---

10 May 2004 : Column 121W—continued

Israel (Targeted Assassinations)

Mr. George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his policy towards Israel's targeted assassinations policy. [169853]

Mr. Mike O'Brien: We have repeatedly made clear to the Government of Israel that their policy of targeted assassinations is illegal, unjustified and counter-productive. Both Israel and the Palestinians must refrain from actions that may further escalate tensions, including any more such killings.

Maldives

Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign   and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government's relations with the Maldives. [172054]

Mr. Rammell: The UK enjoys good relations with the Maldives, a fellow member of the Commonwealth. The British High Commissioner in Colombo (accredited to the Maldives) visits regularly, most recently from 19 to 22 March when he met the Foreign Minister and the Minister for Home Affairs among others.
 
10 May 2004 : Column 122W
 

Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action the Commonwealth has taken to encourage multi-party politics in the Maldives. [172055]

Mr. Mike O'Brien: It is for the Commonwealth Secretariat to comment on any action they may have taken to encourage multi-party politics in the Maldives. The Commonwealth Secretary General visited the Maldives in January 2003.

Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what official contacts his   Department has had with representatives of the Democratic Party of the Maldives. [172056]

Mr. Mike O'Brien: Officials in London and at our High Commission in Colombo (accredited to the Maldives) have met representatives of the Maldivian Democratic Party several times, most recently on 24 March.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what means other than the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty the Government are seeking to use to (a) strengthen the inspection and monitoring of uranium enrichment facilities and (b) restrict the extension of such facilities. [171037]

Mr. MacShane [holding answer 6 May 2004]: As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary made clear in his statement of 25 February 2004, Official Report, columns 46–49WS, on Weapons of Mass Destruction, recent experience has shown there is a need for more wide-ranging inspections of national nuclear industries. The   International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Additional Protocol provides the basis for carrying out such inspections. We seek universal adherence to the Additional Protocol and believe suppliers of nuclear technology should increasingly see this as a key commitment when they judge export licence applications. We are working with partners to enhance the effectiveness of the IAEA and strengthen its ability to ensure that nations comply with their safeguards agreements.

There is a strong argument that states which fail to comply with their safeguards obligations should forfeit the right to develop the nuclear fuel cycle, particularly the enrichment and reprocessing capabilities which are of such proliferation sensitivity. This would not deprive them of the possibility of constructing and running civil nuclear power stations but would prevent a seemingly civil programme masking a weapons programme.

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action the UK Government have taken to (a) support and (b) implement the Proliferation Security Initiative. [171038]

Mr. MacShane [holding answer 6 May 2004]: Since the launch of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) in May 2003 the UK has been one of a core group of countries working to drive the initiative forward. This has involved intensive worldwide lobbying efforts in
 
10 May 2004 : Column 123W
 
support of the Statement of Interdiction Principles agreed at Paris in September 2003. To date, more than 60 countries have expressed their support for PSI and their intention to apply its principles.

We want the PSI to become an established, accepted and effective part of the international security architecture. To that end, we are working with partners in the context of the International Maritime Organisation to make it an internationally recognised offence to transport weapons of mass destruction (WMD), their delivery systems and related materials on commercial vessels. To extend the legal base of interdiction operations we are opening negotiations with major commercial flag states to allow for the boarding of vessels which may be carrying cargoes which could be used in WMD programmes. We are currently examining a range of measures to deter proliferators and further raise the political and economic costs of trafficking in WMD.

We will continue to take the necessary steps to strengthen our capacity to act effectively as and when required to take action consistent with the PSI Statement of Interdiction Principles.

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent steps the Government have taken to prevent the proliferation of missile and nuclear weapon technology from North Korea. [171039]

Mr. MacShane [holding answer 6 May 2004]: The Government support fully the six-party talks process aimed at ensuring compliance by North Korea with the   ideals of a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, and persuading them to comply with their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

We are also playing a principal role in the Proliferation Security Initiative which, while it does not specifically target any particular state, aims to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and technology associated with such weapons.

Peru

Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what reports the UK mission in Peru has received concerning the date of the review of the case of Walter Cubas Balathazar; and if he will make a statement; [170240]

(2) what representations the Government have made to the Peruvian Government (a) in support of Mr. Cubas Balathazar and (b) in opposition to his detention; and if he will make a statement. [170277]

Mr. Rammell: Our Embassy in Lima raised the matter with the Ministry of Justice in July and November 2002, and again this April. We understand from the Peruvian authorities that the first hearing of Walter Cubas Balathazar's re-trial before the normal criminal justice system will be held on 14 May 2004. Our Embassy will continue to monitor closely this and all other similar cases. We support the Peruvian Government's efforts to improve and protect human rights for all Peruvians. We maintain a good dialogue with Peru on human rights.
 
10 May 2004 : Column 124W
 

DEFENCE

Arctic Convoys

Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of those who served on the Arctic convoys during the Second World War received the Russian 40th Anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War medal. [170357]

Mr. Caplin: The Royal Navy Medal Office issued approximately 15,000 Russian 40th Anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War medals during the early 1990s to eligible Royal Navy, Royal Marine, Army, Royal Air Force and Merchant Navy personnel. It would not be possible to provide a more precise figure without a manual trawl through the relevant service records at disproportionate cost. In addition the Russian Embassy in London issued medals directly to members of both the Russian Convoy Club and the North Russia Club, but the numbers involved are not known.

Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of those who served on the Arctic Convoys during the Second World War received the Atlantic Star. [170358]

Mr. Caplin: There is no definitive Medal Roll which indicates how many people received the Atlantic Star. It would not, therefore, be possible to establish how many recipients of the Atlantic Star sailed in Arctic waters on the convoys to Russia without undertaking an individual check of all the wartime personnel records which could be done only at disproportionate cost.

Mr. Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimates he has made of the cost to the Department of awarding a medal for service on the Arctic convoys. [171121]

Mr. Caplin: It is not possible to determine with any certainty how many people served in Arctic waters during the Second World War, but it is estimated that more than 95,000 Royal Navy personnel may have done so. The cost of issuing a new medal to Royal Navy veterans alone, including staff costs and the cost of the medal itself, would be at least £14 million if all those eligible or their next of kin applied.

---