§ 4.21 p.m.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, with the leave of the House, I should now like to repeat a Statement that is being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary. The Statement is as follows: "With permission, Madam Speaker, I would like to make a statement on Sarajevo.
"In the senseless atrocities last week some 70 civilians were killed. These deaths showed again how urgent it is to end this war.
"It will not end by military victory. A lasting settlement cannot be imposed. It can only be achieved by agreement between the parties. The Government repeat their full support for the efforts of Lord Owen and Mr. Stoltenberg. We welcome recent indications that the United States wants to take a more forward part in the peace process.
"Meanwhile, every sane person wants to see an end to the bombardment of Sarajevo. As honourable Members will be aware, the UN Secretary-General wrote to his NATO counterpart on 6th February asking the North Atlantic Council to authorise its military command to launch air strikes on request from the UN. Mr. Boutros Ghali recalled NATO's readiness, following its decisions last August and reaffirmed at the NATO Summit in January, to carry out air strikes to protect UNPROFOR and to prevent the strangulation of Sarajevo.
"NATO Ambassadors met yesterday in the North Atlantic Council. They reaffirmed NATO's support for a negotiated settlement of the conflict in Bosnia, agreed by all parties. They commended the UN negotiating efforts towards securing the demilitarisa-tion of Sarajevo. In support of these efforts, they agreed on three main points: first, with immediate effect, they accepted the UN Secretary-General's request to be prepared to launch air strikes, at UN initiative and in co-ordination with UNPROFOR, against artillery or mortar positions which UNPROFOR determines are responsible for attacks against civilian targets in Sarajevo; secondly, the North Atlantic Council called on the parties to respect a ceasefire around Sarajevo. The Bosnian Serbs were called on to withdraw all heavy weapons from within 20 kilometres of the city, excluding an area within two kilometres of the centre of the Bosnian Serb capital of Pale, or to place their heavy weapons under UNPROFOR control. The Bosnian Government were called on to place their heavy weapons in the same area under UN control and to 1711 refrain from attacks within the city; thirdly, they decided that all heavy weapons, along with their direct and essential military support, found within 20 kilometres of Sarajevo and not under UN control after 10 days from 2400 GMT today, 10th February, would be subject to NATO air strikes. These air strikes would be conducted in close co-ordination with the UN Secretary-General.
"HMG fully support these decisions. We helped to ensure that they were discussed and taken in NATO rather than any other forum, in the light of professional military advice. The NATO Council will be kept fully informed of all developments, day by day, and will review yesterday's decision at the latest on 2nd March.
"We were clear that any strategy for the use of force should be forward looking.
"There was no support in the North Atlantic Council for action which was simply punitive.
"We have since last August been prepared to see air power used, if necessary and practicable, to back the UN in carrying out its mandate. The UN, with NATO support, is taking an increasingly firm position: pressing ahead with the rotation of troops in Srebrenica; pressing for Tuzla Airport to reopen; confronting obstacles to road convoys; and warning off the Croatian regular army from entering the war on the side of the Bosnian Croats.
"The North Atlantic Council decision forms part of this pattern, specifically aimed at improving the situation in Sarajevo, helping the UN to fulfil its mandate and contributing to pressure on the parties to end the war.
"We look to the parties, particularly the Bosnian Serbs, to respond. Their aims cannot be achieved on the battlefield, nor by killing and mutilating civilians. They should end the siege of Sarajevo and hand it over to the UN administration. Such an agreement would mark a real step towards peaceful settlement.
"If the Bosnia Serbs do not so respond, they are now in no doubt of the action which NATO and the UN will take.
"No-one would pretend that this was an easy decision. The risks are clear; so are the advantages if it succeeds. It is the job of governments to test and retest options of this kind, and decide where the British interest lies. There is a strong British interest in maintaining the strength and solidarity of NATO. In Bosnia our interest lies in preventing the war from spreading, in helping forward the work for a peace settlement, and in relieving the suffering of the Bosnian people. We judge that these interests are best sustained by supporting the NATO decision and working for its success."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ 4.27 p.m.
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement, which we welcome. We believe that the right decision was reached in the NATO Council yesterday in response to the UN Secretary-General's request to issue an 1712 ultimatum to the Bosnian Serbs, backed by the intention to use air power if they fail to observe it. It had become vital for the international community to take action to end the wanton and cowardly slaughter of unarmed civilians in Sarajevo, including elderly people and children. People all over the world were deeply shocked by the events in Sarajevo last weekend. It is estimated that there have been some 10,000 deaths in Sarajevo alone since the war began.
