Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40
- 59)
TUESDAY 23 NOVEMBER 1999
MR PETER
HAIN MP, MR
TONY BRENTON,
AND DR
CAROLYN BROWNE
Mr Chidgey
40. In the year report on foreign policy and
human rights on page 11 it is confidently stated that "the
liberation of Kosovo and the message it sent to regimes that disregard
human rights will come to be seen as a defining moment in modern
history." I think we need to challenge that, Minister, because
I think it is the case that the only difference that most people
will see between the barbarism of the activities of Milosevic
in Kosovo and what is now being perpetrated by the Russian generals
in Chechnya is the failure in many people's eyes of the western
nations to react in any positive way. In fact, the present situation
in Chechnya suggests that regimes will continue to disregard human
rights, and I would like very much to hear on behalf of the Committee
what you might have to say about this in your particular brief
for protecting human rights.
(Mr Hain) First of all, can I assume from what the
honourable Member says that he strongly supports the strong stand
that the Government took in Kosovo against ethnic cleansing and—
41. It is not really, is it, Minister? This
is so much hot air. You have made three key demands, but that
has not materially affected the plight of the population of Chechnya
in terms of the action by the Russians in the way that they are
perpetrating that particular action.
(Mr Hain) Chairman, I just want to get on the record
that I assume that he does support the action we took in Kosovo.
Mr Chidgey: We are questioning you, Mr Hain.
You are not questioning me.
Ms Abbott
42. We ask the questions.
(Mr Hain) If I am allowed to answer questions I will
do so. I am assuming that, and therefore the issue is whether
we can take similar action in Chechnya. I totally deplore Russia's
action in Chechnya, unequivocally. The Prime Minister has made
that clear, the Foreign Secretary has made that clear, both in
bilateral representations and publicly, so there is absolutely
no disagreement on that. The issue is what can be done about it.
We were able to intervene in Kosovo. I do not think anybody is
suggesting the same thing could happen in Chechnya. However, what
we did at Istanbul at the OSCE Summit is, against President Yeltsin's
wishes, against his very firm resistance, we got agreement at
that Summit that the OSCE would send a mission, that it would
visit Chechnya, that Russia would engage in a consultative dialogue
on what was going on there. That does not produce the wham-bam
instant action that perhaps the honourable Member is asking for,
but could I ask how he practically thinks he—
Mr Chidgey
43. Can I, Minister, respond to your comments
on that. I have never for one minute suggested that there was
a wham-bam reaction in Kosovo. I seem to remember the this Government
was somewhat late in making any decision on what to do in Kosovo.
The point I want to stress, Minister, and tease out with you is
that it seems to me that the Foreign Office is exercising different
policies on human rights depending on the particular country we
are trying to advise or influence on human rights. I can understand
the differences myself, of course I can, but what I want is some
clarity now from the Foreign Office on its policy and to let us
know whether or not it is taking the actions that I consider to
be appropriate in dealing with the differences in cultures and
the differences in the magnitude of the countries where human
rights violations are taking place. It is not good enough just
to turn round and say that we have made demands to Russia. We
know very well that demands are one thing; action is another.
I want to hear from the Minister how he believes that some positive
action is going to be taken using the influence that we do have
through our own councils and those internationally to bring Russia
into the fold as far as human rights are concerned.
(Mr Hain) I have just given a concrete example of
that in which we played a prominent role in the OSCE Summit in
Istanbul against Russia's wishes. In terms of the general point
which the honourable Member makes, I readily accept that in respect
of intervention to curb human rights abuses, we are not able to
do exactly the same thing in different circumstances. Of course
we are not, much as I would like to do so.
44. Is it not the question that we are not able
to achieve them.
(Mr Hain) We are either not able to or it would be
impractical to. What distinguishes us from our predecessors in
government is that we try to put human rights constantly at the
top of the international agenda. We have succeeded in many respects
and I will happily go through all of those, but I am not suggesting
that there is a uniform, blanket policy or tactic or strategy
that can be applied in every single country equally with every
single other country where there are undoubted human rights abuses
as in Chechnya across the world.
45. I understand; of course I do, but the Minister
has set out the Government's actions and their three demands that
they have made in Istanbul. Can the Minister tell us what sort
of forecast he has of those demands creating some positive action
from Russia in meeting our desires for human rights?
(Mr Hain) I am hopeful that the Russian Government
will respond because it has signed up to that.
46. What sort of timescale are we talking about?
(Mr Hain) I am hopeful that it will respond because
it has signed up to the agreement that was made in Istanbul. If
it defaults on that in any way, and I have already condemned the
appalling levels of atrocity and attacks on the Chechnyans by
the Russian Government, there are 220,000 refugees who have been
the victims of that, which is unacceptable, sooner rather than
later because the Government of Russia has signed up to it.
Chairman
47. Have they not said in terms that they will
solve the military matter before they proceed to the discussions?
(Mr Hain) I am not speaking for the Russian Government.
I want it to fulfil its obligations under the OSCE agreement that
it reluctantly was forced to sign up to, partly as a result of
British Government pressure in Istanbul last week.
Sir Peter Emery
48. Mr Hain, I do not wish to get into a political
argument of which side is more interested in human rights than
the other, and that is between our political parties, I mean.
