§ 3.59 p.m.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (The Earl of Arran)My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat in the form of a Statement the answer to a Private Notice Question which has been asked in another place on the latest situation in the Gulf.
"Mr. Speaker, in the absence of my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary, on pressing Foreign Office business, I have been asked to reply.
"Last night there was a report on Baghdad radio that Iraqi forces had been ordered to withdraw from Kuwait. In a broadcast this morning, Saddam Hussein appeared to confirm this. At the same time as this order was apparently given, however, two further Scud attacks were launched, one of which caused a large number of casualties among US forces in Dhahran. At this time, we have no reliable evidence of a general Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. In many areas in southern Iraq and Kuwait, Iraqi forces are retreating, but as a result of allied military action. British and allied troops are still in contact with Iraqi forces.
"As my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said a few minutes ago, what we require now is that Saddam Hussein publicly and explicitly accepts all the Security Council resolutions. To ensure the safety and security of our forces we require all Iraqi forces in the theatre of operations, both those occupying Kuwait and those supporting the occupation, to abandon their equipment and withdraw. Otherwise they will continue to be treated as hostile."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ Lord Williams of ElvelMy Lords, the House is grateful to the Minister for repeating the Statement made in answer to a Private Notice Question in another place. We support all the points that the Minister made. I have only one question for him: in the event of all Iraqi troops abandoning their equipment, as we rightly propose, and moving out of Kuwait northwards, do they have any assurance that they will not be attacked as belligerents?
§ Lord MayhewMy Lords, we thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. He has had the enviable experience of making two Statements of great encouragement and importance on successive days. It is hard to comment upon the Statement when the position is so fast-moving—when one has just read on the tape that there are no Iraqi troops left in Kuwait City, and that the withdrawal was organised. It is especially difficult to comment upon the Statement, when, in accordance with custom relating to Private Notice Questions, one has had no preview of the Statement. Nevertheless, I am sure that my noble friends would wish me to associate ourselves with the views expressed by the Minister.
There can be no question of allowing the withdrawal back home of fully armed troops with their tanks and artillery. That would be going far too far. What is more, in this difficult situation, which is neither peace nor war, there is a special danger to the coalition forces, and their security must be paramount. Nevertheless, I hope that there is no question of coalition forces firing upon troops who are withdrawing from the battle. I am sure that that cannot be the intention of the coalition. Will the Government assure us that the coalition is doing nothing to jeopardise its post-war objectives; for example, the maintenance of the United States/Soviet collaboration which is so important for the future; the strengthening of the authority of the Security Council; and the widening of support for the coalition in the Moslem world? All those post-war objectives are of enormous importance. I hope that the Minister can assure us that they are in no way being jeopardised by the present conduct and policies of the coalition.
§ The Earl of ArranMy Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their remarks. I can say to the noble Lord, Lord Williams, that there is no intention of attacking unarmed troops who are withdrawing, but obviously formed combat units retreating with their arms must be regarded as hostile. I want to make that point clear. Secondly, the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, made the point about the security of the coalition forces which is of extreme and paramount importance. He also talked about post-war objectives. I can confirm that those post-war objectives remain as they were.
§ 3.2 p.m.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the Minister aware that certain organisations, individuals, newspapers and periodicals are rightly concerned about the fate of the people in Iraq and the withdrawing Iraqi army. Should it not be made clear to them that Saddam Hussein and his murderous army which invaded Kuwait are withdrawing only because of the presence of the coalition in the Gulf? If there is any sadness to 878 be felt, it should be felt first for casualties in the coalition forces which have probably saved Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and many other Arab states. The Arab people and the great Islamic republics must understand that they have probably been saved from massive slaughter by the coalition forces which have done a magnificent job on behalf of all humanity.
§ The Earl of ArranMy Lords, I do not believe that there are many in your Lordships' House who would disagree with the thoughts and sentiments expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Molloy.
§ Lord MonsonMy Lords, does the Minister agree that it is essential that retreating Iraqi columns be thoroughly screened by the coalition forces to ensure that they do not include Kuwaiti civilians who have evidently recently been kidnapped in large numbers to be held as hostages in Iraq?
§ The Earl of ArranMy Lords, I am certain that every effort will be made to detect those circumstances if and when they arise.
§ Lord Hatch of LusbyMy Lords, has this situation been reported to the Security Council? Is the Security Council meeting to discuss it, and, if so, when will it do so and what powers will it have to deal with the situation that the Minister has outlined this afternoon?
§ The Earl of ArranMy Lords, my understanding is that the Security Council is aware of the situation at the moment; but as to what action it will take at what time is as yet unclear.
§ Lord Cocks of HartcliffeMy Lords, would the Minister like to put on record the unusual events taking place in your Lordships' House?—neither the noble Lord, Lord Mayhew, nor the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, have cared to blame all the problems of the Middle East on the state of Israel.
§ The Earl of ArranMy Lords, I take that point.