§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave 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 will withdraw their support for the Government of the U.S.A. in their military operations in Vietnam in view of (1) President Nixon's rejection of a peace-making coalition government in South Vietnam and (2) of the withdrawal of American representatives at the Paris Peace Talks; and whether they will take the initiative among the non-involved nations to bring about the maximum international pressure for a settlement of the war on the basis of the Geneva Agreements.]
THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND) COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (LORD SHEPHERD)No, my Lords. Our attitude towards American policy in Vietnam is not affected either by President Nixon's refusal to accept Communist demands to overthrow the legitimate Government of South Vietnam, or by the resignation of Mr. Cabot Lodge, for personal reasons, as leader of the U.S. delegation to the Paris talks. The Americans have already put forward proposals which would lead to a settlement based on the Geneva Agreements; progress can be expected when the other side agree to discuss them.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that Questions like this affecting the operations of the United States do great disservice to the relationship between Great Britain and the United States, particularly when, 1386 unlike Australia and New Zealand, we have no participation in the operation?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I do not think it is for me to answer that particular point. I think it is for the House itself to decide, but I feel sure the noble Lord, Lord Barnby, would agree that we are a democratic society.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether Her Majesty's Government are sensitive to the deep concern in this country about what is happening in the war in Vietnam and about the Government's support of America's role in it? Is not the deadlock in the Paris talks due to the fact that there has been concentration upon mutual withdrawal of troops rather than on the constructive proposal that there should be at Saigon a broad-based Coalition Government which could bring about a settlement on the basis of the Geneva Agreement?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, we are as sensitive to the horrors of Vietnam as any noble Lord or any person in this country. The noble Lord speaks of a broad-based Government, but we must recognise that the Government of South Vietnam is the legitimate and constitutional Government. The President and Vice-President have been elected. The Communists' demands for the Government to be arbitrarily and unconstitutionally replaced are unreasonable and unrealistic. The selection of the Government of South Vietnam is surely a matter for the South Vietnamese people.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, does the Minister recall that in country after country taken over by the Communists they have as a convenient step entered a Coalition Government? Are not those who advocate coalition with the Communists consciously or unconsciously furthering a Communist tyranny?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I would not say that that is necessarily so. I hope the noble Lord will appreciate that we have to live with the Communist societies and we must find some basis of living with them.
§ LORD GLADWYNMy Lords, although I well know the concern we all feel about this terrible problem, do the Government think that suggestions by the 1387 American Government as to how we should solve the Ulster problem would be acceptable to us, or do they conceivably feel that they might be counter-productive?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am not aware of the particular proposals; I may have been out of the country at the time. Clearly, on all problems we can all gain from advice given, but it depends upon what the advice is.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONMy Lords, would the noble Lord bear in mind that Ulster is a part of Great Britain and Vietnam is not a part the United States?
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, is my noble friend, as I am sure he is, prepared to look at the probable consequencies of what is happening in Vietnam? It it not a fact that this Government of incredulity now in Saigon, with the very influential opposition to it, may fail to be representative of the South Vietnamese people? And is it not desirable that every effort should be exerted to bring about a really representative Government of the South Vietnamese people, so that there may be free elections for such a Government?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, my noble friend must surely by now be aware of the views of Her Majesty's Government about the need for free elections in South Vietnam, and it is only in that way that we can in fact see that the South Vietnamese decide what Government they wish to have.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, when in history have the Communists been interested in free elections?
§ LORD GRIMSTON OF WESTBURYMy Lords, whilst this war has escalated in a terrible manner not foreseen, is it not a good thing to remind ourselves, and the various people who are now criticising the Americans, that they were, after all, invited in by the legally elected Government of South Vietnam to help defend themselves? I think that case was very well made by Mr. Stewart, the Foreign Secretary.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I would only say that this is Question 1388 Time and I try to provide information on a factual basis for question and answer. I have a suspicion that we are now moving into the realm of debate.