East Timor (Hansard, 5 February 1991)

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, we support the efforts of the UN Secretary-General to promote contacts between the Indonesian and Portuguese governments aimed at achieving a settlement which reflects the interests of the East Timorese people.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in December 1975 the Security Council unanimously passed a resolution which, calls upon the Government of Indonesia to withdraw without delay all its forces from the territory". What have Her Majesty's Government done and what are they doing to implement that Security Council resolution, a part of which also called upon all members to support the resolution and its implementation? Is the noble Lord aware that in the meantime, according to Her Majesty's Government's figures, between 60,000 and 100,000 people in East Timor have lost their lives as a result of that invasion and occupation?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, the United Nations has moved on since 1975. I remind the noble Lord that in 1982 the United Nations Secretary-General was asked by the General Assembly to promote talks between the two governments with a view to reaching a bilateral settlement. We support that process and believe that the Secretary-General's approach is the best way forward.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, taking account of what the noble Lord has just said, and given the way that Indonesia has treated the East Timorese, how can the sale of arms on a huge scale by this country to Indonesia be justified? Can the noble Lord say whether Her Majesty's Government support the United Nations' decision to send a fact-finding mission to East Timor in the spring?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, with regard to the first question, our policy is to meet requests from the Indonesian government for their legitimate defence needs. I do not have any figures for the amount of arms which we have supplied in recent years. However, there is no evidence that British military items sold to Indonesia have been used in East Timor.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is the noble Lord able to justify the sale of arms, including arms which could be and are used against the East Timorese, resulting in the death, as my noble friend said, of between 60,000 and 100,000 out of a population of 600,000 Timorese, on such a scale? Does he not agree that their sale by a civilised country like Britain is one of the causes and seeds of war in this world at present?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, I understand that at present there is anxiety as regards the export of arms. 1070 However, I repeat that there is no evidence that British military items sold to Indonesia have been used in East Timor.

§ Lord Rea
My Lords, does the noble Lord not agree that if Security Council Resolution No. 384 of 1975, mentioned by my noble friend, had been acted upon—not necessarily involving armed force—then other potential aggressors, such as one with whom we are having a certain amount of bother at present, may have been deterred? Do the Government now regard the Indonesian aggression in East Timor as a fait accompli?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, there are important differences between the two cases which the noble Lord seeks to raise. However, the important point is to look forward. In our view, the Secretary-General's efforts offer the best prospects.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, perhaps the noble Lord will answer the second part of my question about the United Nations fact-finding mission.

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, I have no information with me with regard to a United Nations fact-finding mission. However, I shall investigate the matter and write to the noble Lord.

§ Baroness Ewart-Biggs
My Lords, is the Minister aware that an East Timorese member of the Indonesian National Assembly was reputed to have been arrested recently? Is that true and, if so, has that member since been released?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, I have no information on the issue which the noble Baroness raises. Again, I shall look into the matter and write to the noble Baroness.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that his original Answer to me was not completely correct by implication? In the original Security Council Resolution No. 384 of 1975, responsibility was passed to the Secretary-General who was asked to promote talks between the Portuguese and the Indonesians. That is now nearly 16 years ago. How is it that Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States—apparently friendly with and supportive of the Government of Indonesia for 16 years—have been in breach of a Security Council resolution passed unanimously which still stands and has not been overtaken by events?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, it is also true that in 1982 the United Nations Secretary-General was asked to do what he could to promote talks between Portugal and Indonesia with a view to reaching a negotiated agreement. We believe that we should support the United Nations in those endeavours.