§ 2.39 p.m.
§ LORD HENDERSONMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the following Question, of which I have given Private Notice: Whether Her Majesty's Government have any statement to make on the situation in Laos?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (THE EARL OF HOME)My Lords, the Royal Laotian Government forces, who retreated from Nam Tha, have retired in disorder and a large number have entered Thailand. Communist forces are known to have followed them for some 40 miles, but it is not yet clear whether they are pressing this advance. A dangerous situation has been created by this breach of the ceasefire. Her Majesty's Ambassador in Moscow tried to persuade the Soviet Government to restrain the Communist forces and to agree to immediate action by the International Control Commission to establish the facts of the situation and restore the cease-fire. The Soviet Government has not agreed to such action.
Prince Souvanna Phouma will return to Laos on May 19 to take charge of the situation in the Plain of Jars. I hope that on his return all parties can be persuaded to attend a very early meeting, as proposed by Prince Souvanna Phouma, in order to agree at last on the formation of a national Government.
§ LORD HENDERSONMy Lords, we are all very grateful to the noble Earl for his statement and we hope that the developments to which he has referred in the last sentence of his statement may lead to progress. I take it that if there are any fresh developments in the next day or two the noble Earl will keep the House informed. May I at the same time, ask him two supplementary questions? Is it the view of Her Majesty's Government that external efforts should be restricted to diplomatic intercession and that military intervention, which would almost certainly produce wider 526 international repercussions, should be avoided? My second supplementary is this: Is not the main problem the attainment of a political solution; that is, the creation of a coalition Government on the basis of national independence and neutrality and is not the chief stumbling block to this the intransigence of Prince Boun Oum?
THE EARL OF HOMEMy Lords, in answer to the first question which the noble Lord asked, I will certainly keep the House informed from day to day, because, as I have said, this could be a very dangerous situation. As we have all realised, I think, for a long time, this could involve the SEATO Alliance, on the one side, and the Communist Powers, on the other, and we have certain obligations under the SEATO Alliance of which the House is aware. All our efforts have been directed over the last year to achieving what the noble Lord wants; that is, a diplomatic and political settlement of the troubles. Indeed, the Geneva Conference was successful in that I think it has laid down the foundations on which a national Laotian Government could build. It has provided the framework, because it has made it possible, I think, for a Laotian national Government to agree to a situation in which there is no outside intervention at all from any external Power, in which there is a disbanding of the Laotian Army, and in which there is control of that disarmament—if you like so to call it—by an International Control Commission. So the Geneva Conference has in some sense done its work.
What we are waiting for, as the noble Lord said, is agreement between the three Princes in Laos, who should now be able to agree on the formation of a national Government. I should not like to apportion blame, but I think it is common knowledge that we believe that Prince Souvanna Phouma could form a national Government, and if that is done in the near future then I think we shall be through our troubles. But until that is achieved we have a very dangerous situation.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am sure that the Foreign Secretary knows that we have all been agreed about the situation, since the matter was raised two or three 527 times at the end of last year. We had all hoped from the reports at that time that the Soviet largely agreed with this policy of obtaining neutrality there. Has a reason been given by Moscow for their failure to fall in with the suggestion which was made to them?
LORD REAMy Lords, before the noble Earl replies, might I ask a small supplementary? I think he said that the Soviet Government has not agreed to action by the International Control Commission. Could that be interpreted as meaning that it has not yet agreed, or that it has indicated that it will not agree?
THE EARL OF HOMEMy Lords, I think I have to say that it was indicated that it would not agree. Nevertheless, although that may be the public position, I hope that the influence of the Soviet Union will be exerted to maintain the cease-fire. It is the breakdown of the cease-fire which has led to this very dangerous situation, and impatience with the Prince is, I am afraid, a very poor reason for breaking the cease-fire. Therefore, I hope that the Russians will, in fact, whatever they may say in public, exercise their influence to maintain the cease-fire, because I believe that it is of interest to all the external Powers that this situation in Laos should not flare up into a state in which the SEATO Alliance and the Communist Powers might be involved.