Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180-199)
BARONESS AMOS,
DR ANDREW
POCOCK AND
MR TONY
BRENNAN
TUESDAY 25 MARCH 2003
Sir Patrick Cormack
180. My admiration for your mastery of diplomatic
language grows with each answer that you give us.
(Baroness Amos) Well I have been in this job now for
nearly two years, and I am slightly worried by your saying that,
because I always hope that you will think that I am open and honest.
181. I am sure you are open and honest.
(Baroness Amos) But, if you think I am becoming too
diplomatic, I worry.
182. I think you might have gone native.
(Baroness Amos) I hope not.
183. But may I ask you just one question about
this extraordinary visit to Paris. You said what you said, but
have you indicated, since then, to the French President—I
am sure the Prime Minister is very sorry he gave him a Churchill
pen—that putting up Mugabe in that luxurious accommodation,
seeing his wife go out on shopping sprees, every day, was a grotesque
insult to the starving and bleeding people of Zimbabwe?
(Baroness Amos) That is a view that we have. As I
have tried to explain to the Committee, I do not think that that
way of looking at this issue is one which is shared necessarily
by our colleagues in France.
184. No, I accept that, but they are in no doubt
that that is what we think of it?
(Baroness Amos) They are in no doubt that that is
what we think.
Sir John Stanley
185. Minister, can I return to an issue which
the Chairman raised right at the beginning of this session. Is
it not a rather poor reflection on the Foreign Office that the
US State Department has got out its detailed public information
booklet "Zimbabwe's Manmade Crisis", where the British
Government, with its particular responsibilities, actually has
not managed to issue any such similar or comparable publication?
(Baroness Amos) I do not agree with that, and the
reason I do not agree with that is that we took the view, and
I will look at this again in the light of the promise that I made
to the Committee right at the beginning, that there was ample
evidence out there from NGOs in Zimbabwe, as well as NGOs like
Amnesty International, on the human rights issues in Zimbabwe.
So our focus has tended to be, in the documents that we have produced
on the history of our relationship with Zimbabwe, focusing in
particular on land reform, but also, most recently, on the humanitarian
crisis. I take the point which the Committee has raised, which
is that maybe this information is not as widely available as it
could be, and certainly I will be looking at that; but I do not
think that it is a failure on our part at all. The information
is there, it is publicly available, we took the view that it was
publicly available; perhaps this is something that we should have
reviewed at a slightly earlier stage, I am very happy to do that.
The European Union has made, most recently on 19 February, a very
strong statement about human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. We have
taken just a slightly different approach, and the Committee will
be aware that our assets freeze, and the European Union assets
freeze, has been in place for a year. The United States Government
made a decision on an assets freeze only recently; again, a slightly
different approach.
186. Did the United States State Department
document owe anything to British diplomacy?
(Baroness Amos) In what sense? It is very much a US—
187. Was British diplomacy behind that State
Department initiative, or was it wholly a home-grown, US Government
initiative?
(Baroness Amos) I have been, as have officials in
the Foreign Office, and indeed the Foreign Secretary, in regular
contact and regular discussion with colleagues in the United States
on the situation in Zimbabwe, that has been the case since I have
been in this job, and certainly before that. So what the United
States Government document is intended to do is back up the resolution
which is going to the Commission on Human Rights, and we were
aware that they were putting that document together, it is to
back-up the EU resolution. And I think the United States have
put up their own; they are supporting our resolution.
188. So do we take it that the British Government,
though it did not initiate in any way the US State Department's
document, warmly welcomes it?
(Baroness Amos) Yes, absolutely; and, as I say, we
have been working very closely with our colleagues in the United
States on these issues.
Chairman
189. Before moving on to the Commonwealth, I
would like to round off what Mr Pope began, on the European Union.
Is there any prospect, in relation to the sort of document that
Sir John has mentioned, of the EU agreeing such a factual document;
have we tried?
(Baroness Amos) We have not tried, no.
190. Should we try?
(Baroness Amos) There is no reason why we should not
try, and we will.
191. I think it was Sir John, or Sir Patrick,
raised the SW Radio, and the prospects of funding. Has any thought
been given to financial assistance from the EU?
(Baroness Amos) I do not know, actually, whether they
have made an application to the EU. Have you any idea?
(Mr Brennan) I understand they have had some discussions
in Brussels, but I do not know where it has gone.
192. Would we support any such representations
application by them to the EU?
(Baroness Amos) Support, in what way?
193. Support the EU granting the funding to
SW Radio?
(Baroness Amos) If they met the criteria, there would
be no problem at all, from our point of view.
194. Just one or two final questions about African
solidarity and the Mugabe visit. Is it true that the African countries
had made it clear that if Mugabe were barred from Paris they would
not attend?
(Baroness Amos) This is something that I was told.
Certainly, I have no idea how true that is.
195. Even if we do not know about Paris, presumably
as an EU member we would know about the proposed meeting in Portugal?
(Baroness Amos) I do know, certainly, about that meeting.
196. And what was the position there?
(Baroness Amos) I attended the Ministerial Meeting
in advance of the proposed Heads of State EU/Africa Meeting, which
was due to take place towards the end of next week, and it was
made absolutely clear at that meeting that the African countries,
through the mechanism of the African Union, had taken a decision
that if Mugabe was not invited to EU/Africa they would not attend.
That was the position that was put to us, on behalf of the AU[12],
by the AU Chair.
197. Did we point out gently to the AU that
that was in contradiction to the sorts of comments and commitments
they made at NePAD[13],
to provide good governance and support good governance in response
to the aid and support from the West?
(Baroness Amos) Not only was it made
clear in respect of NePAD, it was made clear also with respect
to their relationship under Cotonou, that there are principles
governing the relationship between the EU and Africa which the
European Union would want to see applied, and the European Union
apply those principles to themselves, in terms of their relationship,
and it is absolutely right that the EU should apply those principles
in terms of its relationship with other parts of the world. And
that was made absolutely clear.
198. So, in effect, notwithstanding the damage
to the image of Africa, notwithstanding the potential damage to
financing, they put African solidarity and Mugabe as their first
priority?
(Baroness Amos) I think it is deeply disappointing.
Certainly, I have said on a number of occasions, and others have
repeated this, in the G8, that we are risking the whole NePAD
initiative here. What we have sought to do is say that we cannot
punish an entire continent by the actions of one country; having
said that, as the situation in Zimbabwe has continued to deteriorate,
I think that there has been an expectation across the world that
there would be some acknowledgement of this, in some way, by some
of the countries in Africa. What I know, from the discussions
that I have had with many countries on the continent, is that
there is a great deal that is going on behind the scenes, and,
as I said, I think that the public statements that are made very
often are at variance with the frustration I know that there is
with the situation, they are at variance very often with some
of the tough messages that I know are delivered in private. And
I think what sometimes we have to remember is that when there
is an alliance between countries, either through something like
the Southern African Development Community, or the African Union,
different kinds of methods are used to express displeasure. The
same applies, the Committee has pushed me very hard today on our
relationship with France, and I have been accused by Sir Patrick
of using diplomatic language.
199. Do you plead guilty?
(Baroness Amos) I hope that he was referring only
to that particular aspect of my evidence.
12 Africa Union. Back
13
New Partnership for African Development. Back
|
