HL Deb 12 May 1987 vol 487 cc535-7
Lord Chelwood

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the present strength of the United Nations International Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), what prevents it from carrying out its present mandate and by how much it would need to be reinforced to provide protection for all Palestinian refugees living in camps in Lebanon.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)

My Lords, UNIFIL's current strength is approximately 5,700. The continued Israeli military presence in southern Lebanon and the resistance this provokes among the local population have prevented the full implementation of UNIFIL's mandate. Protection of the Palestinian refugee camps is not part of UNIFIL's mandate.

Lord Chelwood

My Lords, while UNIFIL and UNWRA have done their best under near impossible conditions, may I ask my noble friend whether she can confirm that some 140,000 Palestinian refugees are in the camps? Is not that figure probably an underestimate? Secondly, does my noble friend share the quite widely held view that there is a serious risk that the Beirut camps might be beseiged again? To try to reduce this risk and dissuade Israel from terror raids on Ein Hilwe which has 30,000 helpless occupants, will the Government co-operate with the European Community in raising these questions in the Security Council?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I confirm that the number of refugees in the camps is approximately as my noble friend has described, but the total number is higher. I should not want to speculate on whether or not the camps might be beseiged again, as I believe my noble friend will understand. The Security Council is fully seized of the problem. We, as the Government, have supported the Security Council statements of 13th February and 19th March calling for a ceasefire and for the relief agencies to be allowed access to the camps.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, against this tragic background, is the noble Baroness aware that Mr. Shimon Peres said recently that Israel fully supports UNIFIL and is further prepared to enter into negotiations with the Lebanon or with any other relevant partner in the area under the authority of Resolutions 242 and 338? To what extent do Her Majesty's Government support that initiative and what are they doing about it?

Baroness Young

My Lords, we have argued and said to Israel that she should complete the withdrawal from the Lebanon to enable UNIFIL to deploy to the international border because we recognise the valuable work that UNIFIL is doing. As I believe the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, will know, our own position and that of the Community is based on the ministerial statement of 23rd February in which we expressed support in principle for an international conference as a framework for negotiations between the parties directly concerned.

Lord Bottomley

My Lords, would not the best way of easing the Palestine refugee situation be for their leader Arafat to recognise the state of Israel and also to indicate that the peace talks suggested by the Israeli Labour party leader have his full support?

Baroness Young

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Bottomley, will be fully aware of the British Government's policy, which is based on the recognition of the state of Israel and the Palestinian's right to exist.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, apropos the stated support of Israel for UNIFIL, can the Government confirm that Israel is the only neighbour of Lebanon which is blamed by UNIFIL in its most recent six-monthly report to the United Nations and that to help Israel withdraw, as UNIFIL and we have asked, to its own border, it would be a good idea if whoever it is were to stop firing katyushas at them out of the area that they now occupy?

Baroness Young

My Lords, as I answered in a previous question, the British Government's view is quite clear. We have urged Israel to complete withdrawal from the Lebanon to enable UNIFIL, whose work in very difficult circumstances we admire, to be deployed to the international border.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, does the noble Baroness not agree that, as with the invasion of Afghanistan, which this House has rightly condemned, so we ought to condemn the behaviour of the Israelis in south Lebanon where they have blatantly ignored the unanimous decision of Security Council Resolutions 408 and 409? We cannot say in this House that we support only resolutions of the Security Council that are against the Soviet Union.

Is the noble Baroness aware of the appalling reports in our British press of the slaying of men, women and young children in south Lebanon by Israeli air forces allegedly attacking terrorists? Should we not raise our voice and make clear that, as with Afghanistan, we deplore this sort of behaviour?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I do not think I would draw an analogy between the situation in the Lebanon and that in Afghanistan. The position of the British Government is as I have described it. We do not in any way condone the Israeli raids and the naval shelling of targets in southern Lebanon. The Israelis are well aware of our view that such actions only add to the cycle of violence in the area.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, we warmly welcome the initiative of Her Majesty's Government towards a conference. Taking that side by side with the offer of Mr. Shimon Peres for talks, can the noble Baroness say what progress has been made in connection with the initiative and is there any hope that a conference on these appalling problems can be held soon?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I entirely agree with what the noble Lord says about our wish for an international conference. Indeed we have made our view quite clear. We want to encourage and assist the parties to narrow the gap both on participation in the conference and on modalities so that a conference can be convened with a realistic chance of success. We have held important discussions with the parties and my right honourable friend the Prime Minister discussed the issue with King Hussein on 9th April.

Lord McNair

My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that the threat to the Palestinians in the Beirut camps comes from the Amal militia? Is she aware that the Amal are armed with tanks and artillery and that, quite apart from its mandate, UNIFIL would as at present constituted be quite unable to provide the protection which we should all like to see provided?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I accept the noble Lord's point that UNIFIL is not the right body to protect the camps in that sense. Its mandate does not cover their protection. We all share his widespread horror at the suffering that has been inflicted on the civilian population by the violence in the Lebanon.

Lord Chelwood

My Lords, as the question of the recognition of Israel by Arafat has been raised, though that was not the object of my Question, would it not help a good deal if the Israeli Government ceased to look with total disdain on binding Security Council resolutions requiring their withdrawal from the occupied territories?

Baroness Young

My Lords, my noble friend will understand that I do not wish to get drawn further into this. The position is as I have stated it and it is built on Security Council Resolution 242.