Let us look at humanitarian intervention. Your officials gave
evidence to this Committee only last week defending absolutely
the action of the Government in the intervention in Kosovo. I
happen to agree that it was right we should have gone in, and
I happen to agree that the overriding of the humanitarian situation
in Kosovo was unbelievable. None the less, there are many people
who argue that it was illegal for us to have taken that action.
I do not happen to support that, but one has to accept that that
argument exists and you will have heard a member of my party arguing
that on the floor of the House only yesterday. What action therefore
is the Government taking with the United Nations to try and get
better established the legal position of intervention being allowed
when there is gross humanitarian interference of any population
anywhere and to be able to protect the humanitarian position of
peoples wherever they may be living?
(Mr Hain) I agree with the honourable Member that
that is an important point, and indeed the Prime Minister last
night laid out some principles about intervention following on
the Secretary-General of the United Nations' speech to the General
Assembly in September, which we broadly welcomed, and we are currently
within the United Nations context working on a series of proposals
on how the practicalities, both legally and in resource terms,
could be taken forward so that we get as consistent a policy on
humanitarian intervention as it is possible to do across the world,
preferably under the UN's auspices.
49. Can you tell us, Minister, what those recommendations
or proposals are?
(Mr Hain) I am not in a position to do so at the moment.
It is very early days, but we are taking a leading role in this
and we very much welcome the Secretary-General's initiative in
September in order to take this issue further.
50. But would it not be helpful for the Government
to be able to have absolute support on the action they were taking
and therefore surely it makes sense to publish the action that
you are taking as soon as possible?
(Mr Hain) At the appropriate time, and I realise how
tempting it is to have support from the Foreign Affairs Committee
which the honourable Member is kindly offering, we will of course
make it public, and it will become a matter of public debate and
not simply private diplomacy, but you will appreciate that it
should happen at the appropriate time.
51. I am always a little worried with the bureaucratic
phrase which, Mr Hain, you have condemned at other times, of "the
appropriate time". When the hell is "the appropriate
time"?
(Mr Hain) We want to see this initiative of ours work,
and others are also working on the whole matter, and part of making
it work is allowing our international partners in this exercise,
and those with whom we have to seek multilateral or bilateral
agreements, to see our proposals. It is not a question of being
at all defensive or shy about them. We want an international debate
because there are lots of countries in the United Nations who
will oppose them.
Chairman
52. Minister, in his speech to the UN General
Assembly Mr Kofi Annan said that such intervention could only
happen with the approval of the Security Council. You said you
approved of his speech. Do you accept that part of it?
(Mr Hain) I think that is an ideal which we all ought
to sign up to. Whether it is always practical, as we saw in Kosovo,
where people are literally being murdered by the minute, is another
matter, but it is precisely because the Kosovos of this world
and the East Timors, where we acted very speedily and honourably
to get the United Nations' backing for the support for the people
of East Timor, that to get a consistent framework if we possibly
can that we are working so hard on this and have welcomed his
speech, as you say.
Sir John Stanley
53. Minister, I want to follow the same point.
I am concerned about what the Government's position is not in
relation to policy on intervention but in relation to legality.
Can you explain to us what made the intervention in Kosovo legal
as far as the British Government's view is concerned?
(Mr Hain) I think the honourable Member will find
that this has been consistently addressed and replied to by the
Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister and others. We have taken
advice, we have not been challenged on this, that we are absolutely
certain that it was legal.
54. But would you answer the question?
(Mr Hain) I thought I had.
55. No, not at all. What were the features of
the Kosovo intervention which made it legal?
(Mr Hain) The features of the Kosovo intervention
which made it legal were a combination of the genocide and the
ethnic cleansing which was being perpetrated, the way in which
we, together with the US, sought ourselves agreement and pursued
other areas in order to get it. That was the essential environment
in which the legality was set.
56. The legality arose out of a judgement in
relation to the scale of the humanitarian disaster.
(Mr Hain) That was undoubtedly one factor, not an
exclusive one, but one factor.
57. I am not clear that there was any other
factor. There was no UN Resolution cover or anything like that.
Was there any other factor which in your view made it legal?
(Mr Hain) There are a number of other Security Council
Resolutions which bore down upon Slobodan Milosevic and the Government
of the Federal Republic in Yugoslavia's murderous activities in
Kosovo and elsewhere in the region which also provided us with
the shelter under which we thought that that intervention was
not just justifiable on humanitarian grounds but justifiable in
terms of international law as well. I note that there has been
no successful attempt to challenge that. It seems to me to speak
for itself.
58. But you would agree that none of the United
Nations Security Council Resolutions in any way authorised military
intervention in Kosovo?
(Mr Hain) None of them specifically did so. Many of
them had a bearing on it and none of them either condemned it.
59. Would you say then that the issue of legality
would appear, as far as the British Government's position is concerned,
to largely relate to the scale of the human rights violations?
(Mr Hain) Not exclusively, but obviously, if people
are being killed under a systematic programme of ethnic cleansing
and genocide, as was happening in Kosovo, and also of course in
Bosnia before that, then that is a n important factor. It is very
unusual to get action of this kind and when it occurs, clearly
there are often extraordinary circumstances. I am not suggesting
it is exclusive. If there had not been as it were any shelter
provided by previous United Nations Security Council Resolutions,
I think the legality matter might have been much more difficult
to justify.
| 
