Bosnia (Hansard, 14 December 1994)

§ 5. Mr. Nigel Griffiths
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further discussions he has had with representatives of the US Congress and Senate on Bosnia.

§ 7. Mr. Raynsford
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the current situation in Bosnia.

§ Mr. Hurd
I had a meeting with Senator Dole when he visited London on 1 December. We had a thorough discussion on Bosnia. Senator Dole's views differ on some points from those of the United States Administration, with whom we are co-operating closely. We and the other members of the contact group are united in pursuing peaceful settlements in former Yugoslavia.
On Bosnia, we all agree that the way forward is to achieve a ceasefire around Bihac, a Bosnia-wide cessation of hostilities and a resumption of political negotiations on 912 the basis of the contact group plan. We welcome the recent statement by some members of the Bosnian Serb assembly in support of that.
On Croatia, as I told the House last week, we welcome the recent economic agreement between the Croatian Government and the Croatian Serbs, brokered by Lord Owen and Mr. Stoltenberg, and we hope that it will be quickly and fully implemented.

§ Mr. Griffiths
Does the Foreign Secretary share the American concern that the Bosnian Serbs rejected the Vance-Owen plan and were appeased, rejected the Owen-Stoltenberg plan and were appeased and rejected the contact group plan and are still being appeased? The stench of Munich is in the air here and in Bosnia. Has not the Foreign Secretary learned any lessons from appeasing the Hitlers of this world?

§ Mr. Hurd
As I pointed out last week, that is a ludicrous analogy. The hon. Gentleman is completely out of date with his views on the United States Administration. The United States Administration is one of the authors of the contact group plan. They fully support and are working with us on the policy that I outlined a moment ago.

§ Mr. Raynsford
The Foreign Secretary has frequently emphasised the importance of a settlement that preserves the territorial integrity of Bosnia, but he will be aware that Lord Owen, in a recent interview with Brian Walden, expressed the view that the Serbs could reasonably expect to achieve autonomy of such a degree that in most people's minds it would be independence". Does the Foreign Secretary agree with Lord Owen? If not, what steps is he taking to ensure that the European Union's peace envoy does not undermine the prospect of maintaining Bosnia's integrity?

§ Mr. Hurd
The contact group plan is clear and we reaffirmed it when contact group Ministers met in Brussels the week before last. It is based on two main principles: the need for the Bosnian Serbs to withdraw from 72 per cent. to 49 per cent. of the land that they occupy in Bosnia and the need to preserve the integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina within its present frontier. Once those two principles are accepted, talks can take place between the parties about territorial swaps and constitutional relationships, including those between different entities in Bosnia-Herzegovina and their neighbours.

§ Mr. Cormack
In view of the increasing gravity of the situation and the importance of ensuring that the United Nations' authority and credibility are not damaged beyond repair, will my right hon. Friend talk urgently with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister about a British initiative to summon a summit meeting of the Presidents of the United States of America, Russia and France and the Prime Minister?

§ Mr. Hurd
Such a meeting would not be complete unless it also contained the parties. I am not especially keen at the moment to give Mr. Karadzic, the leader of the only group that has rejected the contact group plan, a world platform. I do not exclude my hon. Friend's idea 913 and the possibility of a summit in order either to avert a disaster or to consolidate a success. In either case, that might be possible.

§ Mr. David Howell
Does my right hon. Friend agree that, whatever silly things may have been said in the Senate, in Congress or a few minutes ago in the House about the Bosnian position, the American Defence Secretary's offer of at least 18,000 or more American troops—should there be a need for reconfiguration of UN troops, including our own, on the ground, or should there be a need for withdrawal—is thoroughly constructive and very much in the spirit of maintaining the Atlantic alliance and of not allowing it to be undermined by differences of emphasis over Bosnia? Would my right hon. Friend welcome that?

§ Mr. Hurd
I would, indeed. My right hon. Friend is right. President Clinton's decision, which he described, substantially helps forward what NATO is doing to prepare to help withdrawal, if that should be needed. However, as Secretary Perry and my right hon. and learned Friend agreed again today in Brussels, we believe that UNPROFOR is doing a good job, and that its withdrawal would be complicated and difficult. It is necessary to plan for withdrawal in case UNPROFOR's task becomes impossible. We hope that that will not happen, and so do the Americans.

§ Mr. Menzies Campbell
Does the Secretary of State agree that the history of the conflict in former Yugoslavia suggests that the Bosnian Serbs have been adept at taking advantage of any signs of disunity in the international community and, in particular, in the contact group? There have been substantial signs of that disunity since the congressional elections, to which he referred. What efforts are Her Majesty's Government taking to ensure that public disagreements of the sort that have occurred in the past two or three weeks will be eliminated?

§ Mr. Hurd
There are no public disagreements between Her Majesty's Government and the United States Administration on the right policy towards Bosnia. We are working together to further the policy that I outlined to the House today.

§ Sir Anthony Grant
Although I appreciate the splendid humanitarian work carried out by the British Army, will my right hon. Friend tell our United States allies that, from a military point of view, we shall heed the sound maxim, "Never reinforce a failure"?

§ Mr. Hurd
If my hon. Friend had been with my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on his visit to British troops in Bosnia last week, he would have agreed with my right hon. and learned Friend's conclusion that they continue to do, as he said, a thoroughly worthwhile job. We hope that they can continue to do that. If it becomes impossible, we have to plan to withdraw. The American decision to help that withdrawal is a considerable comfort.

§ Mr. Robin Cook
May I press the Foreign Secretary on a question to which he did not respond in his statement last week? Is anything being done to make the remaining safe havens safe? Is there any prospect of the UN forces there being strengthened, or of the safe havens being demilitarised? Will air power be used the next time any of them come under threat? Does the Foreign Secretary 914 appreciate that if we do none of those things, there is a real risk that we will be held responsible on the next occasion when one of the safe havens suffers the same fate as Bihac?

§ Mr. Hurd
We should always look for ways in which what the UN is accomplishing in Bosnia through UNPROFOR and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees can be strengthened. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence is doing precisely that at today's NATO meeting in Brussels.
We must constantly seek realistic ways of strengthening the role of UNPROFOR. We should not exaggerate; there is a role for air power, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, but, as he himself said on the radio last week, it could not solve the problems and might make them worse. There is also a role for reinforcement and demilitarisation of the safe areas. We need to examine all those aspects constantly if we are to improve the situation on the ground.