Perhaps I may remind the House that the Labour Party called for an ultimatum to the Bosnian Serbs, backed by the threat of air strikes, as long ago as April of last year. I have to add that action earlier might have saved some of those lives. I was also a little surprised to hear in the Statement that the Government had been prepared to use air power since last August. I was not aware of that. We also welcome yesterday's decision because we have always supported UN Resolution 424, which was passed to create safe areas and to enable the United Nations to deliver humanitarian aid. To that end, it is vital to reopen Tuzla Airport. I wonder if the Minister can tell the House what, if any, decisions were taken about that at the NATO Council yesterday other than, as is stated in the Statement, to press for its reopening.
We also welcome the cease-fire which has, I understand, been negotiated by the UN commander on the ground, Lieutenant-General Rose, and hope that that cease-fire, along with the ultimatum, will be the basis for the beginning of more successful negotiations for a peaceful end to the war than we have seen so far.
Yesterday's ultimatum should also help to restore the credibility of the United Nations and NATO, which had been undermined for some time by the failure to implement their resolutions so that threats became little more than empty gestures. Will the Minister tell the House what steps will be taken to ensure a more permanent demilitarisation of Sarajevo should the Bosnian Serbs accept the ultimatum and withdraw within the 10 days allowed? Will she also comment on reports that NATO is ready to unleash air strikes on heavy weapons, shelling civilians in Sarajevo, even before the 10-day deadline for the withdrawal beyond the 20 kilometre zone?
We support the decision to allow a period of 10 days before the deadline is reached because it gives the Bosnian Serbs ample time to withdraw. There can be no excuses. It also allows time for our own troops on the ground to be reorganised and redeployed in the event of a Serb refusal to observe the ultimatum—at least, I believe that to be the case. Will the Minister reassure the House on that point?
We strongly agree with what was said by the Minister at the end of the Statement. Of course, these decisions are not easy. On the contrary, they are very difficult and we are all well aware of the risks. But the suffering of the Bosnian people has been both terrible in its intensity and protracted in its length. I reiterate that we must hope that the ultimatum will lead eventually to a lasting negotiated peace.
§ Lord Bonham-CarterMy Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement made by her right 1713 honourable friend in another place. I congratulate the Government on taking action at last. I also congratulate General Sir Michael Rose on successfully —or so it would seem—negotiating a ceasefire, which equally was achieved by taking a tough posture in the whole business. It would have been better if the decision had been taken much earlier; if we had taken the advice of the French, which we have taken at last, and the advice of my right honourable friend the Leader of the Liberal Democrats 18 months or more ago. It will now be much harder and the risks will be much greater.
I have three questions to which I should like answers. First, is the equipment for detecting artillery and mortar fire available to our troops in sufficient quantities? In the circumstances, that is a matter of some importance. Secondly, I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, that the comment about Tuzla is weaker than others in the Statement. It merely states:
pressing for Tuzla Airport to reopen".That is an absolutely crucial step in helping the Bosnian Government, which is what it is, and I wish to know what steps are being taken to open the airport and when they will be taken.Thirdly, I take it that care is being taken to protect the aid convoys in the new situation. I am grateful that we shall be able to discuss all these issues more fully on Monday when there will be more time. In my view, the debate is long overdue.
§ 4.34 p.m.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, for her positive initial response. I do not believe that any Member of this House or another place would have wanted us to take precipitate action. It would have been foolish had the action not been taken unanimously.
Many of us who have been deeply concerned with the detail of what has been happening in Bosnia for almost two years have been aware that we would support air power provided that it would support and not undermine the aid effort and the peace process. It is a matter of difficulty in deciding that.
Together with our NATO allies, we decided that this shelling of Sarajevo demands the strongest support. The decision passes the test that it will do more good than harm. I say to the noble Baroness and to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, that United Kingdom support for our air power is not new. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister suggested it to President Clinton last May. The concept became part of UNHCR 836 on safe areas. NATO close air support for UNPROFOR has been available since June last year. The UK fully supported NATO's decisions on air strikes which were made last August. The Prime Minister's initiative, with Prime Minister Balladur of France, led to the NATO summit decision in January on the readiness to use air power in Srebrenica and Tuzla. We have always said that air power is not an end in itself and on that the NATO allies agree. But air power can be part of the strategy to improve the situation and the prospects for peace. We believe and hope that that will happen.
