§ 3.8 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they and our EEC partners favour the recall of the Geneva Conference to seek a peaceful settlement in the Middle East; and if so what initiatives are being taken to this end.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, we and our EEC partners favour any negotiations, including the resumption of the Geneva Conference, which seem likely to help achieve the goal of a just and lasting settlement of the Middle East dispute, and we shall take whatever practical steps we can to assist in the peace-making process.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I am glad to hear that reply. May I ask the noble Lord whether he agrees that high hopes were raised in 1973 at the EEC Summit Conference when the Nine countries agreed to work as one,
for the full implementation of Security Council Resolution No. 242 in all its parts, taking into account also the legitimate rights of the Palestinians "?Arising out of that, may I ask two brief questions? First, is it the view of Her Majesty's Government that there should be no Geneva Conference unless there is Palestinian representation, not as refugees but as a national political entity? 731 Secondly, am I right in saying without any fear of contradiction that Resolution No. 242 requires that Israel should withdraw from 70 illegal settlements in Arab territory occupied since the 1967 war?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I think I can give substantial reassurance on all three points. As the noble Lord remarked, the European Community Summit meeting of 1973 remains the basis of the policy and attitude of the Nine on the Middle East question. The second reassurance is that Resolution No. 242, with Resolution No. 338, certainly remains the basis, as we and our partners see it, for a lasting and fair solution, and that of course in turn rests on the balance of assurance to Israel that it is recognised within secure boundaries and, on the other hand, of a restoration of territories taken in former conflicts. As to the third point the noble Lord raised, I can assure him that, while the question of participation in a Geneva or other type conference would be primarily a matter for the parties concerned, we would look for the widest possible participation and hope that everybody concerned would regard the question of participation with moderation and in a constructive way.
§ Lord WEIDENFELDMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that the Government should seek to use their influence to harmonise EEC policies with those of our American allies, who bear the brunt of the mediation, and, particularly on the question of participation, that the EEC backs the American position, which is against the participation of the PLO unless and until it adheres to Resolutions Nos. 242 and 338?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, we are, naturally, and have been, in very close touch with the United States on this important matter. Clearly the United States have a lead in the matter and we think it is right to support that lead. Having got a very substantial consensus on this question in the Nine, we naturally want to connect that consensus with a larger one involving the Americans and in particular the new American Administration. On the question of Palestinian participation, I revert to my answer to the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood: we would wish to see the fullest practical 732 participation, but I repeat that this primarily depends on the acceptability of suggestions to those primarily concerned. We will work to get proper representation, and that includes a possible Palestinian presence.
§ The Earl of ONSLOWMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware—I am sure that he is—that the long-term survival of Israel is based on one of two things: either on the consent of the Arab world in which it lives, or on the United States of America? Is the noble Lord further aware that the Israelis do not seem to understand this and also that the mood for peace in the Arab world is very much stronger than we may have thought? Will the noble Lord take into account what is going to happen at the Palestinian Conference on 12th March and encourage the moderate element among the Palestinians and, furthermore, urge the Israelis not to quote only the immoderate Palestinians but occasionally to listen to the moderate Palestinians? Will he also encourage the Israelis not to use the terrorist argument with all the blood that there is on the hands of Menachem Begin?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am sure that the House will agree that the terrorists are present in all Parties—and, thank Heaven! the moderates are present in all Parties as well. We must depend on the latter. However, the noble Earl has made some valid points and I am glad to agree with him that the prospect of moving to a peaceful solution appears to be better today than for some time past. We certainly agree that the lasting security of Israel and, indeed, of every other country in that troubled area depends upon indigenous consent rather than international sanction, although it may be that, for a considerable period, both must march together, and perhaps merge. As regards the noble Earl's final point about the conditions of peace, he will not expect me to argue the two sides at Question Time. We in this House have had some excellent debates which have gone into this matter and have aired the broadly Arab attitude and the broadly Israeli attitude.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, is not one of the basic difficulties that Resolution No. 242 regarding the evacuation of occupied territories is ambiguous and 733 always has been a difficulty? Is there any reason to suppose that the Nine are now agreed on the right interpretation of this resolution?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I think that most international documents are ambiguous in one respect or another; even legal documents have been known to be somewhat ambiguous when they deal with land. However, I do not think that there is an ambiguity here that would not be resolved by genuine negotiation. I am well aware of the point that the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn, has made, and I am quite sure that this will be among the very first and most important matters for negotiation.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, while I agree with my noble friend that it is highly essential that moderate people should come together, will he give an assurance that, unless and until there is a categorical statement by anyone who participates in the negotiations that they recognise Israel as a sovereign State, the negotiations will not be allowed to be used by the PLO so as to gain some kind of negotiating advantage in order to achieve their declared aim which is at present the destruction of Israel?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, as usual, my noble friend asks me to anticipate beyond the bounds of possibility. However, I take the central point he makes that, if we are to have a lasting fair and equitable agreement, a firm objective of any conference must be recognition of the Israeli State, internationally and regionally within firmly recognised and secure borders.