§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they can confirm the statement in The Times that the British Ambassador (among others) walked out of a Moscow diplomatic dinner party because he was asked to occupy the same table as the Communist Chinese and East German Ambassadors.]
THE MARQUESS OF READINGMy Lords, I can confirm that Her Majesty's Ambassador in Moscow, and his Western colleagues, left the dinner party to which they had been invited by the Burmese Ambassador on October 19 before dinner was served. This was because Sir William Hayter found on arrival that representatives of States which Her Majesty's Government do not recognise, including the Ambassadors of the so-called German Democratic and Korean People's Republics had, unbeknown to him, also been invited.
The Ambassador was given no warning that the party was to be other than a 567 small, informal gathering and, in particular, he was not informed that the Soviet Minister for Foreign Affairs would be present. As the noble Viscount will know, Moscow has its own traditions and ways of life. There are complicated relationships between the various Embassies and Ambassadors have to use their discretion in the peculiar local circumstances about their attendance at diplomatic functions. On this occasion the Western Ambassadors had to take a decision on the spur of the moment and they decided to extricate themselves from the embarrassing position in which they had been placed.
In the circumstances in which they found themselves, I consider that the decision which Her Majesty's Ambassador and his Western colleagues took to leave this party was a correct one. Sir William Hayter's decision was not, of course, connected with the presence of the Chinese Ambassador at this dinner party since, as the noble Viscount well knows, Her Majesty's Government recognise the Chinese Government. Nor, needless to say, was there any question of discourtesy towards the Soviet Foreign Minister who, unknown in advance to the Western Ambassadors, was also a guest at this function. Her Majesty's Ambassador and his Western colleagues have in fact informed Mr. Molotov that they regretted the embarrassment which had been caused, explaining that the Burmese Ambassador had not told them whom he intended to invite.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, I should like to ask the noble Marquess one or two questions. The first is this. This happening amounted to an affront to the Burmese Ambassador. Has any expression of regret been made to him? Mr. Maung Onh, who is well known in this country, is a warm friend of our country. I am told that the meeting, in fact, covered all the diplomatic corps in Moscow. That being so, is the complaint suggested in the noble Marquess's answer justified; and if not, would it not be well to express to the Burmese Ambassador some regret for this unfortunate occurrence? Secondly, inasmuch as The Times said that our Ambassador left because of the presence of the Chinese Communist Ambassador, as he was called, and the East German Ambassador, would it not be well for it to 568 be made clear that the presence of the Chinese Ambassador had nothing whatever to do with the withdrawal or boycott by the seven Western members?
THE MARQUESS OF READINGMy Lords, as regards the position of the Burmese Ambassador, it may be that the invitation that he extended, in those circumstances, was done in all good faith; but he did put Her Majesty's Ambassador and the other Ambassadors in an extremely difficult situation from which, as I have explained, they felt obliged to extricate themselves in the way that they did. No expression of regret to the Burmese Ambassador has been presented, nor, so far as I know, has any expression of regret been received from him for the difficult position in which he placed the Western members. As regards the second part, I cannot be responsible for what The Times newspaper may have stated in this context. I have given the noble Viscount so far as I know them the facts, and I hope that they will obtain the necessary publicity.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, I am glad to hear the noble Marquess say that the invitation may have been extended in all good faith. I met the Burmese Ambassador in Moscow about a fortnight ago, in the British Embassy there, and I knew him for several years when he was in London. Would the noble Marquess be willing to accept my assurance that this invitation was not deliberately intended as an act of discourtesy towards the British Ambassador or any of the Western Ambassadors?
THE MARQUESS OF READINGMy Lords, I also have known the particular Ambassador in question for some years from the time when he was here. I did not suggest that it was an act of deliberate discourtesy. It might have been an unwise step. But really I think we should do very much better in the interests of all concerned if we left it at that point.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEIt is obvious from what the noble Marquess has said that some difficulty will arise. On Saturday we are to sign a Convention excluding all association with the representatives of the Eastern German State. Will the noble Marquess in due course be willing to give some public explanation of what parties may or may not be attended by our representatives and by representatives 569 of the Houses of Parliament? Because he will see that, especially in Asia, if the presence of the East Germans or certain others is a reason for boycotting or withdrawing from a party, it will make any progress with the possibility of friendship and co-existence impossible.
THE MARQUESS OF READINGI think the noble Viscount has stated his case in wide terms. I should not be prepared to take the responsibility of laying down any sort of hard and fast code, because I think circumstances vary in different cases and in different places. It must be left to the good sense of the persons on the spot to decide what is the correct procedure to take.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEAre we to understand, therefore, that the protocol is at variance with the policy of the country—namely, that we should try and act in a friendly manner towards these countries?
THE MARQUESS OF READINGWe are prepared to try to act in a friendly manner towards countries, but what we cannot do is to put ourselves in the position of seeming to recognise representatives of countries which we in fact do not recognise from the official angle.
§ VISCOUNT HAILSHAMIs my noble friend aware that Her Majesty's Ambassador in Moscow at any rate commands the respect and support of a great number of people in this country?