(1 month, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberI thank the noble Lord for that question and I should say that I am always very reassured when the noble Lord from the Ministry of Defence is sitting next to me. I am very confident that Argentina understands the message that the UK Government and this House are sending. The Foreign Secretary posted on X:
“The UK’s position on the Falkland Islands is unwavering. The Islands are British and will remain so because that is the overwhelming position of the Islanders. Their right of self-determination is paramount, grounded in international law and we will resolutely uphold it”.
I touched previously on the defensive forces that we have in the area, but I hope the noble Lord will understand that I do not want to enter into hypothetical discussions.
My Lords, I welcome the noble Baroness to her position and the unanimity of the House on this issue. Argentina obviously has a lot of international support for its claim, which worries me. If a UN advisory council committee were to say that the Falklands were actually Argentinian, would we then do exactly as we have with the Chagos Islands and say that that has to be complied with?
Our position is clear, as I have said. When it comes to raising this issue in international fora, I should say that my noble friend Lord Collins attended the Organization of American States on 24 June to provide a right of reply on the Falkland Islands on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, asserting UK sovereignty over the islands and their right of the islanders to choose their own future. We use those opportunities, at international level, to make our position absolutely clear.
(1 year, 7 months ago)
Lords ChamberThat is such an important point. Often, when we talk about reconstruction, we are talking about airfields, roads and railway tracks. The cultural assets of a country that has been under such threat as Ukraine has experienced are so important in rebuilding that sense of identity—the Ukrainian sense of self and confidence—and in the message that that sends. We will do everything we can to support Ukraine in that, as we have said, in our 100-year partnership. On whether those assets can be used, the same argument applies that applies to any other form of reconstruction, and it must be done legally and correctly, in accordance with law.
My Lords, the Minister will know that there are millions of pounds of frozen Libyan assets in London, and that there has been a long campaign by victims of Libyan Semtex supplied to the IRA for compensation through that. Will she look again at this? Other countries have managed to get the compensation. Will she also please put into the public domain the Shawcross report, which we are all waiting to see and which looked into this whole issue?
The point about doing this legally applies equally in every situation. I will look into the question the noble Baroness raises about the Shawcross report, but I want to be completely clear that we are examining all legal routes available to us in order to get the money that should rightfully be spent on reconstructing Ukraine.
(1 year, 11 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, did the Foreign Secretary raise the appalling treatment of Tibetans, particularly the sacrilege by which some of their wonderfully famous and sacred sites are being destroyed? If this was raised, does the Minister know the answer?
I am frantically looking through the read-out of the exchange to see a reference to Tibet. I assure the noble Baroness that the Foreign Secretary raised a number of foreign policy and security matters, particularly issues around human rights. As she would expect, you do not get an instant result in these sorts of exchanges—diplomacy is about consistency and it takes time. But we are now in a period where we want a consistent, stable and pragmatic relationship. For 14 years, the relationship has blown hot and cold, and we have not had that stability and consistency. So that is the approach we will see from this Government.
(2 years ago)
Lords ChamberTo ask His Majesty’s Government what consideration they are giving to recognising Somaliland as an independent nation.
My Lords, the UK, alongside others in the international community, does not recognise Somaliland’s unilateral declaration of independence. The settlement of Somaliland’s status is an issue for Somalia, including Somaliland, to decide through a consultative process and dialogue.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer, but does she realise that since 1991 Somaliland has had six democratic elections, observes the rule of law, has religious tolerance and is a haven of piece in that awful area of the Horn of Africa? Why will His Majesty’s Government not recognise that we must support and encourage democracy around the world, particularly in Africa where we give money to some appalling regimes such as Zimbabwe? Surely this is a time for the Government to face up to the fact that, like other countries, such as France, we should recognise Somaliland now.
My Lords, the noble Baroness is right in her strong support for Somaliland, but that does not change our position on the question of recognition of Somaliland as an independent state. She is right, and we have a very long-standing and deep relationship with Somaliland, not least because of the large number of Somalis living here in the UK, but also our support for the port there, for health, education, security and in many other ways. We are very pleased to continue that relationship.