§ Lord BROCKWAYMy 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 what was the purpose of the visit to London of Dr. Viljoen, South Africa's Administrator General in Namibia and what were the conclusions of the discussions with him.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, Dr. Viljoen is on a private visit to London to address the half-yearly dinner of the South Africa Club. Dr. Viljoen paid courtesy calls on my noble friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary and my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs during which the negotiations for Namibian independence were reviewed.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Was it revealed in these discussions that the objections of the South African Government to the United Nations' proposal are in relation to the extent of the demilitarised zone, the SWAPO military bases, and the size of the United Nations' force? Do the Government agree with Dr. Waldheim, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, that the time has now come for definitive political decisions, despite South African differences, to allow the supervised election to take place by January at the latest?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, the details of the conversations must, I am afraid, remain confidential. South African reservations about the demilitarised zone and the other matters to which the noble Lord referred have been publicised before, 1460 and what the noble Lord said is more or less accurate. As for the report, Dr. Waldheim submitted that report only a few days ago and the Government are not yet in a position to give a detailed reaction to it; but we agree with Dr. Waldheim that we should now move from discussion to implementation.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, may we take it that Her Majesty's Government have continued to impress upon the South African Government the danger of further delay in settling the Namibian question? Secondly, may we assume that there is in the successful solution of the Zimbabwe question an exemplar for a similar solution in Namibia?
§ Lord TREFGARNEYes, my Lords, we certainly hope that the settlement we have reached in Zimbabwe will serve as a good example to South Africa and Namibia. As for South African delay, we think it right that the South Africans should be given an opportunity to consider the implications of the recent settlement in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe; and we shall allow that, but we shall not allow them to delay indefinitely.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, since the assumption of the assignment by Dr. Viljoen, is it not to be understood that, contrary to the precedent in Rhodesia, there has been from among the external hostile ranks of South West Africans—of course from SWAPO members supported by Russia and also by the United Nations—a steady drift back of SWAPO intellectuals, if they can be so called, into South West Africa, where their presence now is likely to increase the chance of intimidation as and when the expected elections take place?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I am not sure that I fully catch the drift of my noble friend's question. I can say that the Government do not recognise SWAPO's claim to be the sole representative of the Namibian people. That is for the people of Namibia to decide for themselves. But no doubt SWAPO will be putting forward their claim when the elections come to pass.
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether his 1461 noble friend, in his discussions with Dr. Viljoen, raised the issue of those who have been detained without charge or trial, and the associated question of the allegations of torture of these detainees, as has been raised by the Parliamentary Human Rights Group?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, as I said earlier, I am not in a position to give the detailed conversations between my noble and honourable friends and Dr. Viljoen, but I can say that that matter was raised and that Dr. Viljeon's reaction was satisfactory.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, did my noble friend see the interview on BBC television last night about this matter, and can he say whether we are to make representations, as a result of these discussions, about the SWAPO bases in Cuban-occupied Angola? It is this threat to the independence and free elections which looms large in South African minds, though clearly from the interview last night they have moved following the Zimbabwe results towards a desire to get on with free and fair elections as soon as possible.
§ Lord TREFGARNEYes, my Lords. The SWAPO bases outside Namibia is a matter which concerns all the parties to this matter and clearly must be solved in the context of an overall agreement.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, would not the demilitarised zone on the Angolan border stretch 600 miles in width and be 60 miles across, and would not that prevent any intervention by Angola, as has been suggested?
§ Lord TREFGARNEYes, indeed, my Lords; the demilitarised zone is a most important part, indeed I think I would say the most important part, of the United Nations' proposals. As the noble Lord says, it is about 600 miles long and 100 kilometers wide.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister a second supplementary question on this matter, which is so important to the whole of Southern Africa? With regard to the vast demilitarised zone proposed on both sides of the frontier with Angola, may I ask whether it is to be 1462 understood that the responsibility for patrolling this vast area will be entirely with the proposed United Nations force, or is it to be by combined operations with the forces, military and police, of the Republic, which forces are paid entirely by the Republic?
§ Lord TREFGARNENo, my Lords; the demilitarised zone will be patrolled by United Nations troops both on the ground and in the air, and to facilitate the United Nations task of monitoring the cease-fire and protecting the border, it will be established as soon as possible after the cease-fire.