§ 3.10 p.m.
§ Lord BOSTON of FAVERSHAMMy 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 whether they will make a Statement about the progress of negotiations on the future of Namibia.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, my right honourable friend, the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary met the Foreign Ministers from the other four Western members of the Security Council in Paris on 14th June to discuss developments, particularly the Front-Line Presidents' meeting in Luanda on 10th and 11th June. We are in touch with all the parties involved and are resolved to resume discussions as soon as possible.
§ Lord BOSTON of FAVERSHAMMy Lords, while accepting that that report contains some welcome progress, may I ask whether my noble friend agrees that it is rather a pity that the South Africans should have chosen next week 1378 to go ahead with their plan for the registration of voters, just as SWAPO was on the point of resuming the talks? Does he feel that going ahead with that registration next week is likely to impede progress? So far as the resumption of talks by SWAPO is concerned, can my noble friend say whether their participation is to seek to renegotiate the terms of the proposed settlement, as has been reported, or to seek clarification of certain points, which would clearly be much more welcome? May I also ask whether those points include, in particular, Walvis Bay and the disposition of forces during the election period, and whether he thinks that progress is likely on those points?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the proposals of the five, as my noble friend knows, state that proper registration of voters will,
… have to be conducted to the satisfaction of the special representative";that is the special representative whom we expect will be appointed by the UN Secretary-General when he is authorised to do so by the Security Council. As to the point of clarification with the South-West African Peoples' Organisation, SWAPO, we are most ready to see them for reasons of clarification on any point that gives them concern. We appreciate, of course, that their concern is primarily addressed to the two points that my noble friend has mentioned: the location of the residual forces—some 1,500, as compared with the present presence of, I am told, between 20,000 and 30,000; and also the future of Walvis Bay. Certainly, I do not think that those two points—the question of the location of the residual forces and the future of Walvis Bay—should present insuperable difficulties to a final settlement.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, while welcoming the information from the Minister that SWAPO has resumed taking part in these talks, may I ask whether the Minister would confirm that the Government will in no way renege on the final terms which were negotiated between the five Western Powers in the United Nations Security Council and South Africa, whose Government accepted those terms? I should be grateful for this confirmation. I should also like to know whether the Government will seek to implement a 1379 satisfactory solution in the UN Security Council.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, my Lords, certainly. Regarding the last point, the sooner the Security Council discuss this question, the better we shall be pleased. As to the first two points, SWAPO have indicated that they are willing to resume discussions with the Five. I take it that they are particularly interested in clarification of the two points which we have mentioned this afternoon. There may be others. For our part, we are ready to meet them at any time. The South Africans have accepted the proposals. This is not, so far, the precise position of SWAPO. The South Africans have accepted the proposals, but there are, no doubt, certain reservations—I make no complaint about this—which SWAPO may consider to be deterrents to their own acceptance of the proposals. We hope that the Five can now get together everybody who is concerned in order to continue the discussions, certainly with regard to any points of clarification, and also to discuss practical steps to implement the executive action which is mapped out in the proposal of the Five—a copy of which I believe the noble Baroness already has, although I should be delighted to make my own copy available to her—and which I regard as a most workmanlike paper for a peaceful and expeditious transfer of sovereignty to an independent Namibia.
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend two questions? First, does he agree that it will facilitate negotiations if the South African Government desist from any further incursions into Angola against the SWAPO freedom fighters there? Secondly, what is the position of Her Majesty's Government so far as the question of Walvis Bay, an essential outlet for a future Namibia, is concerned?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, the House will know, of course, that we have made very clear our view of the South African raid on Kasinge. Indeed, we voted for the United Nations Resolution which denounced this action. I do not think that it will be repeated. Indeed, with the diminution of the South African military presence in South-West Africa—Namibia—the residual force 1380 will hardly be in a position, either locationally or in view of their strength, to repeat this piece of adventurism. Equally, I expect that the South African leaders will have learned the lesson that this kind of action is not to the advantage of anybody, least of all to the South African Republic. As to the second point that my noble friend made, I wonder whether he would be kind enough to repeat it for me.
§ Several noble Lords: Walvis Bay!
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, would my noble friend tell the House what is the position of Her Majesty's Government regarding Walvis Bay as a future outlet for an independent Namibia?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend, and in part to the rest of the House, for making it possible for me to be reminded. The fact is that occasionally one's handwriting runs ahead of one's mind. We take the view that Walvis Bay is part of Namibia. No doubt a declaration by all concerned in that sense would be very helpful. In any case, we think that SWAPO could, with advantage, accept the proposals of the Five and hand over the question of Walvis Bay to negotiation between an independent Namibia and South Africa after independence. I can see no contingency in the future in which Walvis Bay will not indeed be part of Namibia. This is inevitable. It is equitable. Let us do it in a way which enables the South Africans to co-operate with Namibia in a peaceful, orderly and productive transition of sovereignty.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, with regard to the first part of the last question which the noble Lord answered, instead of warning the South African Government against their security forces' incursions into Angola, would it not, in his judgment, be more effective if the Government, in negotiations with SWAPO, backed by Russia—although SWAPO have already said that they do not want to join in any discussions—were to use their influence to discourage the guerrillas from Angola proceeding into South-West Africa?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, we do everything that we can 1381 to discourage guerrillas, whether official or unofficial, whether governmentally promoted or otherwise supported. As to the future of Namibia, we aim at an independent Namibia that is independent of all external influences, except proper ones. As I once said, the way to preserve Africa from going red is to remember that it is black.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether he is aware that those of us who sought to influence SWAPO to resume these discussions are delighted by the announcenent that he made? Is he also aware that his statement on Walvis Bay is likely to make an agreement much easier to reach?
§ Lord DRUMALBYNMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether Walvis Bay was in fact a part of the League of Nations mandate? Was it part of German South-West Africa?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I think that it has always been a peculiar enclave. I could not, off the cuff, answer the legalistic point put to me by the noble Lord. Perhaps others may be able to do so. However, I should prefer to do so in my own way if the noble Lord would put the question separately to me.