War in Sudan

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As the noble Baroness knows, we have continued to raise the question at the Security Council. Last November, we tabled a resolution with Sierra Leone focusing on what the Secretary-General called for in relation to the protection of civilians. Sadly, that resolution was opposed by the Russians with their veto, but that did not stop us continuing to raise this question. The Foreign Secretary’s call for a conference event in April is intended to coalesce the international community to look at not only the humanitarian support that is so desperately needed but the longer-term solutions that will engage all civil society in a dialogue that will see a future for Sudan led by a civilian Government.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, as we approach the second anniversary of this terrible, brutal conflict, and with so many other matters occupying our attention, it is important that we do not lose our focus on it and that we continue to do all we can to end it. First, on sanctions, can the Minister say whether the Government intend to go further, perhaps following the lead of the recent spate of US sanctions? Secondly, beyond sanctions, are the Government working to identify any other hard-hitting ways to put pressure on the leadership of the RSF and the SAF and on the countries supporting their war machines?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As I think the noble Lord knows, I will not discuss future possible sanctions, but we have already made a number of sanctions against both sides and against individuals and companies involved. However, the future must be about how we build an international coalition for peace and humanitarian support. That is why the April conference is so important; it will bring together Foreign Ministers, including not just our international allies but all regional players, to ensure that they understand that there must be a better way forward. There is no military solution to this conflict, and the only people suffering are the civilians. The so-called representatives of the two warring factions have no interest in defending their civilian population, so we have to change that attitude and get the international community working together to ensure that we put people first.

Democratic Republic of the Congo: M23 Group

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Noble Lords will appreciate what I have reported before. Right from day one, we have been engaged with President Lourenço of Angola to ensure that there is a process to achieve long-lasting peace in the region. That is long overdue, because the internally displaced people are numerous and suffering hugely. These recent advances create an even worse situation.

On Friday I was pleased to talk to the Ministers in Dar es Salaam who were hosting the EAC-SADC summit, which produced a communiqué towards peace in the region and set out a very clear road map to achieve the withdrawal. Our concern is that the Rwandans have not fully complied with that, which is why we have made the announcement today of the measures we are taking, along with our allies, to ensure that they respond to that African-led peace process.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, the Minister will be aware that the UK has given more than £1 billion in development aid to Rwanda in recent years. As has been said, evidence is mounting that Rwandan troops are heavily involved in the fighting in DRC. Is it not increasingly difficult to justify this funding when the Rwandan Government themselves are spending so much time, energy and money intervening militarily in a sovereign neighbouring state?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord’s previous Government reached an agreement to give substantially more money to Rwanda.

The important point here is that our focus for development assistance is on those most in need. The measures that we announced today—I was able to convey these to the Foreign Minister of Rwanda in Geneva this morning at the Human Rights Council—are as follows: we will cease high-level attendance at events hosted by the Government of Rwanda; we are freezing trade promotion activity with Rwanda; we are reviewing our existing trade infrastructure in facilitation projects; and we are pausing direct bilateral financial aid to the Government of Rwanda. We are excluding from this our support for the poorest and most vulnerable, which is not direct support; we are committed to that. We are also co-ordinating with partners on potential sanctions designations and suspending future defence training assistance to Rwanda. Our position is absolutely clear. We want to ensure that these measures achieve what they set out to do: to ensure that Rwanda commits to the peace process led by the African Union.

Sudan and Eastern DRC

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, the latest atrocities unfolding in Sudan and eastern DRC are a sobering reminder of the human cost of conflict and the duties that we all share to respond decisively and compassionately. A brutal attack on the hospital in El Fasher, which has claimed the lives of 70 patients and their families, is a grim illustration of the callous disregard for international humanitarian law by many of these armed groups. Stories of women and children suffering unspeakable violence shared by the Foreign Secretary from his visit to the Chad-Sudan border really do underline the urgency of our necessary response.

In the DRC, the resurgence of M23 and the appalling reports of atrocities against women and children are heart-wrenching. There has been some fantastic reporting recently from British reporters in those areas. The bravery of the UN peacekeepers who lost their lives in Goma must not go unacknowledged, and we extend our deepest condolences to the nations that supplied them and to their families.

