CO537-3702 — Page 47

759

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Foreign Affairs

[MR. PIRATIN.] countries upon which they can depend: one is Britain, the other is Spain. They cannot rely on France. An article in the Sunday "Observer a few weeks ago re- ferred to the very difficult position facing us in France and asked how we could give the French more support or get America to build up the armed forces there when one man in four in the Army was a Communist. American military strategists know they cannot rely on France to carry out American big busi- ness policy. Britain and Spain are the only places in Europe which America-

Mrs. Leah Manning (Epping): They cannot rely on Spain.

Mr. Piratin: But they are hoping to. In fact, however, Spain is of no account, either in Europe or in the world. But Britain is, and we have the key to the situation. If we told America we would not take part in its war plans, that we would produce for the needs of our people, that we would maintain a force for the defence of our people and not for carrying out the war plans of America; if we spoke in those terms and stood firm on that ground we would get a different attitude by the Soviet Union towards us. That would be a gesture in the right direction and one which would win its reward.

65

For these reasons, I say that this De- bate on foreign affairs is a deplorable Debate. I do not understand-I hope he will forgive my saying so, for I have some respect for him-what was the necessity of the contribution made this morning by the Chancellor of the Duchy. [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear."] Oh, no, I am not playing your game. I do not understand why he thought it neces- sary to answer the accusations and alle- gations of hon. Members opposite. There may have been some personal justifica- tion but his contribution helped us no further in discussing the affairs either of our own country or of the world.

I hope the outcome of the Debate will be that consideration will be given to the question, not of how to intensify the gap between the Western world and the Soviet Union, but how to get rid of that gap. I hope, too, that the words near the end of the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Woodford, who spoke with sincerity and sentiment,

110 A 30

Foreign Affairs

760

will mean a change from the speech he made on 11th October at Llandudno. He said something very different this morn- ing from what he said two months ago. We all want peace, and I hope that the Government will take up the various points which have come from our dis- cussion. Our attitude towards Palestine is just one example. They can take up the reins where we left them three years ago in our relations with the Soviet Union.

Hon. Members may think it a little quaint for me to conclude with words used by the right hon. Member for Woodford and not those of Harry Pollitt or Stalin, but I ask them to remember that in this case we all fall, or stand, together. The right hon. Gentleman said in the House on 27th February, 1945:

"The ties that bind the three Great Powers together, and their mutual comprehension of each other, have grown.... United we have the unchallengeable power to lead the world to prosperity, freedom and happiness. The Great Powers must seek to serve, and not to rule."[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th February,

1945; Vol. 408, c. 1294.]

That philosophy still stands and I hope the Government will welcome those

principles today.

2.1 p.m.

Major Legge-Bourke (Isle of Ely): Before referring to the diversionary tactics to which we have just listened, I wish to say a few words in comment on the most admirable speech of the hon. Member for West Coventry (Mr. Edelman). I believe last Sunday he was described by a colleague, the hon. Member for Shore- ditch (Mr. Thurtle) as a dark horse in the party. So far as speeches from the other side of the House are concerned, I think he won in a canter this morning. He made some recommendations, to which I hope the Government will pay careful attention, regarding the future of the Ruhr

and Western Germany's industries. What he said was extremely important. I am convinced that there is nothing the French consider more im- portant at present than the solution of the future of the Ruhr and if we can give them some reassurance it will help to stabilise their political situation more than any one thing.

I now turn to the hon. Member for Mile End (Mr. Piratin), whom I see fast disappearing from the Chamber. He

761

Foreign Affairs 10 DECEMBER 1948 begin by quoting from the Fulton speech of my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Mr. Churchill). In view of the great misrepresentation put about not only by the Communist Party, but by others, about the Fulton speech, it is fitting that we should bear in mind what the right hon. Gentleman did say in that speech. Obviously I cannot quote it all, because it covers many pages of one book, but I think we should remember that he said:

"I do not believe that Soviet Russia desire war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here today, while time remains, is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries."

It seems to me that the criticisms made by the hon. Member for Mile End of my right hon. Friend are quite insub- stantial and if he also looks at what the right hon. Gentleman considered the greatest threat to humanity he will find that he said:

"To give security to these countless homes they must be shielded from the two giant marauders, war and tyranny."

It is obvious that the hon. Member for Mile End and his colleagues are only too anxious to show to the world that the right hon. Gentleman is a warmonger. That speech at Fulton has been quoted in various ways as representative of that view. I believe that if everyone in this country and in the world took the trouble to read the speech again they would see how very far from the truth is that sug- gestion. So much for the hon. Member for Mile End.

May I turn to what I consider to have been the three salient points which have come out of the Debate so far. Two of them are the result of what my right hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden) had to say yesterday. The third has run through several speeches. It was touched upon by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and also referred to by the senior English Member for the Combined Universities (Mr. K. Lindsay) and the right hon. and learned Member for Mont- gomery (Mr. C. Davies). Those three things are, first, the recommendation re- garding Palestine, secondly, the recom- mendation regarding the Italian Colonies and, thirdly, the general disquiet

110 A 31

Foreign Affairs

762

of mind which seems to exist on the subject of U.N.O. So far as the Palestine suggestion is concerned I think I should make clear and emphasise what my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford said this morning when he said that this matter cuts right across party and that, in fact, parties themselves are divided within themselves on the matter. Any- one who has listened to previous Palestine Debates will know what my view is on the matter of recognition of Israel. I indicated what it would be when the Foreign Secretary first an- Of nounced the Bernadotte proposals. course, I must separate myself from my right hon. Friend's view about what I think virtually amounts to de facto recognition.

I cannot possibly accept that. That does not mean that I have any quarrel with my right hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leaming- ton. It would be natural that my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford should support him in that because, after all, he is a self-confessed Zionist who has always been a Zionist [HON. MEMBERS: "No."-he has openly said in Parlia- ment that he is-

Mr. Stokes: He has not always been.

Major Legge-Bourke: I beg the hon. Gentleman's pardon, I am grateful for the correction. Certainly since the end of the war he has generally been sym- pathetic towards the Zionist point of view, anyway. I should be extremely surprised if he tried to controvert in any way the suggestion made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington. What I strongly urge the Government to realise is that this matter of recognition will I believe if not immediately, eventually, sound the death knell of the Arab League. I do not know whether His Majesty's Government want the Arab League to continue. Personally I believe the Arab League is as essential to this country as it is to the Arab States. Probably some hon. Members think I am plus Arabesque queles Arabes but, never- theless, I assure them that my interests in this matter have been solely guided and directed towards serving the ends of our own interests. I believe there is nothing incompatible between British and Arab interests and I believe we must, from our own point of view as well as from the Arab point of view, seriously consider whether this matter of recognition of