§ 2.47 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, and if so when, the Palestine Liberation Organisation has resolved to withdraw from its expressed decision to seek the destruction of Israel by violence.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, the PLO remain formally committed to the terms of the Palestinian National Covenant, including rejection of the establishment of Israel, and to the objective of a secular democratic State in the whole of Palestine. However, there have been indications in recent years that the PLO may be prepared to accept a compromise in which Israel and a Palestinian homeland will co-exist in peace.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, will the noble Lord please tell us when and where the PLO have stated that they were withdrawing from this particular intention to destroy a sovereign State? Will he also let the House know why on earth, 8 when the PLO-inspired murderers went into a kibbutz the week before last with the intention of taking babies as hostages—killing one of them and at the same time violating the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, to which I believe we are all supposed to adhere—we did not condemn that, and why the United Nations did not object? Why was there not at least some outcry against this terrible, brutal and horrific action on the part of terrorists who were trained in and by the PLO?
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, there have been a number of statements which indicate a realistic approach by the PLO leadership. For example, in December 1978 Yasser Arafat told the United States Congressmen that the PLO, in return for a State on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, would renounce all violent means to enlarge this territory and give de facto recognition to Israel. Khaled el Hassan of the PLO said something similar in London last year. There is, of course, evidence pointing in both directions. But I have made it clear, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, in this House on a number of occasions, that any policy not involving acceptance of Israel's right to exist is unacceptable to us. With regard to the last part of the noble Lord's question, we unreservedly condemn terrorism wherever it comes from.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is not the case that the PLO has recently modified its policy? Was not its representative at the United Nations largely responsible for the resolution to which I have already referred and which recognises the right of Palestine to exist?
§ Lord CARRINGTONYes, my Lords. I think that the noble Lord is right. I also think that one sometimes gets conflicting evidence on this matter. But I believe that there has been a considerable shift of opinion in the PLO in recent years.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he will please have a look at the statements that have been made within the last few days by Arafat himself, and by others of his gangster group? Will he see to it that the PLO, who have killed Arabs and Jews as well as Christians, and have done 9 a lot of damage to a very large number of people in Lebanon itself, including murder, are not to be the deciding factor in the case of a settlement? How does he expect Israel to have any contacts with people who have definitely stated, time after time, that they are out to destroy Israel, and show it by their actions, such as the one to which I have referred?
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, if the noble Lord is referring to the interview given to a Venezuelan newspaper by Yasser Arafat, which I think is the interview that he is speaking of, there are some considerable doubts as to its authenticity. It has been described by Yasser Arafat himself as a complete fabrication. But, as I say, the fact remains that the PLO have to accept and recognise the State of Israel if we are to get a settlement. With regard to the second part of the noble Lord's question, I deplore these acts of terrorism and, indeed, I also deplore the incursion by Israel into Lebanon.