Government of Syria: Freedom of Expression, Religion and Belief

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Monday 10th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Carey of Clifton]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the new government of Syria’s commitment to freedom of expression, religion and belief.

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

My Lords, the interim Syrian President has stated that he will form a transitional Government who are representative of Syria’s diversity and has pledged to protect religious groups. We are monitoring how the interim authorities treat all civilians in areas they control. We will judge them by their actions. We will continue to advocate for the right of freedom of religion or belief in Syria and for a political transition leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government.

[Lord Carey of Clifton (CB)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that careful and helpful reply. While accepting that the new rulers in Damascus have taken steps to reassure some minorities of the desire to create an open society, how do our Government intend to monitor the actual situation? How do they intend to verify whether assurances are followed up, bearing in mind the intense disquiet felt in some groups, such as the Christian churches, about increasing Islamisation, particularly as it bears on women, and the creation of an environment unwelcoming to minorities?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I said last week that we have a special envoy who has visited Syria. We are in close contact with the interim authorities. We are working closely with our allies in the region and we are carefully monitoring the situation. As I said, we are judging them by their actions, not simply on their words. We are concerned by reports of attacks on minorities, including Christians, and attempts to stoke sectarian tensions. We are monitoring the situation extremely closely.

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

Does my noble friend agree that it is early days and that the point is currently in both directions? Would he agree that one potentially positive sign is that Turkey, our good ally, has close relations with the new regime? Should we not therefore be ready to encourage Turkey to play a positive role in influencing the new regime in these areas?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend makes a good point. We are concerned by increased tensions in northern Syria and the impact that this may have on civilians and stability in the region. Turkey has been playing a critical role there and we have been in regular contact with it, as well as with Syrian democratic forces. Our priority across the board is de-escalation.

[Baroness Northover (LD)]

My Lords, security and prosperity are vital in Syria. What action is being taken with others to try to halt the spread of revenge attacks? The EU has lifted some economic sanctions. We have always said—and the Minister has always said—that sanctions are more effective if we act together. Why have we not done likewise?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

On the latter point, we are reviewing both actions and the Prime Minister has made that clear in the other place. As the noble Baroness knows, we do not comment on future designations or de-designations. The Prime Minister has been absolutely clear on that. I think she is right that there are forces within Syria that may stoke sectarian violence and instability. As my noble friend raised, we are trying to work with allies, across the board, to ensure that there is de-escalation, and to take the interim authority at its word and make sure that we monitor it on a regular basis. The noble Baroness is right to point this out.

[Lord Green of Deddington (CB)]

My Lords, as a former ambassador to Syria, I speak in support of the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Carey of Clifton. I spent three years as ambassador in Damascus, in the dying days of President Assad, and I saw that regime first hand. His son’s regime was no better. In answer to an Oral Question last Thursday, the Minister described the present time as a

“critical but fragile moment for Syria”.—[Official Report, 6/2/25; col. 803.]

Indeed so; Syria could fold up and the regime would be widely affected. Does the Minister accept that there is a real risk of a backlash against western involvement in Syria, and, accordingly, that we need to be firm but careful about what we say in public and how we say it?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I have been diplomatic in response to the Questions we have had last week and this week. We should not take immediate decisions but rather focus on the interim authorities and their words, which we should ensure they keep to. We are monitoring that situation closely. As I said, we have an envoy for Syria, who is doing excellent work—I think she is engaged with parliamentarians here. The noble Lord is right to suggest caution, but we have some reason to be optimistic for the future for Syria. We must not forget what Syria went through under the Assad regime, during which horrendous crimes were committed.

[Lord Hain (Lab)]

My Lords, I want to ask my noble friend about the consequences of the withdrawal of 2,000 US troops from Syria, who were working with Syrian Kurdish forces, in particular to contain some 9,000 ISIS—Islamic State—fighters in prison camps. There is a danger of those fighters breaking out and not just damaging religious tolerance but imposing their reign of terror on the whole region.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

To reiterate what I said last week, the first duty of every Government is to protect its citizens, and we are certainly cognisant of that in relation to those camps. The United Kingdom notes the decision of the US to pause foreign aid funding for three months pending a review; that is a matter for the United States. As I say, we are working with our allies to ensure that there is stability in Syria and that Daesh’s territorial defeat endures and that it can never, ever resurge. We are working closely with US colleagues and humanitarian partners to understand and assess the impact of the pause, but we are fairly confident that there will be continued support for the IDP camps in the north.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, on Wednesday, will the Minister carefully follow the proceedings of the Joint Committee on Human Rights as it continues its inquiry into the failure to bring to justice members of ISIS who were responsible for genocidal crimes against Yazidis, Christians, gay people, and other minorities in Syria and Iraq? In Raqqa alone, the headquarters of ISIS, the number of Christians was reduced from 11,000 to 100, and throughout Syria 80% of that community has disappeared. Given what the noble Lord, Lord Hain, has just said about the thousands of people who are still in the camps, can the Minister say what is being done to bring to justice British nationals in those camps who are members of ISIS and responsible for many of these crimes?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I follow the work of the committee and I congratulate the noble Lord on his chairmanship. One thing he knows we have been absolutely committed to is accountability, not just for ISIS but for the crimes committed by the former Assad regime. We have given practical support to NGOs and INGOs, to ensure that we can gather credible evidence and hold these people to account for the crimes that they committed. This year alone, we have committed £1.15 million to accountability and documentation-related programmes. We will continue to work with our international partners and civil society to advocate for the UN charter and support mechanisms to ensure full compliance with it.

[Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD)]

My Lords, does the Minister accept that the stability and future of Syria are in the interests of not just the Middle East but the entire region? Does he accept that we must avoid repeating mistakes made in earlier experiences in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, and learn the lessons? The most important lesson is that any process on the road to stability and a plural democracy should be led by Syrians and supported by the international community, and not the other way round, and especially not by those who supported the murderous Assad regime over the years.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Let me focus on the thrust of the noble Baroness’s question. She is absolutely right that this should be Syrian-led, Syrian democracy; that is what we are focused on. We are engaging with the interim authorities and international partners to do precisely that: to support the political process and civil society. I have often said that the most important ingredient of a healthy democracy is a vibrant civil society, and that is particularly true of Syria. The noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, raised last week the involvement of women in this process. We have been absolutely committed to that and we will continue to be so.

Syria

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assistance they are providing to Syria to support a peaceful transition to inclusive and representative government.

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

My Lords, at this critical but fragile moment for Syria, the United Kingdom is supporting a Syrian-owned political transition process, leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. We are engaging intensively with the interim Syrian authorities and international partners, to whom we are underlining the importance of including key groups, including women and ethnic and religious minorities. We are consulting the interim authorities about what additional support they need to deliver a peaceful transition, including through our Syria envoy, who was in Damascus again last week.

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con)]

I thank the Minister for his response, and I am glad he agrees that it is important that Syria has a pluralistic and inclusive Government. There are indeed many strong women’s groups in Syria, but around the world we are seeing women’s rights rolling back. How will the UK help to ensure that women in Syria will have sufficient representation in the Government after the transition, and that they will be able to contribute on an equal footing to the men there?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. Support to women and girls continues to be at the heart of UK’s policy and programmes in Syria. UK support is through INGOs, Syrian civil society—she mentioned the women’s groups—and the United Nations. Women’s empowerment and political participation are vital. We regularly engage with civil society, including on the position of the women’s groups that the noble Baroness mentioned. The United Kingdom’s special envoy for Syria met the head of the women’s affairs department in Damascus last week, and they discussed the ways to empower and support women in Syria and build their capacity to take on an active and influential role in society.

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, it is not enough to talk to just one woman; we have to have a coalition of the women’s groups, like we had to do in Northern Ireland, as there will be no way that the women can be at the peace table with just one woman. It has to be a coalition of women. Also, I would like an undertaking that no aid will be stopped, because of pressure from the United States, for maternal and women’s health, women’s education, and children’s health. Can the Minister please give me an indication that this will be so?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. I repeat that support for women and girls continues, and will continue, to be at the heart of our policy and programmes in Syria. But I emphasise that we have long supported Syrian civil society and will continue to do so. As the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, says, that means that we move towards a more pluralistic solution. My noble friend is absolutely right: we need to engage the broad range of women’s organisations.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, first, the self-declared President of Syria is also head of a proscribed terrorist organisation that restricts the rights of minorities and women. Has the Government’s assessment of proscription changed with regard to that organisation? Secondly, given the news from the United States yesterday that the Trump Administration are now preparing to withdraw from Syria 2,000 troops who are part of the anti-terrorism work with the UK, what are our contingency arrangements to reduce terrorism in that part of Syria if the US troops are withdrawn?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The fact that HTS is a proscribed terrorist group does not prevent the United Kingdom engaging with the interim authorities in our efforts to help secure a political settlement. Of course, as the noble Lord knows, the Government do not routinely comment on whether a group is being considered for proscription or de-proscription. We are absolutely focusing on how we can consistently advocate for an inclusive political transition, underlying the importance of protecting the rights of religious and ethnic minorities. The US decision to pause foreign aid and funding for three months pending review is, of course, a matter for the US. The first duty of any Government is to keep the UK safe, working with allies to ensure stability in Syria and to ensure that Daesh’s territorial defeat continues and that it can never resurge. That is our absolute priority.

[The Earl of Courtown (Con)]

My Lords, it is great to see all the work being carried out and continued with civil society in Syria, but how are His Majesty’s Government working with regional partners to counter the influence of hostile state actors, such as Iran and Russia, in Syria?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Earl is absolutely right. We are concerned about increased tensions, particularly in northern Syria, and the impact those may have on civilians and stability in the region. So we are in regular contact with Turkey and the Syrian Democratic Forces. Our priority is constantly to focus on de-escalation.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

Would it not be easier to monitor and, one would hope, influence developments in Syria if we were to reopen the embassy now?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

What we need to do is constantly evaluate the situation. As I have mentioned twice already, we have a special envoy there—she was in Damascus last week—and we will continue to evaluate the situation so that we can ensure that, when that transition into a more permanent solution or more permanent Government happens, we will consider what the noble Lord asks for.

[The Lord Bishop of Chichester]

My Lords, Syria is home to some of the oldest and most significant Christian churches in the world, although Christians now number only 2.5% of Syria’s population. Although small in number, they see themselves as an integral part of the people of Syria and its identity. In view of this, will the Minister ensure that policy and statements about Syria robustly identify its Christian communities and history as an important part of its identity and life and in need of special protection, rather than simply being assimilated as Syrians defined as citizens of the state?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The right reverend Prelate raises an important point. Of course, the FCDO has consistently advocated for an inclusive political transition and underlined the importance of protecting the rights of religious and ethnic minorities, both publicly and as part of our engagement with international partners and the interim Syrian authorities. We are of course concerned by reports of attacks on minorities and attempts to stoke sectarian tension, and we are monitoring the situation closely, but I reassure the noble Lord that we are absolutely focused on this. Certainly, that has been picked up by the Foreign Secretary and me.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend the Minister for his Answer to my Written Question last month on this very topic. I am glad to see the commitment of the British Government to this. Will he reinforce the notion, with which I am sure he agrees, that the high-quality education of girls is absolutely central to making sure that Syria functions well into the future and that we have educated women who can play an effective part in Syrian politics?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right, and I am grateful for her comment on my response to her Written Question. We continue to support those in need across Syria, where safe to do so, through NGOs and UN organisations. We are providing food, healthcare, protection and other life-saving assistance. We are absolutely focused, as my noble friend said, on supporting the education programmes that she referred to, in addition to agricultural livelihoods.