I was asked about the work undertaken by General Rose. We warmly welcome the agreement that he 1714 achieved to establish a ceasefire in Sarajevo from today to be followed by a withdrawal of heavy weapons and placing them under UN command. The noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, asked whether there could be air strikes before the 10-day deadline. If artillery is judged by UNPROFOR to be responsible for the shelling of civilian targets, it could be used. However, we hope that the ceasefire will be successful because no one wants to start opening up unless it is really necessary. We wait to see the progress that is so badly needed for the people of Sarajevo. I believe that the attempts made by General Rose to secure the demilitarisation of Sarajevo and the agreement to place the city under UN administration, as envisaged in the European Union action plan, are a major step forward. That will be the beginning of the more permanent demilitarisation, which the noble Baroness asked about, and on which we shall work with all speed.
I fully agree with her about the suffering of the people. We sincerely hope that we shall be able to continue to relieve that suffering. The noble Baroness spoke of some 10,000 deaths in the Sarajevo area. I must put that figure against the many hundreds of thousands of lives that have been saved as a result of the aid that has gone in there, in particular during the winter periods.
The noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, asked me about the safety of those in the forces and of aid workers. We have plans for their protection and reinforcement if necessary. They are our paramount concern. Last year the Defence Secretary announced that other capabilities would be made available as a contingency to draw on should that be necessary. That of course includes the already available NATO close air support. I am sure that the House will understand that I cannot give further details.
The noble Lord also asked me about the detection equipment being available in sufficient quantities. Last year the Defence Secretary announced that that would be so. However, I shall not engage in further detail on that matter, which I hope the noble Lord will understand.
The noble Lord and the noble Baroness asked about Tuzla Airport. That is an issue for which I have been trying to obtain support for a long time. Pressure is being exerted at this very moment. The United Nations and the NATO military commanders in theatre are co-ordinating the plans, including the use of air power, if the Serbs will not co-operate. We intend to see not only that Tuzla Airport is opened but that it is kept open. In line with the other remarks that I have made, I am sure that the House will understand that I do not wish to reveal the detail of that. Although this is a very serious matter, we can view the examples that are being set by General Rose and the whole command structure as extremely hopeful for the future. We all hope that it will bring peace to the people of Bosnia and Sarajevo.
§ 4.40 p.m.
§ The Earl of LauderdaleMy Lords, will my noble friend accept that many people will be relieved about what appears to be the political target of the operation; namely, the demilitarisation of Sarajevo? But is my noble friend aware that, even if the Serbs withdraw their 1715 heavy weapons to 20 kilometres, the demilitarisation of Sarajevo will be extremely difficult to accomplish and secure? The demilitarisation of other places may need to follow. All that will involve the deployment of more, I dare to call them, first-class quality troops, without naming names. Is my noble friend aware further that we are not dealing with a civil war which has only three parties but one which has about 20 sub-plots all over the place? It will be a lot easier to get in than to get out. However, I am sure that my noble friend will accept that many of us are greatly relieved by the tone of her Statement, while crossing our fingers very tightly and hoping for success.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. He is absolutely right that the demilitarisation of Sarajevo will be difficult to secure, but it will be for the UNPROFOR commanders on the ground to decide the dispositions. That is a substantial task and there may be scope for redeploying existing UNPROFOR forces. At present we have no plans to provide additional UK forces, but we shall continue to support the aid effort through the winter and we shall wish to consult closely with our fellow troop contributors in taking future decisions. My noble friend reiterates something that I have said many times; that this civil war is full of sub-plots, apart from the three warring parties. That is why it has been so difficult to bring about a peace.
§ Baroness Williams of CrosbyMy Lords, we add our congratulations to those expressed by the Minister on the professional and resolute bearing of General Rose and the troops associated with him. Perhaps I may ask the noble Baroness two short questions. In view of the likelihood that the convoys may be put at risk by the action that Western governments have now decided to take, and which we very much welcome, can the Minister give any indication of the state of current negotiations about Tuzla airport, because were that airport open, supplies could come in by air rather than overland?
Secondly, will the Minister comment on the resistance shown by the Bosnian Government—and it is to the point that one of the so-called warring parties is an independent internationally recognised government and not a guerilla force—and say whether one of their most fundamental problems can be solved; that is, access to safe and secure sea ports for their territories so that they would be viable if there were to be a peace settlement?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness. Nobody is more aware than I of the risks that our convoy drivers, mechanics, electricians and mining engineers are taking all the time. I assure her that we have taken action to ensure that the best possible care is taken of the ODA civilians and the military who are involved in delivery.
We shall be able to open Tuzla airport only when it has been secured sufficiently from Serb artillery. Various preparations must be made before that can happen. They are taking place at this time.
