---

Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney, North and Stoke Newington) (Lab): The whole House will want to congratulate the Secretary of State on the lead that he has taken in respect of a tragedy that has unfolded largely as the eyes of the world were on the middle east. The question of military intervention has been raised, and he is quoted in the newspapers today as ruling it out. Does he accept that many of us support him in ruling out military intervention at this point, and that we support the emphasis that he has correctly placed on the responsibility of the Sudanese Government, the role of the UN and the potential role of the African Union? I believe that, in the long run, the only sustainable solution to the problems of that continent lies in the hands of Africans themselves.

Hilary Benn: I can only agree with every single word that my hon. Friend has said. I agree in particular with her last point, which is why I am such a strong supporter of the African Union's initiative on peace and security, the development of its standby force, its current force in Burundi, and the regional initiative taken by the Economic Community of West African States, which first sent troops into Liberia when the fighting and carnage were going on Monrovia. That is exactly the direction in which we need to go, not least because in the past, when the world wanted something to be done, it has traditionally looked to a very small number of countries to do it. One reason why it has been difficult to respond is that that burden has fallen in particular on a small number of countries. Increasing the world community's capacity to take effective action is something that we should welcome, and that is exactly what the African Union is doing.

Dr. Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park) (LD): I wonder whether the Secretary of State has managed to read the International Development Committee report on the Sudan, which was produced during the 1997–98 Session? If so, does he share my concern that that report described circumstances very similar to Sudan's in the lead-up to the humanitarian crisis in Bahr el Ghazal in 1998? Does he agree that the only way to prevent conflict and bring about truly lasting peace in the Sudan, which is a huge country and very difficult to control, is to have long-term development and, above all, control over the spread of arms in the country?

Hilary Benn: I have not read the report to which the hon. Lady refers, but I should and I will, and I would like time to reflect on the points that she made. As I said in response to an earlier question, I share her desire for long-term development in this poor country. In order for that to happen, certain other things have to happen earlier. That means turning the Naivasha protocols into a comprehensive peace agreement. In my discussions with First Vice-President Taha yesterday, he expressed
 
9 Jun 2004 : Column 286
 
his commitment to that, working through the partnership that he has developed with John Garang. That was one of the products of the long period that the two spent together in Naivasha: they have built a relationship of trust that has enabled the negotiations to succeed. That should be taken forward, but the principles set out in the Naivasha protocol should be applied to the other regional difficulties within Sudan. I genuinely believe that those are the essential preconditions, together with support from the international community, to bringing about longer-term development.

Alan Howarth (Newport, East) (Lab): Having myself visited Sudan and been horrified by the seemingly interminable history of the legacy of racial and cultural conflict in that vast area, I add my congratulations to the Secretary of State on his moral and practical energy in dealing with the present tragedy in Darfur. Will he tell the House whether there are features of international law that create obstacles to other countries and agencies entering sovereign territory to help with palpable humanitarian crises where the existing authorities in that territory are clearly complicit in the creation of the circumstances of the disaster? What is our Government's policy to ensure that international law is reformed so that, whatever the administrative and political problems within the UN, at least there are no legal excuses for failure to act early and effectively?

Hilary Benn: This is exactly the issue that Kofi Annan's high-level panel is currently considering. The plain truth is that it is one of the biggest challenges that the world faces. What do we do about states and countries that oppress their own people and threaten people in other countries? In a sense, dealing with that problem is what the UN was established to seek to do. There is a record—the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) alluded to it earlier—of some successes and some failures. The world must reflect particularly on those failures, because people look at the principles of the UN, find themselves in the circumstances that we are facing today in Darfur and other countries, and ask themselves what those principles mean for them. They ask when those principles will apply to them, and I believe that that is a very pertinent question for people in those circumstances to ask. It is our responsibility to answer them.

Mr. Robert Key (Salisbury) (Con): Can the Secretary of State reassure the House—and raise it with Kofi Annan when he speaks to him later today—that there is appropriate satellite cover of Darfur in order to enhance proper surveillance of military activity, the movement of people, better management of agriculture, hydrology and infrastructure and, of course, better communications? That, surely, would be a contribution that the richer countries of the world could and should make.

Hilary Benn: The hon. Gentleman raises an interesting point, which, to be honest, I had not thought about before; but I undertake to reflect on the point.

Mr. Malcolm Savidge (Aberdeen, North) (Lab): I add my congratulations to those expressed on both sides of
 
9 Jun 2004 : Column 287
 
the House to my right hon. Friend and the Government on their commitment to dealing with this crisis. I urge that we should continue to seek to focus the international community on this tragic situation, not least to pressurise the Sudan Government to give active co-operation to attempts to bring peace and relief to the area.

Hilary Benn: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his words. What has characterised all the questions asked by Members in response to my statement has been the common view that pressure must be put on the Government of Sudan to honour their obligations. In the end, the Sudan Government bear the primary responsibility for the state of the country and the welfare of its people. It is their responsibility to do the right things. Given the difficulties in the past about gaining access for humanitarian supplies, it is important to recognise that I noticed some change during the course of my discussions. I believe that that was the result of international pressure and it shows that we can have some impact.

We should acknowledge that the Government of Sudan have recognised the need to deal with difficulties surrounding registration, the clearance of goods, travel visas and so on. Those difficulties were simply unsustainable in the face of the crisis, and the Government have moved on that matter. As I said, it shows that international pressure works and it shows that the Government of Sudan are beginning to recognise the scale of the crisis on their hands.

Mr. Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con): I too pay tribute to the Secretary of State's work. Eighteen months ago, a number of us visited Rwanda—a country that has already been mentioned—and we were horrified by what we saw. I am sure that the three hon. Members in their places now who visited that country will have been chilled by the Secretary of State's words when he said that there was not much time left to deal with the crisis. We know that in Rwanda a massive genocide took place in a relatively short time. I therefore ask the Secretary of State what lessons the Government—and, indeed, the international community—have learned from the genocide in Rwanda. How can we ensure that the same outcome is avoided in these similar circumstances?

Hilary Benn: The circumstances are not, of course, exactly the same. As the hon. Gentleman knows, in the genocide in Rwanda, 800,000 to 900,000 people lost their lives in the course of 100 days. One of the difficulties in Sudan has been the problem of access. In the early part of the year, it was very difficult for anyone in the outside world to know what was going on, because it was difficult to get in. When I visited Khartoum in December, one of the issues that I raised with the Government of Sudan was the need to allow access for humanitarian agencies. At that time, it was very restrictive. That is part of the reason why the world did not see the scale of what was going on earlier. As I have reported to the House, that has begun to change.

Another aspect of the crisis in Darfur is that it is a process that unfolds rather than a particular event. We need to reflect on what has happened and to ask
 
9 Jun 2004 : Column 288
 
ourselves—the international community, the UN, relief agencies and others—how we can be more effective in intervening earlier.

Finally, it is the degree of uncertainty that causes me the greatest concern. We do not know the full picture, which is why we must strive might and main to ensure that we do all that we can to prevent a catastrophe from occurring.

---