| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Goodlad : Our relations are excellent. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary paid a successful visit to the Republic of Korea last week. He had full and useful exchanges with--among others--the President, the Foreign Minister and the Defence Minister. As well as bilateral matters, their discussions covered regional and international issues, including North Korea, market access, trade, technology co-operation, investment and the European Community. This was a very good opportunity to establish contact with the new South Korean Administration. My right hon. Friend also met and had useful discussions with representatives of the British business community.
Mr. Bellingham : I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that extremely informative reply. Does he share South Korea's grave concern about North Korea's threatened withdrawal from the non-proliferation treaty? Does he agree that that poses the threat of destabilisation throughout the region and that there is an urgent need for the International Atomic Energy Agency to move in and
Column 823
carry out an inspection? Will he seek the support of the Government of the People's Republic of China in putting pressure on North Korea?Mr. Goodlad : Yes. North Korea's announcement of its intention to withdraw from the non-proliferation treaty is a cause for great concern and its refusal to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency's special inspections gives further cause to question the intentions of the North Korean Government. The United Kingdom is determined to maintain and strengthen the non-proliferation treaty. We urge North Korea to reconsider its position and we intend to explore all possible avenues with our Security Council colleagues to persuade North Korea to change its mind.
My hon. Friend is quite right that China has a vital role to play in attempts to persuade the North Koreans to reverse their position and we look to the Chinese to exercise that responsibility. We also attach the greatest importance to full co-operation among all states on the Security Council, especially the permanent five.
Hong Kong
16. Mr. Colvin : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when and where he intends to have talks with the Government of the People's Republic of China on the development of democracy in Hong Kong ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Goodlad : We and the Chinese Government announced yesterday that talks on Hong Kong's electoral arrangements will begin in Peking on 22 April. Our aim will be to reach an understanding with the Chinese side on arrangements which will ensure that elections are fair, open and acceptable to the people of Hong Kong. If we can reach such an understanding, we and the Hong Kong Government will recommend it to Hong Kong's Legislative Council. It will be for that body to pass the necessary legislation.
Mr. Colvin : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that although it was the Governor who tabled the proposals for constitutional change in Hong Kong, those proposals were, none the less, the recommendations of Her Majesty's Government and have the broad support of hon. Members on both sides of the House? Furthermore, they are within the Basic Law. If the People's Republic of China thinks otherwise, it would help the proposed talks if the Chinese were to be specific about the respects in which they think that the proposals depart from the Basic Law so that those matters can be addressed in detail before the talks take place.
Mr. Goodlad : My hon. Friend is correct in every particular.
Mr. Kaufman : The Minister keeps talking about reaching an understanding with China. Is it not a fact that any understanding with China can result only in a further watering down of proposals that were already grossly inadequate in terms of what the Hong Kong Legislative Council and OMELCO have asked for? Is it not also a fact that continual caving in to Chinese tactics of delay and dilution will result in there being very little democracy indeed to be handed over in 1997?
Column 824
Mr. Goodlad : The right hon. Gentleman's views are well known to the House. I can reiterate only that the outcome of the talks will be placed before the Legislative Council in Hong Kong and will, we hope, be acceptable to the people of Hong Kong.
Peru
17. Mr. McFall : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last met the Peruvian ambassador to discuss the democratic process in that country.
Mr. Garel-Jones : My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary last discussed Peru with the Peruvian ambassador on 18 November 1992. I visited Lima from 7 to 9 January and was able to assess the progress that Peru has made in restoring democratic government.
Mr. McFall : Is the Minister aware that when I visited Peru last year, I witnessed for myself the evil which the Sendero Luminoso is perpetrating on the people of Peru ? However, there is no social welfare programme in that country, and the more President Fujimori goes ahead with his proposals and ignores the social reality, the worse it will be for the western world, particularly in relation to drugs. When the Secretary of State next meets the ambassador, will he impress on him the overall need for democracy in Peru so that that helps the people of that country ?
Mr. Garel-Jones : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his perfectly correct remarks about Sendero Luminoso which is probably the most horrific terrorist organisation operating anywhere on the globe today. We must recognise that since the autumn coup--as I believe it is called-- President Fujimori has made progress in the restoration of democracy and the new constitutional assembly holds out considerable hope for the future of Peru. When I was there, I was able to speak not only to the Speaker of that assembly, but to a number of human rights groups. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that, in the end, although the activities of Sendero Luminoso may be challenging and deeply repulsive, the route to its defeat must be through the proper restoration of full democratic human rights in Peru.
Malaysia
20. Sir Fergus Montgomery : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions have taken place with the Government of Malaysia on United Kingdom-Malaysian relations.
Mr. Goodlad : I visited Malaysia from 1 to 5 April and was able to see at first hand that our relations with Malaysia are excellent. I met the Minister of Finance, Mr. Anwar Ibrahim--who had himself visited the United Kingdom earlier this year--and had wide-ranging discussions with him and a number of his ministerial colleagues. I also visited the free trade zone in Penang and the Forestry Research Institute of Malaysia.
Sir Fergus Montgomery : Is it not important that British firms should try to secure contracts in respect of the new Kuala Lumpur airport? What are the Government doing to assist?
Column 825
Mr. Goodlad : My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is plenty of scope for British firms to increase British business in Malaysia ; the new planned airport at Sepang is an important example of that. In February, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister offered up to £42 million- worth of grant finance to be used in association with export credits and contracts that may be awarded to British companies of up to £120 million-worth of United Kingdom goods and services for the planned new airport. Any firm commitment will be subject to the usual appraisal procedures and contacts with our Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development partners in line with internationally agreed rules on the provision of tied aid. I very much hope that our companies will be successful.