1716 The noble Baroness spoke also about resistance by the Bosnian Government which would be lessened by access to the sea. That has always been part of the negotiating effort of the noble Lord, Lord Owen, and Mr. Stoltenberg. That will continue because peace efforts must continue in parallel with all the other measures that are being taken to try to stop the fighting.
§ The Earl of OnslowMy Lords, I think it was a Frenchman who said, "Gouverner, c'est choisir". This particular operation has produced more options for choice than it is possible to forbear. We must give Her Majesty's Government our maximum support and recognise the immense difficulties which they face.
My noble friend says that one of the reasons for the operation was to prevent the strangulation of Sarajevo. By its very nature, that is an action on behalf of the legitimate Government of Bosnia. According to John Simpson in this week's Spectator, the French Foreign Legion are patrolling the airport to make sure that people do not go into or out of Sarajevo. In effect, that is the United Nations helping the Serbs in their siege of Sarajevo.
Furthermore, large quantities of fuel and rations are reaching the Serbs because of attacks on the convoys which are going in. It seems to me that the Government have now come down on the side of the Bosnian Government. What happens if air strikes are called for and the Serbs hide their guns and go on fighting? Having taken into account all those factors, knowing how difficult it is to choose and knowing the horrendous problems which Her Majesty's Government and the United Nations are facing, what will be the next step in the event of the Serbs not responding to the ultimatum? I am trying to be helpful and not difficult.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for his initial words of support. I should make it absolutely clear to your Lordships that the British Government, NATO and the UN are not taking sides. We are trying to bring to an end the fighting in the region. We are trying to make sure that it is not extended.
I believe that in General Rose we have a commander who has moved decisively in the very early days as regards Sarajevo. I for one would not wish to second-guess him in connection with some of the points which my noble friend has made. It is perfectly true, as it has been in every conflict in the Balkans, that there are hidden guns and weaponry. But the heavy artillery has done the most damage. If attempts can succeed to still that heavy artillery and have it withdrawn beyond the 20-kilometre range, it will be easier to deal with other hidden weaponry. That is exactly what the UNPROFOR troops will be asked to do.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that there are grave misgivings across the political spectrum about the wisdom of this course and the risks that accompany it? There are serious anxieties about what will happen if the Serbs do not respond to the ultimatum. When you enter a situation, it is always as well to know exactly how you can get out 1717 of it. Have the Government and NATO considered what will happen if the Serbs defy the ultimatum and keep their guns where they are?
Secondly, what has changed since last weekend when the Foreign Secretary—and he has done it before—warned of the danger to our troops of an escalation of action, including air strikes? What has happened to his view that we must not listen to the "must do something" brigade? I hope that we are not being pressurised against our will into a dangerous situation which could put our troops at risk.
Finally, does the Minister have any news of the latest Russian reaction? Are the Russians calling for a special meeting of the United Nations? Further, what will happen if they use their veto on the decision of the United Nations to call for NATO to make air strikes? Would that not bring about a very serious situation which may lead to a widening of the conflict?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I must tell the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, that I am aware of the many different views as regards the decisions that have now been taken by the NATO Council, and of the risks involved. Indeed, no one in this House has been more closely associated with what has been going on than I have over the past few months.
However, the answer to the noble Lord's question must be that if the Serbs do not respond to the ultimatum, then the heavy weaponry will be taken out. The decision that we have taken is that if, after 10 days, heavy weapons of any of the parties are found within the 20 kilometre zone (except within 2 kilometres of Pale) and not controlled by UNPROFOR, they will be subject to NATO air strikes. Whether or not the air strikes take place is a matter for the parties; in particular, it is up to the Bosnian Serbs. NATO has issued a clear warning. If that warning is not heeded, it has authorised the use of air power in co-ordination with the UN.
The noble Lord also asked me whether I could assure him that we had not been pressurised into such action against our will. Of course we have not. As I said in answer to an earlier question, it is, and has always been, a narrow balance. We believe that the decision we have now taken is right because we understand that it was the Bosnian Serbs who caused some 70 deaths at the weekend.
The noble Lord also asked me about Russian objections. I can tell him that the Security Council will discuss Bosnia tomorrow. There is no doubt that the action agreed by NATO falls within the framework already authorised by Security Council Resolutions 824, 836 and 844. There is no need for a new resolution and, therefore, there is nothing for the Russians to veto. Both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary will be discussing the matter with President Yeltsin and Mr. Kozyrev during their visit to Moscow. I believe that the foundations for those talks augur well for the decisions that will be taken. The change since the weekend is due to the action taken by General Rose which has shown the possibility of a way forward; but it needs backing up. That is exactly what the NATO decision has done.
