The Gulf (Hansard, 13 February 1991)

§ 8. Mr. Sillars
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with Arab League states about further exploration of diplomatic solutions to the Gulf crisis.

§ 11. Mr. Strang
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has had dicussions with any of his counterparts who are members of the union of Arab Maghreb nations, since the commencement of military action against Iraq.

§ Mr. Hurd
Discussions with members of the Union of Maghreb Nations and of the Arab League continue. We all agree on the need to end the conflict as early as possible, on the basis of the relevant Security Council resolutions. But a diplomatic solution can be possible only once Saddam Hussein is willing to comply with the Security Council resolutions.

§ Mr. Sillars
Does the Secretary of State agree that, although Saddam Hussein bears the primary responsibility for the conflict in the Gulf, the events in Baghdad this morning, involving very substantial loss of human life, not only constitute a human tragedy but represent a political disaster for the coalition forces and, in particular, for those Arab leaders associated with the coalition, against the wishes of the mass of people in their countries? Does not this point to the need to rule in compromise as a possible solution before the land battle commences and further civilian casualties of the magnitude experienced today occur? Has the Secretary of State talked to the Kuwaiti Government and received from them any suggestion that they might agree with the United States ambassador to Baghdad that Saddam Hussein could perhaps retreat to the two islands and the oilfield and hold them as a compromise solution until international—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That is far too long for a supplementary question.

§ Mr. Hurd
I had discussions with the Kuwaiti Government four days ago, but I should not have thought it right, or in any way fruitful—their whole country having been invaded and virtually obliterated, and their people tortured and oppressed—to suggest to them that they should take the initiative or should accept from anybody else any initiative involving the dismembering of their country.

§ Mr. Strang
What effect does the Secretary of State think the bombing of the air raid shelter today has had on the opinion of these nations and their leaders? Is it not clear that there is growing revulsion, not only among the Arab nations but throughout the world, at what is 846 happening in Iraq? Surely the Secretary of State must accept that thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians have now been killed.

§ Mr. Hurd
In Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and in discussions here with Syria's Foreign Minister, I have heard that in those three key Arab countries, which are members of the coalition against Saddam Hussein, the issue of civilian casualties has been considered fairly and accepted—accepted in the sense that those countries realise the nature of the operation, agree with its objective and intend to stay within the coalition. I do not believe that even tragedies of the kind reported this morning will alter that analysis or shake that determination.

§ Sir Richard Luce
Is it not more constructive that my right hon. Friend has made it absolutely plain that the British Government stand ready, once Kuwait has been liberated, to respond to any request from middle east countries to play a prominent role in the economic and political reconstruction of the middle east?

§ Mr. Hurd
Indeed, and it is because the Kuwaitis have begun to plan in detail the reconstruction of their country that a group of British business men came with me to talk to the Kuwaitis four days ago. I am glad that they did that. We have made two things clear—first, that it is not for us to impose a political, strategic or economic blueprint on the region. The good ideas have to come from the region itself and that is beginning to happen. Secondly, as my right hon. Friend says, we have made it clear that we are willing, within our means, to consider any suggestions for help from those countries once they have sorted out their own ideas.

§ Sir Michael Marshall
Does my right hon. Friend accept that in pursuing a diplomatic solution that will see the withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait, one of the key players at the present time is Iran? Will he take this opportunity to characterise the state of the dialogue with that country? Does he also accept that the continuing parliamentary links with Iran suggest that there is a much more favourable climate now in which to make progress?

§ Mr. Hurd
We restored diplomatic relations with Iran in the autumn, as my hon. Friend is aware. I am in favour of the kind of parliamentary contacts to which he referred and I hope that they will bear fruit before long. The progress of our relations has not been as fast as I would have wished. I am very anxious to make progress on some of the bilateral points, which is diplomatic jargon for the British hostages held by pro-Iranian groups in Lebanon and also Mr. Cooper who is in prison in Tehran.

§ Mr. Ernie Ross
When the Foreign Secretary next meets the Arab League states, as part of his attempt to find a diplomatic solution, will he assure them of his determination to strengthen the new Lebanese Government? As part of that determination, will he raise with the Israeli Government the need for them to stop their land, sea and air incursions into Lebanon? Will he also raise with them the need to help strengthen that Lebanese Government?

§ Mr. Hurd
I welcome the move of the Lebanese Government into the south of their own country, but that is a slightly different point. Palestinian groups have been using force and rockets against settlements in the north of 847 Israel. While I accept the need for the whole tragedy of Lebanon to be discussed, the Palestinian part in the latest violent episodes cannot be brushed aside.

§ Mr. Brandon-Bravo
Will my right hon. Friend contrasts the immediate comments of certain Opposition Members about the tragedy—and I stress the word "tragedy"—of the civilian loss of life about which we have heard today, with the absolute silence that greeted the destruction of thousands of homes in the state of Israel as the result of Scud attacks?

§ Mr. Hurd
To be fair, the whole House has shown its revulsion against the indicriminate attacks made by the Iraqi Scud missiles whether against Israel or civilians in Riyadh. The sooner this whole crisis can be brought to an end by reversing the aggression and freeing Kuwait, the sooner we can get on with the task of trying to rebuild a more sensible middle east in which these tragedies d o not occur.

§ Mr. Kaufman
I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for repudiating the offensive and foolish remark made by the hon. Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Brandon-Bravo). Does the Foreign Secretary agree that as Scud missiles continue to rain on Israel causing civilian casualties and destroying people's homes, the need for Israeli security through a peace settlement becomes more obvious, because it is clear that the occupation of the occupied territories does not provide Israel with that security, as Amos Oz so widely said in that superb interview that he gave on television on Sunday afternoon? Will he remind Mr. Shamir that a settlement is not possible unless he is ready to speak to representative Palestinians and that it is deplorable that he places in prison moderate Palestinians like Sari Nusseibeh?

§ Mr. Hurd
I do not think that my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Brandon-Bravo) and the right hon. Gentleman are differing in their reactions to the attacks on Israel or in their support for the restraint that the Israel Government have shown in response. However, the right hon. Gentleman's second point is soundly based, because after the war we will have to return to the search for a lasting settlement of the Arab-Israel dispute. That cannot be done simply by agreements between Israel and Syria on the one hand and Saudi Arabia and other Arab states on the other. It must include what is called the Palestinian question. It must be based on the United Nations Security Council resolution which defines as necessary the ending of the occupation by Israel of the occupied territories and the recognition and the securing of Israel's security behind safe borders.