Mr. Dalyell : As the Minister said that he visited the forestry institute, what did it say about the rate of logging and the destruction of rain forest in Sabah and Sarawak and on the Malaysian mainland?
Mr. Goodlad : Nothing, Madam Speaker.
Serbia and Montenegro
21. Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action he proposes to improve the effectiveness and impact of United Nations and European Community sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro.
Mr. Douglas Hogg : We have provided customs personnel to the sanctions assistance missions, which are helping Serbia's neighbours enforce sanctions more effectively, and £100,000 to establish a communications network along the Danube. I am confident that sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro are already having an impact, but sanctions may need to be tightened still further to put pressure on the Serbs to sign the Vance-Owen plan ; further action is under consideration in New York.
Mr. Mackinlay : Has the Minister had an opportunity to read the report of the debate in European Standing Committee B which, a few weeks ago, probed the Government on the policing and implementation of sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro as they relate to this country? It was shown that there was an hiatus and an unsatisfactory system of controlling and policing exports from the United Kingdom to the former states of Yugoslavia. Further, there was an indication from the Minister that Greece was, to say the least, sloppy in its policing of the sanctions regime. Will the Minister bear that in mind and tell us whether the Government have taken measures to ensure that the United Kingdom is rigorously applying the sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro and that there is no sloppiness on behalf of the United Kingdom?
Mr. Hogg : It is certainly our intention rigorously to impose sanctions and I am not aware of any shortcomings. If the hon. Gentleman--or any other hon. Member, for that matter--has evidence of substantial shortcomings, the Government will be anxious to look at it.
The point has been made to Greece on a number of occasions that it is important that all Community members most vigorously and rigorously eforce the sanctions. As the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr.
Column 826
Mackinlay) knows, there is a draft resolution in New York that will further tighten the sanctions regime if it is voted for in the Security Council.Mr. Dickens : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is one thing to have tight sanctions to try to bring the parties in the former Yugoslavia to their senses and to a peaceful resolution, but that it is another thing to start talking from the comfort of another place about military intervention, which would mean that the fighting forces in Yugoslavia would move into the towns where the bombing would be on civilians and children?
Mr. Dickens : Yes. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that many people in the United Kingdom and, indeed, the Chamber would be aggrieved if the British armed forces were used in a warlike manner in the former Yugoslavia? The people who are crying for military intervention would soon be crying for the bodies of our men and women if they were returned in body bags to Southampton and other airports.
Mr. Hogg : I agree with a lot of what my hon. Friend said. It seems that there are two different sorts of military action that one should consider. The first is whether it would be right to deploy United Kingdom ground troops in an aggressive role--and then the question is whether it would be right in what is effectively a civil war to take action that would condemn probably a substantial number of British soldiers to die. That is a question which the House must consider. My view is that it would not be right.
A different question is whether it would be right in any circumstances to use air power. That question is constantly kept under review because there is a case to be made for it. Against that, there are serious disadvantages associated with that policy. So far, it has been held--in my view, rightly- -that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
Ms Short : Does the Minister agree that there are awful parallels between Europe's failure to protect the jews before the second world war and our failure to protect the Bosnians from the systematic use of rape and ethnic cleansing? Is it not proposed that massive ground forces will be put in place if the Vance-Owen proposals are carried? The Serbs are refusing to accept implementation of those proposals. Can we not have an alternative plan at least to create some safe havens for the Bosnians?
Mr. Hogg : There is a distinction to be made between deploying troops in a peacemaking role and deploying troops in a peacekeeping role. So far as the latter is concerned, if there were a genuine agreement and a sustainable ceasefire, and if there were substantial troop contributions from a number of other countries--most notably the United States--and the control and command mechanisms seemed right, we should look sympathetically at a proposal that British troops should be used in a peacekeeping role.
There is a major distinction between that operation and what the hon. Lady is referring to, which is to use troops in a peacemaking role--to enforce peace by military action. I ask the hon. Lady rhetorically : is it right to condemn British soldiers to die for that purpose? I say no.
Column 827
Commonwealth of Independent States
22. Ms Eagle : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans Her Majesty's Government have to support and assist the independent republics of the CIS to ensure a smooth transition to democracy.
Mr. Douglas Hogg : We fully support the development of democratic and economic reforms in all the countries of the former Soviet Union. We contribute to this process through our bilateral aid programmes, such as the know-how fund, and play a substantial part in multilateral efforts. We are doing all that we can to foster contacts and exchanges with the newly independent states through international forums to support democratic processes.
Ms Eagle : Following the demise of the Soviet Union, there is great instability in the former Soviet states that are now independent within the Commonwealth of Independent States. One of the problems is that Ukraine
Column 828
and Kazakhstan have access to nuclear weapons. What is the Government's opinion on trying to force these states to sign strategic arms reduction talks in exchange for aid so that we can help them on the path to democracy and alleviate their poverty?Mr. Hogg : The hon. Lady is right with her general point that there is instability. We look to the conference on security and co-operation in Europe as the instrument most likely to provide the solution of regional and ethnic problems in the former Soviet Union. As for nuclear-weapon states, our real concern is focused on Ukraine. That is because the tension between Ukraine and Russia is increasing. The view is expressed in the Ukrainian Parliament that Ukraine should not relinquish its nuclear weapons while there is the tension to which I have referred. We regard that as a disastrous mistake. We shall do all that we can, both by way of negative security assurances and by persuasion, and to some extent by assistance, to persuade the Ukrainians to sign the non-proliferation treaty as a non- nuclear state.
| Next Section (Debates)
| Home Page |