HL Deb 29 March 1982 vol 428 cc1164-8

3.31 p.m.

Lord Mayhew

My Lords, for a second time, I beg to ask a Question of which I have given Private Notice. The Question is as follows: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary will defer his visit to Israel".

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Trefgarne)

My Lords, may I first apologise to your Lordships for not being in my place about half an hour ago, when it would have been appropriate to answer this Question, but I think that the noble Lord and the House will know the reasons for that. The Answer to the Question is as follows: No, my Lords. We have taken careful note of representations requesting my noble friend Lord Carrington to cancel his visit to Israel because of the situation on the West Bank. We deplore the dismissal of the democratically-elected mayors and have called for an end to the violence. However, we believe that it would be wholly unproductive to cut off communications with Israel at a time when it is vital to try to persuade the Israeli Government to show restraint and work for an overall settlement.

Lord Mayhew

My Lords, in thanking the noble Lord, may I ask whether he is aware that the Foreign Secretary's efforts to promote a peaceful settlement in Palestine have been widely admired, but that, no matter how toughly he talks when he gets to Israel, the mere fact that he is willing to make a courtesy call at this time is bound to help Mr. Begin to resist his critics and to continue colonising and oppressing the Arabs in Gaza and on the West Bank? Is it really appropriate that a British Foreign Secretary should pay a friendship visit to a Government whose international conduct is so widely condemned, universally condemned, and which is indeed so outrageous?

Baroness Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there is a very strong feeling in the country and in the House that, precisely because of the dangers and difficulties in the Middle East at the moment, we feel it is essential that his noble friend should carry out his visit to Israel? The most productive gesture that could be made at this time of great danger would be for the PLO to declare formally its belief that the state of Israel should exist, particularly since there are many Israelis who do not approve of their own Government's methods on the West Bank. Will the noble Lord urge his noble friend to repeat that plea to the PLO?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, I would say that my noble friend's visit will be considerably more than a mere courtesy visit, as he suggested. It will of course be an opportunity for an exchange of views at the highest level within Israel. Not only will my noble friend be able to convey his views to the Israeli Government, but the visit will be of great value to him to hear their views at first hand as well. It is, I think, important to maintain the dialogue in this situation and not to cut off communication, as would happen if the visit were to be cancelled.

With regard to the point made by the noble Baroness, I certainly agree with her that it would be of the greatest value if the PLO could, for example, be persuaded to accept the right of Israel to existence as a state, and in the same context it would be of great value for the Israelis to undertake a dialogue with the PLO.

Lord Gladwyn

My Lords, while I quite understand the reluctance of the Foreign Secretary to cancel his proposed visit to Israel, will he take the opportunity of the visit to express to his Israeli hosts his strong displeasure, and I should hope also that of the European Economic Community, at the recent dismissal of many Arab mayors by the Israeli authorities, and at the imposition of what on the face of it seems very like martial law on the West Bank of the Jordan?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, we view the developments on the West Bank with grave concern, and we deplore the dismissal by the Israeli military authorities of the democratically-elected mayors of Nablus and Ramallah, as well as the earlier dismissal of the mayor of El-Birch. We have again appealed—and I would do so now, if I may—for an end to the violence there. It can only harm the prospects of a settlement which gives the Palestinian people the right to choose their own future.

Lord Shinwell

My Lords, is the Minister aware that whether or not the Foreign Secretary visits Israel, whatever intentions he may have—whether he intends to visit Israel, or remains away from Israel—there is not the slighest prospect of peace in the Middle East until the Arab countries, whether collectively or individually, decided to recognise the state of Israel? Let there be no doubt about this: I say it with the utmost emphasis in meaning what I say—and backing Begin, if necessary—there must be an assurance that Israel's security is assured, while at the same time there is a readiness to enter into negotiations. Let that not be forgotten—and Camp David provides for it; let that not be forgotton, either. Until such assurances are given, there is not the slightest prospect of peace in the Middle East. There is also a danger. If, whether in this House or elsewhere, there are some people who, for some reason or another known to themselves but unknown to other people, continue to attack Israel, or anybody associated with Israel, they will not promote peace; they will make for war.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I absolutely agree with the noble Lord that the Israelis are entitled to the kind of assurances to which he has referred. But one must say that one of the sources from which they seek the assurance—namely, the PLO—is one organisation with which they refuse to have any dialogue at all.

Lord Wells-Pestell

My Lords, bearing in mind the word "outrageous" used by the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, may I ask the Minister whether it is not outrageous that most of the Arab countries still consider that they are at war with Israel, and that all the Arab countries, with the exception of Egypt, do not recognise her Government or her existence?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, that is really an extension of the point that I think was being made by the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, but I should prefer not to use words such as "outrageous" in any context in the Middle East situation, hoping that we can move forward to a consensus agreement in due course.

Lord Brockway

My Lords, may I ask the Minister whether he will convey to the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, how sincerely we appreciate his initiative, in particular through the European Community, for a solution of this problem by recognising both Israeli frontiers and the Palestinians' right to self-determination? But is it not the case that this visit, at this time, might prejudice the conclusion of such an arrangement? In view of what is happening on the West Bank, might it not antagonise Arab feeling, which is growing in favour of the proposal, and might it not strengthen the position of the Begin Government when they are in crisis on this very issue?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, one of the purposes of the visit of my noble friend will be to convey to the Israeli Government the views of the British Government on the various events that have been taking place recently, in particular the most unhappy events on the West Bank, and I think that, if the visit were to be cancelled, that opportunity would be lost. I am firmly convinced, I must say, that the way forward is to maintain a dialogue with all the parties to this dispute, for to cut them off, as is suggested in the Question, would not contribute to that end.

Lord Mishcon

My Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister aware that by virtue of the fact that, happily, Israel is a free democracy, the views which have been expressed in this House which are critical of happenings in the West Bank have been freely expressed in the Israeli press and certainly freely expressed in the Parliament of Israel, where a substantial vote on this very issue was registered against Government policy last week?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, of course it is true that Israel is, happily, a democracy, and hopefully the views of their Government will reflect the views of the Israeli people.

Lord Mayhew

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there are distinctions between not making a courtesy visit and cutting off all communications, which is not, I think, suggested by anyone? But is he also aware that his replies about the need for reciprocal recognition will be very warmly welcomed—the PLO must of course recognise Israel, but reciprocally the Israelis must recognise the PLO—and that in this context his statement, in striking contrast to the statements of the noble Baroness, Lady Llewelyn-Davies, and the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, produces a hope for the future? But, really, one cannot expect the PLO to recognise Israel when Mr. Begin says repeatedly that even if they do the Israelis will never recognise the PLO.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the PLO is not, of course, a state as we would understand it, and therefore the concept of recognition may not be precisely the right description of the relationship which should be evolved with that organisation. What we have said, and what I repeat now, is that there is no prospect of peace in the Middle East without taking into account the views of the PLO, who clearly represent a substantial portion of Palestinian opinion.

Lord Shinwell

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that when the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, talks about my not having a future, I have a far better future in comparison with his awful past?

Lord Mayhew

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we all look forward to an indefinite future for the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell?