§ 2.47 p.m.
§ 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 what conclusions were reached by the Security Council of the United Nations on action to contribute to peace in the Middle East, following the reports by Dr. Waldheim and Dr. Jarring.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, the Security Council meeting on the Middle East is still in session. We hope that it will lead to progress towards a peaceful settlement in the Middle East based on Security Council Resolution 242 of November, 1967.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the Minister may I ask whether he would agree that the discussions so far have encouraged some hope; that both sides have said they are prepared to talk without prior conditions? Do Her Majesty's Government think that a new visit from Dr. Jarring, who alienated Israel, is the best way of dealing with this problem? Might not the other suggestion of a group of members of the Security Council beginning initiatives and negotiations be a better method?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I would agree that so far the atmosphere in the Security Council has been a good deal more friendly and helpful to the solution of this very difficult problem. It would be perhaps difficult for me to say to-day whether Dr. Jarring's mission is the best way, or not, of trying to reach an agreement. I should like to say, of course, that Her Majesty's Government are always willing to do their best to help in whatever may come out of the Security Council in the way of trying to find a solution to this difficult problem.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, does the Minister appreciate that it was not my intention to be critical of Dr. Jarring?—he has with quite extraordinary persistence sought peace there. But might I suggest to him that in the new situation—
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, might I ask him whether he would consider the suggestion that in the new situation it might be better to have a group representing the Security Council taking the initiative with the ultimate idea of renewing the Geneva Conference at which both sides could be present—in different rooms at first if they liked, but meeting together on the Rhodes model ultimately?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think we would all agree that if there is to be a lasting settlement of this problem there must in the end be negotiations, in one form or another, between the two parties. As I have said, if there is anything that Her Majesty's Government can do towards this end, we shall certainly do it.
§ LORD SHINWELLMy Lords, would not the noble Marquess agree that the best approach to a solution of the problem—I am not suggesting that there would be a solution—would be for the Arab countries to meet the Israeli Government across the conference table? Is it not obvious by now that no resolution passed by the Security Council will have the slightest effect? And if it is suggested —as it has been suggested—that the Israeli Government rejects Resolution 242, is the noble Marquess not aware (as the Foreign Office should be aware) 689 that this is not the first time that a resolution of the Security Council has been rejected? Will the noble Marquess recall the year 1947, when the Security Council resolution on partition was unanimously rejected by the Arab States?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think we must all hope that Resolution 242 will be adhered to by all the parties involved. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, that in the end, as I think I said before, there must be a negotiation, presumably across the table in the final analysis; but of course it must depend upon the willingness of both sides to do this.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, can the noble Marquess explain how Israel can ever be assured of having secure frontiers if insistance is made upon the word "withdrawal"?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANMy Lords, I think this is very much a matter which will have to be negotiated between the two parties concerned.