§ Lord HyltonMy Lords, I welcome the general tone of the Statement. However, I noted that it spoke of 1718 warning off the Croatian regular army. Is there not already evidence to suggest that units of that army are in Bosnia and may indeed be connected with the fighting in Mostar? Should not a much stronger and firmer line be taken with the Croatians?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I believe it is possible that the firmer line for which the noble Lord, Lord Hylton, backed by many of us, has been calling for a long while will be taken in Croatia. However, the action that we are now discussing concerns Sarajevo. I have also been asked about Tuzla. We note what the noble Lord has said. His remarks will be acted upon.
§ Lord HarlechMy Lords, can my noble friend the Minister say what protection can be offered to volunteer aid workers who go to Bosnia in the interests of humanitarianism but who do not in fact legitimise, so to speak, their arrival through the Foreign Office, UNHCR or, indeed, the armies that are in operation in the field?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for asking that question. I advise any volunteer aid worker who is thinking of going to Bosnia not to do so. During the past two years, there have been many incidents where people have gone there not fully prepared; or, sometimes, even when fully prepared, they have not been adequately protected. That has created difficulties for those people and has also led to the involvement of troops who are needed to protect not only the ordinary aid convoys but also other troops. It has meant that troops have been diverted from the duties that they were supposed to be carrying out. I implore volunteers to stay away. When the peace is secured, there will then be plenty for the volunteers to do: but not now.
§ Lord Merlyn-ReesMy Lords, the Minister will know my grave reservations as regards this action, which has been talked about for a long time. There is no need for me to repeat my views. However, the presence of General Rose, whose work in the SAS means that he knows a great deal about action on the ground, makes it a good deal better from my point of view.
I have one question for the Minister which arises from the answer that she gave to my noble friend Lord Stoddart of Swindon. The noble Baroness very confidently said that if the Bosnian Serbs take no notice, the aircraft from Germany, America, France and Britain will take out the guns and the mortars. Is it the advice of General Rose that that can be done?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I am not at liberty to disclose exactly how and where things will be done. However, that is the general outline of what would be done. There will be no indiscriminate bombing. The air strikes will be strictly limited to specific circumstances and targets as set out in the NATO decision. The objective is to support a ceasefire. The Secretary General must not only authorise the first use of the air strikes but, also, the strikes will only be launched in agreement with UNPROFOR—that means UNPROFOR commanders on the ground. I believe that answers the noble Lord's question.
§ Lord EltonMy Lords, I should like to ask the Minister a question which is perhaps less academic than it at first sounds. I have heard that there is to be demilitarisation of the zone as a result of an agreement negotiated by General Rose. I have also heard that there is to be a withdrawal or neutralisation of heavy weapons as a result of an ultimatum agreed by the United Nations and NATO. Is it the case that the ultimatum produced the agreement or has the ultimatum been put in place to prevent the agreement breaking down? In other words, was the agreement arrived at by negotiation and now locked in place by force, or is it something that has been arrived at reluctantly in the face of the threat of force?
I have a further question that I am not sure my noble friend will want to answer. I understand that nowadays, heavy weapons can deliver projectiles over a distance of more than 22 kilometres. What is it intended to do if the bombardment of Sarajevo continues at a greater range?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, my noble friend is right; I shall not answer his second question at the present time. However, as regards his first question, I must tell him that the efforts to establish the ceasefire were tied in with the wish to secure a withdrawal of the heavy weapons and have them placed under UN control. Certainly, the NATO decision backs that up. I can assure my noble friend that General Rose has not been acting independently of Ministers and Governments. We are moving to try to secure a ceasefire. I sincerely hope that we shall succeed.
§ Lord SwinfenMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that I was somewhat surprised to hear her answer to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, on the ability of our forces to locate heavy artillery? In a news report shortly after the incident in Sarajevo, Brigadier Ritchie told the reporter that we did not have the artillery-locating equipment to locate the fire from heavy artillery pieces and large mortars. Is the equipment being supplied so that our troops can be properly protected? I ask that question because, nowadays, heavy artillery can be moved quite easily in a short space of time from one position to another. It is useless if we do not know the location of such weaponry.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I believe that General Ritchie was referring to mortar-locating radar, the purpose of which is to engage warring factions. That device has not been used because that has not been our purpose. However, because the security of UK forces is paramount, the Secretary of State for Defence will ensure that our forces will have the equipment that they need.