§ 11.17 a.m.
§ LORD MILFORDMy 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 why, since they refuse to urge President Nixon to stop the bombing in 1665 Vietnam in which dykes, crops, water supplies, forests are being destroyed and the soil may be made sterile for years, they take part in any conference on the subject of pollution.
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)My Lords, all wars involve destruction of the environment. The North Vietnamese themselves caused great destruction in Indo-China. So long as they are unwilling to negotiate an end to the war, it will continue with consequent effects on the environment. Consideration of these pressing issues should not be delayed by linking them to disputes which are essentially political in origin.
§ LORD MILFORDMy Lords, once again I am not satisfied by the reply of the noble Baroness. I should like to ask whether Her Majesty's Government are aware that the Third World and a vast majority of the world's population consider that all these new, atrocious modern weapons of pollution have been and are being tried out against coloured people, and consider that they would never have been used against the white community. Is the noble Baroness also aware that Her Majesty's Government, a signatory to the Geneva Agreement, by refusing to criticise or condemn these acts, are in fact condoning such gross perversion of Western science?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, so far as the first part of the noble Lord's question is concerned, that is a question of opinion with which I do not in any way agree. The fact remains that the North Vietnamese restarted the war and of course the Americans have replied. But the fact is, as I said to the noble Lord the other day, the United States have put forward some very constructive proposals for the Paris talks and, so far as our responsibility is concerned, we have over and over again asked the Soviet Union, as co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference, to help us to reconvene the Conference.
§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEKMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that some of us, whatever political opinions we may 1666 have, believe that mankind seems to be trapped by the disruptive weapons which are now being used without knowledge of their consequences? Is the noble Baroness—whose heart is as kind as the heart of anyone in this House—aware that the environment and the use of the Far East for this kind of bombing and the explosion of the hydrogen bomb is something that is being added up by Oriental man? Will the noble Baroness now assure us that the Foreign Office will, to the best of its ability—and I know its difficulty—throw its voice on the side of common sense and human understanding in this terrible war, whatever attitude one may take, which has been going on for over thirty years? Will she remember the famous phrase, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?"—"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Why pretend that we are Christians with this going on?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, all noble Lords would regret any war of any character anywhere. I would remind the House of the proposals put forward on May 8 by President Nixon for discussion, to which the North Vietnamese have not yet responded. They were, first, that all American prisoners of war must be returned ; secondly, that there must be an internationally supervised cease-fire throughout Indo-China ; and, thirdly, that once prisoners of war are released and an internationally cease-fire has begun, the United States will proceed with the complete withdrawal of all American Forces from Vietnam within four months.
§ LORD SEGALWill Her Majesty's Government ask the North Vietnamese Government, through the available diplomatic channels, what their troops are doing on the wrong side of the demilitarised zone, and why this stupid fighting has to continue in order to inflict on the reluctant and long-suffering South Vietnamese the doubtful benefits of a Communist régime? Why do they not withdraw to their own side of the demilitarised zone, as the Communists have had the good sense to do in Korea, instead of creating more and more pitiful refugees in South Vietnam? Surely this is an urgent humanitarian question in which Her Majesty's Government ought now to intervene.
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEI entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Segal. It is because the North Vietnamese pushed South over the demilitarised zone that the United States Government felt bound to reply on behalf of the South Vietnamese. So far as our responsibilities are concerned, we have on several occasions, and quite recently, asked Mr. Gromyko whether he would reconvene the Geneva Conference. That was the best we could do in the circumstances.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, returning to the Question on the Order Paper, while considering the Government entirely right to continue to attend Conferences on the subject of pollution, and while some people may have thought that at one tine this type of warfare, particularly chemical warfare and the bombing of dykes was more humane than the bombing of human beings, will the noble Baroness, who has not been as forthcoming as she usually is on these occasions, bear in mind that there is the very deepest concern in this country not only with regard to the present damage but with regard to the long and continuing effect? There will be heavy deaths even when peace is established. Could this be conveyed to the United States Government through any unofficial channel which the noble Baroness can find?
§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEKFair enough.
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, I have sought to be as forthcoming as possible in order to explain the situation. The United States have said that they would not bomb dykes deliberately, although they could possibly do some incidental damage. United States officials have pointed out that to make any substantial impact on a dyke an aircraft would have to drop 2,000-lb. bombs literally on top of each other. Of course, they are now using only 500-lb. bombs. So far as our general attitude towards the environment, to which the noble Lord quite rightly draws attention, is concerned, we welcomed the Declaration on the Human Environment at Stockholm which was adopted by acclamation.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, leaving aside, with some self-discipline, the 1668 rights or wrongs of the war, and bearing in mind that in every war there is inevitably pollution, may I ask whether any new methods are now being used in Vietnam not merely to destroy life but to create vast areas of defoliation by chemicals and even to control the weather? Would Her Majesty's Government support the proposals made recently at Geneva by the Conference on methods of war in order that there may be a new look at all of these issues?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, we ourselves put forward at the Conference on Chemical Weapons in Geneva a paper which sought to distinguish the worst of these weapons of mass destruction, and we are doing our very best in that area.
§ LORD MILFORDMy Lords, I got side-tracked by the noble Baroness from pollution to the peace terms. As she mentioned the peace terms of President Nixon, may I ask whether it is not true that the North Vietnamese have also put forward peace proposals which many people consider to be absolutely legitimate and fair? Secondly, in what war have prisoners been returned before peace has been established? Why are the Americans insisting on the return of prisoners first?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, I think it is for the humanitarian reasons which the noble Lord has so very much at heart. If the North Vietnamese would respond to the peace proposals, which I have read out, the American President has undertaken to remove all forces within four months. I should have thought that that is the best possible hope of getting some peaceful solution.
§ LORD PLATTMy Lords, is the noble Baroness telling us that the United States, which uses napalm bombs, is influenced by humanitarian considerations?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, the North Vietnamese themselves have used terrible weapons of destruction. It is therefore not surprising that modern weapons of the same character are used by the Americans. Most certainly the Americans would not have put these peace proposals forward or shown concern about their prisoners of war, their own nationals, 1669 unless they indeed had their future at heart.
§ LORD MILFORDMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that napalm bombs were used before this war—by the Americans in Korea?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, I thought the Question referred particularly to the Vietnam war.
§ LORD BALOGHMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that an American General conducted his own private warfare long before the North Vietnamese attacked over the demilitarised zone ; that this has been discussed in the American Senate and he has been interrogated? Why does that not figure in the noble Baroness's answer?
§ BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIEMy Lords, if one returns to the Question on the Order Paper one will see that I was asked in particular about bombing in Vietnam and about our taking part in discussions on the subject of pollution. I pointed out that were the North Vietnamese to agree even to discuss the proposals put forward by President Nixon the war would end very shortly.