[Baroness Foster of Aghadrumsee (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, it is not just a good and nice thing to involve women in political processes: it has been shown that deals made that include women are more sustainable by the very fact that they are inclusive. What plans does the Minister have to equip women in Syria and give them the proper tools to be involved in any peace deals, since they cannot come in without that training?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. As I said to the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, we are supporting, through INGOs, Syrian civil society organisations and the UN, programmes that provide for women’s empowerment and political participation. We are absolutely focused on giving those tools. The debate on this issue focuses on the vital point that women need to be included for a sustainable peace in Syria.

Sudan and Eastern DRC

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Lords Chamber

[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.

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

My Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their comments.

I will focus first on the DRC, because the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, asked for an update. I decided that it would be better to discuss this Statement today so that I could afford the House an update on the situation. The United Kingdom remains firmly of the view that all parties should cease hostilities and return to diplomatic talks immediately. Their engagement in good faith in African-led processes is absolutely key. Of course, there can be no military solution.

Noble Lords will be aware that I have been engaged in following this conflict since day one. The very first country I visited was Angola, followed by the DRC and then Rwanda. Throughout those visits, I was focused on President Lourenço’s attempts at a new peace process to ensure that there was an inclusive process that could guarantee a future secure peace.

When I arrived in Angola, the Government there announced the ceasefire, and our attempts since that day have been to ensure that that ceasefire held. When we saw and heard the movement of M23 towards Goma, we made very clear our view that that should not happen and that Rwanda should cease supporting M23—and there was clear evidence that RDF forces were there also, supporting that move on Goma.

When I spoke to the Foreign Minister of Rwanda on 24 January, I made it clear that such a move would have consequences: the international community would respond on a collective basis—and the Foreign Secretary made the same call the next day to President Kagame and repeated that. Now, of course, Goma has fallen and it looks like M23 is determined to move further to Bukavu.

I have had conversations with the Angola Foreign Minister, as well as the DRC Foreign Minister, repeating the fact that we should keep Luanda as a process that is there and which can guarantee an inclusive dialogue if ceasefire is held and the combatants stop fighting immediately. I spoke to the Ugandan Foreign Minister just an hour ago to reiterate that collective view about the way forward in terms of the Luanda process and ensuring peace. The Foreign Secretary has had conversations with European allies, including the EU high representative, and I have also had conversations with European Foreign Ministers on the same subject. Yesterday we had the G7 statement, which very much reflected the United Kingdom’s position of ensuring that those combatants cease their conflict and cease moving towards the second largest city in eastern DRC. I know that the Foreign Secretary also had discussions with Secretary Rubio on this question, and the United States and the United Kingdom both remain concerned about the situation and want to ensure that there is de-escalation and a ceasefire as soon as possible.

We also should not underestimate the huge humanitarian impact of this conflict. Hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to flee since the beginning of the year. Currently, 7 million are displaced, and that has huge impact. We have also seen the terrible rise of sexual violence in conflict, which of course we are absolutely focused on. We also saw foreign embassies attacked in Kinshasa; fortunately, our staff were secure and safe. I have made it clear to the Foreign Minister, and I know the Foreign Secretary made it clear to President Tshisekedi, that the protection of diplomatic staff is essential.

We are going to take the matter forward. We are reflecting on our actions, but we think it is really important that we are sending a very clear message to Rwanda that it must cease this support and return to the negotiating table. We have made it clear that its presence in DRC is unacceptable. So we are not holding back in terms of communications, but we are absolutely determined to support the African-led peace processes, and SADC and the other regional organisations are very clearly coming to that view too. I will keep the House updated on what our attempts deliver, particularly as we move to a further meeting of the UN Security Council. We have already had two on the DRC, and we are absolutely committed to that collective action.

I appreciate the comments of noble Lords regarding the Foreign Secretary’s visit to Chad. I think it is the first visit of a Foreign Secretary to that situation. His visit to Adre, on the border, made absolutely clear our focus on the humanitarian situation and how to get aid in. This has created the worst humanitarian crisis, with half of Sudan’s population, 30 million people, in urgent need of aid, 12 million having been forced from their homes and 8.7 million on the brink of starvation. We need to move this up the global agenda and we are certainly determined to. We have worked with international partners, as a penholder at the United Nations Security Council. Noble Lords have mentioned the Russian veto on our last attempt, but that has not stopped us raising this question at the UN. We are focused on the Secretary-General’s call for the protection of civilians and in particular holding the combatants to their Jeddah commitments, to ensure that there is a mechanism to protect civilians.

We are absolutely convinced that more needs to be done. We are convening a meeting of foreign ministers, hopefully next month, in London, to galvanise efforts on Sudan, in particular on humanitarian support but also in terms of a political solution. The noble Lord knows very well how we have been seeking and supporting civilian actors in Sudan so that we can see a return to a civilian-led government. The integrity of Sudan is absolutely vital. We cannot afford to see it collapse and we are certainly not accepting that there should be any breakaway or any recognition of any force outside the move towards a democratically elected Sudan Government.

