Namibian Independence (Hansard, 27 July 1983)

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

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 532, the Secretary-General is holding consultations about the implementation of the United Nations Plan for Namibia. We and our partners in the Five have assured the Secretary-General of our support and cooperation. Separate discussions on regional security issues are continuing between the United States and Angola. Progress towards Namibian independence depends on these.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer, but can he address himself directly to what the British Government are doing, with their own special responsibilities in this situation? Is he aware that for many years now and right up to the present moment, Namibian citizens—men, women and children—have been detained, tortured and killed by the South African Administration? This has gone on for many years. What are the British Government doing at present in order to fulfil their obligations to bring independence to Namibia under the terms of the United Nations resolution?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, as I have endeavoured to explain, responsibility for this matter rests with the United Nations. As the noble Lord knows, we are a member of the Five, and the Five are in close touch and considering ways in which to move the negotiations forward—for example, the Foreign Ministers of the Five met in Williamsburg on 28th May and again in Paris on 8th June and affirmed their intention to achieve a settlement. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary discussed Namibia with members of the United States Administration earlier in July during his visit to Washington.

Lord Paget of Northampton
My Lords, will the noble Lord agree that it all depends on what you mean by "independence"? Would Her Majesty's Government's policy be really advanced by allowing Namibia to fall into the hands of a tribal party controlled by Cuban advisers?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, the policy of the British Government in this matter, within the ambit of the United Nations' plan, is of course to allow Namibians to choose for themselves the type of government they require.

Lord Paget of Northampton
My Lords, a fat lot of chance they have to do that!

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, can the noble Lord confirm that towards the end of May the Government asked the South African Government to withdraw South African troops from Angola? Can the noble Lord say whether any response to that request has been received from the South African Government? Secondly, would the noble Lord not agree that the difficulties in Namibia have had the result of causing enormous economic damage in the country and that every day that goes by that damage becomes worse? Can he say whether Her Majesty's Government have any specific initiative in mind which might lead to a settlement?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, as I have said before, the onus of producing an initiative rests with the Five, of which we are a member, and with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. He is moving this matter forward in the ways that I have described. As regards the South African troops in Angola, we certainly think that they ought to withdraw; we certainly think that all foreign troops in the region ought to withdraw.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, would the noble Lord the Minister not agree that the situation now in Namibia is reaching horrendous proportions? The slaying, the killing, the mutilating and the butchery ought to shock us all. Is he, therefore, able to enlarge a little upon what he meant by the co-operation of Great Britain in support of the United Nations resolution? What exactly is that co-operation and what is the level of support that our country is giving in this particularly awful situation?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, the United Nations' plan, in essence, calls for the withdrawal of all the foreign troops from Namibia; the return of the SWAPO troops to their bases; the holding of free and fair elections in that country; and, in the interim, the presence of a United Nations force to see that the elections are properly conducted. We are using our best endeavours to see that that plan is operated.

§ Lord Caradon
My Lords, is it not understood and appreciated what dreadful damage has been done to the reputation of this country and of the Five and, indeed, to the authority of the United Nations, by the fact that South Africa has been able for years to stand in the way of the declared intention of the international authority? Is is not a matter for grave 1542 criticism of our country for not taking a lead in the matter in which we have a special responsibility? May I also add: Is it not widely believed that South Africa has been able to postpone carrying out the decision of the international authority, and that the United States, by raising a separate issue, has contributed to that serious delay?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I agree that the attitude of the South African Government on some of these matters has been less than helpful. But they do have some legitimate security concerns in that part of the world, not least the presence of Cuban troops in Angola. We hope that the right way forward, therefore, is the way that I have described.

§ Lord Brockway
My Lords, will the Government urgently give their mind to expediting a settlement of this problem, not only because of the atrocities which my noble friend Lord Hatch of Lusby indicated, but because every delay is strengthening the position of the illegal South African occupation and the situation is deteriorating so that there is now loss of confidence in the group in the West which has been seeking a solution?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I agree that a settlement is highly desirable in this matter, but I am afraid that it is not possible for the British Government or even for the Five to impose a settlement upon the region. I believe that the interests of all parties would be served by an early settlement but, as I say, that is not a matter over which we can wave a magic wand.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I was a little concerned at the first answer given by the noble Lord to my supplementary. May I ask him to clarify it? Did I hear him aright in saying that the negotiations between the United States and Angola were all important for security in the region? Surely the British Government have their own responsibility, quite apart from United States policy? Is it not the case that the Cuban troops are in Angola—not in Namibia—and that they are there because Angola was originally invaded, before there were any Cuban troops there, by South African forces?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, it is the case that Cuban troops are principally in Angola, but the South Africans can hardly be expected to face that with equanimity.