Examination of witnesses (Questions 60
- 79)
TUESDAY 18 APRIL 2000
MR PETER
HAIN and MS
FRANCES MACLEOD
60. Would you agree that what we are now seeing
is the beginnings of ethnic cleansing?
(Mr Hain) I do not want to use that phrase. This phrase
has been used in an inflammatory way by the Opposition. I think
we should take this opportunity, if I may say so, to adopt a measured
response. To compare what is happening in Zimbabwe with what happened
in Kosovo I would have thought was ludicrous. It does not make
it any more acceptable to find the lawlessness and violence and
now deaths of all sorts of people. I do not think the targeting
of the predominantly black (though multi-racial) Opposition, with
the whole succession of killings, with up to 100 people violently
attacked, I do not think you can describe that as ethnic cleansing
because it is often black on black, but it is equally serious.
61. Chairman, I would just observe that it was
not me who mentioned Kosovo, it was the Minister. The point I
want to put to the Minister is this: that if we do have human
rights abuses taking place, if we do have incitements to racial
hatred—whether or not we have ethnic cleansing beginning
is clearly a matter on which we do not agree—but is your
thesis that, given those things are taking place in Zimbabwe,
what we need are robust words? Should the world community just
simply talk about this, or is it not the time when the world community
does something about it?
(Mr Hain) First of all, I do not see how you can describe
the cleaning-out of black farm workers on the farm of the white
farmer who was recently killed as being ethnic cleansing. I cannot
see how you describe it as that. I think we should get away from
inflammatory rhetoric like that. As for robust words, Mr Rowlands
referred to the fact that I have been very robust. Some people
have said I have been too robust. I have felt it my responsibility
to give a very clear message. I do agree with you, Mr Wilshire,
that the international community does need to take its own responsibilities
seriously, which is exactly why we approached all of the different
international fora in the way that I described.
62. You say you agree with me. I certainly agree
with you in that we should not see this as a unilateral United
Kingdom versus Zimbabwe issue. What I do believe is that we should
see it as a world issue for taking action. You said at the beginning
of your evidence that you were reluctant to take about the UN
role in this. Notwithstanding that reluctance, can I press you
to say why you are reluctant to? Is there not a role for the UN
to take action?
(Mr Hain) There may well be. I am not reluctant to
discuss the UN, in fact I said it had been discussed in New York.
There is a progression to these matters. If an African solution
can be found to this African problem that would be the best solution.
63. What suggestions have we put to the United
Nations about action that the United Nations could take?
(Mr Hain) I do not want to go into detailed discussion
about what we are saying through private diplomacy. What we need
to achieve is a successful resolution of this crisis?
64. Have you or have you not proposed to the
United Nations that they should take some action?
(Mr Hain) At this stage we have concentrated on doing
what I have described, which is approaching the Commonwealth,
which is approaching the organisation for African unity, neighbouring
African States and one of the most powerful African leaders, President
Slavasinger. That has been our priority. The question of the United
Nations involvement may well come at a later stage. What we are
interested in is effective action, not gestures.
65. With respect, that is not answering the
question that I asked. The question that I asked was, "Has
the British Government put any proposals to the United Nations
for them to take action?"
(Mr Hain) No, we have not asked the United Nations
to take action. We have had discussions with our colleagues in
the United Nations. If you are interested in serious diplomacy
as opposed to gestures these things have to be approached in a
measured and a progressive fashion.
66. Can I ask you what contact you have had
with the various international financial bodies with a view to
suggesting that they take action?
(Mr Hain) Effectively President Mugabe has imposed
negative sanctions on himself by the inability of the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank to actually support Zimbabwe
in the way that, other things being equal, and the different policies
we would all like them to do. We have not needed to talk to the
IMF or any other international financial institution about action
against Zimbabwe because Zimbabwe has prevented itself from receiving
support from us.
67. Whilst that is true it must be blindingly
obvious to everybody concerned that if there is to be a solution
to the problems in Zimbabwe at some stage it will require the
involvement of the IMF and others. Therefore, would it not be
sensible to encourage world financial institutions to make it
crystal clear that they too will require change before they are
prepared to join in any sort of discussion?
(Mr Hain) With due respect, Mr Wilshire, that is exactly
what I said. The IFIs have not been able to agree a programme
of support they want to provide because the Government of Zimbabwe
has been unable to change its policies. There have been calls,
not from this Committee, I am pleased to say, for sanctions and
other tough action of the kind that Mr Wilshire is alluding to.
It is very significant that the leader of the opposition Morgan
Tsvangirai has explicitly said he does not want sanctions. He
does not want these kind of instant gestures which may seem as
if Britain is taking some action but could well have a totally
counter-productive effect, not least, on the people in Zimbabwe
who are suffering terribly, as they are at the present time. If
the Opposition takes that view I think we should all take heed
of it.