Of course, we have recognised the scale of this crisis with an unprecedented response. The Foreign Secretary has doubled UK aid to Sudan this year, as well as visiting the border in Chad to draw attention to the crisis. I am clear that we all must do more. Funding is just one part of the problem. Far too much of the aid already committed is unable to reach those who need it most. We are pressing all parties to ensure that there is safe and unimpeded access to humanitarian support.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, during the previous war in Congo, some six million people died. Can the Minister tell us what he believes is driving the conflict in the DRC, given that what are being called “blood minerals” are regularly sold through the markets in Rwanda? What have we said to our Commonwealth partner Rwanda about the exploitation of the DRC’s natural resources and how this is empowering groups of rebels to take the law into their own hands and to drive on the conflict?

In the case of Sudan, the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, referred to the bombing of the hospital in al-Fashir, with the deaths of some 50 people. A further 70 people died in the nearby market as well. What are we doing to collect evidence to ensure that those responsible will be brought to justice? Far too many people who were responsible for the earlier genocide in Darfur are still roaming the land with impunity and fuelling the present conflict. I think the House would like to know what is being done to hold those to account who have been responsible for those atrocities.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think that the noble Lord appreciates that the issues surrounding this conflict are clearly complex in terms of the history of eastern DRC. We should not forget the genocide that occurred in Rwanda, which after all is only 30 years ago. However, the integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is important, and international law is important. That is what we have been focused on. As I mentioned, we have been supporting inclusive talks so that, where there are concerns, they should be addressed in those negotiations. I felt confident that at the meeting on 15 December we would make progress, but sadly we did not.

I am deeply concerned by the reports from the UN group of experts about M23 and Rwanda illegally extracting critical minerals from the DRC, including coltan. We have made our concerns known and will continue to do so.

On Sudan, the UK condemns in the strongest terms the increasing reports of atrocities being committed across Sudan, particularly in Darfur and al-Fashir, as the noble Lord mentioned. The Foreign Secretary issued a tweet on this subject, particularly in relation to the hospital. We are committed to doing everything in our power to ensure that those responsible are held to account. That means ensuring that those parties remain committed to their Jeddah commitments. We also strongly support the ICC’s active investigation into the situation in Darfur, and we welcome prosecutor Khan’s report and briefing to the council. We are absolutely committed to hold these people to account.

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

My Lords, I commend my noble friend the Minister on his initiatives and his very strong personal commitment of long standing to peaceful solutions to conflicts in Africa. Clearly, both these conflicts depend in part on the lure of natural resources and on external intervention—Qatar and others in Sudan and Rwanda in the DRC.

Can my noble friend say what leverage we have, and are we prepared to use it in a clear form? For example, in 2012, the British Government froze our aid to Rwanda, which led fairly speedily to a solution to the M23 intervention in the DRC. Would we consider a similar intervention?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his comments. The Foreign Secretary’s Statement in the other place last week made it clear that we will be working with our allies, and this is the important thing; we want a collective, international response that shows how serious and concerned we are about Rwanda’s activities in the eastern DRC. The first point is the one made by the noble, Lord Purvis: we have been absolutely clear in our message that it is unacceptable and there should be an immediate ceasefire. I will not speculate on what actions the international community will take, but rest assured they will be serious and will have an impact.

On the extractive industries and the mining situation, it is important to say that, when I first met President Lourenço, we talked about the Lobito corridor; we talked about the potential that Africa, and particularly that part of Africa, has in terms of greening the global economy. It has huge potential, and the DRC has the biggest amount of potential. We have focused in all our talks on saying there is a dividend for peace here—let us look at the future and not focus on the past. Sadly, we were unable to deliver that vision at the 15 December summit, but I am confident that we can refocus efforts on that and ensure we focus on progress in Africa.

[Lord Bellingham (Con)]

My Lords, following on from the Minister’s point and what the noble Lord, Lord Alton, said, Rwanda is now exporting more gold and, in particular, more smart tech minerals than it is producing in country. So is there an argument for this Government to put pressure on the major tech companies to look at their global supply chains? Especially as, for example, the UN group of experts pointed out that there is now compelling evidence that minerals smuggled out of the DRC have been used by Apple in constructing its latest generation of iPhone.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As I have said, we have seen those reports from the mission and expressed serious concern about the exploitation of those minerals in the eastern DRC for the benefit of both M23 and Rwanda. We have expressed our concern. Again, I will not speculate on what action the international community takes, but the noble Lord can rest assured that we are determined to act on a collective basis that has the most impact.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, I commend my noble friend the Minister on his comprehensive presentation. Clearly, it the most awful of situations, and I would like to say a word about the exploitation of children in the extractive industries, which I am sure the noble Lord agrees with. Very many children who should be in school are in mines in the DRC. As the Secretary of State noted in the other place, there has been a 16% increase in what he described as irregular migration from Sudan. On that basis, can the Minister say whether we are considering the possibility of safe and legal routes for people who may be in a position to leave Sudan, particularly those who may have family in the UK? I realise that that is very far from the answer to this problem, which should be African-led and should take place in Sudan.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right in her latter comments. Since the conflict began in Sudan, 3.6 million refugees have fled to neighbouring countries, including Chad, Egypt, South Sudan, Uganda and the Central African Republic. As the Foreign Secretary said, we have already seen an increase in people crossing into Europe, with the number of Sudanese people arriving irregularly to the UK increasing by 16% from the previous year to 2,882. Not only is UK aid vitally needed on humanitarian grounds but it will help people to stay within their immediate region. Having 3 million people trying to cross the Mediterranean is just not acceptable. We have to focus on those neighbours and on a solution for Sudan. We are committed not only to ensuring that we deliver the humanitarian aid that is so vitally needed now but to finding a political solution that ensures that we return to one Sudan, with a civilian-led Government who will put the interests of the Sudanese people first. That is what we need most.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I draw attention to my entry on the register in working for organisations committed to conflict prevention and resolution. In commending the Minister and his efforts across the piece, I put on record our thanks—I know, having sat where he is, the focus that a Minister engaging at this level brings. Turning to the important responsibility he now carries on preventing sexual violence in conflict, as the Minister will know, the biggest tragedy of all the tragedies that unfold in conflict is that it is the most vulnerable, particularly women and girls, who are targeted in the most abhorrent way by crimes. Over many years, we have supported the Panzi Hospital in the DRC and the excellent work done by Dr Mukwege. Can the Minister please update the House on our continued support for these initiatives that are helping victims at a time when they are facing the worst kind of tragedies and violations of their being?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is right. I met Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh last week and we talked about that hospital and the vital need to support it, and we continue to do so. As the noble Lord knows, the situation is extremely difficult. With fighting going on between combatants, it is extremely difficult to get in the support that is required, but we are committed to doing so and are supporting every effort to do so. He is right that we should focus on ensuring that the voices of those people suffering such abuse are heard. We have done that in Sudan—we raised it at the UN General Assembly, where we held a meeting so that survivors could speak—and we are determined to do that in the DRC. Many of those in internally displaced people camps have suffered from all kinds of sexual violence. We are focused on supporting them with aid and support, and giving them a voice so that the leaders of the DRC and Rwanda can hear the true consequences of their actions.

