§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Sutcliffe.]
10.50 pm§ Mr. Mohammad Sarwar (Glasgow, Govan)I am grateful for the opportunity to debate peace in south Asia. This is a timely debate, as events across the region have moved rapidly in recent days. Peace and stability go hand in hand, but where there is no peace, bold leadership is required, not only from the conflicting sides but from the British Government in their role as an honest broker with strong links to nations across the region. We must exert greater pressure on India and Pakistan to restrict their military excesses. Instead of the widespread poverty in India and Pakistan being tackled, there have been steep rises in spending on arms in both countries.
Jane's latest estimates place Indian defence spending at almost $14 billion a year, and Pakistan's at $3.3 billion. With a standing army of well over 1 million in India and one of around 600,000 in Pakistan, this confrontational madness must end for the sake of the security of the whole region. India has also shown an interest in Russian air defence systems while being positive about President Bush's proposals for missile defence—much more so than other nations and many Members of this House, including myself.
Arms spending and military ambitions go way beyond the defence needs of both countries, but the nuclear capability possessed by India and Pakistan threatens us all. Although nuclear tests began four years ago on the sub-continent, there is still no treaty obliging either side to reveal the extent of their arsenal. Jane's experts speculate that India could have as many as 250 missiles, and Pakistan 150. The Centre for Strategic and International Studies estimates that India has about 60 warheads and Pakistan 25, but no one knows exactly how many each country has. Experts are uncertain whether either side even has a warhead able to be delivered by a missile.
This crazy uncertainty is a real threat to peace and stability in the region. Posturing along the border could quickly escalate. This is a crucial time. For more than five decades, Kashmir has experienced persistent conflict. Since partition, India and Pakistan have fought three wars over this disputed land. A nuclear confrontation would destroy both countries with terrible consequences for us all.
The situation has been extremely serious in recent months, and President Musharraf must be praised for taking bold steps to bring us back from the brink. He has made real gestures of friendship, not only with the symbolic handshake with Mr. Vajpayee, the Indian Prime Minister, at the conference of south Asian leaders, but with tough measures to tackle terrorist activity on Pakistani soil.
In recent days, the brutal murder of Daniel Pearl while he was working to expose the truth behind certain groups has only stiffened the resolve of President Musharraf. He is determined to deal with terrorists. I am disappointed that India has so far failed to respond positively. Prime Minister Vajpayee must show statesmanship, and India must negotiate with Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir.
There are currently moves to install India as a member of the United Nations Security Council. How can that be considered when India still fails to observe UN 682 resolutions concerning Kashmir? I am not opposed to India or any other nation seeking membership of such a body, but how can any prospective member of the Security Council be seen openly to flout decisions taken by the United Nations?
Bilateral talks between India and Pakistan have taken place, but they were not successful. There must be a genuine attempt at mediation. In that matter, Britain has a special responsibility. As the colonial power, it created the situation facing Kashmir. Britain has a unique role as a close ally of both India and Pakistan, and it possesses much wider influence on the world stage. Britain is the leading nation in the Commonwealth and has shown itself to be an active and fair-minded member of the UN Security Council.
§ Mr. Khalid Mahmood (Birmingham, Perry Barr)Does my hon. Friend agree that, as British parliamentarians, Members of this place ought to concentrate on human rights and not take sides in any country in south-east Asia or any conflict arising there? We ought to concentrate on the people living in those areas whose human rights are being eroded and what we can do to assist them in restoring those rights so that they can live with respect and dignity.
§ Mr. SarwarMy hon. Friend is right. There are gross violations of human rights in occupied Kashmir and we have a responsibility as Members of Parliament to do whatever we can to end such violations in occupied territories
Britain must assume leadership in resolving the situation in Kashmir through mediation. Our Prime Minister should also use his special relationship with President Bush and the USA. There must be a change in priorities for the United States as the world superpower. Instead of making sabre-rattling threats against Iraq, Iran, Syria and North Korea, it must focus clearly and concentrate on outstanding issues such as Kashmir and Palestine. That will bring greater peace and stability not only for the people of those disputed regions but for us all, and build trust among Muslims that the west is even-handed
That will not happen while the US continues to threaten other nations in the ongoing war against terrorism. The people of Kashmir deserve a just and peaceful settlement, and the leaders of Pakistan and India must show commitment to achieve it, bringing peace and stability to the region and enhancing the quality of life of the poor people of those two great countries.
We can take a lead from Sri Lanka. On Saturday, the ceasefire ending 19 years of civil war took effect. After substantial mediation by the Norwegian Government, the Tamil Tigers and the Sri Lankan Government signed a permanent ceasefire, which I am confident will lead to direct peace talks. Measures to build confidence are to be implemented within three months. We know from Northern Ireland the difficulties involved in meeting deadlines, but that is a very positive start. Will the Minister join me in praising the Sri Lankan and Tamil leaderships for reaching agreement to build a better future for all on the island? Will he also join me in congratulating Norway on its pivotal role in bringing the opposing sides together? I am certain that the success in Sri Lanka is a lesson for Britain and the opposing sides in the dispute over Kashmir.
