states, not merely the husk, and must be assured that the Iranians will respect the inviolability of our diplomats.

§ Mr. Grylls
Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that many people in Britain and throughout the world will feel safer as a result of the resolute stand that he has taken against terrorism and against the maltreatment of diplomats whose sole duty, does my right hon. and learned Friend not agree, is to serve their country and nothing else?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. I remind him that the purpose of diplomatic immunity is not to protect diplomats, but to protect their work on behalf of the people of this country.

§ Mr. Beith
In the light of the mounting evidence that Iran is not merely failing to respect diplomatic immunity, but is orchestrating the kidnapping of innocent hostages, is it not slightly illogical that nominally we still have diplomatic relations with Iran, but do not have such relations with Syria, which to some extent has sought to put its house in order on such matters? If the Foreign Secretary believes that maintaining the vestige of diplomatic relations may help to deal with the problems that we face with Iran, would that not also be more helpful in a situation where the Syrian Government have at last taken steps to make changes in those matters that greatly concern us?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
Each of those cases must be considered separately on the facts and evidence available. There was no doubt that the conduct that led to the rupture of relations with Syria was wholly justified, and no 479 one dissented then. It is true that there is some evidence that the Syrians are making some changes in Syria at the moment. However, they do not go far enough by any means to satisfy our requests for the abandonment of support for terrorism. With regard to Iran, the evidence is different. The conduct that led to the present state of affairs, although outrageous and unacceptable, was not in the same category as that which led to the breaking of relations with Syria. That is why we must distinguish between the two cases.

§ Mr. Dalyell
What is the Government's policy towards the supply of arms to Islamic fundamentalist groups?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
That situation is not very frequently likely to arise. However, the supply of arms in all circumstances is subject to the comprehensive control by means of licensing and approval in the ordinary way.

§ Mr. Couchman
While I understand the actions that my right hon. and learned Friend has taken in virtually breaking off diplomatic relations with Iran, what arrangements will be made for those people trying to leave Iran to come to this country, for example for medical treatment, who may have relatives in this country and who are at present finding great difficulty leaving that country?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The rundown in the scale of our presence in Iran must lead to the virtual suspension of the availability of visas. The position was such that the Iranian authorities were seeking to reduce our representation to nothing more than a visa-issuing factory, with the removal of reality from the relationship. Arrangements are made for visas to be available from other posts and special attention will be given, so far as possible, to cases on compassionate grounds or those of real urgency.

Mr. Robertson
Why did we allow ourselves to be messed around, with the humiliation that was imposed by the Iranians on us and our diplomats? Why did we not immediately close down the Iranians' arms sales office at 4 Victoria street? Is this country so pathetically desperate for any trade with Iran that those people just across the road from this building can continue to buy and sell vast amounts of armaments for the war between Iran and Iraq, while our diplomatic personnel are beaten up and thrown out of Iran?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The hon. Gentleman has approached this matter in a characteristically exaggerated and distorted fashion. The Iranian military purchasing offices are conducting purely commercial operations, which must operate within the confines of British law. This dispute was confined to a consular and diplomatic matter, and it would be wrong, for the sake of British industry and jobs, to disregard the fact that in other respects we still have a substantial export trade with Iran, which is conducted entirely within the law.