Zimbabwe

HC Deb 16 May 2000 vol 350 cc130-6

2. Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold)

What representations he has received calling for the suspension of Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth. [120871]

6. Mr. Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge)

What actions Her Majesty's Government have taken to convey their disapproval of recent events in Zimbabwe. [120875]

15. Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby)

If he will make a statement on the Government's policy on the situation in Zimbabwe. [120884]

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Robin Cook)

We deplore the continuing violence in Zimbabwe and the persistent failure of its Government to guarantee the rule of law and to respect its citizens' rights to freedom from political intimidation.

I regret that the Government of Zimbabwe have rejected every reasonable proposal for international help with a fair programme of land reform. We deplore the continuing threats against commercial farmers, who provide one of the essential pillars of the economy in Zimbabwe and its main access to foreign currency. If President Mugabe persists with his threats to confiscate farms without compensation, he will sentence the economy of Zimbabwe to isolation and his Government to international condemnation.

Today, Don McKinnon, who is the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, and a team from the European Commission are in Harare to agree the terms under which international election observers can be deployed. I hope to speak to Don McKinnon tomorrow. The talks have already obliged President Mugabe to announce last night the date for elections on 24 and 25 June.

I have stressed in the Commonwealth and the European Union that election observers must be deployed immediately. No election can be free and fair unless political parties can campaign without repression and voters can go to the polls without fear. Not only Britain but the world is watching and monitoring the conduct of the elections. For our part, Britain will do everything possible to ensure that the people of Zimbabwe can choose their future in freedom and without fear.

Mr. Clifton-Brown

I thank the Foreign Secretary for that complete and strong answer. Does he agree that the situation has been moved on by the announcement of the date of the elections on 24 and 25 June and that the priority now is to get a Commonwealth team of observers into Zimbabwe to ensure that proper voter registration lists are drawn up, that proper constituency boundaries are sorted out and that the elections are free and fair? Does he also agree that intimidation should cease now?

Mr. Cook

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for expressing his support, and I utterly echo and endorse his demands. On the teams of election observers, I am pleased to tell the House that it appears that the Secretary-General has reached agreement with President Mugabe. If that agreement is also achieved by the European Union, we would expect that both the Commission and the Secretary-General will leave behind in Harare today the nucleus of a team of observers, and we will certainly work to get it up to full strength as soon as possible.

Mr. Hammond

Foreign Office Ministers have previously said that a military coup is a precedent for suspension from the Commonwealth. If Mr. Mugabe reneges on his promise of elections, or if those elections are patently unfair, and he remains in power beyond the constitutional time limit, will the Foreign Secretary give a commitment that Britain will regard that as the equivalent of a military coup and immediately seek Zimbabwe's suspension from the Commonwealth?

Mr. Cook

The hon. Gentleman slightly understates the opportunities available under the Millbrook action programme, which provides for the suspension of Governments who are in power unconstitutionally from the councils of the Commonwealth. Whether the Government of Zimbabwe find themselves in that position in future will crucially depend on the conduct of the elections. That is why we shall watch with great care the report of the international observers and why we shall press the Commonwealth ministerial action group to pay particular attention to the conclusions of the Commonwealth's observers.

Mr. Robathan

When I read the screen at 1 o'clock this afternoon, I was surprised to discover that my question had been grouped; I had had no notification of that.

I, too, welcome the strong tone of the Foreign Secretary's comments, but actions speak much louder than words. Why do not we suspend the British military training team that is currently in Zimbabwe? Why do not we suspend all aid to Zimbabwe? President Mugabe is a pretty authoritarian dictator, whatever past elections may have shown, and is involved in murder, so why do not we send him the message that we will not tolerate such behaviour or continue to support his regime?

Mr. Cook

With respect, we have sent such a message repeatedly, and I have just done so again today. On aid, I have repeatedly told the House that I would be extremely reluctant to take steps that made the position of the poor in Zimbabwe even more miserable than it is already under President Mugabe. I do not see the sense, from our own national interest, of suspending the very large programme that we have combating AIDS in a country where a quarter of the population is HIV-positive. However, if the elections are not free and fair and if the political violence does not moderate, a lot of options will be on the table, and we shall keep many of those issues under review.

