You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Written Answers
Previous Section Index Home Page
21 Oct 2004 : Column 899W—continued

Israel

Mr. Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on how many occasions he has requested the Israeli Government to dismantle the separation barrier where it has been built in occupied territory. [192383]

Mr. MacShane: The Government regularly raise our concerns over the route and the humanitarian consequences of the barrier with the Israeli Government. My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary, my noble Friend the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, and I as well as our Embassy in Tel Aviv, continue to urge the Israeli Government to re-route the barrier away from Occupied Territory. To list the total number of occasions on which this issue has been raised could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Mr. Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the ruling of the International Court of Justice of 9 July, concerning Israel's separation barrier. [192384]

Mr. MacShane: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion of 9 July stated their view that the barrier being built on occupied land is illegal. This echoes the consistently held position of the UK, the EU and the UN. The UK voted in favour of United Nations General Assembly ES-10/15 acknowledging the receipt of the Advisory Opinion and making clear that both Israel and the Palestinian Authority must abide by international law.

While agreeing with the broad conclusion, the Government do not agree with the legal reasoning of some of the ICJ Advisory Opinion, in particular the very limited recognition of Israel's legitimate right to defend itself. We recognise Israel's right to protect its citizens from terrorist attack, but it must act in accordance with international law.

The UK will continue to urge Israel to route the barrier away from Occupied Territory, in order to comply with international law.

Libya

Mr. Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of Italy's proposals to lift the EU arms embargo on Libya. [192047]

Mr. MacShane: Libya's dismantlement of its declared weapons of mass destruction programmes and formal acceptance of responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing are welcome developments.

The Government supported the European Union (EU) Presidency's proposed conclusions on Libya, that were adopted by the Council on 11 October, on lifting the EU arms embargo and repealing remaining EU sanctions.

The Government believe lifting the embargo sends an important signal to Libya, and other states, that there is a route back into the international community, and will open the way for the further development of EU-Libya relations.
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 900W
 

Mauritania

Mr. Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions have taken place with the Government of Mauritania on the alleged coup to overthrow President Maaouiya Sid'Ahmed Ould Taya. [192046]

Mr. MacShane: UK Officials regularly meet with their Mauritanian counterparts. Recent discussions have included the alleged coup attempts. We continue to monitor the situation in Mauritania from the British embassy in Rabat, Morocco.

Mutual Defence Agreement

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the renewal negotiations concerning the 1958 UK/USA Mutual Defence Agreement. [192705]

Mr. MacShane: Negotiations were concluded and amendments to the 1958 UK-US Mutual Defence Agreement were signed by empowered UK and US representatives on 14 June. These amendments were then laid before Parliament with an Explanatory Memorandum for 21 days in accordance with the normal procedure. The 21 days ended on 20 July. The amendments have also been laid before the US Congress, where they must lie for 60 days in accordance with US procedures. Entry into force can then be completed by an exchange of notes.

Nuclear Disarmament

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what instructions he has given to the British officials attending the current session of the United Nations General Assembly regarding the draft resolution entitled, "Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world: Accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments". [192703]

Mr. MacShane: The draft New Agenda Coalition (NAC) resolution. "Towards a nuclear free world: Accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments", contains a number of points that we support, but also a number that we do not. For example, we do not agree that the Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) are failing to implement their disarmament obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Officials have discussed these points with NAC and other delegations but no decision has yet been taken on our voting intentions.

Pakistan Missile Testing

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions (a) he, (b) members of his Department and (c) UK representatives in Pakistan have had with officials of the Pakistan Government, concerning the reported testing of a Hatf-V type Ghauri missile on 12 October; and if he will make a statement. [191610]

Mr. MacShane: We take every opportunity in our bilateral and multilateral contacts to encourage India and Pakistan to practise restraint in testing long-range
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 901W
 
missiles. However, we have not in this instance spoken with the Pakistani Government over the test firing of a Hatf-V Ghauri missile on 12 October.

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions (a) he, (b) members of his Department and (c) UK representatives in India have had with officials of the Indian Government, concerning the reported testing by Pakistan of a Hatf-V type Ghauri missile on 12 October; and if he will make a statement. [191611]

Mr. MacShane: We take every opportunity in our bilateral and multilateral contacts to encourage India and Pakistan to practise restraint in testing long-range missiles. However, we have not in this instance spoken with the Indian Government over the test firing of a Hatf-V Ghauri missile on 12 October.

Post-war Reconstruction

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which countries have provided (a) military, (b) political or diplomatic and (c) logistical support to the occupation and post-war reconstruction of (i) Kosovo, (ii) Afghanistan and (iii) Iraq. [192404]

Mr. MacShane: The information requested is as follows:

Kosovo

There are no grounds to refer to the NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999 as an occupation. NATO intervened in Kosovo to avert an immediate and overwhelming humanitarian disaster. The NATO website provides a list of those countries contributing to the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR): http://www.nato.int/kfor/

The combined diplomatic efforts of the European Union, Russia and the United States made possible the resolution of the crisis within the framework of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244: http://www.unmikonline.org/press/reports/N9917289.pdf. UNSCR 1244 set up the United Nations Interim Administration in Kosovo (UNMIK) whose mandate includes promoting the establishment, pending a final settlement, of substantial autonomy and self-government in Kosovo. The UNMIK website http://www.unmikonline.org provides further information about its role.

The six-nation Contact Group (US, UK, Russia. Germany, France and Italy) supports the rebuilding of Kosovo through UNMIK and the UN authorised. NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR).

The UN Secretary-General's report on Kosovo dated 30 July provides a full list of countries supporting UNMIK http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/sgrep04.html. The number of contributors and the nature of their contribution is constantly changing.

Afghanistan

There are no grounds to refer to military operations in Afghanistan as occupation. These operations are being carried out with the consent of President Karzai and the Afghan Transitional Administration and increasingly involve units of the new Afghan National Army. The following countries have supplied support to Coalition
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 902W
 
missions in Afghanistan under Operation Enduring Freedom, the UN-authorised International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), or both:

The number of contributors and the nature of their contribution is constantly changing. The NATO website (http://www.nato.int/issues/afghanistan/index.html) and the Coalition website (http://www.centcom.mil/Operations/Coalition/joint.html) detail many of these contributions.

At the Berlin Conference on Afghanistan in March 2004 the following countries pledged to support Afghanistan's reconstruction and development with pledges of support and development funding:

The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Union and the Aga Khan Development Network also made pledges.

Iraq

More than 40 countries provided political, or logistical support to military action against Iraq. Subsequently UNSCR 1483 agreed by the UN Security Council on 22 May 2003 recognised the status under international law of the occupying powers under unified command and called on member states to provide humanitarian support in Iraq. 37 individual states, the European Union, World Bank and IMF have consequently committed considerable funds to the reconstruction of Iraq.

In addition UNSCR 1511, which was unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council, authorised a multinational force (MNF) under unified command. The following states have formed part of the multinational force in addition to the United Kingdom and United States forces: Italy, Netherlands, Denmark, Portugal, Lithuania, Czech Republic, Romania, Japan, Bulgaria, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Albania, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Macedonia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, El Salvador, South Korea, Australia and Tonga

Direct reconstruction support is also provided though each of these contingents.

Some states provided a valuable contribution to the MNF during 2003–04 but have since withdrawn, including Spain, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Thailand, Philippines and New Zealand.
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 903W
 

On 28 June 2004 the Iraqi Interim Government (IIG) came into power and the Occupation ended. The MNF is now operating in Iraq in support of the IIG. The current MNF was re-authorised by UNSCR 1546 on 8 June 2004.

Next Section Index Home Page