§ 2.55 p.m.
§ Lord MolloyMy 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 whether they will sponsor an international force, involving the EC and the UN, to guard all shipping in the Gulf.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Glenarthur)My Lords, we have no plans to sponsor any formally integrated multilateral naval force in the Gulf, under the United Nations or any other umbrella. Practical considerations lead us to the view that ad hoc co-ordination of national naval forces is the best option.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, I acknowledge the commendable endeavours of the British Foreign Secretary in trying to remain absolutely neutral between the belligerents, but will the noble Lord agree that there is now a quickly changing attitude in the Gulf? The Armilla force is there on patrol, on station. The United States is under severe attack. With other shipping, or military shipping of other nations, the situation could well get out of hand, with disastrous results. Ought we now to be considering unified action by those who want to see freedom for all shipping in the Gulf?
§ Lord GlenarthurMy Lords, I am grateful for the comments of the noble Lord about the role that my right honourable friend and the Government have played in this matter. However, the idea of umbrellas of different kinds, including that of the United Nations task force, has been floated. As I have said, we have no objection in principle to a UN task force, but there are severe practical difficulties. For example, one difficulty would be obtaining agreement of the Security Council and the United States, and the Soviet Union's position on that. There are other difficulties.
§ Lord Cledwyn of PenrhosMy Lords, will the noble Lord confirm that the role of the British naval force is to protect British shipping and not to take the side of one country or another in the Gulf?
§ Lord GlenarthurMy Lords, the noble Lord is quite right. The role of the Armilla patrol is to protect British shipping, and there are no plans to extend the Armilla's area of operation.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, is it not a fact that as matters stand the best and possibly the only peaceful solution to the problems of the Gulf would be co-operation in respect of some possible arms embargo on Iran—always assuming that Iran does not abide by the original Security Council resolution on armistice—between the Soviet Union and the United States? Would not the best way of achieving that be to push in the Security Council for some resolution which would be accepted by all the five permanent members of the Security Council, plus four others? It is not impossible to imagine that. What is our Security Council representative doing, if anything, to push that concept?
§ Lord GlenarthurMy Lords, the best way to reduce the threat to shipping is to end the conflict. As I said in answer to the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, the Government are playing a leading part in moves at the United Nations to that end.
On an arms embargo and British policy towards it, the noble Lord will be aware that we refuse to sell to either side defence equipment which would significantly enhance the capability to prolong or exacerbate the conflict.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, is it a fact that the United Nations is on record as asking both sides to stop this war? Iran, because it is led by a maniac called Ayatollah Khomeini, has refused to do so. The result is that Britain now, in order to defend her own shipping, is doing what she should do. Unless United Nations intervention means declaring war against Iran, there is nothing else we can do.
§ Lord GlenarthurMy Lords, naturally we have to protect our ships in the way that the Armilla patrol is doing. But Iran and Iraq remain legally obliged to obey Security Council Resolution 598, including immediate ceasefire at sea as well as on land.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in another place quite recently our Foreign Secretary said:
The world has never been more united in seeking an end to this bloody and senseless conflict'?I think that he has done his level best not to expand the conflict, but those words now need more practical support. The Russians are now paying their costs to the maintenance of the Gulf. The United States is under heavy pressure. Ought we not to support the United States of America and at the same time encourage the USSR?
§ Lord GlenarthurMy Lords, I do not think that the noble Lord can say that we are not supporting the United States. The important thing is that the freedom of navigation in the Gulf is an important principle to be upheld, and the Armilla patrol, which we provide, has been there since 1980 for that very purpose.