What concrete steps are the Government able to take to help to secure lasting peace in these regions? Diplomatic efforts are of course welcome, but can the Minister clarify how the Government plan to strengthen Britain’s role in African-led peace processes and ensure sustained international engagement, especially with partners such as Rwanda and Uganda, who bear responsibility for much of the violence there? In the other place, the Foreign Secretary said that the Minister spoke to the Rwandan and Angolan Foreign Ministers last week. I would be interested if the Minister could update the House on what he discussed, particularly with the Minister from Rwanda.

It is deeply concerning that Russia vetoed the UK’s and Sierra Leone’s humanitarian resolution at the Security Council. What efforts are being made to circumvent the paralysis of the UN, possibly through regional alliances or coalition-building outside of the Security Council framework?

On humanitarian aid, I welcome the UK’s commitment to increasing assistance, including the additional £20 million for Sudan and £62 million for the DRC. How do the Government intend to ensure that this aid actually reaches those in need, given the persistent blockages and insecurity on the ground, and the dangers for international organisations operating there?

Finally, I echo the Foreign Secretary’s point about the lack of global outrage. The selective attention paid to different conflicts is not just morally indefensible but strategically foolish. Neglecting African crises risks exacerbating instability, illegal migration and the proliferation of armed groups, all of which have consequences for all of us. We must never be indifferent to suffering, regardless of where it takes place. I urge the Government to maintain their focus on these crises, not just in the headlines but through sustained diplomatic and humanitarian efforts. I am sure that the House stands ready to support any measures that bring us closer to peace and relief for the benighted people of Sudan and the DRC.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I am very happy to associate myself with the final remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Callanan.

The House is aware, as is the Minister, of my ongoing interest in supporting Sudanese civilians in exile. The humanitarian suffering continues on an enormous and heartbreaking scale, with what the US had previously categorised as genocide in Darfur, again, and atrocities committed by both sets of belligerents, civilians slaughtered by Chinese drones, reports of chemical weapons being used, and the systematic blocking of humanitarian aid to the communities that need it most, especially women and children.

There are still far too few safe zones, which should have been established many months ago. The Minister is aware that I have supported the Government’s work at the Security Council. It is worth reminding ourselves that, had it not been for the Russian veto, many of the diplomatic actions and work that we have been calling for would have been put in place as a result of the UK-drafted resolution.

The scale is enormous. That was brought home to me when I was in Nairobi last weekend, with civilians in exile, as part of dialogue. One of the former diplomats who is working tirelessly to try to bring about cohesion in the civilian voice told me that his brother had been killed the day before.

For those who are working to try to bring about an end to the war, who cannot return home and who have many family members at home in great peril, this is very real. In a country in which so many of its population face starvation—although Sudan is a country that could feed itself, and indeed export food elsewhere—there are still the basic needs of clean water, medicine and food.

Will the Minister reassert that there should be no impunity for those who are afflicting these terrible breaches of international humanitarian law and war crimes on the civilian population? There should be no hiding place for those who are committing the atrocities, or for those who are systematically blocking food, hydration and medicine. These are war crimes and need to called out as such. I commend the work that the UK is doing with others to ensure that there is the proper collation of evidence, so that there can be consequences to this.

It is not just about those who are afflicting the war crimes; it is about those who are profiting from it. I appeal to the Government to do more to reduce the illicit gold trade. I read a credible report that that part of the economy of Sudan is now more profitable as a result of nearly two years of war than it was prior to the war commencing. That means that near neighbours, including allies of the United Kingdom, are profiting from this humanitarian horror. What work are the Government doing to ensure that there is no profit from war for many of those within the Gulf or near neighbours who are seeking transactional relationships with the belligerents in the gold trade?

The same goes for possibly the most disgusting trade of all: that in human beings. There has been a proliferation of trafficking and smuggling. What actions are all parts of the UK Government taking to ensure that that element of the war economy is closed and there is no future for those who are profiting from war by securing advantage in any form of peace?

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s visit to the Chad border, and what he has said and is doing, as well as the work of our envoy and diplomats. Indeed, we are lucky to have the Minister for Africa in our own House, and I commend the work that he is doing. However, given the reports that the RSF may be seeking to form an administrative authority of its own, which it will call a Government, can the Minister confirm that we will not recognise or provide legitimacy to the RSF? At the moment, there is too much consideration of what Sudan might be if it becomes like Libya: two Governments—two competing authorities. The RSF may seek to an end to the war but it will also seek to have permanent influence; however, it should have no right to govern Sudan.