Mr. Bruce Grocott (Telford)

I welcome all that my right hon. Friend has said today and all the efforts that he and his colleagues have made through the international community to try to resolve the very difficult situation in Zimbabwe, but does he recall vividly, as I do, that during the 18 years of the previous Government not only were we isolated in Europe, as is well known, but British policy on southern Africa was, quite disgracefully, frequently totally isolated in the Commonwealth? Will he therefore be wary of instant Opposition experts on such problems and continue with the strategy of working with our partners in the international community to resolve those very difficult problems?

Mr. Cook

It is fair to say that one of our strengths in the current crisis in Zimbabwe is the universal support that we have had from many of the Commonwealth African leaders, especially President Obasanjo of Nigeria, who has been robust in his criticism. I know that his support for our views and his strong support for democracy reflect the fact that he knows that the Government substantially supported the case for democracy in Nigeria during the years of military rule. The support that we are mustering from others in the Commonwealth reflects the fact that they know that we take the Commonwealth seriously.

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East)

President Mbeki of South Africa, whom we shall welcome to this country later this week, has spoken of an African renaissance. Is not part of the tragedy that follows the brutal actions of President Mugabe, in encouraging the squatting and deaths, the fact that such a vision becomes less possible? Investment will dry up, and so much damage has already been done that it will be very difficult to restore the basis of confidence that is essential for that African renaissance.

Mr. Cook

I think the tragedy of what is happening in Zimbabwe, and the publicity that necessarily surrounds it, is that it is obscuring some of the success stories of Africa and the general trend towards higher standards of democracy there. I believe I have spoken to all the leaders of the countries surrounding Zimbabwe, and it is fair to say that there is widespread alarm not just about the situation in Zimbabwe, but about the impact that it will have on the region if it is not brought under control.

Mr. Tony Lloyd (Manchester, Central)

I endorse all that my right hon. Friend has said about the situation in Zimbabwe, not just today but in recent weeks, but may I press him on the issue of the British military advisory training team? The House should be given the clear message that that team does invaluable work, not just in Zimbabwe but throughout southern Africa, and that calls for it to be dismantled would be counterproductive in a huge range of countries.

Mr. Cook

I echo my hon. Friend's praise for the work done by the training team, whose commitment extends throughout the region. It is much valued by Zimbabwe's neighbours, and we would not want to take any step that would make them feel that Britain was reducing its commitment to the region or to the countries themselves. However, if our observers come back and say that the election was pursued with violence and political intimidation, we may well have to review the team's location.

Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife)

Is not the Foreign Secretary right to exercise some caution with regard to suggestions of immediate suspension—not least because of the attitude of Mr. Tsvangirai, president of the Movement for Democratic Change, who has courageously sought to continue to argue a case for democratic change but who, in this context, has cautioned against any early effort to suspend Zimbabwe because of the weapon that that might well hand Mr. Mugabe in the coming election?

As we are talking about suspension, can the Foreign Secretary tell us what rather tortuous process allowed the Foreign Office to move from suspension of the export of military equipment and arms to what I now understand to be cancellation of the licences? That is welcome to many Members, but there is residual anxiety about why it took so long. Perhaps the Foreign Secretary would like to place in the Library of the House the changed legal advice that he received, which enabled him to make the decision that he announced at the end of last week.

Mr. Cook

As I told the right hon. and learned Gentleman a week ago, I defer to his superior knowledge of the flexibility of legal advice. I can only welcome his support for the actual outcome.

On the question of sanctions, I spoke to Mr. Tsvangirai again at the weekend. As I have been accused by President Mugabe and others of backing Mr. Tsvangirai, let me put it on record that I am not backing any candidate in the election, but I am certainly backing the demand by Mr. Tsvangirai and the opposition for a free election process in which they can present their views. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is correct: Mr. Tsvangirai is not calling for sanctions, which he thinks would play into Mugabe's hands in the current circumstances, helping him to fulfil his ambition to stage a confrontation as an election backdrop. I think everyone understands, however, that if the elections are not free and fair, the international community will have to reassess the position.

Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington)

One of the reasons given for restricting the amount that can be given to the Zimbabwe Government for land purchase and the compensation of white farmers is that existing land has been reallocated to the cronies of President Mugabe. Could my right hon. Friend publish the evidence for that? I think the detail would help the advancing of the case.

Mr. Cook

I am pleased to say that the information is published. Indeed, it is published in the Zimbabwean Parliament, with answers from the Government of Zimbabwe. It details that, over the past three years of the commercial farm programme, half the farms have gone to employees of the public sector, or to people with connections with the Government. We have always stressed that we are willing to help to fund a fair land reform programme, but that it must be within the rule of law, involve a fair price for the farmer and, importantly, help the landless poor, not those who have the right connections.

Mr. Francis Maude (Horsham)

I strongly agree with the Foreign Secretary's insistence that the elections that have now been announced in Zimbabwe must be open, free and fair. It is only a few weeks until polling. We know that for many weeks there has been systematic intimidation of opposition activists and voters, with whole villages told that there will be vicious reprisals against the village unless it returns a ZANU-PF candidate.

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that even if observers could start tomorrow—as we hope they will be able to do—their ability to ensure a fair election has already been massively compromised because of the intimidation that has already happened? Did not his failure to engage the Commonwealth early enough in the process allow Mugabe to believe that he could get away with it? Has not his softly, softly approach given Mugabe breathing space in which to intimidate his way through the election?

Mr. Cook

First, may I say that I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman's characterisation of the political violence of the past few weeks. I said to the House a week ago that the current position in Zimbabwe had already compromised the prospect of a truly fair and free election. Nevertheless, the Opposition are united in demanding that international observers be admitted as soon as possible in the hope that that will inhibit some of the worst of the brutality. That is why we are doing everything possible to get those election observers in as quickly as possible, hoping that it may contribute towards a fairer climate of elections. As to what conclusion they come to, I will wait for their result.

I am disappointed, particularly given the exchange that I have just had with the spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell), that the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude) continues to complain that we have not taken tough enough sanctions. He has just heard me say that the Opposition leader, whose life is on the line, does not want us to take those sanctions because it would be counterproductive.

I add that, when the Opposition leader came to see me four weeks ago, he came fresh from meeting the right hon. Gentleman. He told me that he had said to him that he wanted bipartisan support for the British position and did not want him to play party politics. I regret that the right hon. Gentleman did not take that advice. It is the one thing that the Opposition of Zimbabwe have asked him to do.

Mr. Maude

Does not the Government's reluctance to put pressure on Mugabe, now an established law breaker, contrast with the Government's attitude to another Commonwealth African country—Sierra Leone? Is it not now clear that it was a mistake to pressure President Kabbah into pardoning Foday Sankoh last year, giving him a whole new power base from which to organise further violence and killing? Did the Foreign Secretary see the remarks of the Nigerian negotiator, Dr. Fayemi? He said: We called it the pact with the devil.

Madam Speaker

Order. We are not on the right country. For all that, would the Foreign Secretary like to make some comment? We are dealing with Zimbabwe. I know that the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude) was trying to make a comparison, but it was not close enough.

Mr. Cook

I am grateful, Madam Speaker, but the right hon. Gentleman has made a serious allegation and I believe that I must be allowed to rebut it. The agreement that was reached at Lomé was brokered by ECOWAS. It was signed and witnessed by ECOWAS and by the Organisation of African Unity. We were not party—

Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot)

What is ECOWAS?

Mr. Cook

I do not know what Conservative Members are doing discussing Sierra Leone if they do not know what ECOWAS—the Economic Community of West African States—is. We were not party to that agreement. Nor did we pressure President Kabbah to sign it; far from it—the peace agreement was wildly popular in Sierra Leone. It has also enabled us to drive a wedge between the rebels, which is why the former army of Sierra Leone is fighting against Sankoh, not alongside him.

Coming back to the matter under discussion, I conclude by saying that I note with regret that the right hon. Gentleman has not taken this opportunity to take the advice of the Opposition leader in Zimbabwe and give us the bipartisan support that would give greater strength to our protest.