68. You said in reply to my colleague, Sir David
Madel, about the Commonwealth, if I understood you correctly,
that if a country becomes a military dictatorship Commonwealth
rules allow for its suspension, expulsion or whatever else it
may decide. Did I hear you correctly when you said that there
are no rules within the Commonwealth institutions that allow us
to take action again human rights abuses. Is that what you were
saying?
(Mr Hain) What I said was that the remit of the Commonwealth
Ministerial Action Group, which is the only body to act for the
Commonwealth in between heads of government conferences—the
last one was in Durban last November—only enable action
to be taken in the terms of suspension. Gambia, for example, is
still on the agenda of the CMAG. Cameroon was discussed at the
meeting of CMAG in New York and Zimbabwe will be discussed, because
Britain asked that it be so, at the next meeting. Can I also just
briefly add, I was at a meeting of CMAG, the Commonwealth Ministerial
Action Group, and one of the leading voices on behalf of the British
Government in early October that urged a widening of the remit
of CMAG precisely to address the wider issues raised by the Harare
declaration in terms of human rights abuses, bad governance and
so on. That was agreed by CMAG but it was put off at the Durban
CHOGM meeting for consideration by a high level group, which is
chaired by South Africa and has to report back to the next Commonwealth
heads of government meeting.
69. The Commonwealth can suspend Zimbabwe if
it chooses to?
(Lord MacDonald) No. Not unless there is a military
coup.
Chairman
70. The precedents are for a military coup.
There is no precedent for any human rights matters being the basis
for suspension?
(Mr Hain) There is a precedent for them being addressed,
as I have said in respect of the Gambia and Cameroon, but there
is not a precedent for suspension. The rules do not permit it.
Mr Wilshire
71. Can I be clear on that, is it precedent
for it or is the Minister saying that the rules technically do
not allow it. I think that is a very important distinction.
(Mr Hain) Unless there was a consensus amongst the
heads of government of the Commonwealth—they do not have
to formally meet—that action could be taken.
Chairman
72. There is no chance of African colleagues
agreeing to such a suspension in the case of Zimbabwe?
(Mr Hain) No, I do not think there is, that is the
plain statement of fact.
Chairman: I would like to move on to citizenship.
Mr Mackinlay.
Mr Mackinlay
73. I would like to ask you about a very narrow
area, Minister, arithmetically mainly, presumably the people who
live in Zimbabwe, to whom we owe obligations, there is like a
ranking order, there are people who are demonstrably British citizens.
I guess, perhaps you might amplify on that, there might be some
who are Zimbabwean citizens but have relinquished United Kingdom
citizenship, and then there might be others. I wonder if you can
give us some amplification on what you see as the numbers, bearing
in mind, I think, even emanating from British Government circles
there is a bit of ambiguity. There is talk about 20,000 British
nationals and then we have also heard the figure 15,000. We have
obligations to everyone in terms of human justice and for humanitarian
reasons, I accept that. There must be a ranking order for priority?
(Mr Hain) I am happy to the clarify the situation.
Chairman
74. Please.
(Mr Hain) I think the Foreign Affairs Committee received
in confidence a document describing some of these matters. As
of the end of last week there were 14,500 registered British nationals,
but this figure is constantly being updated. Overwhelmingly these
are Zimbabwean citizens who can, however, claim British passports
and register as British nationals either directly themselves or
through their parents or grandparents.
75. Would have unrestricted right of access
to the United Kingdom?
(Mr Hain) If you are a British passport holder that
is clearly the case.
Mr Mackinlay
76. Do you think there is also a group amongst
the Africans, and there is probably a small minority of Asian
people there, who are equally entitled but it probably has not
been activated or they are unaware of their rights on a comparable
basis to the last group you referred to?
(Mr Hain) I would not want to speculate or guess on
what the total is. I am trying to be as helpful as I can be. Not
all of the 14,500 registered British nationals that I referred
to are white.
77. No.
(Mr Hain) I do not think we should see this as a white/black
issue. In fact some of the media coverage has focused too much
on this recently. More black citizens have been killed as a result
of this lawlessness than whites.
78. I agree with you. You probably missed my
point, it seems to me that the group you referred to, which people
who are Zimbabwean citizens , who have a right to a British passport
from the point of view of London, you say that is rising 14,500,
many of them are not white, many are African, and so on, I wonder
if that could grow considerably? There must be some assessment
of what the maximum number would be, is there not?
(Mr Hain) I do want to—
79. We must have these records back from pre-1981?
(Mr Hain) We think there is up to 20,000 people in
Zimbabwe who may qualify. We cannot be exactly sure. This is an
issue that goes back generations. This enables me to briefly make
this point, these are people who want to stay in Zimbabwe, they
want to continue to farm the land, to contribute to the country.
It is their country, Britain is not their country. I think it
is important we keep a focus on that. All of our diplomacy and
all of the, I hope, pronouncements and statements of this Committee
ultimately will bear in mind that it is in the interests of those
people to stay in Zimbabwe and contribute to its future.
|
