FORMOSA (Hansard, 20 December 1954)

§ LORD HENDERSON
My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE MARQUESS OF READING)
My Lords, the answer to the noble Lord's question is, No. Her Majesty's Government are anxious to see the fighting in the area brought to an end. As my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary said in another place on December 8, we have urged on all concerned the dangers of fighting, the importance of lowering tension and the need to avoid precipitate action.

§ LORD HENDERSON
My Lords, I welcome the answer given by the noble Marquess. Arising out of it, I should like to ask two questions. The first is whether there is any international instrument implementing the Cairo Declaration and, if not, what is the present international status of Formosa; and the second is whether Her Majesty's Government 511 have any obligations to defend Formosa other than those which may be inherent in loyalty to the United Nations Charter.

THE MARQUESS OF READING
In answer to the first part of the noble Lord's first supplementary question, I would say that no such international instrument exists. As regards the second part, the position of Formosa is some what difficult in international law. The situation is that the Japanese Government renounced sovereignty over it but we do not regard it as forming part of China. The exact position is highly technical and, if I may say so, not very suitable for discussion in this way. As regards the second question, whether Her Majesty's Government have any obligation to defend Formosa, the answer is that they have no obligation other than that arising out of their membership of the United Nations.

§ EARL JOWITT
My Lords, whilst welcoming the statement of the noble Marquess, does he not think that it is undesirable that Ministers should give speculative answers to questions concerning foreign policy based on hypothetical circumstances?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
I think I see what is in the mind of the noble and learned Earl, but I believe that what my right honourable friend the other Minister of State said does not substantially differ from anything that I have said to-day.

§ LORD HENDERSON
But may I ask the noble Marquess whether he is aware that his colleague referred to Formosa as a member of the United Nations, and that is certainly not true in fact?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
I have stated what I believe to be the view today. As I have said, it is a difficult and delicate question.

§ VISCOUNT STANSGATE
My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess two questions?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
Please do.

§ VISCOUNT STANSGATE
First, when he says there is no change of policy, does he mean that Mr. Nutting's statement represented the Government policy? That 512 is the first question. The second question is: when he says there is no instrument implementing the Cairo Declaration, does he not regard a public statement signed by our Prime Minister, that the island would be restored to the Republic of China, as being an international obligation?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
As regards the first question asked by the noble Viscount, I do not think that anything my right honourable friend has said purported to announce a change of policy. I have stated what I believe to be the policy of Her Majesty's Government in general terms to-day, and it is better at this moment left in general terms. I was asked a question whether there was any international instrument carrying out the terms of the Treaty. I replied that there was not, and there is not.

§ VISCOUNT STANSGATE
Does the noble Marquess allege that Mr. Nutting's statement represented Government policy, tel quel? That is the first question. The second question is: does the noble Marquess regard the Cairo Declaration as existing as an obligation of this country?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
It is possible to take different views as to the exact construction to be put on the statement that my right honourable friend made. I have given what I understand to be the Government policy in this matter, and I do not think I can usefully carry the matter beyond that. As regards the other question, I know that the Cairo Declaration came into being. What I was asked was whether there was an instrument—I think that was what was in the noble Viscount's mind—putting into force what was decided; and I said that there was not.

§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH
My Lords, in view of the earlier answer being given by the noble Marquess, may I ask whether the Government's view is that the United States action in relation to Formosa in general is right and that they are committed now to the defence of Formosa as such? The Government apparently regard it as not being any longer a part of Chinese territory. To whom are we committed, and are we committed in any way to supporting the United States in any defensive action that they may take?

THE MARQUESS OF READING
If I may say so with respect, I thought that I had answered that point in replying to the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Henderson. He asked me whether we had any obligation for the defence of Formosa other than that arising from our membership of the United Nations. I said that the view of the Government was that we had no such obligation. When the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, put his question and spoke about "obligations," I am not sure whether he was talking about our obligations or the United States obligations. The United States, as the noble Viscount knows, have recently entered into certain arrangements with the Chinese Nationalists which are the subject of a Treaty; but we, of course, are in no way a panty to that Treaty.

§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH
I am much obliged for the last statement, because when the announcement was made in the United States by the colleague of the noble Marquess, China apparently felt that it meant that we were already implicated behind the United States. I am much obliged for the last statement.

THE MARQUESS OF READING
I do not think that it could have been made clearer, it the time when the announcement of this Treaty was made, that Her Majesty's Government were not a party in any way to the Treaty. That was stated plainly then, and it has been stated time and again since. I hope that, if anybody was under any delusion on the subject, we have been able to remove it.