Namibia: UN Resolution No. 435 (Hansard, 14 December 1983)

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)
My Lords, we have no plans at present to call a formal meeting of the Contact Group. However, we remain committed to early implementation of the United Nations plan and we are ready to take whatever action we consider would contribute to this objective.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the latter part of her reply will give encouragement to many people inside and outside the British Commonwealth who regard the United Nations as being somewhat laggardly in bringing about the independence of Namibia, and that the latter part of her statement is also very welcome indeed? Anyone who believes in the principle of democracy must acknowledge that the South West African People's Organisation exists, that it might well win the general election in Namibia and that, because of that democratic element, the South African Government keep a stranglehold illegally on Namibia.

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I welcome the first part of the noble Lord's statement—perhaps that would be the correct way to describe it. But on the point about progress of the talks, may I say that all major issues related to the United Nations plan are now resolved. Further progress depends on meeting the essential security concerns of the parties. An accommodation on Cubans satisfactory to the United States and South Africa is an important element in this.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, in view of the fact that France has now withdrawn from the Contact Group (a group which unquestionably has done very useful work), does the noble Baroness see a future for the group? Secondly, can she indicate the nature of the Portuguese initiative which has now been started? Are Her Majesty's Government in favour of that initiative? Thirdly, is it the case that Ministers from Angola and South Africa are shortly to meet the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary? Could she say what is the purpose of those meetings?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, to answer the first part of the noble Lord's supplementary question, in fact the French have not withdrawn from the Contact Group. The position could perhaps best be described by saying that they believe that the Contact Group should be put into cold storage for the time being until it has something useful to do. On the other hand, we believe that the Contact Group has contributed much in the 238 past and could do so again in the future and that it is important to keep it in being. On the other two points, we welcome anything which will contribute towards a settlement, but, as I said in answer to the first supplementary question, this is now very much a matter of the security of the states involved.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, will the noble Baroness say a word about the Portuguese initiative to which I referred? Can she tell the House what is the nature of the initiative and what is the purpose of the meeting of the Foreign Secretary and the Angolan and South African Ministers?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, it is perfectly true that the South African Foreign Minister saw my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, and of course Namibia was one of the matters that was discussed. I am sure the noble Lord will appreciate that in these circumstances the discussions are confidential at this stage.

§ Viscount Massereene and Ferrard
My Lords, does not the Minister agree that owing to the heavy Soviet penetration of SWAPO it might be very dangerous at this stage to permit free elections in Namibia? Does my noble friend not also agree that if there were to be a one-party communist state in Namibia, it would be very dangerous for industry and technology in this country and the EEC generally, as the Soviets might then get control of the mineral resources in South Africa on which we are so dependent?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, in answer to the first part of my noble friend's question, I may say that of course we have supported the settlement plan for Namibia and we should like to see it come into effect. I think his second question about natural resources is somewhat wide of the main Question. If the cares to put down a Question on that point, I shall be happy to answer it.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, can the noble Baroness answer two questions? First, is it not the case that the Commonwealth communiqué mentioned the issue of other countries accepting as important the linkage between the freeing of Namibia and the removal of Cuban troops, which the noble Baroness has also mentioned this afternoon? Does that indicate that the British Government have changed their opposition to the linkage element in the Namibian settlement? Secondly, as the noble Baroness says that the British Government are open to take any initiative to complete the freedom of Namibia, and in view of the fact that they have rejected the call for economic sanctions against South Africa, what initiatives do they now intend to take to conclude this long story of providing Namibia with independence?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I can confirm that our position on linkage is that we do not believe that the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola is part of the United Nations plan, nor should it be a precondition for its implementation. This is a practical issue. I would draw to the noble Lord's attention what my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said in another place in answering questions on the statement 239 on the Commonwealth conference communiqué. She made it plain that we should have preferred an injunction about the withdrawal of all foreign troops, which would have seemed to be fair. On the noble Lord's second point, about whether we should have another initiative, as far as the Contact Group is concerned if circumstances change we and our partners would of course reconsider the question. Indeed, any member of the group can call a meeting at any time.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, as the question of the release of the British mercenaries who have been held so long in prison in Angola has been linked with the settlement in Namibia, will the noble Baroness be kind enough to tell the House what efforts are being made to secure the release of these unfortunate men?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I think that this point, too, is a bit wide of the Question. If the noble Lord will put down a Question I shall try to answer it.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that, notwithstanding the situation in Angola, unless action is taken soon by the contact five—who after all are five of the most eminent members of the United Nations—the situation can only get worse and, even more important, yet more dangerous? As we all five independently say that we adhere to the principle of the resolution and want to see it made a reality, why can we not get together, begin work on that task and avoid what could possibly be an extremely dangerous situation in Southern Africa?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I think we should all like to see progress on this matter, but we do not think there is a need for an early meeting of the Contact Group because at the moment there are no new major developments affecting Namibia. As I indicated in answer to an earlier supplementary question, further progress on Namibia depends on meeting the essential security concerns of all the parties.