§ Baroness ELLESMy 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 through what diplomatic channels they intend to take action on the removal of Cuban troops from Angola.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, we have made clear from the outset, through diplomatic channels and publicly, our view that all foreign troops should be withdrawn from Angola. Naturally, we remain in the closest diplomatic contact with our friends and allies, both in Africa and the West, on all Southern African problems. We wish to develop relations of friendship and cooperation with Angola.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Now that the Cubans have achieved the objective of obtaining recognition and freedom for Angola, is it not time that Her Majesty's Government, together with other members of the EEC, and possibly the United States, took stronger measures against Cuban troops in order that they should be withdrawn either through economic, political or commercial measures or even through the international measures which have been available for some time in the United Nations?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the noble Baroness is suggesting what can only be described as an operation of the West in Africa in present conditions. I would strongly advise that that kind of sectional and possibly ideological intervention would not conduce to the stability and peace of 358 Southern Africa. I prefer the views, if I may say so frankly, wisely expressed on the media the other night by the noble Lord, Lord Home of the Hirsel. If there is intervention it must not be identified by African nationalism as a kind of recrudescence of Western imperialism. If there is any intervention it must be universal and is best considered in the context of the United Nations.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, is not this a little unrealistic? It is Cuban troops who have conquered Angola and are at present sending for their wives and families, and there is nothing we can do about it. Can the noble Lord tell us something about the negotiations which I gather we are at present undertaking in order to provide Mozambique with money which will enable them to hire some Cubans of their own?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, in my pursuit of reality under the tutelage of my noble friend, I should require some little time to disentangle the implications of that question. He raises important matters, as always. The part of the question that relates to Mozambique I think he would do better to put down as a separate Question on aid to Mozambique. On the question of the Cuban presence in Angola, we have made it abundantly clear, and will constantly do so, that while the Cubans may be there by invitation of the Government of that country, so far there is no invitation for them to enter any other country. If they did, a new and very serious situation would be created.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that those of us who think that double standards operate in these matters in the United Nations and in other international organisations also think that this does no credit to those organisations and makes it very difficult for those who wish to see them effective to be as enthusiastic as they should otherwise be?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am bound to agree with the noble Lord so far as any international organisations reflect double standards. He has in mind, of course, the possibility of the Secretary-General considering the facilities open to him under Article 99. I have no doubt that he is constantly 359 looking at the powers he has under that Article. I have no doubt also that this Secretary-General as well as his predecessors is, as they were, bound to consider whether intervention by the United Nations would be successful in terms of its acceptance by the countries in Southern and Central Africa immediately concerned. Those countries are, of course, not all extremist; a number of them, very important countries in Africa, are moderate and constructive.
§ Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLSMy Lords, if the noble Lord is using the noble Lord, Lord Home of the Hirsel, as part of his shield, may I say that there was nothing in Lord Home's broadcast (if we listened to the same broadcast) which said anything other than that it was dangerous and unsatisfactory for Cuban troops to remain in Angola.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I agree. I thought that it was a most constructive and satisfactory interview. I was particularly struck by the wisdom of his remarks about the need for careful thought when we consider intervention in Southern and Central Africa.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is not Cuba a member of the United Nations; and, if so, is it not remarkable that the United Nations have not made any protest?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSCertainly, my Lords. The United Nations, whether under the Article which enables the Security Council to move or whether under the Article to which the noble Lord and I referred in our recent exchange, must have regard to the acceptability of such an initiative among the countries immediately concerned. It is no good proceeding "cold" in these matters and finding that even a United Nations' initiative is faced by a quite sudden but real opposition from the Continent itself.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, would the Minister agree that the last part of my question referred to the use of international machinery at the United Nations? Is it not rather remarkable that a unanimous resolution can be passed by the Security Council to give aid to Mozambique, but the British Representative 360 is unable to table any resolution regarding Cuban troops?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSNo, it is not, my Lords. The United Nations must be understood to be an instrument of international action which still rests, rightly or wrongly, on a sufficiency of acceptability for what moves it decides on. I was asked just now whether there were double standards. Double standards arise when resolutions are moved and passed and some of them are not acceptable to all the Members of the United Nations. This is not so far, I regret to say, a world authority which can take initiatives with a strength that national authorities have. It must always feel its way and see how many of its own members will uphold it in its own decisions.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, could my noble friend explain what is the special interest of Cuba in Angola, and why Cuban troops were sent there in the first place?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSNo, my Lords, I could not explain with any authority the intracacies of Cuban foreign policy. We have our own thoughts about this, and we have our own statements and actions to take. We have, since the fighting became obviously international, made it very clear on our own account, through the Community which joined us in this and through the Commonwealth, where we stand: that there is no justification for the intervention—certainly militarily—of any one country in the affairs of another anywhere in the world.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, in answer to my noble friend the noble Lord came dangerously near, it seemed to me, to saying one should never raise anything in the United Nations unless it had a chance of success. Would he please deny that?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not think the noble Lord should edit my remarks. I said that the United Nations was the only world authority we have; it is nevertheless imperfect—and I regret to say this—and therefore must proceed by resolution and action entirely on a sufficiency of support for those actions by its own members.