HL Deb 14 April 1989 vol 506 cc483-7

11.13 a.m.

Lord Hatch of Lusby asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they played any part in giving permission to the South West Africa Territory forces to attack SWAPO guerillas on 1st April and subsequently.

The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Lord Trefgarne)

My Lords, no. As my right honourable friend the Prime Minister stated in Namibia on 1st April, any action to deal with the incursion by SWAPO forces must be taken under the authority of the United Nations. This has remained our position.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, as the noble Lord knows, on 1st April the Prime Minister was in Windhoek. On the same day the United Nations released the South West African defence force to resume its attacks on SWAPO. If the Minister read the report of the adjournment debate which took place in the other House last night, he will know that the personal evidence of Mr. Paul Boateng, who recently returned from Namibia, was that since then there have been massive and widespread atrocities. I do not say that they are all on one side, but the release of the South African force produced a state of war— —

Noble Lords

Question!

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, was the Prime Minister in any way responsible for the decision that was taken? She was representing a member of the Security Council. Did she partake in any way in the decision that was made on 1st April?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, no. The decision was taken by the United Nations authorities in Namibia on that day and not by my right honourable friend.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the unhappy problem has been exacerbated by the overbearing presence of South African security forces at United Nations bases in Namibia, as was made clear in the "Nine o'clock News" on BBC television last night? Furthermore, can the Minister say when it is expected that the United Nations forces will be in full complement in Namibia?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the reason why the United Nations plan, which was due to come into effect from 1st April, got into such difficulty was because of a major incursion into Namibia by members of SWAPO who had no right to be there. However, that was in the past and they have now agreed to withdraw into Angola, north of the appropriate parallel. Matters are now on track to resume a successful implementation of the United Nations plan. Important duties are laid upon the South Africans in accordance with the implementation of the UN plan as well as upon SWAPO. We are now looking to all the participants in the United Nations process to honour their undertakings, and we have evidence that they all intend to do so.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, does the Minister agree that if the United Nations were asked to keep the peace, sufficient forces should have been sent in time to do so; and that to put them in under-strength and in the humiliating position which they experienced is quite wrong? Does he further agree that if we are to back the United Nations, we must do so with money and forces?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, keeping the peace is not quite the role of the United Nations forces and officials in Namibia. Their task is to oversee the implementation of the United Nations plan which calls for elections to be undertaken later this year, and for an appropriately elected government to come into office in Namibia in due course. Nonetheless, it is important for an appropriate number of United Nations forces to be in place. We are ensuring that they will arrive as quickly as can be arranged, and all the United Kingdom's contribution is now in place.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, with all respect, does the Minister not agree that while the United Nations forces are there to oversee the plan, in the midst of armed forces on both sides they need to be able to enforce the plan?

Lord Trefgarne

But, my Lords, they are not there and were never intended to be there in the kind of force which the noble Lord has in mind. It is not the role of the United Nations forces to conduct military operations in Namibia of the kind that he suggests.

Lord Mellish

My Lords, is the Minister aware that some of us on this side of the House were delighted to learn that Britain has enough forces to contribute to the United Nations peace force? That is something to brag about! Secondly, is the Minister aware that the history of this matter has been extremely sad? For a long time there has been a war between SWAPO and South Africa which has come to a halt at last. The tragedy has been that there was insufficient control over SWAPO which endangered the position. Can the Minister indicate that SWAPO now recognises its responsibilities and will go back to where it belongs?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, in recent days we have heard much more helpful utterances from senior officials within SWAPO, including its agreement to withdraw across the border north of the 16th parallel in southern Angola. That will mean that the United Nations will be back on track. I do not put it more strongly than that. The United Nations plan is far from complete, but there are signs that it is now moving in the right direction, and I invite your Lordships' support of that process.

The Lord Bishop of Sheffield

My Lords, in welcoming the part played by Her Majesty's Government in bringing this unexpected hope of independence and peace in Namibia, I ask the Government to use their influence to ensure that SWAPO is involved to a greater extent in the necessary negotiations.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, of course SWAPO is a very important element in native opinion in Namibia and is intimately involved, as the right reverend Prelate suggests, in discussions going on continuously with a view to keeping the United Nations process under way and ensuring that a successful conclusion is reached in due course. I certainly agree with the right reverend Prelate about the importance of the SWAPO position.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we support the general principle he has enunciated and what he has said generally about the position? However, does he not agree that it is really important for us and the United Nations forces to be even-handed in reaction to both SWAPO and South Africa? While the United Nations forces are not there to keep the peace, they are there to help to maintain the peace leading to fair and open elections in Namibia. Does he not further agree that in addition to the reaction of SWAPO, it is very desirable that the South African security services should withdraw? Can he give an assurance that he is confident that South Africa, with all the power it has in the region, will do that?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, yes; the noble Lord is quite right. The withdrawal of South African forces to bases will be an important part of this process. It is certainly essential that that part takes place, and we have reason to believe that the South African forces intend to do just that.

Lord Burton

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the SWAPO Democratic Party in Windhoek is opposed to the SWAPO external communist terrorists and deprecates their actions in invading Namibia as armed terrorists?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, there are different strands and strains of opinion within SWAPO, as there are within many political groupings, if one may say so. However, the important matter now is that the peace process should continue on track and that duly constituted and properly conducted elections should take place later this year.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, can the noble Lord tell us what is the latest news Her Majesty's Government have on the withdrawal of SWAPO forces?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the latest news I have is that the withdrawal is going more or less according to plan. Naturally, communications are not always terribly good between London and the situation on the ground. However, we have no reason to believe at present that things are not going more or less as we had hoped.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, the noble Lord did not fully answer my Question. I am aware of the fact that the United Nations administrator took the decision on 1st April. I asked whether the Prime Minister, as a representative of a country which is a member of the Security Council, took any part in that decision. The Minister now says that the South African forces will withdraw to base. Is he aware that at present South African forces are surrounding the bases where SWAPO forces are asked to gather and are threatening them? Two days ago, they threatened to interrogate those who gather there, with the result, as was pointed out by Mr. Boateng last night, that many SWAPO guerillas will not go to those bases because they will not feel safe there.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I am happy to clarify the position with regard to the last point of the noble Lord's supplementary question. Interrogation, as it has been somewhat unfortunately described, such as it is, will be conducted by UNCTAD officials and not by South African security forces personnel and will simply relate to the essential information required to ensure the implementation of the arrangements now in place. I agree that it would not be appropriate for South African officials to conduct the kind of interrogation that has been feared. I believe that there was an unfortunate remark made in that connection by a member of the South African security forces which gave rise to that misconception.

As for the first part of the noble Lord's supplementary question, perhaps he will allow me to say that he does the United Nations officials there no service by suggesting that they are in some way subject to external pressures other than the authorised ones. As the noble Lord rightly said, my right honourable friend was in Namibia on 1st April. However, her role was simply to see what was going on and to meet some of the British personnel involved in that process, and not to twist the arm of United Nations officials.