HL Deb 20 April 2000 vol 612 cc819-22

11.23 a.m.

Lord Lamont of Lerwick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What discussions the Prime Minister has had with Mr Putin about Chechnya.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal)

My Lords, the Prime Minister has had regular discussions with Mr Putin on Chechnya. It was discussed at length when Mr Putin visited London earlier this week. Prior to that it was discussed on 27th March in a telephone conversation following Mr Putin's victory in the Russian presidential election. Chechnya was also discussed during the Prime Minister's visit to St Petersburg on 11th March.

Lord Lamont of Lerwick

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. It is encouraging that the Prime Minister has made these representations. But what fundamentally is the difference between the allegations against the Russian forces in Chechnya under Mr Putin and those against the Chilean forces under General Pinochet?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, the distinction is clear, but let me explain it to the noble Lord. So far as the allegations made in regard to Chechnya, they are the subject of investigation. Noble Lords will be pleased to note that Mr Putin has agreed that there should be a commission to investigate the allegations made in relation to atrocities and that that commission will have within it an independent element. So we will be able, it is to be hoped, to see in a very clear way what has happened and to make an assessment of what actions were taken, by whom and when.

Viscount Waverley

My Lords, what benefits are envisaged from the Government's policy of critical engagement with Russia?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, we believe that Her Majesty's Government's policy has had many advantages. The international community cannot of course solve the complex situation easily, but the pressure that has been applied has led to positive results. I have mentioned one already; that is, for Russia to set up an independent commission to investigate human rights abuses. There will be an attachment of three Council of Europe experts to the Russian ombudsman for human rights; the terms are now agreed and that should happen soon. Russia will allow the International Committee of the Red Cross to have access to all detainees; Russia will allow the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe assistance group to return to Chechnya in May; Russia has started a dialogue with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson—as noble Lords will remember, she visited the region earlier this month between 1st and 4th April—who has been invited to return in two or three months' time; and discussions at the United Nations Commission for Human Rights in Geneva are on-going. All of this has happened as a result of our critical engagement—and I emphasise the word "critical".

Lord Renton

My Lords, what is the Government's attitude towards Mr Putin's statement that Russia had to attack the Muslims in Chechnya because of its fear of fundamentalist Muslim attacks elsewhere?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, it is important to remember the history, which, although there are sensitivities, from the Russian perspective is quite complex. Chechnya has a long history of conflict. It fought unsuccessfully for its independence from Russia between 1994 to 1996. Since that war, Chechnya has seen a rise in Islamic militancy and numerous kidnappings, including that of five Britons, three of whom, as your Lordships will remember, were beheaded in December 1998. I understand that that is the history on which Mr Putin relies and expresses anxiety.

We know that that anxiety is not shared by our international partners with the same intensity. That issue has been part of the critical dialogue. We are trying to help Russia to realise that, although we understand that history, this is not the most appropriate way of dealing with the issue. As Russia admitted as long ago as August, the only way to resolve this issue will be through political dialogue and a political solution, not a military one. The Russians have stated that they understand that. We are obviously pushing them to make it a reality.

Baroness Williams of Crosby

My Lords, does the Minister agree that one of the reasons for the war in Chechnya was the original invasion of Daghestan by some of the Chechen irregular fighters—a very different situation from that which applied in Chile? The Minister spoke about a political solution. Does she further agree that there was something close to a lasting solution involving the acceptance of a good deal of autonomy for Chechnya on the basis that it remained legally a part of the Russian Federation? Can she say whether Mr Putin will move in the direction of trying to resume talks as soon as he has identified people who can genuinely represent the population of Chechnya.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, that is certainly our hope and expectation. As I told the House as long ago as August 1999, there was an acceptance by the Russian authorities that this political solution would be the only lasting way forward. We all know that things have deteriorated very badly since then. However, the thrust of the encouragement that we have given remains the same: we have to get back to a situation where there can be a resolution between the Russian and Chechen parties.

Baroness Rawlings

My Lords, although Russia's Defence Minister yesterday denied that reinforcements are being sent to Chechnya, what information has the Minister received in regard to the latest reports from the Russian news agencies that as many as 3,000 paratroopers, motorised infantry troops and special police agents poured into the battle-torn Shatoi region of Chechnya? Despite all that the Minister has told us about the international commission and critical engagement, and bearing in mind my question, can we really trust them?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I cannot confirm or deny the matters outlined by the noble Baroness. They are not within my knowledge. But what I can say is that we have to face the reality of the situation in which we find ourselves. Russia cannot and should not be isolated. An isolated Russia is a far more dangerous entity than one which is engaged. We have discovered that by having this critical engagement with Russia we have been able to achieve positive results. We will continue to drive Russia in the most productive direction.

Lord Steel of Aikwood

My Lords, in the context of critical engagement, has there yet been time for any discussion with Mr Putin on the dilapidation of nuclear power stations in all parts of the Russian Federation which pose a threat to those well outside its borders?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I am not able to give the noble Lord details in relation to that issue. But I do know that the Russian situation was fully discussed with my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. We know that there are some challenges in relation to their anxieties about NMD and that that was also part of their discussion. I am confident that the broad issues in terms of national and international security would have been canvassed by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister and Mr Putin on behalf of Russia.

Lord Wright of Richmond

My Lords, does the Minister agree that to present what is essentially a nationalist threat from Chechnya as a world-wide Islamic threat carries the risk of misrepresenting Islam in the way which, distressingly, a former Secretary-General of NATO, Mr Willy Claes, did when he said that Islam was taking the place of communism as the greatest threat to Western civilisation?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord. The Chechens have a particular difficulty with the Russians and a number of them are of the Muslim faith. But that is not a main issue and I absolutely agree that it should not be used to heat a view that somehow there will be an Islamic threat against us all.

Lord Waddington

My Lords, I am puzzled. What kind of ethical foreign policy is it when you bomb the living daylights out of a country like Serbia which cannot bomb you back and court a country which can?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, we are not courting a country which can. I am sometimes disturbed by the shortness of memory in this House. Milosevic's actions were vile. This country, together with many others, did everything we could to bring him to the table and to make him recognise that he should change. He would not. I remember, if other noble Lords do not, the frisson that went through the House when the decision was made that we had no choice but to go into military mode against him. I shall never forget that day and I would hope that no one else in the House will either.

Viscount Waverley

My Lords, did President Putin elaborate on future Russian policy towards the CIS and were "pipeline" politics specifically discussed?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I am not able to answer that question either. I wish I had been there at the meeting because I would then be able to tell your Lordships precisely what took place. All I can say is that it was a very broad and in-depth discussion on all matters pertaining to our relations with our Russian colleagues.