Mediation, Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding
Lord Campbell-Savours Excerpts(2 days, 10 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab) [R]
My Lords, I have spent 47 years in Westminster. I have supported conflicts worldwide, most notably in the Middle East and eastern Europe, but some recent conflicts have caused me to reflect and have cost me dearly. Friendships have been fractured. My view that we have sometimes questionably intervened in matters overseas has been unpopular. Today’s debate is about global mediation and conflict prevention, and I shall concentrate my remarks on Ukraine and Russia.
In 1992, as a Labour shadow Agriculture Minister, I visited Moscow to investigate our beef export trade. That eye-opening visit gave me an early opportunity post Gorbachev—Yeltsin was president—to look at developments in Russia. I visited the Duma, NGOs and institutions. The Russian economy was in free fall. Its proud people, the spirit of Stalingrad, were being humiliated before the civilised world. Its administration was often riddled with corruption, with many former Soviet apparatchiks openly exploiting the system to survive, their actions often underpinned by reckless acts of officials who sanctioned violence.
I particularly recall the poverty. I witnessed a respectable, well-clad woman in effect begging over a small stall in the street with her meagre offerings—a bunch of vegetables, a tin or two and some vodka—to raise money to survive on little pension. She was one among many whom I witnessed. The currency was in free fall. My hotel rate was $150 for foreigners; it was $5 for locals. Black marketeers were touring the hotels dealing in currency. Russia was in a state of total humiliation and collapse, and the political response was suspicion of the West.
Of course, it was totally unwarranted, a complete misunderstanding, the truth being that across our political divide there was a hope that their suffering would end and a new Russia committed to democratic values would surface and enter the world of advanced, civilised nations. It was not to be, as within two years of this period of humiliation, Russia signed the 1994 Budapest memorandum. It was a treaty born in duress that was prayed in aid by the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Bennachie, last week. That memorandum was signed by Russia at its lowest ebb. Russia, in humiliation, never accepted that treaty. It arguably led to the election of Putin in 1998, a former spook with visions of rebuilding Russia which appealed to its humiliated peoples.
That brings me to the Putin years. I well recall that day in October 2001 when my noble friend Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, as NATO Secretary-General, met Vladimir Putin—I think it was in Vienna. My noble friend had proposed that a working group be established to promote a NATO-Russian relationship—all very welcome—but it was to be completely undermined by President Bush’s calls in the same year for NATO expansion into eastern Europe. Those Bush interventions were critical, as they heralded an end to détente and the revival of a militant Russia, where they were seen as acts of hostility. Russia had relied on the maintenance of a string of non-nuclear, non-NATO barrier states stretching from Finland to Georgia. Ever suspicious of the West, it followed up with its desperate but ill-considered attempt to take over Ukraine, and Zelensky was elected on the backlash.
It was about this time that I started following events in Russia more closely, which I do to this day. Talk of détente had gone, and the Robertson/Putin agenda was dead. We now had an inflexible Russia extending political control, grabbing territory—the Crimea—and manipulating populations in Ukraine’s eastern provinces, provoking a fearsome and brutal response from the Azov Brigade with its history of support for Germany in the Second World War, thus the Russian references to the Nazis. When historians reflect on developments in Ukraine during its darkest periods, let us not underestimate the significance of those battalions in Russia’s decision to use them as foil in justification for their invasion of Ukraine.
For me, the issue is how we should respond. We now face a future where a Russian leadership, paranoid and challenged, stands in isolation. I fear for the future of mankind in this period of conflict. A rogue operator in Russia’s nuclear military establishment could act in isolation. I well recall with concern the actions of Yevgeny Prigozhin, the rebel commander of the Wagner brigade, a former confidant of Putin, who died in suspicious circumstances. Putin himself saw the dangers, and it is in that light that the drift into war where Zelensky controls the agenda worries me.
So now how should we proceed? A proud Russia is cornered, and I suspect it seeks a settlement without humiliation. We need an agenda that avoids humiliation for all concerned. We need to settle this dispute. I have called repeatedly for the UK Government to seize the initiative and take on the settlement agenda. In my most recent interventions, I have called for the establishment of protectorate status in eastern Ukraine, for which there are well-established precedents—a settlement to include much of Donetsk and Luhansk, underpinned by guarantees from the major powers, to include the United States, Europe and Russia. I still believe that Russia’s future lies with the West and that Putin, for all his misunderstanding, can be returned to rational discussion. It is the British who should take the lead, but it is an agenda requiring courage, understanding, wise counsel and risk, and an agenda that listens to those of us who take a different view without the name-calling.
Ukraine: UK Security Guarantee
Lord Campbell-Savours Excerpts(1 year, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Campbell-Savours
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of Ukraine about proposals for the United Kingdom to provide a security guarantee to that country.
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)
My Lords, a strong sovereign Ukraine is essential for Euro-Atlantic security and the UK’s national security. The UK is steadfast in our support for Ukraine. When the war ends, Ukraine will need to be secure against Russian aggression. Earlier this year, the Prime Minister signed the 100-year partnership with Ukraine, which builds on our bilateral security agreement signed last year, strengthening our security co-operation and forging closer links between our defence industries.
Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab) [V]
While recognising the sheer bravado of those who executed Operation Spider Web, we have to accept that action has undermined Trump’s wider initiative, jeopardised his offer on the provision of security guarantees and hardened Russia’s attitude to conflict resolution. How can we ever secure a settlement and avoid substantial defence costs being imposed on European taxpayers if Zelensky is allowed to run amok with unilateral actions, thereby scuppering any prospect of an early settlement? With our long experience in diplomacy, why can we not think outside the box and engage with Trump’s people in discussions with Russia over measures to end this war? We cannot rely on Zelensky—he is out of control.
Ukraine
Lord Campbell-Savours Excerpts(2 years, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Campbell-Savours
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have held with European countries regarding Ukraine and its war with Russia.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)
My Lords, Ukraine is defending itself against an illegal and unprovoked war launched by Russia, as per its right under the UN charter. UK support for Ukraine is ironclad. Ukraine was a key area of focus for the European Political Community summit at Blenheim, at which the Prime Minister brought leaders from across Europe together with President Zelensky. We are committed to working with our international partners to ensure that Ukraine gets the support that it needs to prevail.
Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab) [V]
My Lords, while I recognise the loyal support of Labour in opposition for the war but equally that it is for Members to question strategy where they disagree—in my case with regard to Ukraine in 21 debates over two and a half years in this House—is it not time for a strategy rethink, with new emphasis on conflict resolution, perhaps drawing on the developing relationship between China and Russia and the more opportunist relationship between China and America? With concerns in Europe over the war and the only talk of negotiation coming from a nightmare Trump, can we at least start to think out of the box? Ukraine’s policy of last man standing is unsustainable.
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
My Lords, I completely accept my noble friend’s right to challenge, disagree and ask questions, both in this Chamber and outside it. I am very glad that we live in a country where that is encouraged and is possible with no consequences. It is for Ukraine to decide when it wishes to negotiate and on what terms.