[Lord Hannay of Chiswick (CB)]

My Lords, the Minister referred to the genocide 30 years ago in Rwanda. I suppose nobody in your Lordships’ House can feel that more painfully than me, since I was the British ambassador to the United Nations at the time. I am all too well aware that, along with the rest of the international community, we did not come out covered with glory. But we really cannot allow that argument to justify the invasion of a neighbouring country, with the Rwandan military force operating in the DRC. Rwanda has used that argument again and again. Has not the time come to say very clearly—perhaps privately—to the Government of Rwanda that we are not prepared to justify or condone what they are doing in the DRC because of our failings in the 1990s?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I hope I made it absolutely clear that we have communicated to the Government of Rwanda that it is totally unacceptable to invade a neighbouring country and to have forces present there. We have made that absolutely clear. When I spoke to the Foreign Minister of Rwanda, I attempted to halt that advance, as did David Lammy when he spoke to President Kagame. In response to the noble Lord, Lord Alton, I acknowledged that there are complexities to this conflict and issues that need to be addressed in an inclusive peace process. We were nearly there on 15 December—agreement had been reached. Sadly, one of the parties decided, right at the last moment, that they would not participate. We then saw the sudden surge and advance of troops towards Goma. We tried to stop that; sadly, we could not. The noble Lord, Lord Hannay, is right that it is totally unacceptable to invade a neighbouring country in the way that Rwanda has.

Middle East

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that this is an incredibly fragile situation, and I acknowledge the caution in the Foreign Secretary’s remarks and tone in the House of Commons last week. It is fundamentally a cessation of hostilities rather than a peace agreement, and there is still a very high level of uncertainty in many areas for the days and weeks ahead.

I also wish to put on record the work of the intelligence services of Qatar, the USA, Egypt and Israel. It was noted that, until fairly recently, Prime Minister Netanyahu refused diplomatic negotiations; it was all led by the intelligence services. However the agreement was made, we all hope that it will be sustainable.

I also share the noble Earl’s welcome for the fact that many families are now being reunited with the hostages. It is a tragedy that many families are waiting for the bodies of hostages, rather than live hostages. Hamas should never be forgiven for their actions.

There will be many in Israeli society who were shocked at the armed al-Qassam Brigades being very visible on the streets. Many had assumed that, as a result of the IDF’s actions, Hamas was removed, but it still looks as though it is very present. Does the Minister agree with the previous US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, in his assessment, which he made public, that Hamas has recruited the same number of fighters today as it has lost? What is the Government’s assessment of the current standing of Hamas, and how will that have an impact on any relationship with Fatah and the PLO in the Palestinian Authority?

On reconstruction, the needs are enormous. I will not repeat the question I asked the Minister in Oral Questions some minutes ago; I will just put on record that I agree with everything he said in response. I hope that the Government will find a way of ensuring that education for children in the region is at the top of our priorities. One of the consequences of conflict is that it is often the next generation that is more radicalised than the previous one. Given the scale of the conflict in Gaza, we all fully understand that, without interventions now in relation to child trauma, psychosocial support and education support, there will be potential threats and danger in the future.

On the situation in the West Bank, what is the Government’s assessment of the report of concessions that the Israeli Prime Minister gave to the remainder of the extreme right wing in his Cabinet? According to those reports, while there could be support for the agreement on Gaza, there are now to be far more IDF and Israeli actions in the West Bank—leading to full annexation, as one continuing Minister in the Israeli Government said. Will the Minister state that that is unacceptable to the UK Government? Will he put on record that we will not follow the new Trump Administration in removing the sanctions that were put in place on the settlers for the violence that they had carried out against innocent communities in their own home areas? Will the Government also take the opportunity to reject the fact that the United States has reinstated supply of the Israeli Government with 2,000-pound bombs, which can bring about only mass destruction of community areas?

On the longer term, does the Minister recognise that my noble friend Lady Northover’s Private Member’s Bill, which we will now debate on 14 March, is an opportunity for us to consider the validity of a two-state solution and the need for the recognition of a state of Palestine? If there is to be diplomatic work on both reconstruction and some form of political way forward, the viability of a Palestinian state needs to be in place.

Finally, I acknowledge that the Government have increased support for the Palestinian Authority, as the Foreign Secretary has indicated. However, our support is still way below the level before the 2018 aid cuts. What is the Government’s intent in respect of replenishing the humanitarian reserve so that we can provide extra support and restore fully the level of governance support to the Palestinian Authority that we provided before the previous Government cut ODA from 0.7%?

