§ 11.11 a.m.
§ 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 whether they have noted the statement of Mr. Yasser Arafat, leader of the PLO, welcoming the proposal of M. Mendes France and two Jewish colleagues that peace should be negotiated between Israel and the PLO on mutual recognition of the Israeli and Palestinian nations, and whether in view of this recognition by the PLO of the status of Israel, they will ask the UN Security Council to initiate such negotiations.
§ Lord SkelmersdaleYes, my Lords. We have noted this and other statements, but do not consider that at this stage a United Kingdom request to the United Nations Security Council would be fruitful.
§ Lord BrockwayMy Lords, has the Minister seen the taped interview with Mr. Arafat which appeared in The Times yesterday? Is it not a fact that in that interview he accepted the status of Israel, he did not even restrict the area of a Palestinian state, and actually proposed a Benelux solution between Israel, Palestine and Jordan? Does not this open out a solution on the lines the Government themselves have urged, recognition of Israel and a Palestinian state? Did Mr. Douglas Hurd, the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, meet yesterday Mr. Kaddumi, the head of the PLO political department? If so, what was the result of their discussions?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleYes, my Lords, I am aware of the taped interview with Mr. Arafat reported in The Times yesterday. This, of course, is one of the many things issuing from the PLO which are being considered in London at this moment. Mr. Hurd certainly had a meeting with the Arab League yesterday, but I am afraid I do not have the details of the discussion to hand as it took place comparatively late last night. It was a delegation and included in it was the gentleman to whom the noble Lord referred.
§ Baroness GaitskellMy Lords, in view of what my noble friend said about the recognition of Israel, may I ask whether the recognition of Israel comes into this? It is different from recognition of the PLO, of which I am in favour, too.
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, the policy of Her Majesty's Government, as expressed in the Venice Declaration, which we all know, was that there should be recognition of each other by both sides. This has not changed.
§ Lord Harmar-NichollsMy Lords, recognising the sensitive situation in the area and the dangers which are apparent to everyone, may I ask my noble friend whether he agrees that such exchanges of question and answer are likely to be dangerous? Would it not be better for this sort of thing to be left to the normal diplomatic channels, with all the safeguards 998 and attention to detail that can be given to it? Is there not a certain amount of danger in pinpointing one meeting that the Minister may have with a person, when Ministers are obviously meeting all sorts of people all the time? Does he agree that to single one out gives it a significance and implication which may not be in the general interest of bringing peace to the area?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. The negotiations, if such they are, are of course secret and it would be dangerous to expose any particular lines of such negotiations in advance of their being discussed.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the Minister aware that he should not perhaps take refuge in secrecy in respect of a report of a discussion about which he said he was not fully informed? Is not the position, rather, that the Government will wish to make public those things which they think should be made public, while understandably wishing to keep secret those things which they consider it would be diplomatically unwise to reveal? In these circumstances, rather than write to my noble friend, which he might otherwise do, may I urge him to seek an occasion to make public the answer which he is now not in a position to give, so that the whole House may be informed of exactly what the position is?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, as the House will know, this Government believe in open government. However, the situation is as I described it in my answer to the last supplementary question; should it be appropriate to reveal the details of discussions with my right honourable friend at the Foreign Office, in Downing Street or anywhere else, I shall make certain that that is done and the House will be informed.
§ Lord SoamesMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that there is a long way to go between, on the one hand, a reported interview of an Arab leader by a journalist and matters reaching a point when they could, with hope of success, be referred to the Security Council of the United Nations?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleAgain, my Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. It springs to mind that the situation in the Middle East dates back at least to 1948 and I do not think it will be cleared up overnight.
§ Lord SegalMy Lords, following the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Soames, is the Minister aware that Mr. Avnieri, to whom Mr. Yasser Arafat granted the interview, is the editor of the Israeli equivalent of Private Eye and is regarded as the enfant terrible of the Knesset?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleI was not aware of it, my Lords, but I shall certainly look into the point.
§ Lord BrockwayIn view of what has been said from behind the Minister, my Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that I do not desire to embarrass the Government but want only to put 999 forward constructive proposals to obtain peace in the Middle East? Is the United Nations Security Council meeting today? In view of the repercussions of the Lebanon situation, could not these wider issues also be discussed? Is he aware that The Times proposed that an American representative should immediately meet Mr. Arafat, but that France and Egypt have suggested wider intervention? Has the Minister read the moving conclusion of The Times leading article, that not only would the Palestinians and Israel gain from this proposal but,
so would the world, and Lebanon could be spared its final agony "?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, since taking up my appointment I have said to the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, from this Dispatch Box on at least one occasion that I have learnt considerably from the Questions he has posed to Her Majesty's Government, and I am well aware of his desire to be constructive in this as in all other matters. As to a United Nations Security Council meeting today, the answer is, yes, but I do not know whether it would be appropriate for such discussions to take place at that meeting.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, can the noble Lord say anything about whether the Government share the hope, which I think is universal throughout the House, that the reported interview has been correctly understood in this question, and that Yasser Arafat means that, that he will continue to mean it, and that all the other people in the PLO will continue to mean it?
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, I always try to be helpful, and I must say on this occasion that I really do not know the answer to the question. I shall do my best to ascertain it and, if I may, write to the noble Lord.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, I asked whether the noble Lord shared what I assumed to be the general hope in the House that the interview was genuine, and so on.
§ Lord SkelmersdaleMy Lords, I beg the noble Lord's pardon; I did not quite get the drift of the question. Of course I share the general hope. But it is a fact that the Palestinian Liberation Organisation's leaders are somewhat amorphous—no, perhaps that is the wrong word; distinct would be a better word—and they do not always put forward the same views.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware—
§ Lord DenhamMy Lords, I think that I interpret the feeling of the House generally—if I am wrong, I would apologise—that we have probably explored this Question fully and should move on to the next one.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, I want, if I may, to approve and applaud the endeavours of the British Government over the past few weeks, because they seem to be realistically appraised of the slaughter—
§ Lord DenhamMy Lords, if I have interpreted the feeling of the House wrongly, I must apologise, but I thought that when I spoke earlier there was general assent.