KOREA (Hansard, 1 April 1953)

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF READING)

My Lords, with the leave of the House I desire to repeat for your Lordships' information a statement just made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister concerning the latest developments in regard to Korea. The text of the statement is as follows:

"Early in February my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary suggested to the United States Government the possibility of an appeal to the other side to agree to the immediate repatriation of seriously sick and wounded prisoners. He also put this idea to Commonwealth Governments. The House will recall that on the 23rd of February my right honourable friend announced the despatch, on the previous day, of a letter from the United Nations Commander-in-Chief to the opposing Commanders proposing the immediate repatriation of seriously sick and wounded.

"On the 28th of March the Chinese and North Korean Commanders agreed to General Mark Clark's proposal. They stated that in their view a settlement of this question, to quote their words, 'should be made to lead to the smooth settlement of the entire question of prisoners of war, thereby achieving an armistice in Korea.' 476 "Three days later General Clark proposed that liaison groups should meet at Panmunjom as soon as possible to make detailed arrangements for the exchange of sick and wounded prisoners. He, too, expressed the hope that this exchange would make more likely the smooth settlement of the entire prisoners of war question and declared himself ready to instruct his liaison group, as a second order of business, to arrange for the resumption of the armistice negotiations by the main Delegations.

"The House will recall that when the armistice negotiations were suspended on the 8th of October, General Harrison, the United Nations Command Delegate, announced that the United Nations would be ready to resume discussions at any time when the other side were prepared to accept one of the outstanding United Nations proposals or to put forward a constructive counter-proposal of their own. This situation now appears to have arisen. On the 30th of March Mr. Chou En-lai, the Chinese Prime Minister, suggested in a broadcast—I quote his words: 'that both parties to the negotiations should undertake to repatriate immediately after the cessation of hostilities all those prisoners of war in their custody who insist upon repatriation and to hand over the remaining prisoners of war to a neutral state so as to ensure a just solution to the question of their repatriation.' "This statement, so far as we can judge, does not run counter to the principles on which we have taken our stand on the prisoners of war question. Thus it seems to provide a basis on which the armistice negotiations can be usefully resumed.

"I venture to think that the wisdom and foresight with which my right honourable friend has sought to influence these events will commend itself to the House. On the 11th of November he addressed the General Assembly and stated the principles on which our stand was based. In brief these were that force should not be used to prevent or affect the return of prisoners. It has always been his view that the issue should and could be settled on these lines, which were afterwards embodied in the Indian plan and found acceptable by a large majority of the United Nations. The 477 formula now suggested by the Chinese Prime Minister appears not inconsistent with these principles.

"These developments, if not spoilt, certainly constitute a considerable event. They seem to offer a new hope for a solution of the prisoner of war difficulty and for a cessation of the fighting in Korea for which we and our Allies have striven so earnestly and so long. Many difficulties still remain to be resolved. We shall continue to try to overcome them with the same patience and caution and with the same insistence on basic principles on which we have relied throughout."