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

I thank both noble Lords for their questions and contributions. As the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, repeated, this is a fragile situation. The deal is incredibly fragile, so we have to do everything possible to ensure that we can build confidence on all sides to help sustain the ceasefire and move it from phase 1 to phase 3 and into a lasting peace. It is important to turn this deal into a political process that leads us to the two-state solution. That is the only way to ensure, in the longer term, peace and security for both Palestinians and Israelis.

I join the noble Earl in welcoming the release of the three hostages in Gaza, including, of course, British national Emily Damari. I too place on record our thanks to Qatar, Egypt and the US for their support in bringing these individuals’ and their families’ horrific ordeal to an end. Our thoughts are also with those still waiting to be reunited with their loved ones, including the families of United Kingdom-linked hostages Eli Sharabi, Oded Lifshitz and Avinatan Or—three people who should be reunited with their families.

I shall focus on how we build the future and stability. For the deal to work, parties need to co-operate to make sure that the ceasefire lasts and moves towards a lasting peace. Planning for governance, security and reconstruction must be predicated on progress towards a Palestinian state, with Gaza and the West Bank united under one Government, and the Palestinian Authority must play a key role. The security arrangements must protect both Israelis and Palestinians and, as we heard in the previous Question, allow the safe distribution of aid. We will continue to work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the US and regional partners, including Arab and Gulf states, to build consensus for a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework that supports the conditions for a more lasting and secure peace. Stability in the West Bank is crucial to ensure that the fragile ceasefire in Gaza can last. All sides should work to ensure a lowering of tension in the West Bank at this time.

On Palestinian statehood and support for Palestinian reform, as the noble Lord said, the Foreign Secretary has spoken with President Abbas and the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, Mohammad Mustafa, and offered the United Kingdom’s support as his Government implement much-needed reforms. An effective PA is vital for lasting peace and progress towards a two-state solution. Our long-standing position has been that we will recognise the Palestinian state at a time that is most conducive to that process—not the end but as part of that process. We remain absolutely committed to that.

As I say, this ceasefire provides an opportunity to get aid in—and we have heard that just under 1,000 trucks got in in one day last week. We need to ensure that that continues. I shall not repeat what I said in response to the Oral Question. We have given the funding and, as the noble Lord said, we need to focus on medical and educational support. Obviously, the longer-term rebuilding of Gaza needs a much bigger investment. In addition to the £112 million, we have matched up to £10 million of public donations—we should not forget that. The United Kingdom public have been absolutely concerned, and they have matched their concern with money through the Disasters Emergency Committee Middle East humanitarian appeal, which has provided life-saving aid, including medical supplies, shelter and clean water, to people in the West Bank.

We have to ensure that the process delivers that longer-term building of confidence and dialogue. I was concerned when I read in the Guardian this morning about increased levels of violence in the West Bank. As the noble Lord pointed out, we have moved to sanction those responsible for violence in the West Bank and announced designations against eight extremist Israeli settlers and nine entities known to have supported, incited and promoted violence against Palestinian communities. We will not hesitate to take further action if it is needed. The UK is deeply concerned by IDF military operations in the occupied West Bank.

[Lord Austin of Dudley (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, one of the tragedies of Gaza has been that aid has been looted by the corrupt, murderous gangsters of Hamas, and that money and materials that should have been used to build hospitals, schools and housing have been used instead to pay for weapons and to build tunnels from which to attack Israel. What are the Government going to do to prevent aid that they give in future being stolen and abused like this?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I tried to answer that in the Oral Question. This is an obligation on the Palestinian Authority. We have been supporting the Palestinian Authority security services through training. We have also urged the Israeli Government and the IDF to protect the distribution of humanitarian aid to ensure that it reaches those people who need it. We are absolutely determined to work with all parties to ensure the effective distribution of humanitarian aid—it is vital that it gets to the people who need it most.

[Lord Harries of Pentregarth (CB)]

Following the noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, I shall focus briefly on what is happening in the West Bank, which is a potential conflagration. We know that Hamas is represented there, and it can become only more embittered if settler attacks on Palestinian villages continue. It was good to hear the Minister say that the British Government are going to maintain sanctions against settlers who attack those villages. As we know, President Trump has said that he is no longer going to keep up those sanctions. Will the Minister encourage the Government to make it perfectly clear, publicly, that we are going to continue to maintain those sanctions?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I must admit I thought I had made it clear that we will maintain those sanctions. We are extremely concerned at the increased level of violence, and we have conveyed this to the Israeli Government. The ceasefire is fragile, and we need to build confidence. The noble and right reverend Lord is absolutely right that such confidence relates not only to Gaza but to all the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We are committed to ensuring that this fragile ceasefire and peace process moves towards a more sustainable, long-lasting peace, which requires a two-state solution. That is what we are committed to, and so are the United States Government. We need to focus on that; where we have common support, we need to ensure that we work together. President Trump has been working with the Saudis to ensure that they can come into the process of the Abraham accords. The Saudis want to see a two-state solution, and that is what we are all working towards.

[Viscount Hailsham (Con)]

Does the Minister agree that if, at the end of the initial period, Israel renews the war in Gaza, as is called for by some right-wing Members of the Government, such action, without clear, obvious and compelling justification, will do immense damage to the international standing of Israel and to its moral reputation?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am not going to speculate on what might happen. The point I would make is one that was made by the noble Earl, Lord Courtown. We are in a fragile situation. We have a ceasefire, which we have been demanding for many months, and now that we have it we need to ensure that, during this fragile process, we build confidence for the future. That means taking a step-by-step approach, with all parties, and not looking backwards at the horrors of the past but to the future, with hope for prosperity.