Does the Minister agree that there is an urgency to this? We are just a matter of eight or nine weeks from the second anniversary of the war, but there should be no third year. All efforts should be focused on these short weeks ahead to ensure that there is diplomatic effort to bring the belligerents to the table and to create the space where civilians can have the opportunity to govern one civilian-led Sudan at the end of the process.

Can the Minister say what assessment the UK has made of the terrible decisions that the Trump Administration are making on USAID? Have waivers been provided for US humanitarian and food assistance in Sudan? What is the Government’s assessment of the likely impact of the USAID decisions?

Turning to the DRC, there is little surprise that there has been ongoing territorial violence in that region; many have warned about that for many months. I commend the UN forces and any UK personnel who have been contributing to the end of this. I also send condolences to the families of those who have paid with their life in attempting to have peace in this area.

The work of the Rwandan Government and M23 has been raised in this House repeatedly. I raised it in June 2023, when I asked the Minister’s predecessor what actions the UK Government were taking with the Rwandan Government to cease the latter’s funding and support of the M23 group. It was marked that the previous Administration refused to make any public statement, probably because of the partnership agreement that they had signed with the Rwandan Government. I hope that the Government will not be shy of the consequences for UK funding support for the Rwandan Government if the latter continue to support an organisation that has been repeatedly held up for multiple violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses. Can the Minister comment on whether the Nairobi and Luanda process has now completely ended?

I close with an appeal to the Minister. What we have seen, both in Sudan and the DRC and with the Trump Administration, is that the need for UK development assistance and presence is greater than ever before. If there was ever an opportunity for the Government to review, take stock and then change course on their cut to development assistance, it is now. As well as helping with conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance, we need to ensure that the UK’s global soft power can be a force for good, and so we should not follow the Trump Administration in reducing official development assistance.

Israel and Palestine

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Through our aid programmes, we are supporting human rights organisations in Israel and Palestine on a range of issues. Their work is invaluable for providing us with relevant analysis, as well as for shaping our policy. We are clear that Palestinian leadership and civil society must be at the forefront of Gaza’s recovery. The United Kingdom is committed to promoting an inclusive approach to recovery and reconstruction, supporting the political process towards a two-state solution.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I am sure we are all delighted to see the ceasefire and the release of the three hostages, including the British national Emily Damari, earlier this week. I listened carefully to the Minister, and he is right that proper future governance in Gaza will be crucial if the current ceasefire is to be enduring. Perhaps he could say a bit more about what consideration the Government are giving to helping establish future governance and administration in the Gaza Strip, free, we hope, of the malign influence of Hamas.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for that question. We are continuing to work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the US and regional partners to build consensus on a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework that supports the conditions, as he rightly said, for a permanent and sustainable peace. We have given the PA two posts to help support its work on this, and we will look towards doing even more as we move through the stages of the ceasefire agreement.

UK Strategy Towards the Arctic (International Relations and Defence Committee Report)

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, it is a pleasure to participate in today’s debate on this excellent report from the International Relations and Defence Committee. It was ably introduced by the committee chairman, my noble friend Lord Ashton of Hyde—of our very own endangered species, as he reminded us. He was the Chief Whip in the Government in which I served as a Minister; in the tragic event of him becoming extinct, he will be greatly missed in the same way as we miss the sabre-toothed tiger.

As many speakers have observed, we live in an increasingly dangerous world and it is vital that we get this Arctic strategy right, with threats from Russia and China increasing in this and other areas. On these Benches, we take the security of the Arctic region as an utmost priority. That is why the previous Government commissioned an integrated review in 2021. That review recognised that the UK, as many other noble Lords have reminded us, is the nearest neighbour to the Arctic region, and it committed the Government at the time to contribute to maintaining the region as one of high co-operation and low tension. I am not sure we succeeded in that, but the Government stated that they would do this by

“working with our partners to ensure that increasing access to the region and its resources is managed”

as safely as possible. When he summarises the debate, can the Minister update the House on what work the current Government are doing to take forward that work, to ensure that the Arctic’s resources are being safely and responsibly managed?

In addition, in March 2022, the Ministry of Defence published a policy paper titled The UK’s Defence Contribution in the High North, which set out the then Government’s aim to preserve the stability and security of the Arctic region. It set out four key objectives:

“Protect our Critical National Infrastructure and our other national interests, and those of our Allies … Ensure our freedom to navigate and operate across the wider region … Reinforce the rules-based international system, particularly UNCLOS … Contest malign and destabilising behaviours”.


