§ 3.18 p.m.
§ LORD BARNBYMy 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, since it would appear that relations between India and Pakistan may well lead to a situation likely to 392 endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, they intend to instruct their representative at the United Nations to press for United Nations intervention.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN)No, my Lords, I do not think that such action would be justified or would bring any benefit to those suffering in East Pakistan or to the refugees.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, arising out of that reply and in view of the fact that this Question was necessarily, because of the Recess, put down over three weeks ago and that since then there has been a change from vicious military repression resulting in loss of life to the present time when we are under great compassion for a heartbreaking epidemic, does it not seem that some action might have saved the loss of life? Could the noble Marquess give some clarification of the instructions to our representative at the United Nations as to what action the United Nations should take with regard to the denunciation of similar action or of the action itself?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I appreciate that my noble friend's Question has been to some extent overtaken by events, but it is the opinion of my right honourable friend, as I explained in a Statement the other day. that any action to bring in the United Nations should emanate either from India or from Pakistan; that is to say, on a political basis. As my noble friend knows, the United Nations are now heavily involved on the relief side and the High Commissioner for Refugees has himself been appointed co-ordinator on relief work in that area.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, does the noble Marquess not agree that this problem of what is happening in East Pakistan is one for which we in this country hold a great historical responsibility, and that we are therefore under an obligation to see that the best efforts are made? The tragedy, as I think the noble Marquess will agree, is now becoming of an order of magnitude far greater than was imagined some weeks ago, and surely the United Nations alone can help solve this? Will he not agree that the 393 problem is now one which is beyond the capabilities either of the Pakistani Government or the Indian Government to cope with?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think it depends. If you are referring to the relief question this is true, and that is why the United Nations have become involved. So far as the political settlement is concerned (which is, I think, fundamental to the solution of the problem) this must be a matter for the Pakistani Government. I can assure the noble Lord that my right honourable friend has been using his best endeavours with the Pakistani Government to try to persuade them to come to a suitable political settlement.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, since the noble Marquess was unable to, or did not, answer my first supplementary question, can he now give me some answer to it—how it came about that there was no denunciation from our representative of what appears to be a vicious loss of life by military action?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think the answer to that question is that Her Majesty's Government—I am sure quite correctly—feel that at this time this was purely an internal matter.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, in respect both of the natural disaster a few months ago and also the more recent disaster, has not Britain done very much more than any other country in the world?
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, is the noble Marquess aware that many of us are not only disappointed but also surprised by the Answer which has been given, in view of what the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs said in another place yesterday? Does he appreciate that this Question is not concerned with relief, which may be a matter for India and Pakistan? Is it not a fact that this Question refers to the maintenance of international peace and security? And is not that a matter for all Governments and not only the Governments of India and Pakistan?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANCertainly, my Lords; matters of peace and security concern every country in the 394 world. But if this matter is to be raised in the Security Council, as my right honourable friend said in our view it must be raised either by India or by Pakistan; and it does not appear that they propose to do so at present.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, will Her Majesty's Government see that nothing is done to exacerbate relations between India and Pakistan; and will they use their utmost influence to see that this problem is approached by both those countries entirely on a humanitarian basis?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: Certainly, my Lords.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, do I understand that it is the view of the Government that this is not a situation capable of endangering the maintenance of international peace and security?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, it is the Government's view that this is a situation which is very grave. We do not consider at the moment that it has got to a stage where, as my noble friend thinks, it might endanger peace and security. I feel certain that if the latter were the case, either the Government of India or the Government of Pakistan would be the first to approach the United Nations on the matter.
§ LORD GEORGE-BROWNMy Lords, this is what bothers me about what the noble Marquess, Lord Lothian, has been saying, and I think I am wholly in tune with the noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury. If it is a situation—
§ SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Ask a question!
§ LORD GEORGE-BROWNMy Lords, I will try to frame my remarks as a question. If the situation is one which is going to endanger the peace of the world, the last two countries who will raise it will be India and Pakistan. May I ask the noble Marquess, therefore, whether we should not look at our experience in the Middle East? We, Britain, had to raise the question there, because neither Israel nor any one of the Arab States would. Does not the noble Marquess agree with me, or with his noble friend, that the fact that neither India nor Pakistan wishes to raise it does not make 395 it an issue not affecting world peace, and that maybe one of us ought to step in?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I am the last person to want to disagree with the noble Lord, Lord George-Brown, in view of his experience in these matters and I think that he is on to an important point; as, indeed, was my noble friend Lord Salisbury. We do not consider, though, that the situation has got to that stage at the moment. We are trying to use our best endeavours to persuade the Pakistani Government to come to a political settlement in their own country, at the same time, of course, as the relief operation goes on.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I am sorry to press this matter, but is it not the case that this is not only an issue for India and Pakistan; that in the background there are the interests both of the Soviet Union and also of China, and that this area lies in a very dangerous situation in South-East Asia? In those circumstances, is it not desirable that Her Majesty's Government should not wait until a crisis has arisen but should forestall it by taking this issue to the Security Council?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANWell, my Lords, I think the noble Lord will agree that we must judge for ourselves as to the possibilities that he has in mind; and of course we all have them in mind. But I am afraid that I cannot add to what I have said.