HC Deb 08 June 1998 vol 313 cc728-36 4.41 pm
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Tony Lloyd)

With permission, Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

The dispute over border delimitation and demarcation arose when Ethiopian and Eritrean armed forces clashed on the Badame plateau on 12 May. Ethiopia accused Eritrea of invading its territory and Eritrea defended its actions by claiming that it was responding to an Ethiopian violation on 6 May. There have since been further clashes in border regions over disputed territory.

On 15 May, I issued a statement on behalf of the European Union expressing our concern about the clashes, urging restraint and calling for the resolution of the dispute by peaceful means. At that time, a facilitation team led by Susan Rice, the United States Assistant Secretary of State, and including Vice-President Kagame of Rwanda, commenced a round of shuttle diplomacy in an effort to find a peaceful solution to the dispute. We have fully supported those efforts and continue to do so in both our presidency statements and personal contacts with both leaders by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

The team's initial recommendations included an Eritrean withdrawal from Badame and the restoration of the status quo of 6 May, the demilitarisation of the whole border area, the delimitation/demarcation of the boundary, and deployment of observers. We understand that, while both sides showed a willingness to accept the broad principles of the recommendations, they could not agree on several points of detail—particularly on the Eritrean side. We monitored closely developments throughout the negotiation period and, by 2 June, it became apparent that the facilitators had been unable to bridge the gap of disagreement between the two sides.

Therefore, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary took the decision to intervene in order to reinforce the European Union's position that the dispute should be settled by peaceful means and to underline our support for the work of the facilitators. On 3 June, my right hon. Friend spoke personally to Prime Minister Meles of Ethiopia and sent a written message to President Issaias of Eritrea. He told both leaders that the United Kingdom and the European Union were saddened by this dispute between two friendly nations. He stressed that the outbreak of war would damage the interests of both sides and, in particular, would endanger regional stability and development. My right hon. Friend assured both leaders that the EU supported the efforts of all parties that genuinely wished to see the dispute settled peacefully.

Sadly, as hon. Members will know from media coverage, the two sides escalated the level of military engagement. On 5 June, the Ethiopians flew two bombing sorties over Asmara airport in Eritrea and the Eritreans twice launched air attacks on Mekelle in the Tigray province of Ethiopia. The Ethiopians responded with a further bombing raid on Asmara airport on the morning of 6 June. I regret to report to the House that the raids caused civilian casualties and deaths on both sides of the border. We deplore this needless loss of life and have reiterated our appeal to both sides to seek a negotiated settlement.

In view of the rapidly deteriorating situation, which, because of the geography, threatened to trap foreign nationals in a situation of war in Eritrea—the same geographical problem does not apply to Ethiopia—officials urgently considered the need to evacuate British nationals in Eritrea. At that point, it was clearly very dangerous to risk flying in and out of Asmara airport without guarantees of safety from both sides. Our ambassador in Addis Ababa initiated a joint United Kingdom-United States-German-Italian effort to secure such agreements. Accordingly, an RAF Hercules set off from RAF Lyneham in the early hours of Saturday morning to evacuate British nationals who wished to leave and who had been unable to be accommodated on a US civilian evacuation flight to Frankfurt the previous day. The US flight had accepted 48 British nationals, mostly voluntary service personnel. We are most grateful to the United States Government for their help.

The Germans, Italians, Americans and the United Kingdom sent in military evacuation flights on Saturday evening. Our aircraft was able to evacuate a large number of Commonwealth and EU citizens and one American, as well as British citizens, to Jedda in Saudi Arabia. One of the two American flights that day took 21 Britons to Amman in Jordan. The majority of British nationals have now arrived back in the United Kingdom. Our consulates in Frankfurt, Jedda and Amman have assisted with onward journeys. I take this opportunity to pay special tribute to those closely involved in the evacuation exercise, including the crew of the RAF Hercules and our honorary consul in Asmara, Stephen Burges. He was appointed only recently and works in an unpaid capacity—he literally experienced a baptism of fire.

Although accurate and up-to-date information is now hard to obtain, we understand that the temporary cessation of hostilities negotiated to assure the safe passage of the evacuation flights has, by and large, held. I repeat our urgent call to both parties to maintain the cessation of hostilities and to agree a formal ceasefire. If they do that, I believe that the way will be open for the facilitators to resume their work. The gap between the two sides is small and can surely be bridged. They do not dispute the border line itself: it is a matter of demarcation and delimitation. It is in the interests of both countries, which for 17 years fought together the terrible tyranny of the Derg regime, to find a peaceful settlement to the dispute. The stability and development of both countries is otherwise at risk.