Could the Minister outline whether those objectives are still shared and being prioritised by our new Government? If so, what progress is being made on achieving those goals?

In February 2023, the previous Government published the policy paper Looking North: The UK and the Arctic, which recognised that the Arctic is critical for UK interests, most notably in respect of our future climate and security. The paper maintained the three key principles established in the UK Government’s Arctic policy framework of 2013: respect, co-operation and appropriate leadership.

The 2023 integrated review refresh reaffirmed the UK’s commitment to the priorities set out in Looking North: The UK and the Arctic, while also committing the UK to continue its work in the Arctic with the Arctic Council, the Joint Expeditionary Force and NATO. Could the Minister outline what conversations the Government have had with the Arctic Council, the JEF and NATO on these matters?

The previous Government took active steps to ensure a safer Arctic region, which, of course, benefits the United Kingdom as a whole. Worryingly, we have not heard much yet from the current Government to suggest that the Arctic region is still a priority for them. Since entering office, the current Foreign Secretary has given the Arctic only a brief mention, during his Kew lecture in September last year:

“In the Arctic and Antarctic, global warming is driving geopolitical competition over the resources lying beneath the ice”.


I looked in vain for any further references. Again, could the Minister expand on what specific actions the Government are taking to address the many geopolitical challenges posed by Russia’s increased militarisation in the Arctic? How do the Government intend to safeguard the UK’s national interests in the High North, particularly on these matters?

Although security is paramount, and has featured in so many speeches today, we must also acknowledge that the Arctic plays a crucial role in the global climate system. The melting of Arctic ice is not only a warning sign of accelerating climate change but a trigger for geopolitical tensions as nations vie for newly accessible resources. That is why the Government’s approach must integrate environmental responsibility with strategic security.

The 2021 review set out the UK’s commitment to sustainable development in the Arctic, and the 2023 review refresh reaffirmed that stance. Will the Minister confirm whether the Government continue to align their Arctic strategy with the principles of environmental stewardship and international collaboration, as outlined in both those reviews?

The UK’s presence in the Arctic is enhanced through our alliances. Our membership of NATO and of the Joint Expeditionary Force enables us to contribute meaningfully to regional stability. Our observer status in the Arctic Council provides, as many have remarked, an avenue to influence policies that help shape that vital region’s future. Will the Minister provide an update on how the UK is trying to leverage those partnerships to ensure that the Arctic remains a region of peace and co-operation? Have the Government engaged with Arctic nations such as Norway and Denmark to help us strengthen those bilateral defence and environmental agreements?

Of course, we commend our ally Denmark for increasing spending on Greenland’s defence at this vital time. I find myself agreeing with the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, and, slightly surprisingly for me, with the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, that it would be nice to see some UK ministerial pushback to President-elect Trump’s frankly ridiculous threats against Greenland. I read them with great interest and there are frightening parallels with what Putin had to say about Ukraine and what President Xi has said about Taiwan. Although the UK is proud to have the US as our closest international ally, we should condemn any attempt to redraw national borders by force from wherever those threats come.

The Arctic is an area of immense strategic importance, not only for our security but for our environmental and economic future. The previous Government laid, in my view, a strong foundation through these integrated reviews, the defence contributions and our international partnership. I hope the current Government will help to build upon those relationships, especially at a time when the region is becoming a focal point for global power struggles. We all understand that resources in this area are limited but I hope the Minister will be able to provide some clear assurances that the Arctic remains a priority for this Government and to outline how they plan to uphold the UK’s vital interest in this critical region.

Pro-democracy Campaigners: Arrests

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I am sure that the whole House will agree that this news is very worrying, particularly for those from Hong Kong who have BNO status. Given that the noble Lord’s ministerial friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is visiting China next week, can he ensure that she will raise these human rights issues, and the multitude of other human rights violations, during this cosy little tete-a-tete with the Chinese Communists? Will she also raise, again, the case of Jimmy Lai?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

Our approach to China is not to pivot between a golden era and a deep denial of any contact. We are taking a consistent approach that is rooted in the United Kingdom’s interests and global interests. We will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to and challenge where we must. Let me reassure the noble Lord that, at every opportunity, the Prime Minister and other Ministers have made it absolutely clear to the Chinese Communist Party and its leadership that they should release Jimmy Lai. We have made representations on that and have strongly condemned the recent announcement of Hong Kong police targeting individuals who are exercising their right to freedom of expression. We have called on Beijing to repeal the national security law. We do not tolerate any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas, especially in the United Kingdom.