683 We must also remain vigilant over other threats to peace in south Asia. I have real concerns over the escalating crisis in Nepal. The conflict has worsened in recent weeks. Last Thursday, the vast majority of Nepalese MPs extended the state of emergency by a further three months, allowing the army to continue its deployment against the Maoists. A two-day general strike was then called by the rebels to mark the sixth anniversary of their uprising. Most places of work and education were shut and streets in the main towns were almost deserted but for army patrols and guards at Government buildings. The international community is backing Nepal's Government, but I fear that the conflict could extend beyond Nepal's borders. Can the Minister assure me that we will step up our support to tackle the threat, not just for the people of Nepal but for neighbouring areas?
We must also consider Afghanistan. We must work to extend the fragile peace from Kabul across the country. The Afghan people have suffered enough, living in grinding poverty and being bombed back to the stone age during two decades of conflict. I welcome the Government's pledged support, but it will take years of sustained aid to produce any lasting effect.
Major problems highlighted recently will hinder moves towards peace for the whole nation without Britain's leadership and resolve. Last week, a preliminary survey by the United Nations drug control agency found that drug production levels are again high and widespread, particularly where the Interim Administration have little control. Until recently, Afghanistan was the source of 90 per cent. of all heroin in European markets. A drug problem in Afghanistan means a serious drug problem all over Europe: I know that only too well from my constituency. The Turning Point drug crisis centre helps 5,000 hard-drug users every year.
Hamid Karzai has asked for the multinational force in Kabul to be extended to other areas while the Afghan army and police force are being built up. I praise the skill and commitment of the British armed forces leading the 4,000-strong International Security and Assistance Force. Their role will be crucial as more refugees return home in the coming weeks.
Five million Afghans are living in refugee camps and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is preparing for the return home of more than a million refugees, which will begin this Friday. But in northern Afghanistan thousands of minority Pashtuns are still being forced from their homes, with 20,000 stranded on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border trying to flee the country. The UNHCR is calling for international peacekeeping troops to be deployed to parts of Afghanistan where minorities are threatened.
There have been serious human rights violations. Families have been forcibly evicted from their homes, property has been plundered, and there is a very real threat of violence. People are genuinely running for their lives from areas where the Interim Government have little authority over local warlords.
The Prime Minister has put Labour principles at the heart of the international agenda, committing our Government to striving for peace and a better, fairer life for all who are denied it. I hope that Britain will continue to accept its responsibilities as a lead nation in rebuilding Afghanistan. I also hope that our Government will demonstrate bold leadership to bring peace and stability across south Asia.
§ 11.3 pm
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Ben Bradshaw)I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Sarwar) for raising the subject of south Asia. I have just returned from a six-day visit to part of the region, so the debate is timely. Let me speak about the United Kingdom's relationship with Pakistan and India, about the relations between the two countries, and about Kashmir before moving to other regional issues.
The events of 11 September and coalition action in Afghanistan threw up new challenges for Pakistan. Domestic tensions increased. The appalling terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament in December raised the temperature further. President Musharraf was faced with difficult choices, and he made the right decisions. His wholehearted support for the international coalition against terrorism was courageous; so was his decision to tackle extremism at home.
Pakistan is a key member of the international coalition, and President Musharraf s efforts have helped to reinvigorate the bilateral relationship. That relationship is founded on a shared history and is bound together by strong links, not least by 750,000 British citizens of Pakistani origin.
My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister's visits to Islamabad in October last year and January this year underline our commitment to supporting Pakistan over the long term. The Department for International Development has committed £11 million to Pakistan to help with the short-term humanitarian and broader economic impact of the Afghanistan crisis. In 2001, DFID's development assistance programme in Pakistan totalled £43 million, and it is now looking to increase that
We are also reassured by President Musharraf's commitment to restore democratic government in Pakistan in line with the "road-map" proposals he announced on 14 August 2001. The restoration of the joint electoral system and more parliamentary seats for women are welcome developments. We have made it clear that the full participation of political parties is essential for free and fair elections in October. DFID is already engaged with the Pakistani electoral commission. We will continue to help in any way we can to ensure a smooth transition to democracy, strong democratic institutions and better human rights guarantees, especially for minorities in Pakistan.
Let me turn now to our relations with India, from where I have just returned. There is real strength and vitality in our bilateral relationship, which is confident and strong. Indian and British Ministers are in regular contact. The deep affection and fascination that the British people have always had for India remains. History, culture and shared interests and values bind us together. There is a genuine sense of shared purpose. We share a global vision and democratic values.
The Prime Minister paid a very successful visit to India in January this year. The vision of both Prime Ministers was set out in the New Delhi declaration of January 2002. We both want to play a positive and proactive role in international affairs. We have a mutual interest in co-operation on the world stage. We both play leading roles in the United Nations and the Commonwealth.
685 The partnership stretches from working to combat international terrorism, Afghanistan and peacekeeping, and on through to trade, investment, the environment, information technology, reforming international finance, development, science, technology and combating international crime
Trade and investment is one of the great success stories of the Indo-British partnership. Bilateral trade between our countries increased by 20 per cent. last year to nearly £5 billion. UK development aid will treble over the forthcoming years.
The terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament outraged world opinion. We in Britain were deeply shocked by the attack on the very centre of Indian democracy. Once again, the destructive influence of terrorism on regional stability has been highlighted. As my hon. Friend pointed out, the resulting military mobilisation on both sides of the border is deeply worrying. Britain urges both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint. We are in close and constant contact with both Governments. The aftermath of 11 September has created a new dynamic in south Asia that we think will help us, and other friends of India and Pakistan, to encourage both countries to find lasting solutions.
Both sides will need to show flexibility and understanding. We were struck by President Musharraf's bold speech of 12 January in which he condemned all forms of sectarianism and religious hatred and made it quite clear that terrorism in the name of Kashmir would not be tolerated. As a friend of Pakistan, we will continue to encourage him to pursue this vision of a modern, tolerant and stable Pakistan; we hope others will do the same.
Terrorism and support for terrorist acts such as those that took place on 1 October in Srinagar and 13 December in Delhi must cease. There must be meaningful dialogue on the issues—all the issues—between India and Pakistan.
It is widely accepted that the long-standing tension between India and Pakistan is one of the most pressing regional security problems. The current military mobilisation on both sides of the border underlines the risks inherent in the continuing stalemate over Kashmir—risks that are all the more serious because of their nuclear dimension.
We remain concerned about the suffering of the ordinary people in Kashmir and militant attacks on civilians and the Indian security forces. Continuing violence in Kashmir has done nothing, and can do nothing, to promote a durable solution. An end to the support that the militants receive from outside Kashmir would greatly assist the search for a solution, as would early steps to improve the human rights performance of the Indian security forces in Jammu and Kashmir. We recognise and welcome the action already taken by the Indian authorities to address the concerns, but we will continue to press them to bring wrongdoers to justice and allow international organisations access to Jammu and Kashmir.
My hon. Friend raised the issue of mediation. Mediation can and does work in some situations, but only when the principals accept it. We and others have a role to play—to press the parties themselves to find a solution 686 with which they can both live. We firmly believe, however, that any solution, if it is to carry with it the people living in Kashmir, must take account of their views; only then will it be accepted as a just and lasting solution.
Britain is playing a leading role in Afghanistan, as my hon. Friend rightly said. Almost an entire generation of Afghans have known nothing but war, poverty, insecurity, terrorism, drugs and refugee movements. Millions of Afghans have suffered appalling privations, but their resilience has been extraordinary, and the Government are determined to help make the future better than the past.
We have a responsibility to help, but we also have a direct national interest in doing so. In the first place, we want the Bonn agreement to succeed. The early signs have been extremely encouraging. In particular, we welcome the way in which Chairman Karzai and his fellow interim Ministers are working energetically to provide effective administration. Over time, the Interim Administration should become increasingly broad-based and representative.
Secondly, we are trying to combat poverty. At the Tokyo conference, we announced an additional pledge of £200 million over five years on top of our earlier commitment of £60 million for humanitarian and emergency aid.
Thirdly, there is the problem of insecurity, which my hon. Friend highlighted extremely well. It is perhaps the most pressing and immediate problem. As is well known, the United Kingdom is leading the International Security and Assistance Force, which comprises more than 4,000 troops from 18 contributor nations, but what is less well known is that we have also begun training the new national army of Afghanistan, and provided communications equipment for use by the Kabul police.
Finally, we are considering ways of enabling Afghan refugees now living in Iran, Pakistan and elsewhere, as well as internally displaced persons, to return to their homes.
My hon. Friend rightly drew attention to the extremely worrying situation in Nepal, which I also visited last week. Britain and Nepal have extremely long-standing ties. The Gurkha relationship, and in particular the exceptionally high standing in which these brave Nepalese soldiers are held in the United Kingdom, is an important mainstay.
Britain supports the democratically elected Government of Nepal and recognises the right and obligation of that Government to provide security for their people. We want to offer our full support to the Government of Nepal in their attempts to find a resolution to the Maoist insurgency, and we are actively considering extra ways in which we can do that. The European Union has condemned the Maoist attacks, which brought a violent return to conflict in Nepal, and expressed concern about possible abuses of human rights in the country, including quite barbaric acts by the insurgents.
We believe that the Nepalese Government went to great lengths to ensure a conducive atmosphere for the three rounds of peace talks last year. We would encourage both sides to make every effort to achieve a solution that will result in the renunciation of violence and bring the Maoists back into the political mainstream; only then will Nepal achieve the prosperity that its people need and deserve.
687 Finally, I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Govan for drawing attention to the welcome news, emerging from Sri Lanka in the last week, that the Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have signed a formal agreement on the cessation of hostilities. We applaud the efforts of all the parties responsible for bringing that about. It is vital that they now build on this agreement and continue to make 688 progress towards a negotiated settlement that meets the aspirations of all communities in Sri Lanka. We fully support the Norwegian facilitation process, and we have made it clear to all concerned that the UK stands ready to help, if asked.
§ Question put and agreed to
§ Adjourned accordingly at sixteen minutes past Eleven o'clock.