§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Conway.]
2.30 pm§ Mr. Matthew Banks (Southport)It is an enormous privilege and pleasure to have the opportunity to initiate a debate on the important subject of security in the middle east. I am particularly pleased that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Member for Richmond and Barnes (Mr. Hanley), is in his place to reply to the debate. I hope that, as he did on 24 July when I initiated a similar debate, he will be able to answer my points and make plain the Government's position because Britain has a major role to play in helping to bring about a lasting and comprehensive peace throughout the middle east.
As I have said, I initiated a debate on this subject on 24 July. Many jobs and many lives have been put at risk and many lives have been lost as a result of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people. Everything that the United Kingdom, together with our European partners, friends in the Gulf and the United States can do to bring about peace is to be welcomed.
On 24 July I expressed the hope, which is no doubt the hope of thousands if not millions of people throughout the world and especially in the Gulf, that in the coming months, in the aftermath of the Israeli elections, we would see some real progress. I was optimistic and at that time was prepared to take a kindly view of Israeli Prime Minister Mr. Netanyahu's stand and the way in which he was pressing ahead in trying to find a peaceful solution to the problems.
I regret to say that some three months on there has not been the sort of progress that many of us would have liked. One is beginning to come to the view that the Israeli Government are not prepared to act. I hope that that is not the case, but if there is a shred of truth in that suggestion I hope that Mr. Arafat, who has been statesmanlike over the past few years in trying to further peace, will do his best, as he has done in recent months, to ensure that the Palestinian people do not revolt against any aggression.
I wish that there had been progress in the past two or three months and I regret the fact that there are presidential elections in the United States. Our United States allies played a significant role in Madrid and Oslo in bringing about what I thought was a firm basis to move forward to peace. I have no doubt, and I know that this view is held by many, that the only way forward is along the lines of United Nations Security Council resolution 242. Land for peace is the way forward. I hope that those of us from outside the Gulf, playing an important and supportive role, as the United States and United Kingdom Governments are doing, will be able to support the people at the sharp end to ensure that the Palestinian people have the right to self-determination while at the same time addressing the equally important issue of the security of the state of Israel. Those of us who take an interest in this subject recognise that Israeli security is especially important.
The middle east peace process is a linchpin of our regional security policy, which is in search of a comprehensive regional peace settlement. Despite the 303 difficulties of the post-Israeli election period, there is a way forward. I do not subscribe to the view that Oslo and all that that entailed is in tatters.
The United Kingdom, perhaps more so than France, has an important, fair and non-partisan role to play in bringing the two sides together. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State will be able to assure me that, as soon as the United States presidential elections are over, the UK Government will bring further diplomatic pressure to bear on our American allies because they have enormous influence with the Israeli Government, of whichever political hue.
Once through those elections, the United States has a major role to play in ensuring that we press ahead on land for peace and, in particular, that Mr. Netanyahu and his Government are left in no doubt by their allies overseas, including the UK, that they need to do more in real terms to bring about peace. In particular, Mr. Netanyahu will have to accept that the only way forward is to stick to the agreements that the Israeli Government were part of and signed up to not so long ago.
President Chirac's recent visit to Israel and the occupied territories illustrated the fair and sensible path forward that the UK Government have charted in recent times. President Chirac was a little too partisan in his approach, although no doubt it went down especially well in France. The middle east is volatile and we will not achieve that comprehensive peace settlement unless the allies of Israel and of the Arab people support them in a way that is not too partisan.
Iran and Iraq still pose a threat to the region's security and I hope that Her Majesty's Government will continue to engage in security measures, particularly the monitoring of what is going on in and around those countries. Sometimes, those countries posture in a way that is of great concern to some smaller Gulf nations.
I am especially pleased that my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary will shortly visit Israel, the occupied territories, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. I gather that he is to meet Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Levy, and Mr. Arafat in Gaza. I am pleased that my right hon. and learned Friend will visit not just Yemen, but the United Arab Emirates, one of our oldest allies in the region, which is approaching its silver jubilee. As he said recently, the United Arab Emirates is an
important country with the potential to play a significant role in the region's economic and political development".I pay tribute to him and to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade for the way in which the Foreign Office and the people responsible for trade are now working much more closely together in the interests of trade between the UK and those Gulf countries.I pay particular tribute to Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan An-Nahyan, the United Arab Emirates President, who has played such a supportive role in relation to the Palestinians. I am pleased that the UK Government continue to give aid to the Palestinians in the interim before a peace settlement. Nor would it be proper to fail to record our appreciation of His Highness Sheikh Maktoum Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum and of the United Arab Emirates Minister of Defence, His Highness General Sheikh Muhammad Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum. There is a way forward for Israel and the Palestinians, and I hope that those peoples will one day be able to live together in the same peaceful, prosperous federation as we see in the United Arab Emirates.