Northern Gaza

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, we all want to see this terrible conflict in Gaza come to a sustainable end as quickly as possible, with the emphasis, of course, on “sustainable”. I am sure we are all watching the current developments in Cairo extremely carefully. The key to a sustainable end to the conflict in Gaza remains the release of the hostages. Can the Minister update us with any further information the Government have on the status of the hostages, particularly the British national hostage, Emily Damari? We also want to see more aid reach Gaza because we all know that innocent civilians in Gaza are suffering and desperate. Sadly, they continue to be used as human shields by Hamas, which seems to have no regard at all for their safety and welfare. Does the Minister agree that Hamas has the power to end this conflict immediately by releasing those hostages? Does he agree that there is no moral equivalence between Israel’s defensive war and Hamas’s terrorist atrocities?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows the answers to those questions because he has heard me speak repeatedly of the need for the immediate release of the hostages. Both sides need to show flexibility and do a deal now. We reiterate our call for the safe release of all hostages, including the British national, Emily Damari, and three hostages with strong UK links. Ensuring their release is a top priority for this Government. I also emphasise that we are facing a severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza and that our response has been to focus on that too and make it clear that some of the actions that the Israeli Government have taken need to cease, so we need flexibility on both sides. We have announced £112 million for the OPTs this financial year, including £41 million for UNRWA, which provides vital, life-saving services to civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and to Palestinians across the region. As the noble Lord said, what we need is an immediate ceasefire and proper access for humanitarian aid.

Syria

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I understand the Minister’s difficulty when the Statement was given so recently in the Commons. I used to have a similar problem repeating Statements during the Brexit years, particularly if the Secretary of State would ad lib on their feet. They often varied from the Written Statements we were given to read out, so he has my sympathy. I thank him for repeating the Statement to the House.

There can be no doubt that the Syrian conflict has left a tragic and enduring scar on the region, displacing millions, destabilising neighbouring countries and drawing in international actors with competing interests. While I am sure that the whole House welcomes the end of the Assad regime, this moment must not be seen as the conclusion of our responsibility. The question now becomes one of ensuring that what follows is a stable, inclusive and prosperous future for all the Syrian people.

I note with particular interest, as mentioned in the Statement, the reports that Ann Snow, the UK’s special representative for Syria, met the leader of HTS on 17 December. Given its somewhat controversial history, to say the least, and its designation as a proscribed terrorist organisation, this development raises significant questions about the scope and intent of these engagements. Can the Minister give the House a little further detail on the nature of these discussions? Specifically, what assurances, if any, were sought of or provided by HTS regarding its commitment to a peaceful and inclusive political transition in Syria? Furthermore, what safeguards have the Government put in place to ensure that this dialogue does not inadvertently confer legitimacy on an organisation whose past actions have been far from consistent with international norms and human rights?

In light of this engagement, I urge the Government to outline their overarching priorities when entering into diplomatic contact with HTS or any other non-state actors in Syria. Is the focus purely on counterterrorism and security concerns, or is there a broader strategy to integrate these groups into a framework that aligns with international law and the aspirations of the Syrian people? We also have to consider the implications of those talks on the UK’s relationships with many of our key allies, particularly those in the region. How do the Government intend to navigate the sensitivities of such engagements, especially given the differing stances of international partners on the role of HTS in Syria’s future?

Finally, I seek reassurances regarding the UK’s unwavering support for UN Security Council Resolution 2254—the noble Lord mentioned this—as the framework for a political solution in Syria. This resolution, as the House will know, provides a road map for an inclusive political process, including the drafting of a new constitution, free and fair elections and a comprehensive ceasefire. Will the Government continue to prioritise this resolution as the cornerstone of their policy in Syria, and how does engagement with HTS and other actors fit into this wider strategy? Without a co-ordinated international effort to uphold the principles of that resolution, there is a grave risk that the Syrian people will remain trapped in an endless cycle of conflict and instability. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, we normally thank the Minister for advance notice and sight of a Statement. I sympathise, as I do not think he had it himself today, but I am grateful for the text. I agree with its content and the Government’s position that the future of Syria should be for the Syrian people, that there should be territorial integrity and that there should be a political process.

