Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, in rising to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper, may I point out that there is a misprint and that the word "free" should have appeared after the word "affairs" in the last line. It is a fairly obvious omission.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is the collective view of the European Community that sufficient progress has now been made in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe to justify holding a 35 nation Summit meeting; and whether they will give an assurance that it is the intention of the Community to withhold their agreement to any declaration which does not restate unequivocally the right of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe to hold free elections and conduct their national affairs from foreign interference or the threat of it.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, a decision has been taken in principle by all participants at Geneva that Stage III of the Conference should take place on 30th July, provided that the few outstanding issues can be quickly settled. It is the hope of all the members of the European Community that this date will shortly be confirmed. I cannot give the noble Lord the assurance he seeks. But all 35 participants will give their approval by consensus to a Final Act which will contain full and satisfactory statements of the principles of self-determination of peoples, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and non-intervention in the internal affairs of other States. These 1344 principles are to be applied throughout Europe and without reserve.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I am grateful for that reply. It is very welcome news, as another place was told on Tuesday, that the agreed Geneva text includes a flat rejection of the Brezhnev doctrine. May I ask how much value Her Majesty's Government attach to the Soviet promise to that effect?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the so-called Brezhnev doctrine has no validity in international law. Indeed, the statement of principle embodied in these agreements makes it clear that the Soviet Union, like every one of the 34 other States, are expected to implement this and other parts of the agreements conscientiously and thoroughly.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, does it make sense to go in for all this performance to come to an agreement which everybody knows the Soviets have not the least intention of executing?—and probably in our hearts we are grateful that they will not do so.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, not everybody has the same perception of knowledge and prophecy as has my noble friend. I think that all parts of the House, and all sections of the country, welcome the initiative taken by our predecessors to agree to a workmanlike agenda which has resulted in worthwhile achievements. We shall, of course, be watching to see how these are implemented, but any doubts we may have about how they may be implemented by one country or another should not prevent us from taking this initiative, grasping this opportunity and seeing how far it will go.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, do the Government believe that the rather general formulae, now apparently agreed for acceptance at the Summit conference in Helsinki at the end of July, will promote an atmosphere in which real progress will be made at the even more important conference on mutual and balanced force reductions?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I very much welcome that intervention. It it true that we may hope that the conclusion of these agreements 1345 may help the even more important discussions in Vienna on mutual force reductions and—who knows?—may create an atmosphere which affects further success of the SALT talks.
§ Lord BALNIELMy Lords, while that may be the Minister's hope, is it not a fact to be seriously noted that while the Russians, for an exceedingly long time, have been calling for a security conference and it is now to result in a Summit meeting, the much more important mutual and balanced force reduction discussions which the Western World has been wanting for a long time have made absolutely no progress whatsoever so far?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I would not say they have made absolutely no progress, but I agree that the progress so far has been disappointing. As the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn, reminded us, this is an even more important field of discussion than that at Geneva. This is no reason—and I am sure the noble Lord will agree—why we should not persist, as we have done for nearly two years in Vienna, to seek an acceptable, workable measure of force reductions in Europe.