We are now considering with the US and our EU partners how best we may be able to assist in the process of securing a lasting and peaceful settlement of the dispute. We believe that that can be achieved by giving our unequivocal support to the efforts of the facilitators. If we can provide material help that also supports those efforts, we shall do so. I assure the House that we shall continue to do all that we can to bring about a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Mr. Michael Trend (Windsor)

I thank the Minister for his statement and join him in commending the work of the Royal Air Force and members of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in evacuating British citizens from Eritrea. Like the Minister, I thank the honorary consul, Mr. Stephen Burges, who took up his post only on Monday. He has played an important role in evacuating civilians from that country. It demonstrates once again the value and commitment of honorary consuls, and the Opposition are grateful for their work in assisting British citizens throughout the world.

The Minister has confirmed that all British citizens who wish to leave the country have now done so. Will he tell the House what arrangements have been made to ensure that others who may wish to leave hereafter have the opportunity to do so? On a more general but very important point, can the Minister give the House an unequivocal assurance that the United Kingdom will be able to participate in similar future evacuations should the need arise after the findings of the strategic defence review are made known and implemented?

The Minister will be aware that Britain has a particular relationship with the region, following the liberation of Eritrea in 1941 and our administration of the country for more than a decade. In view of the growing hostility between the two countries, is it right for the ambassador to Eritrea to be resident in Ethiopia? Has the Minister plans to review our diplomatic presence?

I have questions on two further specific points. First, the Minister refers to the Government being prepared to provide "material help" for the efforts of those seeking to facilitate a peaceful settlement. The Minister could have in mind, for example, arranging an international conference or providing direct military assistance. Will he be more specific about what he means by "material help"? Secondly, can the Minister shed light on what arms and other munitions may be getting through to Eritrea and Ethiopia at present?

Finally, the Minister will be aware that the dispute is not the only one in Africa that could destabilise the continent. What steps is the United Kingdom taking to ensure that other territorial disputes do not escalate into military confrontations such as the one in Eritrea and Ethiopia? For example, what does the Minister plan to do about the stand-off between two Commonwealth countries, Botswana and Namibia? What is being done to support the idea of creating an African-based and controlled peacekeeping force, which could be deployed in areas of tension—such as the border of Eritrea—while diplomatic solutions are sought?

Mr. Lloyd

In welcoming the hon. Gentleman to his new post, I thank him for his gracious remarks about those who took part in the evacuation operation, especially the honorary consul, whom I mentioned. He rightly draws attention to the valuable role that is played by not only honorary consuls, but the diplomatic community globally. At times like this, we all realise that they play an especially important role.

The hon. Gentleman asked me about the British citizens remaining in Eritrea. We believe that they number about 20. In the run-up to the eventual evacuation, we gave consistent advice that British citizens should consider the position in Eritrea, and obviously, one of the reasons for the evacuation was premised by the fact that civilian flights ceased to operate, I believe, on Thursday 4 June. In that context, the decision to send in an RAF plane for evacuation purposes was, of itself, a significant signal that we could not henceforth give guarantees about the safety of British nationals in that situation. We shall consider every practical step that is possible to offer assistance to British citizens in the light of what I have said, but I repeat that the citizens who chose to remain did so—I believe—knowingly, on the basis that further evacuation may not be an option.

The hon. Gentleman asked about the possibility of such evacuations continuing in future, after the strategic defence review. He, like the whole House, must await the outcome of the publication of that review, as is right and proper.

The hon. Gentleman asked me especially about our diplomatic relationship, specifically in terms of the ambassador in Addis Ababa also being accredited to Eritrea. That situation was based on the fact that, since 1991, the two countries—this is the sad irony of the present conflict—had relations as close as it was possible to imagine between two neighbours, because they had the same background and had been through the same conflict. In those terms, the situation that confronts us is very new. I believe that the hon. Gentleman will forgive me if I say that, although I do not want to fail to answer his question, it is premature for us to examine how best we continue with our relations, especially with Eritrea.

The hon. Gentleman asked me what support the European Union would consider giving. So far, the primary role has been played by the United States and by the Rwandans; we applaud the role that they have played. Undoubtedly, they played a significant role in trying to prevent the conflict; they are still working hard to prevent it from continuing. We do not want to cut across anything that they do.

At the moment, therefore, the facilities that I spoke of in my statement would mainly be confined—although we would not rule out anything else that might be helpful—to technical expertise, such as the provision of technical experts to take part in the process of delimiting the border between the two countries. That is a practical role, which we may be able to play, and which we would want to play.

Finally, the hon. Gentleman asked about conflict prevention throughout Africa. He may be aware that the British Government, with the United States and France, have been actively engaged at the United Nations, and in co-ordination with the Organisation of African Unity, in proposals to establish an African peacekeeping presence. That would consist of building a capacity between African nations, so that they can play the role that they should be playing, whereby a regional presence moves into such peacekeeping activity and can play a constructive role. We are actively engaged in that agenda; that agenda will pay dividends in future.