[The Lord Bishop of Manchester]

My Lords, I declare my interest as chair of the United Society Partners in the Gospel, one of the oldest Anglican global mission agencies. One of our key partners is the al-Ahli hospital in northern Gaza, a hospital that the people of that area rely on pretty well entirely now for any healthcare they can get. Most of the hospital has been destroyed—both the library and the historic church are now in use as wards. What assurances can the Minister give us about how we can get aid into the hospital, so that the people of northern Gaza, no matter how long the ceasefire lasts —I hope it will become permanent, but for the time being—will be able to get the medical help they need? Over 1,000 emergency patients are being admitted every day.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I agree with the right reverend Prelate. As I said in response to the Oral Question, we are very much focused on getting medical aid and support in, particularly to northern Gaza. I mentioned the £5.5 million in funding for UK-Med to run field hospitals in Gaza. We focus on all the areas where there is most need, but I agree with the right reverend Prelate that we need to do more to ensure that those who need medical treatment get it speedily.

[Baroness Foster of Aghadrumsee (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, we all hope for a permanent ceasefire; that is the wish of everybody in this House. At the end of the Statement, thoughts turn to reconstruction and the need for the international community to deliver the funds for that reconstruction. Given that it has been recently reported by Forbes that Hamas is the second-richest terrorist organisation in the world, can this Government not find a way to capture some of that money, so that we can put it towards reconstruction in Gaza?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

One thing is clear: there is no role for Hamas in the future. That means that we have to work with all parties, particularly those in the region. I mentioned before that we continue to work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the United States and regional partners, including Arab and Gulf states, to build a consensus for a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework that supports the conditions for a permanent and sustainable peace. We are prepared to convene partners and to help lead efforts to ensure that there is international and regional support for security, governance, recovery and reconstruction. It is vital that the whole of the region pulls together, and I am pretty confident that we will be able to do that. I hear what the noble Baroness says about Hamas; there can be no role for an organisation that has committed such horrific crimes.

[Lord Stevens of Birmingham (CB)]

Given that the Minister has rightly said that there can be no role for Hamas, has he seen the well-sourced reports from independent news agencies—such as the one from Reuters today—showing that, as we speak, it is Hamas thugs who are controlling the distribution of international humanitarian aid in north Gaza, as well as controlling the movement of the long-suffering Gazans themselves? How can Gaza be reconstructed and peace be secured while, in practice, Hamas appears to still be in control?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The important thing is that we are working with the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority to focus on the security issues the noble Lord points to. That is why we are supporting the Palestinian Authority in its security mechanisms. The Israeli Government also have a duty to ensure that there is proper distribution of that aid, to northern Gaza in particular. It is pretty obvious that the situation is quite fragile, as was seen by the evidence of the release of hostages, but we are absolutely committed. The solution lies in ensuring that the Palestinian Authority has the ability to conduct its security operations.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the tone and substance from the Minister and both Front Benches, which reflects the unity of purpose in your Lordships’ House. While I agree with much of what has been said, we must engage directly on the importance of the “day after”, because it is here and now. That means grasping the plans which already exist and building on the framework of the Abraham accords and the three Arab states, including Egypt and Jordan, which are at peace with Israel. We have initiatives, such as the Arab peace initiative and more recently the plan put forward by former Prime Minister Olmert and former Foreign Minister of the PA, Nasser al-Kidwa. These plans exist; they are incremental and structured. Surely we can ensure that the UK Government play their part in the process which is needed now and which runs in parallel with the long-term objective of ensuring that a two-state solution is delivered.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right; there are these plans and discussions, which we need, and the United Kingdom is happy to convene whatever meetings we possibly can. Working with the United States, the Israeli Government, the Palestinian Authority and in particular the Gulf and Arab states together is the way forward to ensuring that there is sustainable peace that delivers security for the people of Israel and Palestine. That is what we are all seeking and the noble Lord is right that we need to bring together all these initiatives that show real commitment to peace.

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, we are pleased to be at the stage of peacebuilding. Does the Minister agree that it is important that local women are involved at every level and at every peace table? It is local women who know what is required. They know how the buildings need to be rebuilt, they know about schools and they know that they do not want children to be taught in tents. They want to have proper, safe schools built and the opportunities, if possible, for further education, not necessarily in Gaza but close by when it comes to universities and other forms of education.

There is also the question of health. If we do not have proper hospitals brought into areas, there is no hope for maternal health and for cancer patients and other patients. So, we ought to agree now with everybody that women have to be at every peace table, because without that we are not going to get real peace. We have seen what happened in Northern Ireland. It is still the women of Northern Ireland who are keeping the peace going. So, I would like the Minister to give an undertaking on this and to come back on where those of us who are involved in this House can be of assistance.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. We have both been engaged in focusing on the women, peace, and security agenda, which the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, has been so committed to, and I am glad to see her in her place. What I tried to convey in my response to the Oral Question was the role in terms of reconstruction of civil society and, as my noble friend points out, women can be an absolutely critical part of that reconstruction and peacebuilding. The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised the question of focusing on children and education in particular, but women also have a critical role in delivering that peace process. That is why we are working with the PA as well to ensure that women are involved and engaged, as she says.

[Lord McDonald of Salford (CB)]

My Lords, the country in the Middle East that had the worst 2024 was Iran. At the beginning of 2025 there are indications that Tehran wants to return to the negotiating table. When Mr Trump was the 45th President of the United States, he took the US out of the JCPOA. Now that he is the 47th President, will His Majesty’s Government urge Washington to re-engage with the JCPOA from a position of greater strength?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I hear what the noble Lord says, but we have to recognise that we condemned Iranian attacks on Israel. We have seen what Iran is capable of doing and how responsible it is for malign activity, most recently on 14 October. We have been focusing on calling on Iran and its allies to refrain from further attacks to de-escalate the situation and to support the opportunity for an agreed ceasefire.