304 It is not long since the Gulf war. Recently, there were highly successful elections in Kuwait. I pay tribute to the people there who have gone about their business so responsibly and are turning the corner. However, I regret—following my remarks on 24 July—that there has been insufficient progress in respect of Kuwaitis missing after the Gulf war. I pay particular tribute to Sheik Salem. I am pleased that, following the recent elections, he has been appointed Kuwait's Defence Minister.
It is pleasing that Syria is playing a more supportive role in a peace settlement throughout the region. Stability is possible but, for the Israelis and Palestinians, it must be on the basis of resolution 242 and land for peace.
I want to give my right hon. Friend the Minister a little more time than he might have expected to address the issues that I have raised and to state the Government's position on the hiatus that has followed the Israeli elections. However, I wish to raise one further matter that is important to both the Gulf and the United Kingdom, in ensuring peace and stability in the middle east.
I am particularly concerned about the activities of certain individuals from a number of different countries who live and work in and around London and the UK. They enjoy free and open access to our country but are involved directly or indirectly in supporting terrorist activities in the Gulf. One thinks particularly of the Algerians, Saudis, Bahrainis and Egyptians. I pay tribute to the work of President Mubarak and the Egyptian Government in bringing about a peace settlement.
The Saudis have understandably been upset by the activities of Dr. al-Masari. The Bahrainis have seen people in London, assisted by the Iranians, taking action to destabilise the Government and people of Bahrain. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Minister will continue to support the security services in monitoring the activities of those individuals, who must be dealt with and punished severely if they break the laws of the United Kingdom. Regardless of the carefully chosen comments of our friends in the Arab world, we should not forget the importance of that issue to them.
I regret that more progress has not been made over the past three months but Britain has an important role. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Minister, and my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary during his visit, will lay down another set of markers, to bring further pressure to bear in ensuring that the Israeli Government and Mr. Arafat get back to the negotiating table as soon as possible.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Jeremy Hanley)I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Mr. Banks) for his timely Adjournment debate, and I agree with almost every word that he said. My hon. Friend's speech touched on many important issues. Last month's violence in Gaza and on the west bank left at least 75 people dead and created widespread doubt as to whether the middle east peace process has any future.
Only days before, on the other side of the peninsula, it was again necessary for the United States of America to launch cruise missiles against Saddam Hussein, to make him comply with Iraq's international obligations. Stability and security are in the vital interests of all the countries of the middle east. They are also in Britain's national 305 interests in the region, not only because Britain has a long-standing friendship with those countries but because of our commercial interests and the close links between our peoples. I should like to use this opportunity to explain what the Government are doing to enhance prospects for future security.
I shall turn first—as my hon. Friend the Member for Southport did—to the situation in Gaza, the west bank and Israel. King Hussein has said that we have looked into an abyss. As he pointed out, the recent disturbances were a grave setback, not only for Israeli-Palestinian relations but for the entire region. Television pictures of young Palestinians fighting Israeli soldiers were especially distressing because those pictures could have been filmed nine years ago. Strains are evident even in the relationship between Israel and her Arab neighbours, with whom it has made such great progress over the past three years.
The decision to open a tunnel entrance in a sensitive quarter of Jerusalem triggered the anger of Palestinians, whose dissatisfaction with their situation has been building up since the spring. Much of the interim agreement, which was signed in September 1995, remains unimplemented. The Israeli closure policy has driven Palestinian unemployment above 50 per cent., and substantive final status talks have not started. Many people feel that the Israeli Government have accelerated Jewish settlement building on the west bank and in east Jerusalem to pre-empt the final status talks. While those sources of underlying discontent still exist, it is important that both sides avoid acts that might be provocative.
As my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary said, we are not in the business of apportioning blame. Both sides have a mutual interest in preventing a return to the use of force. Violence is an obstacle to peace, and it can only delay a final settlement. Before September, many people regarded advances in the peace process as an inevitable fact of life. Sadly, since then, the vulnerability of the process has become all too clear.