Mr. David Hanson (Delyn)

I thank my hon. Friend for his statement. First, will he give us an idea whether any assessment has been made of the longer-term solutions to the problems that have been highlighted in the past week or so? Secondly, will he give us an idea of the assessment that he has made of the impact on the important development issues in both countries? As he knows, both countries are among the poorest in the world, and have suffered from drought and famine as well as the long-term effects of war.

Mr. Lloyd

The immediate needs of both countries are an end to hostilities, an acceptance that the zone in dispute should be demilitarised, and a return to the status quo before 6 May, when the present round of conflict had its origins. Beyond that immediate agenda, there needs to be agreement on a process for arbitration between the two parties. Both the United States and Rwandan facilitating team and the European Union will actively work toward that.

The second part of my hon. Friend's question is serious. Since the independence of Eritrea and since the overthrow of the Mengistu regime in Ethiopia, the two countries have worked closely together, in a partnership which, for the first time for a considerable while, has allowed the possibility of development. The real tragedy of this conflict is that all that is now cast in doubt. All that makes it much more difficult for would-be partners to help. It also makes it much more difficult, on the ground, for the practical progress that both countries should be making to occur. That, I regret, is the real foolishness and the real sadness of the present situation.

Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park)

I take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister and the Government on helping to negotiate the ceasefire that led to the effective evacuation of British citizens from Eritrea. Does he recall that, in 1985, there was a terrible famine in the Horn of Africa, which was due to a civil war, in which Ethiopia and Eritrea and their present Governments were on the same side? Since that famine in the Horn of Africa, arms and aid have flowed together to both Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Will the Minister tell the House what proper scrutiny there has been of arms going to Eritrea and Ethiopia since his Government took power? Is it not time to end the spiral of conflict that starts with arms to fuel wars, which cause the poverty, which affects the whole of the developing world?

Mr. Lloyd

I thank the hon. Lady for her remarks about the role of the British ambassador in Addis Ababa in negotiating the ceasefire. It was an important role—one which, as it happens, not only brokered a ceasefire until 3 o'clock GMT on Sunday morning, which was the negotiated time frame, but, as far as we are aware, has led to a cessation of hostilities since. We hope that that cessation continues. A not insignificant role was played by the ambassador and his colleagues in Addis Ababa.

On the wider question of the supply of arms to both Ethiopia and Eritrea, I am rather cautious about giving the House information off the top of my head, for reasons that may be obvious. I am not aware that arms have gone from this country to Ethiopia or Eritrea in that time, although I shall seek to check those facts, to ensure, as ever, that this Government, unlike the previous Government, give accurate information to the House.

The real issue that the hon. Lady raises is the supply of arms to Africa and to other areas of potential conflict. The Government are working hard on that problem. For example, the Department for International Development recently provided the Government of Mali with significant sums, among other purposes for the possible buyback of arms that have gone into that area. The British Government sponsored a conference in the past few weeks in southern Africa, the aim of which was to examine the possibility of controlling the supply of illicit arms in that region. Those are issues on which the Government are engaged because we know that, in the end, conflict is based on the existence of armaments. In the case of Ethiopia and Eritrea, the conflict is between two sovereign nations, which is rare nowadays. Few would deny the right of sovereign nations to engage in defence.

Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Inverclyde)

Is there any possibility of a senior aide of Kofi Annan acting as a mediator between the two nations? Has this dreadful affair been raised at the Security Council? On the question of the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. Trend) about the possibility of regionally based UN peacekeeping forces, how on earth can we expect the United Nations to develop such a fine idea, given that as an organisation it is so badly strapped for money, largely as a result of the stupid obduracy of Congressmen and women on Capitol hill?

Mr. Lloyd

I can tell the House that the matter certainly has been discussed at the Security Council. It should come before the Security Council again, with a view to the United Nations adopting a Security Council resolution. It is important that the UN's authority should be placed behind condemnation of the violence and the efforts of those who are trying to mediate.

Although the United Nations must be engaged at a general level, the view of the international community is that the present efforts of the United States, which speaks for itself, and of Rwanda, which is a country friendly to both parties and a neighbour, are particularly useful. We would not advocate any measure that cut across those efforts. It is important that too many people do not become involved as that would frustrate the mediation efforts.

On my hon. Friend's final question, we believe that the United Nations should be put on a proper financial footing, which means that all those who owe large sums should pay up.

Sir Peter Emery (East Devon)

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor (Mr. Trend) on his first appearance at the Dispatch Box in his new role, which I hope he will enjoy.

I have three questions. First, how many Europeans, other than the British, are still left in Eritrea? Do we know that? Is not the airfield at Asmara both a civilian and a military airfield? One side is military and the other side is civilian, so an attack on the airfield is an attack on a civilian airfield as well as on a military base. If we can get some sort of solution, we should be prepared to ensure that the airfield can be restored for civilian use as quickly as possible.

