Middle East (Hansard, 6 July 1988)

§ 3. Mr. McTaggart
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what new plans he has to further the peace process in the middle east; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Sir Geoffrey Howe)
We shall continue to encourage the parties to the Arab-Israel dispute to respond positively to Mr. Shultz's initiative and to agree arrangements for an international conference.

§ Mr. McTaggart
The Government have made many fine statements about this issue, but when can the House expect real action from them? Will the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs raise with his European partners the need for a positive initiative? As a first step, will he arrange for a Minister to speak to someone from the PLO?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The hon. Gentleman will know that this topic has been the subject of regular and serious discussion at meetings of European Community Foreign Ministers. It is only a short time since we had the opportunity of meeting the Israeli Foreign Minister, Mr. Peres, when we took the opportunity to impress upon him our sense of urgency, and in particular our concern, about the need to ensure that the access provisions for exports from the occupied territories are being permitted and put into effect by Israel.
We have a regular dialogue with the PLO at official level. We have made plain the extent to which it is entitled to participate in the conference, when it is held, and we shall continue to do so.

§ Sir Dennis Walters
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, despite the Israelis' brutality and oppression on the West Bank and in Gaza, the PLO has maintained a very moderate position? Would it not be sensible at this stage to follow up the intentions of the Venice declaration and raise meetings with the PLO to ministerial level?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I understand the extent of my hon. Friend's knowledge of, and interest in, this subject and that particular aspect of it. The PLO is well aware of those aspects of its policy that stand in the way of renewed ministerial contact: the need for unqualified recognition of Security Council resolutions, recognition of Israel's right to a secure existence, and renunciation of violence. However, that does not stand in the way of regular dialogue with the PLO at official level; nor does it inhibit our ability to play our part in carrying the peace process forward.

§ Mr. Dalyell
Ought not either the Foreign Secretary or the Defence Secretary to clarify the rules of engagement under which British ships are operating in the Gull?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
That has nothing to do with the question; nor is it a question that is answered.

§ Mr. Temple-Morris
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that part of the middle east peace process 1046 must relate to the major war that is going on in the Persian Gulf? Does he have any plans in the present tragic circumstances to bring Iran to the conference table at the United Nations, to give it some chance of an honourable peace?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
As my hon. Friend knows, we attach importance to the implementation of resolution 598 as the foundation upon which a negotiated settlement can be built. Iran has failed to accept that resolution. We support the work of the Secretary General in trying to secure acceptance of resolution 598 by both sides, and we shall give our full support to the authority of the Secretary General to that end.

§ Mr. Kaufman
Further to the question that has just been put by the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris), will the Foreign Secretary say whether, before the Prime Minister issued her knee-jerk support for the United States over the tragic incident on Sunday, she gave a moment's thought to the effect of her comments on the British hostages being held in Beirut, whose fate is a matter of great concern to everybody in this country? As almost one year has elapsed since the passage of resolution 598 through the Security Council, without any action being taken to implement it, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman now go to the United Nations and consult its other permanent members with a view to moving a resolution for a mandatory arms embargo on any country that will not accept resolution 598, so that some action can be taken to bring to an end an appalling conflict, which has killed 1 million people and is placing the whole world at risk?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I am prepared to endorse without qualification the right hon. Gentleman's description of the tragedy and horrors of this long-continuing conflict. I am not, however, prepared to go along with his own knee-jerk reaction to the carefully prepared statement put out on behalf of the Government on Sunday in the light of the tragic incident with which he started his question.
As that statement made clear, the whole world must deeply regret the loss of life involved in that tragedy. We therefore took care to extend our sympathy to the bereaved at the outset. But, in the light of the very concern expressed by the right hon. Gentleman about the continuation of the conflict, it is equally right to accept the general right of foreign naval forces present in the Gulf upholding the freedom of navigation, under article 51 of the charter, to defend themselves. The statement clearly reaffirmed—I hope that the right hon. Gentleman does not doubt this—the legitimacy as a matter of principle of action taken in self-defence.
As for the incident itself, obviously it is neither sensible nor proper at this stage to make further comment until there has been fuller investigation of the details, and we must await the outcome of the United States naval investigation.
As for the last point, I need no lectures from the right hon. Gentleman to underline the need for us to take every action that we can to bring about an early end to the Iran-Iraq conflict. It was British action that secured the implementation of resolution 598 in the first place; it was British action that therefore secured the first meeting since 1972 of Foreign Ministers last September. It is Britain that is still in the chair of the five permanent members committed to promoting action to implement it. I raised 1047 with the Soviet Foreign Minister in New York just three weeks ago the need for. further action, and I secured his response precisely to put teeth into resolution 598 by putting on the order paper and implementing an arms embargo resolution. We have not so far been able to secure the support of all five permanent members for that, but the House can he sure that it is not for want of trying on the part of Her Majesty's Government.

§ Mr. Batiste
Given the welcome, though sudden, interest of the Iranian Government in the preservation of human rights, can my right hon. and learned Friend see any prospect either of a more immediate interest in the ending of the Iran-Iraq war or of the ending of the abnegation of human rights in that country or its sponsorship of international terrorism?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to those aspects of the conduct of Iran and the Iranian Government which continue to cause dismay, at best, and shock, at worst, to other parts of the international community. That is why it is necessary, Iraq having accepted Security Council resolution 598, for Iran to do likewise. If Iran does not do that, I repeat that the Security Council should proceed to consider a follow-up resolution to enforce compliance.

§ Mr. Dalyell
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the subsequent answer to the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris), why was my original question on the rules of engagement out of order?