The reporting on the prisons and mass graves draws attention, again, to the venal barbarity of the al-Assad regime. As he sits in his multimillion-dollar apartment in Moscow, he should know, as should other facilitators of grievous crimes against humanity, that there are many—including in this House on all Benches—who believe that there should be no impunity for his horrific crimes against humanity. However, the new appointment to replace the al-Assad regime appears to be from an extremist element in Syria. I would be grateful for His Majesty’s Government’s assessment of those taking positions in the potential new regime.

The terrible scenes of the mass graves reminded me of the situation that we saw in Mosul after ISIS’s occupation. Are the Government willing to provide technical assistance around data capture and evidence building for those who fell victim to the previous regime, including what the UK did so well for those victims in Iraq—using DNA sampling to identify loved ones so that there can be decent burials, as well as evidence building for the potential prosecution of crimes?

We hope that there will be a move away from the levels of corruption of the previous regime. However, the early signs are that al-Jolani’s brother, who has been appointed as Minister for Health, and his brother-in-law, who is now in charge of a major crossing with Turkey, will see these positions as a major source of personal income and from which they can siphon off potential humanitarian assistance. What measures are in place to ensure that the welcome additional humanitarian assistance will go to the people who need it most? Can the Minister indicate whether we are assessing what mechanisms there would be for the delivery of humanitarian assistance? One option that has been suggested is that aid is best provided to localities—to the municipal level directly and to NGO communities—rather than to some of the new regime factions in office.

On Syria’s territorial integrity, can the Minister restate that it is government policy that both Turkey and Israel should respect its boundaries? There is a possibility of ongoing tension between Israel and Turkey and their seeking great territorial advantage from the recent internal situation in Syria. What is the Government’s assessment of Russia’s aims for strategic economic relations? There is a concern in my mind that we, along with the United States, may offer to open up the Syrian economy but, if it is to be filled only by Russian interests, we will not be helping the Syrian people.

On our domestic situation, a couple of weeks ago I asked what the Government’s assessment of HTS was with regard to the 2017 proscription order and the 2020 Syria sanctions. Has our assessment of HTS changed? I acknowledge that, within our proscriptions, there are mechanisms for diplomatic contact. Will the Minister take on board the concern that, while contact is justified, it is important how it is done? With photographs and a degree of legitimisation to those who have not yet earned it—with regard to de facto control—and who are not progressive actors, we have to be very cautious that we are not legitimising those who will continue to be proscribed.

Finally, on the decision by the Government to pause asylum, I acknowledge that that has been done alongside our allies. But these Benches believe that asylum processes should be blind to the political situation on the ground. Those seeking refuge from persecution should find a home open in the United Kingdom. There is great uncertainty and a fear that automatic stability will not be guaranteed within Syria. We should maintain an open mind for those minorities who could still be vulnerable to persecution. While the persecution may not be on the scale of the al-Assad regime, the UK should not close all doors to those who potentially still need refuge. I hope the Minister can confirm that the pause is temporary and that there is ongoing work to ensure that we do not become closed to those who need security, safety and refuge.

Georgia

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Baroness will know that I will repeat that it would not be appropriate to speculate on future sanctions designations, as to do so would reduce their impact. I repeat what my honourable friend Minister Doughty said yesterday when he

“reiterated in the clearest terms to Georgian Dream representative … that police violence and arbitrary arrests in Georgia are unacceptable”.

He said:

“The UK will consider all options to ensure those responsible are held accountable”.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I want to back up the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton. The UK has always been widely admired in Georgia for the support we have offered to that country since it was freed from the shackles of the Soviet Union. Earlier today I was in contact with a friend of mine in Tbilisi—a former Member of Parliament. She said the situation is getting worse every day. Police brutality against innocent civilians is horrible. More than 500 people have been arrested. The Georgian Parliament is passing laws significantly restricting people’s freedom. The US and EU member states are imposing personal sanctions or visa restrictions against the ruling party’s leadership. I understand the point the Minister made earlier, but the UK is in danger of being left behind here. Will he please consider sanctioning people in Georgian Dream immediately?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I will not repeat it a third time because the noble Lord knows exactly what the Government’s position on sanctions is. The shocking scenes of violence towards protesters and journalists by the Georgian authorities are unacceptable and must stop. We are working with our allies to ensure that we can convey that message in the strongest possible terms. We are determined to uphold what is, after all, the constitutional position of Georgia. When I was there 18 months ago I saw that it has strong constitutional rights and very good laws, which are being breached by its Government. It is right that we stand up and point that out.