Secondly, as a secondary effect of the conflict, are there attacks on Europeans? I believe that that is not the case, but it would be useful to have an assurance that, although Europeans may be caught up between the two sides, there are no direct attacks on Europeans.

Thirdly, does the Minister agree that in the efforts to bring about a solution, the leadership ought to be taken by the Organisation of African Unity, whose headquarters are in Addis Ababa? Such an organisation is most likely to be able to represent both sides in bringing about a solution.

Mr. Lloyd

The right hon. Gentleman is right that the airport in Asmara is both military and civilian. As far as we are aware, there have been no further attacks on the airport since before the British evacuation took place. We hope that that state of affairs continues.

I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman any further information about the number of European nationals. We know that there are some 20 British nationals there, but we do not know how many other Europeans may be there. I can tell the House that on the RAF Hercules flight, there were 104 people, of whom the overwhelming majority were non-UK nationals. They were nationals of Commonwealth countries or of other European countries. We trust that we played a significant role in evacuating other European citizens, and I am sure that the House appreciates the work of the RAF and other authorities in that process.

I am not aware of any attack on European nationals. We have had no such reports, but obviously the quality of information is poor and it is not possible to give a guarantee that that is the case.

On the role of the Organisation of African Unity, the House will want to know that the OAU is in session at present. The Secretary-General, Salim Salim, has been in direct contact with the Prime Minister of Ethiopia and the President of Eritrea to put the force of the OAU behind the mediation role currently being played by the Americans and the Rwandans. That is the right way forward. It is important that in this almost inexplicable situation, there is no gap between organisations in the international community, and that all of us speak with the same voice and the same authority to deplore the violence and to demand that both sides get round the negotiating table.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)

To return to the question of the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Dr. Tonge) on arms, when I was on holiday in Iran in October, I got into a chance conversation with a Russian national in Hamadan who was clearly selling arms to Iran. When I commented that he was obviously doing good business, he said, "Yes, I am certainly doing good business, but it is not half as good as the business that we do in east Africa."

Is it not the case that Russian arms, dirt cheap and pretty sophisticated, are swilling around vast parts of the developing world? I do not know what my hon. Friends can do about it, but is that not part of the problem and should we not face the fact that cheap Russian arms and ammunition are creating a great deal of difficulty?

Mr. Lloyd

It is not just Russian arms that find their way into potential conflict zones. Sadly, the world is awash with small arms. The majority of deaths and injuries worldwide are caused by small arms systems, not by the great armament systems that we tend to read about.

As I told the House earlier, the British Government are engaged on practical ways of dealing with the problem. I do not pretend that there is an easy, immediate solution. We are examining the possibility of empowering regional groupings. Southern Africa is an example of a region that has known enormous conflict in recent times and where, even now, huge amounts of arms are swilling around. If we can learn the lessons from that region, they apply in other parts of the world. At the international level, with other partners who share our concern, we are examining other ways of dealing with that extremely difficult problem.

Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate)

Am I correct in understanding that the Minister is saying that the Ethiopians initiated this latest round of violence? Do the Government believe that there is any justification for this behaviour? Is it possible for the international community, especially the United Kingdom and the European Union, to draw a distinction between the behaviour of the two nations that are involved in the violence?

Mr. Lloyd

I did not say that the Ethiopians are the authors of this particular round of violence. In these situations, it is probably foolhardy to try to allocate responsibility. At this stage, we should be saying to both sides that the cycle of violence begetting violence is not the way forward. We need a clear break from hostility, demilitarisation of the conflict zone and a return to the status quo that existed before 6 May, and then to get round the negotiating table to begin the difficult process of drawing up commonly agreed boundaries. Such a process, however difficult, is much less painful than the cycle of violence that simply kills.

Maria Eagle (Liverpool, Garston)

Given that there are other on-going conflicts in the area—one thinks of Sudan and Somalia—what implications does my hon. Friend believe the new conflict has for the region? Is this conflict likely to change the balance of power and the balance of other conflicts in the region and affect the stability of the whole of east Africa?

Mr. Lloyd

My hon. Friend raises an important point. We know that in neighbouring Sudan there has been a civil war for a generation—indeed, effectively since independence. We know also that in Somalia the state of governance is almost no governance. A conflict between what in recent times have been the more stable countries in the region is a tragedy for the two countries involved and is potentially destabilising within the region. That is partly why there need to be intense efforts to bring both sides to the negotiating table.

This extra or latest conflict could, of course, spill over to neighbouring countries, and the process of destabilisation could occur on a much wider scale. Sadly, that destabilisation would feed back into the conflict. There is much for us to agree on in our demand that mediation must be the right answer.