§ 2.46 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have sought positive assurances from the Soviet and Czechosolvak Governments that they will cease persecuting members of monitoring groups and other individuals who draw public attention to breaches of the promises made about human rights and personal freedom by their Governments at the Helsinki Conference; and, if so, with what results.
747§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, the British delegation at the Belgrade meeting is pressing strongly for the inclusion of appropriate wording in the concluding document which is now under discussion at Belgrade, endorsing the principle that organisations and individuals have a clear role in the implementation of the Helsinki Final Act. If this could be achieved it would be a big step forward in the direction desired by the noble Lord.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I am very grateful indeed for that encouraging and forthcoming reply. May I ask whether the noble Lord thinks it doubly important that this should be done, bearing in mind that all the original signatories of Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia, and many leading citizens in the Soviet Union and several other Warsaw bloc countries, have been imprisoned or forced into exile? That is of course totally contrary to the letter and spirit of the Helsinki Agreement where human rights are concerned.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, certainly the noble Lord reinforces the views put forward by the British delegation at Belgrade. It would be extremely unfortunate and might have serious consequences on détente itself if certain prosecutions or persecutions were engaged in during the session in Belgrade or after it. We have made this view very clear to all Governments who might be concerned.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister this, while passionately agreeing with the purpose of the Question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood: Is it not the case that we are more likely to influence the situation in the Soviet Union by the kind of persuasion that has been expressed by the British delegation at Belgrade than by aggressive confrontation? For example, is not this shown by the decision of the Soviet Union to lift the ban on BBC broadcasting in the Soviet Union? Are there not many other issues which were raised at Belgrade which are being satisfactorily progressed which might be prejudiced if an attitude of abrasive confrontation were taken?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, my Lords. I am quite sure that my noble friend is right when he says that the technique and tone of discussion in Belgrade was rightly one of non-confrontation, however robust it was in defence and in the promotion of the rights and purposes that we all have at heart. I agree entirely with him that, in expressing our disappointment at the meagre progress made in certain directions so far in these exchanges, we must not lose sight of certain advances which have been made. He has instanced one or two this afternoon.
§ Baroness GAITSKELLMy Lords, may I ask the Minister this: Is it not true to say that abrasive confrontation is part of the Soviet propaganda and not part of our propaganda at all? Would the Minister not agree that certainly in the United Nations—from where I have just returned—this is definitely so? I might add that we keep too low a profile on these matters.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, this is, in the end, a matter of judgment. I think it is within the recollection of the House that, in the last two years or so leading up to the meetings in Belgrade, I have constantly stated on behalf of Her Majesty's Government that it was our intention, which we have carried out—but there are deeper feelings, as evinced by my noble friend—to present solid argumentation, rather than engage in sterile polemics. That attitude was progressively and comprehensively accepted by our friends and allies in the Nine, and was faithfully carried out by them. So it is a fair consensus of view in Western democracy that this is the right way to go about this kind of conference. We shall see what comes out finally from the conference. We shall not accept a purely cosmetic document. We shall insist on there being a substantive, concluding document and we are working on that now. But we shall see what comes out of it, and look forward, possibly, to a continuing discussion and another meeting of the Belgrade type in some other venue in, perhaps, two years' time, with constant work in the interim on these grave and very difficult, but fundamentally important, matters.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, would the Minister agree that there has been a 749 slight movement in the right direction in Eastern European countries? Perhaps the Minister will allow me to inform him of a visit of young Conservatives in the Federation of Conservative Students, who were recently given the podium at a youth meeting in Budapest where their speeches were very much welcomed. Would the Minister encourage this kind of activity among youth movements, where so much good work can be done?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, my Lords. Indeed, I very much welcome the contribution of young Conservatives to European détente. I am sure that, in so doing, nobody would wish to accuse the young Conservatives of bearing a low profile, of being less enthusiastic than the rest of us on behalf of human rights, or less critical than the rest of us of the enormities of totalitarian systems. I very much welcome that information and I wish them well in the future, if I may recoin a judicial phrase. On the fundamental importance of the noble Baroness's supplementary question, which is an extremely prescient one, it is undoubtedly a fact that the mere holding of this kind of European conference yields dividends for the West. This is a democratic process and therefore must support democracy. To get totalitarians—and I am not mincing words—to a democratic process of discussion, even though we do not emerge with major agreement, is in itself of historic importance and we must not underestimate it.
I repeat what I said in reply to my noble friend. It is absolutely vital that we maintain a posture—one may like to call it a low profile—of democratic argumentation, rather than one of special propagandist pleading, because we are addressing ourselves not only to systems and Governments which are basically unwilling to come to agreement with us, but also to an element in the world and in Europe—the neutral and non-aligned. As I see it, this is the second great gain for the democractic West from what has happened in Belgrade; that is, that there has been an increasing accord between the Western democratic nations and the nations of the neutral and non-aligned world. That is a very great gain indeed.
§ Lord BETHELLMy Lords, is the Minister aware of the great satisfaction 750 that will be felt at the fact that the British Government have taken the initiative in Belgrade, and proposed amendments to the Final Act which will give the right to groups and individuals to monitor the Final Act? This is a very great step forward. Will the Minister, though, bear in mind that, whatever the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, says, outspokenness on human rights has its place in relations between the East and the West, as well as in behind the scenes diplomacy? Does he not agree that it would be very difficult, for instance, for us in Britain to see the Helsinki Agreement as having very much of a future, so long as individuals such as Anatoli Sharansky, Yuri Orlov and Alexander Ginsburg, who are in prison for the only crime of trying to monitor the Final Act, remain in prison and are put on trial for this so-called crime?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I take once more the opportunity, on behalf not only of this side of the House but of Her Majesty's Government, of denouncing and deploring profoundly any legal or quasi-legal action against the kind of dissidence that the noble Lord has mentioned. I say that again. As to being outspoken, there is a time and a place for being outspoken, and I am sure that advice is hardly necessary to be handed to my noble friend who is always outspoken, who has been as outspoken as any of us about infringements of basic human rights wherever they occur, and who has a splendid record of active protest against these enormities, whether in the East or in the West.
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, in view of the noble Lord's earlier reply, in which he somewhat widened the Question to include the non-aligned world, and, again, in view of the last question, may I ask him whether Her Majesty's Government will do something to give a lead to try to bring an end to the fearful hypocrisy and double standards in judging human rights which are applied in the United Nations and elsewhere?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, indeed, my Lords, This is a continuing concern, and we should welcome every help from any quarter in order to evolve a sustainable, consistent and practical policy. I have said more than once that we find ourselves obliged—and I think 751 that this would apply to any Government—to apply principle and practice case by case, country by country. There is a shifting sand of basic performance by countries and systems which overtakes even the most clear-cut governmental decision as to policy, and it is a continuing matter to restore, to refurbish, our policy in this regard. May I take advantage of what the noble Lord has said and say that I fundamentally agree with him, and also may I add to what I said to the House in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Bethell. We have taken the initiative in some 20 amendments during the Belgrade meeting, and I mean that the British initiative has been very marked indeed. There have been other amendments which we did not feel we could support, but 20 very important amendments owe very much to the activity of the permanent British delegation, so ably led by Ambassador Parsons, and among those initiatives are some designed to further the purpose of the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood, this afternoon.