The main responsibility for moving the process forward lies with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Arafat. The parties now need to rebuild confidence in the peace process among the Palestinian and Israeli people, many of whom need to be reassured that peaceful co-existence can be made to work. They must generate a sense of optimism that, in the end, the process will lead to a permanent settlement. We believe that the best way to achieve that is to implement promptly and in full the agreements that have already been reached.
Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Arafat have both said that they intend to implement the Oslo accords in full. I welcome their statements, which should be translated into action as soon as possible.
Reaching an agreement on removing Israeli troops from the city of Hebron is an essential next step. By itself, however, that will not be sufficient to restore the forward momentum of the peace process. The Israelis should take firm action towards implementing other outstanding elements of the Oslo accords, in particular redeploying their troops from zones B and C in the west bank. For their part, the Palestinians should renew their efforts against terrorism and violence, which Israelis legitimately 306 view as a threat to their security. I welcome President Arafat's statement that Palestinian police are now under a "permanent order" not to open fire.
Peace helps to build security. Palestinian frustration with the lack of clear progress towards a just, negotiated peace settlement has added to a climate in which people have turned to terrorism and rioting. Israel's need for security makes it imperative that the talks make progress. Without progress, there will not be the economic prosperity and inward investment that could underpin the final settlement.
Britain's deep-rooted friendship with both the Israelis and the Palestinians leaves us well placed to encourage dialogue between them. Over the past month, the Government have had intensive high-level contacts with all the region's major players. I was present when the Prime Minister met the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, on 24 September. On 11 October, the Prime Minister met King Hussein of Jordan. He has also been in direct contact with President Arafat, President Mubarak and President Clinton.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Southport rightly said, the Foreign Secretary will visit Israel and the occupied territories next week, and he plans to meet Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Arafat and the Israeli Foreign Minister, David Levy. The visit will be an opportunity to build on the substantive dialogue that Britain is fortunate to have with both sides.
Through the European Union, too, we are examining ways in which we can play a more positive and active role in advancing the peace process. Europe has a substantial economic, historical and security interest in the region. The EU is already the largest aid donor to the Palestinians and has pledged 500 million ecu over five years. Britain contributes a sixth of that, and altogether the UK's commitment is some £88 million. The European Union is in the process of ratifying association agreements for Israel and the occupied territories. Those will deregulate trade in goods and should promote higher growth.
I am aware that the influence of the international community could be dissipated if we do not all pull in the same direction. Britain wishes to retain and reinforce the vital mediating role of the United States in the current talks. The European Union's renewed determination to support the peace process will complement American mediation, in line with the wishes of the Arabs and the Israelis.
A central part of our efforts to make the area secure is improving economic well-being. A prosperous society is one of the most effective defences against extremism and intolerance. The Israeli policy of closing off the west bank and Gaza for security reasons has raised prices and lowered standards of living throughout the occupied territories. Many Palestinians feel that they are suffering a collective economic punishment for the acts of a violent minority. Britain has asked Israel to allow Palestinians maximum freedom of work and movement commensurate, of course, with reasonable security precautions.
I would also like to see faster progress on opening the airport that was planned for Gaza and on the free passage of people and goods between the west bank and Gaza, as stipulated in the interim agreement.
Let me now focus on the Syrian track. Talks between Israel and Syria were suspended earlier this year; I am pleased that both sides now seem to want to bridge the 307 gap between them. I greatly hope that they will resume negotiations at the earliest opportunity, on the basis of a renewed commitment to the principle of land for peace, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Southport also referred. A comprehensive settlement in the middle east depends on success in the Israeli-Syrian relationship. Syria has taken constructive steps towards closer economic links with the European Union. Syrian isolation is in no one's interest, and I hope to see international agreements integrate Syria into a stable relationship with its neighbours.
Only last week, I paid successful visits to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar in support of key British interests. I am delighted to say that, after his visit to Israel and Gaza, my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary will be going to the United Arab Emirates and Yemen at the beginning of November, and that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence will be visiting Oman and Qatar this weekend. The frequency of such visits to the region is a clear indication of the importance we attach to the close relationship with our friends in the Gulf.
My visit gave me an excellent opportunity to exchange views on, among other things, a broad range of security issues—a subject dear to my hon. Friend's heart. During my talks, I was particularly struck by the fact that our policies on security matters are remarkably close to those of our allies in the Gulf.
