HELSINKI AGREEMENTS: MADRID REVIEW (Hansard, 19 May 1980)

§ Lord TREFGARNE
No, my Lords; we believe that the best way of supporting those whose only crime is that of working for the full implementation of the Final Act is to continue to take part in the Helsinki process.

§ Lord AVEBURY
My Lords, does not the Minister agree that we have made some efforts in the past, including at previous review meetings of the Helsinki Agreement, to persuade the Soviet Union to honour the undertakings which they entered into freely, particularly those concerned with the freedom of expression and the emigration of people who wish to join their relatives abroad? Is the noble Lord aware that in particular a conference was held just last weekend in Amsterdam, attended by the former Prime Minister of Portugal, former Ambassador Andrew Young and many other distinguished persons, which unanimously issued a demand for the release of the prisoner of conscience, Anatoli Shcharansky, so that he can join his wife in Israel; but that there are many thousands of other people in the same position as Anatoli Shcharansky, on whose behalf the efforts of Great Britain are urgently needed? Therefore, if the noble Lord will not 542 accept the suggestion in my Question, will he undertake at least to ask his colleagues personally to raise at the Madrid review meeting as many of the individual cases as are brought to their attention?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, as for raising the matter of individual cases with the Soviet Union, we do this on a selective basis. First, of course, we make representations on those where we have a formal locus; that is, those who have an English or British connection of some kind. But in other cases we do so on a selective basis only because otherwise we think we might degrade the effectiveness of our representations. As for attending the Madrid review conference, what the noble Lord says is entirely right about the Russians' failure to live up to their undertakings in these matters. But we think that to go to Madrid and to draw their attention to their shortcomings in a public forum is the best way in which to proceed.

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, on the question of monitoring groups in various countries which are signatories of the Helsinki Agreement— a very important development in between the conferences— can the noble Lord tell us whether, leading up to the Madrid meeting this year, there has been a similar group in this country, independent of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office although acting with its full approval, to the one that was set up before the Belgrade meeting in 1977-78? Can the Minister also tell us whether the United States Congress, which produced a very useful report before the Belgrade Conference in 1978, has similarly been engaged in preparation for the Madrid Conference?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I am afraid that I am not informed as to what is going on in the American Congress at the present time. But as for a British group on this matter, there are a number of people who are, of course, taking an interest, not least the noble Lord, Lord Caccia, who I see in his place now.

§ Lord CACCIA
My Lords, is the Minister aware of the gratitude with which his remarks will be received by many of the monitoring groups outside the Iron Curtain and in Western Europe? Without any breach of confidence, may I 543 also say, as the chairman of the group of the David Davies Institute which did this monitoring before Belgrade and which is engaged in this work at the present time— which has been referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts— that the representations that we have received from all these groups are in the strongest terms that the West should go to Madrid in order to act exactly as the Minister has said, and that it would give grave disappointment if they did not do so?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I am sure that what the noble Lord says is exactly right. Indeed, as the noble Lord will know, the Foreign Office gives his current group every support.

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, although we are deeply concerned about the persecution of dissidents in the Soviet Union, will the Minister not agree that persecution is also taking place in many countries? Will he not agreee that the main elements of the Helsinki Agreement were the development of economic and disarmament co-operation, and will not progress in those directions be the best way in which to establish a climate in which the rights of the dissidents in the Soviet Union could be respected?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, the noble Lord has put that assertion to me before and I am afraid that I must again refute it. The factors which the noble Lord mentions are, indeed, part of the Helsinki Final Act, but not, I think, necessarily the most important part. The matter of human rights is certainly the one which has attracted the most international attention, and rightly so.

Lord JANNER
My Lords, I should like to thank the Minister and the Government for the active part, which includes monitoring, that they have taken with regard to these particular people. Is it possible for us to discuss with other nations what can be done in order to ensure that there will be no interference with monitoring in the USSR?— particularly because it is a very important subject and because the Russians themselves know what is going on in the USSR and whether or not, in fact, that is interfering with a proper appreciation of what 544 has been happening. While appreciating the fact that perhaps it is best for us to attend the conference, may I ask whether he will try to get such nations as he is in contact with to help in the matter?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, I think the only way of persuading the Russians, for example, to comply with, and live up to, their undertakings given so freely in regard to the Helsinki Final Act is to persuade them in open forum, and to bring to bear the full weight of international public opinion. That is why we think it is so important that we should go, for example, to the Madrid Conference.

§ Lord AVEBURY
My Lords, while accepting what the Minister says about the problem of modus, is he aware that in the recently published Amnesty International document, Prisoners of Conscience in the USSR, there are literally dozens of cases of individuals who are being persecuted and imprisoned who have very strong British connections? In particular, Anatoly Shcharansky has many friends in the British computer world, including Professor Donald Michie, the Professor of Machine Intelligence in the University of Edinburgh, who has issued appeals on his behalf. Will he therefore undertake to raise in particular the case of Mr. Shcharansky at the Madrid review meeting?

§ Lord TREFGARNE
My Lords, the case of Mr. Shcharansky, which I referred to in your Lordships' House when I answered a Question from my noble friend Lord Renton on 1st April, is indeed one of particular concern, and we made a representation on that particular case some months ago. But in general, as I have said before, we have to be selective in these matters, because if we were to make representations in each and every case that is brought to our attention— and, as the noble Lord says, there are indeed a great many altogether— I think we would degrade the effect of our representations.