Ukraine: Humanitarian Assistance

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Thursday 12th December 2024 Grand Committee

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I also thank the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, for securing this important discussion. We all look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say to update the House on the progress of UK support for Ukraine.

Over the past few weeks, as we move into winter, the people of Ukraine have continued to suffer greatly. Putin’s war machine is trying new and insidious tactics to break the spirits of those brave people. On the morning of 26 August alone, Russia fired more than 200 missiles and drones in one of the largest aerial attacks on Ukraine. The main targets were the country’s energy infrastructure, in the most cynical attempt to freeze the country into submission—no military targets were targeted in that bombardment. As other noble Lords observed, around 8 million households, hospitals and schools were hit without warning. The capital, Kyiv, experienced its first unscheduled blackout since November 2022. According to the International Energy Agency, Ukraine’s energy system has been the subject of regular targeting by Russia since its first full-scale invasion in 2022, with attacks intensifying since the spring of this year.

On 28 November, after Russia’s 11th mass attack on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, President Putin threatened to strike again with new ballistic missiles, this time having nuclear capabilities. We are aware that he has made these threats fairly regularly. Thankfully, none of them has borne fruit yet, but we should bear in mind that someday they might. Furthermore, Ukraine is having to import increasing amounts of electricity from Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Hungary and Moldova.

According to the BBC, on the subject of housing, at least 12 million people have fled their homes in Ukraine since Russia’s first invasion. It estimates that 5 million have left the country and 7 million are still internally displaced in Ukraine. The Council of Europe Development Bank noted earlier this year that housing continued to be one of the sectors most impacted by the war, with over 10% of the total housing stock in the country either damaged or destroyed.

I am proud of the record of the previous Government. We launched the highly successful Homes for Ukraine scheme, with the latest figures showing that since the scheme was set up in March 2022 around 131,000 Ukrainians have been successfully supported to arrive in the UK, with £2.1 billion of funding provided. I am sure that work is continuing, and would be grateful for an update from the noble Lord when he sums up.

It is truly tragic that so many Ukrainians have lost their homes and I commend all the Government Ministers, civil servants and most of all the volunteer families who have helped to provide sanctuary for Ukrainians and welcomed them into their homes. I would be grateful if the noble Lord could update us on progress and on whether the Government intend to extend this scheme. Furthermore, many of the visas issued under this scheme are set to expire after three years, with many expiring early next year. Again, can the Minister update the Committee on whether those Ukrainians will be able to have their visas extended?

Finally, the conflict has obviously had a severe impact on the mental health of the Ukrainian people. According to the Ukrainian health ministry, the number of patients reporting mental health problems in 2024 had doubled since a year earlier. In addition, a study published in the Lancet earlier this year suggested that over 50% of surveyed non-displaced persons, 55% of internally displaced persons and 62% of refugees all met the diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder. I can imagine nothing more traumatic than living in a war zone, whether as a soldier fighting the illegal occupation or as a civilian just doing your best to even survive. We have to highlight, as we do constantly—but we should never be afraid to say it—the sheer brutality of Russian’s campaign in Ukraine, targeting markets, petrol stations, cafés, post offices and humanitarian aid centres, and targeting the civilian population in playgrounds and public squares in many non-occupied areas of Kherson. None of these is a military target. With such distressing stories, we must continue to do all we can to support Ukraine. I know that the Government are doing that and we support them fully.

When the noble Lord summarises the debate, I hope that he will be able to update the Committee on what steps the Government are taking. As we move into the new year, we are all waiting with some trepidation for the incoming American President and the effect of any policy changes on Ukraine. I am sure that the Government are using all the diplomatic sources at our disposal to try and influence the new Administration. Some of the appointments that incoming President Trump has announced give me a little more hope; some of the statements from the likes of Marco Rubio and others on Ukraine have been slightly more encouraging. This really is an existential conflict for us in Europe. I argue that it is also an existential conflict for the US. We have to continue to supply the crucial support to Ukraine in its battle for survival. I look forward to hearing what the noble Lord has to say.