I should like to mention now those who threaten our security interests in the Gulf—first, Saddam Hussein. The UN special commission's revelations about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programmes have been alarming. Iraq developed enough biological and chemical weapons to kill the world's population several times over. Saddam's recent obstruction of UNSCOM shows that he still harbours ambitions to use weapons of mass destruction to dominate the region. The UNSCOM chairman, Rolf Ekeus, whom we strongly support, has warned that he does not have a full picture of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Iraq has made a nonsense of past so-called
full, final and complete declarations".The Security Council has rightly insisted that Iraq co-operate fully with UNSCOM.Saddam Hussein remains a threat to the Iraqi people, as was demonstrated by his recent attack on Irbil—a clear flouting of UN Security Council resolution 688, which demanded that Iraq end such repression. The US action in response, which we strongly supported, sent an unequivocal message to Saddam Hussein that such behaviour will not be tolerated. Fighting between the two Kurdish factions, the PUK and the KDP, which gave Saddam a pretext for his attack on Irbil, has caused much suffering in the area. We have urged the parties to stop fighting and to settle their differences through dialogue. With the Americans, a British official met the leaders of both sides earlier this week, and I am pleased to tell the House that they have agreed to a ceasefire. We shall pursue political reconciliation between them, with further meetings in the coming week.
While Saddam Hussein refuses to comply with Iraq's international obligations it would be foolhardy to relax sanctions; that would leave him free to spend Iraq's resources again on making war. His priority would certainly not be the Iraqi people. In September, the Security Council agreed that current conditions did not 308 permit a change to the sanctions regime. Saddam has shown callous indifference to the suffering caused by his failure to fulfil the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. He spends money on weapons, not food; on palaces and statues of himself, not medicine.
The international community has tried to help the Iraqi people through Security Council resolution 986, the "oil for food" scheme, but Saddam has played a cruel game. He rejected that resolution for a year. His attack on Irbil further delayed implementation. Now, I regret to tell the House, the United Nations has said that the Iraqis have again obstructed us by going back on agreements already reached with the UN. We hope very much that Saddam will reconsider and allow the resolution to be implemented soon.
As I said to the House in July in response to my hon. Friend's debate, Saddam's indifference to human suffering is not confined to his own people. During my recent visit to Kuwait, I heard many harrowing tales of the suffering of families affected by Saddam's refusal to account for the Kuwaitis and other nationals missing since the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. Iraq's failure to give a full account of the whereabouts of those families' loved ones is unacceptable and in clear defiance of the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.
Despite its claims, Iraq has so far failed to facilitate the work of the tripartite commission set up under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross to bring an end to this uncertainty. In clear defiance of the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions, the Iraqis still refuse to give a clear account of their action.
Our ambassador to Kuwait took a robust view at the commission meeting in Geneva and called on the Iraqis to stop placing obstacles in the way of the commission's work. If they list missing Iraqi soldiers, those soldiers are not on a parity with those who were snatched from their homes during the occupation. I call on the Iraqis to respect that process, and I pay tribute to the Emir, to the Crown Prince and especially to Sheikh Salem—who was until recently Minister for the missing people—for their commitment to returning these people to their loved ones. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that subject.
My hon. Friend also mentioned the presence in Britain of many dissidents from the middle east. We are of course seriously concerned about people who abuse our hospitality to launch verbal attacks on friendly Governments, but we cannot act against them unless they break our laws. If there is any evidence that individuals are responsible for terrorist acts in the United Kingdom, we do not hesitate to take action against them.
That problem is not confined to Britain; it is truly international. We continue to work with our G7 colleagues and the European Union and in the UN to find solutions. A British initiative for a declaration designed to deny to terrorists and those who plan, finance or incite terrorist acts anywhere in the world the protection offered to refugees, while retaining the important safeguards for those in genuine need, is under consideration at the United Nations.
I began by saying that stability and security in the middle east represented important national interests for Britain. One of our great advantages is our close 309 friendships with many countries in the region. The Gulf nations themselves have made a significant contribution to maintaining stability and security in the region. The Gulf Co-operation Council has established, and continues to develop, a common defence force, the Peninsula Shield. GCC has also consistently exercised a stabilising influence through its responsible and measured foreign policies. I was very pleased to have the opportunity to meet the GCC's Secretary General during my visit and to exchange views with him.
310 I pay tribute to the countries in the Gulf. I pay tribute to the way in which they are investing in the future of their people with the wealth that may not last for ever. The Government remain committed to using these relationships to help build security and stability for the future. I thank my hon. Friend for the opportunity that has been afforded by his debate to make the United Kingdom's commitment to the Gulf, and to peace in the middle east, total and absolute.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at one minute to Three o'clock.