Arab-Israel Dispute

HC Deb 22 May 1991 vol 191 cc920-2

9. Mr. Norman Hogg

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress to date in resolving the Arab-Israel dispute.

Mr. Hurd

We welcome continuing American efforts to restart the middle east peace process, as I emphasised to Mr. Baker in Washington on Monday. With our EC partners, we have given them our full support. There has been some progress towards acceptance of the idea of a peace conference. Important differences remain, but there is enough encouragement to wear down those differences in order to get a conference under way.

Mr. Hogg

Has the Foreign Secretary read the remarks attributed to Mr. David Gore-Booth, an Under-Secretary at the Foreign Office? Do those remarks assist the Government's endeavours with the peace process, and are senior civil servants at the Foreign Office entitled to make such speeches under the cloak of a personal capacity? Will the right hon. Gentleman please clarify the position on that?

Mr. Hurd

After speaking on 20 March to a meeting of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, on lines which set out Government policy, Mr. Gore-Booth answered questions. A report on this appeared just the other day. Some of his answers gave personal views, not Government policy, as he made clear at the time. [Hon. Members: "Why?"] Mr. Gore-Booth is a talented and experienced public servant. I intend to take no further action.

Sir Dennis Walters

Despite the recent tendentious press attacks aimed at undermining Britain's role in the middle east, which have just been aired again, does not my right hon. Friend agree that Britain and Europe have an important part to play, either in supporting Secretary Baker's initiative or in replacing it if it is blocked because of Israeli intransigence, as, regrettably, now seems likely?

Mr. Hurd

I agree about supporting it. I do not believe that a European initiative could replace the active and energetic efforts of the United States. That is the view of the Twelve. We have deliberately stepped back from putting our own ideas and initiatives directly so as to give Mr. Baker's efforts a fair wind. I still think that that is the right policy.

Mr. Benn

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that there will be no permanent peace in the middle east until there is a Palestinian state? A clear statement on those lines by the British Government and other Governments would accelerate a long drawn out peace process that has no prospect of success while the Americans accept that there is an Israeli veto on the proposition.

Mr. Hurd

We believe in the right of the Palestinians to exercise self-determination. The outcome of that is not for us to decide. To get this process under way, a conference must be held, which must include both tracks of negotiation—between Israel and the Arab states, which are still in a state of war or a state of belligerency with her, and between Israel and representative Palestinians. That, in essence, is the Baker plan, and we believe that it is the only sensible way to proceed.

Mr. Latham

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if progress is to be made there must be confidence-building measures on both sides? One important confidence-building measure, if the United Nations is represented at the conference, would be the rescinding of the "Zionism is racism" resolution.

Mr. Hurd

I think that that would be difficult to achieve, but my hon. Friend is right about confidence-building measures. An important confidence-building measure would be a stop to new settlements on the west bank. If that were forthcoming, it would be reasonable to ask Arab states to look at the operation of the boycott. It is possible to imagine, on both sides, confidence-building measures that would help the parties to get to grips with the essential central matters of substance.

Mr. Anderson

We pay tribute to the tireless efforts of Mr. Baker in seeking to find an acceptable peace formula for the middle east. Can the Foreign Secretary say whether, plausibly, there is any life left in those peace efforts, as Syria appears to have been written out of the script and the Israeli Prime Minister has said in terms that there will be no trading of land for peace?

Mr. Hurd

Following my talk with Mr. Baker on Monday, I believe that there is enough encouragement —though not a breakthrough—for him to persevere. That is also his view. The issues that have not yet been successfully tackled are the exact role of the United Nations in the process and whether the conference would be a once-for-all conference which would launch the discussions on the two tracks that I have described or whether it would be resumed from time to time.

Those are important points of difference. There is also the question of Palestinian representation, on which some progress has been made. But the points of difference are not so overwhelming as to justify writing off the whole process.

Mr. John Marshall

Does my right hon. Friend really believe that Mr. Gore-Booth's not-so-youthful indiscretions really helped Britain in its role as an honest broker in the middle east? Does he agree that any Minister who was as indiscreet as that mandarin would have been asked for his or her resignation? Should not Mr. Gore-Booth be treated similarly?

Mr. Hurd

I have said what I have to say on that matter. When people go to meetings which they believe to be private and answer questions in an expressly personal capacity, the House must show some understanding of their position. I have confidence in Mr. Gore-Booth, with whom I have worked for a long time and, as I have said, I intend to take no further action in the matter. As my hon. Friend knows, we have close dialogue with the Government of Israel—perhaps closer and more intimate than for some years. I welcome that and intend to maintain it, and I see no difficulty in doing so.