Bosnia (Hansard, 11 January 1994)

§ 4. Ms Hoey
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the latest developments in Bosnia.

§ Mr. Hanley
The Government will continue to provide support to United Nations humanitarian relief operations in Bosnia through the winter.

§ Ms Hoey
I am sure that the whole House will want to pay tribute to the work that our British troops are doing in Bosnia. Is the Minister aware, however, of the credibility gap that is undermining both NATO's role and that of the UN because of their failure to take sufficiently severe action against Serbian aggression? Will the Government now support immediate selective air strikes to get the airport at Tuzla reopened and, most of all, to lift the siege of Sarajevo?

§ Mr. Hanley
The hon. Lady is absolutely right to pay tribute to what is being achieved by the British contingent in Bosnia. I know that the whole House would want me to 5 congratulate it, especially as we approach the most difficult months of the winter. So far, 1,675 convoys have been escorted by British troops—more than 80,000 tonnes of aid. In addition, more than 1,000 flights have been carrying aid to Sarajevo and more than 14,500 tonnes of aid have been delivered in that way.
The hon. Lady is not right, or fair, to say that there is a credibility gap. We are helping to save countless thousands of lives in Bosnia, and countless thousands of people are being kept alive by our efforts. We believe that there is a balance to be achieved in carrying out that United Nations resolution. I repeat the NATO summit declaration that we restate our commitment to air power. The NATO summit also called for further action by UNPROFOR to draw up plans to deal with the blockage of the rotation of troops at Srebrenica and we are considering ways in which to make efforts to examine whether Tuzla airport can be reopened. We are doing a great job of which I am proud.

§ Mr. Wilkinson
May I express my appreciation for the appointment of Commander, United Kingdom Land Forces, Lieutenant-General Sir Michael Rose as general officer commanding-designate of United Nations forces in the former Yugoslavia? Will my hon. Friend tell the House whether the general officer will go out to the theatre with any new political instructions from Her Majesty's Government or other United Nations countries with troops assigned to the theatre?

§ Mr. Hanley
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his tribute to Lieutenant-General Sir Michael Rose. He will assume command of the United Nations protection force in Bosnia-Herzegovina soon, and shall be out there by the end of month; and I know that he will carry out his task superbly. He is a magnificent soldier, and no change in role is foreseen.

§ Mr. Menzies Campbell
Does the Minister agree that the language of declarations threatening air strikes is much less significant than the political will that lies behind such declarations? The Government have shown little enthusiasm for air strikes over the past 12 months. What has changed that we should now believe that the Government have the political will to carry them out?

§ Mr. Hanley
If the hon. and learned Gentleman is questioning the political will of the nations that came together at the NATO summit and reconfirmed the commitment to air strikes, as they had done in August, he will see that it is the strongest commitment that could have possibly been given towards air strikes. If he watches in the days ahead, he may realise that our commitment is a darn sight more than his party's commitment to defence. Instead of mouthing generalities, NATO is getting on with the job.

§ Mr. Cormack
Does my hon. Friend accept that any ultimatum given to Serbia or the Serbs following today's declaration must be clear and unequivocal, and that if it is not accepted, it must be followed by action?

§ Mr. Hanley
I accept that threats are credible only if it is believed that they are likely to be carried out. However, we hope that the action that they are threatening will not take place. If the actions by others not to carry out the sort of acts that have occurred recently—happily, it seems that there have been fewer shelling attacks on Sarajevo 6 yesterday and today—perhaps the threats will have worked. There certainly remains the political will and the military capability to carry out those threats if necessary.

§ Dr. David Clark
The Prime Minister's much-touted claim this morning to have persuaded NATO to strengthen its stance on bombing of the Serbs in Bosnia stands ill with the long official communiqué from NATO which merely dismissed the matter in two short sentences beginning with the words, "We reaffirm". In view of that, can I ask the Minister whether there has been any change in NATO and Government policy, or whether this is merely another example of PR hype?

§ Mr. Hanley
Of course it is not a matter of pure PR hype.

§ Mr. Campbell-Savours
Is there any change?

§ Mr. Hanley
The hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) degrades the efforts of the NATO countries in coming to their conclusions and in bringing clearly to the attention of the world their intentions with regard to Bosnia.

§ Mr. Campbell-Savours
Is there any change?

§ Mr. Hanley
It is easy to be dismissive of help in—

§ Mr. Campbell-Savours
Is there any change?

§ Mr. Hanley
The hon. Gentleman at the back is chattering away and saying, "Is there any change?"

§ Madam Speaker
Order.

§ Mr. Hanley
There is change daily in Bosnia. We react daily to the situation in Bosnia. We are helping to save lives in Bosnia, and we are making sure that we have the wherewithal to act if the situation gets worse in Bosnia. We will continue to do that. There is no media hype. The Prime Minister will report to the House in due course on the summit.

§ Mr. Viggers
Does my hon. Friend agree that air strikes, however selective, increase the risk that the British forces, as part of the United Nations, could be perceived as the fourth side in the civil war? Will he ensure that Her Majesty's Government do not enter into any commitment that they cannot fulfil?

§ Mr. Hanley
I can assure my hon. Friend that if there were air strikes, they would not be taken unilaterally by the United Kingdom forces but would be part of the international effort. Therefore, I do not believe that the United Kingdom should be seen to be a fourth party. However, my hon. Friend is right to say that air strikes change the situation and make it more difficult to deliver aid on the ground. That has to be borne in mind with each passing day.