Now that we have that ceasefire, we can work with our regional allies to ensure that there is a process that can deliver a more sustainable peace for the whole region. The mechanism for doing that has to be open to further dialogue. We cannot be prescriptive in the way that the noble Lord hopes to be. We know that mechanism delivered a much safer world in terms of nuclear proliferation, so we need to engage and focus with our allies in looking at the possible mechanisms to achieve that.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, I wonder whether my noble friend knows that, over quite a lot of years—probably coming up to two decades—the international teacher trade union movement has worked extensively with teachers in Palestine, offering training and curriculum development. I include the Nordic countries, France and certainly Britain. I have been into Palestinian schools and looked extensively at the curriculum and I can assure my noble friend—and hope that he will agree—that UNRWA does not engage in indoctrination.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Like my noble friend, I had the opportunity to visit the Occupied Territories and I certainly visited schools. I looked at many of the facilities that UNRWA provided, and they are an essential mechanism for delivering that humanitarian aid. My noble friend makes a very important point, which again raises the issue of the role of civil society. Like the initiatives she mentioned in terms of teachers, there is a role for all kinds of civil society. We have heard about faith groups—I would mention trade unions. I had a long association with the Palestinian trade union federation. I think we can do more to encourage civil society from all quarters to support that reconstruction. So, I agree with my noble friend: there are great opportunities for the future here.

[Lord Walney (CB)]

I know the Minister is not going to dismiss the substantial evidence that has built up over the years of extremist poison being injected into the minds of young Palestinians through the school system. But, whatever the past, does he agree that it is very hard to see a more tolerant future if this were still to occur? Will he commit the UK to make clear to the Palestinian Authority that any further support for it will be contingent on there being no extremism within the education system?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Building confidence and trust is not an easy thing to do over the long period of conflict that we have seen, and that is true of every area of conflict. We need to ensure that we define what peace means and what are the benefits and dividends of it, because there are great opportunities in Palestine and in Israel to develop economic progress in a way we have not seen before, and that peace can deliver. That is what we need to focus on. Looking back to old definitions, particularly the terms of terrorism, can hold back the building confidence process. I have spoken to many Israeli organisations working for peace in Israel and they are focused on ensuring that they look to the future, that we do not look at the past, and that we certainly build trust among young people.

[Lord Bellingham (Con)]

My Lords, can the Minister clarify whether the Foreign Secretary has met US special envoy Steve Witkoff yet? Can he also clarify what he said about the two-state solution, because surely this is the only way forward in the future to find a realistic peace? Would he also agree that this will work only if the State of Israel does actually now desist from the settlement programme on the West Bank?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

We have made our position clear, as has the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad. We have been consistent about settlements in the Occupied Territories, we have been consistent in terms of the duties on Israel and we have condemned any extension of settlements. We have made absolutely clear, as the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, said, that the previous Government and this Government are committed to that process, and we have made clear to the Israelis the consequence of undermining the possibility of a secure Palestinian state.

The Foreign Secretary has visited Israel and the region on three occasions since taking office. Every time he has visited, he has visited the Occupied Territories. I am pretty certain he has met the envoy, but I cannot give the noble Lord that assurance—I am not absolutely certain—but he has been heavily engaged in this process. As I said at the beginning, we have been making very serious calls about the ceasefire, we now have it, it is fragile and we need to be committed to ensure it is sustainable.

Israel and Palestine

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Lords Chamber

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

My Lords, this deal is a fragile process but one that the United Kingdom is ready to support. It is a first step. We must build confidence on all sides to help sustain the ceasefire, moving it from phase 1 through to phase 3, into a political process that sees lasting peace. We are already convening partners to build consensus for a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework, and co-ordinated and effective support for recovery and reconstruction.

[Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend Minister for his Answer. Would he agree, as has been the case in other areas of conflict, that a vibrant, free and civil society is essential to building peace and reconciliation? In this respect, would it be possible for the Government to increase their funding to human rights groups in Palestine and Israel to underpin the organic growth of that much-needed civil society to try to achieve a shared future and reconciliation for all citizens of Israel and Gaza?

[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.

[Baroness Deech (CB)]

My Lords, has the Minister read the wise words of the noble Lord, Lord Finkelstein, in this morning’s Times, where he points out that the time has come for the Palestinians to behave like all the millions or trillions of people displaced since the Second World War with the creation of new states? Does the Minister agree that the problem is UNRWA? The Arabs have to accept the existence of Israel and UNRWA must resettle refugees. It must get them settled in the countries in which they are living and make sure that they have full civil rights, so that their children grow up not to hate but to make a new life and take new opportunities in the countries where they are living, like all other refugees around the world.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I hear what the noble Baroness says, but, of course, many Palestinians are living in occupied territory. We want to ensure, through the peace process that has been agreed, that we work with all sides to bring them towards a consensus that will ensure the safety and security of Israel, as well as the safety and security of a Palestinian state. We must work towards that, and this agreement provides the basis to do so.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, the people of Gaza need homes and shelter. The UN estimated last summer that clearing the 40 million tonnes of rubble in Gaza will take 15 years. Does the Minister agree that human reconstruction, especially for the children of Gaza—who are equivalent to the entire under-10 population of London and are homeless, without shelter or health or education facilities—should be our number one mission? The UK cannot do everything for the reconstruction, but it can ensure that some pop-up education and child trauma centres are erected now, so that if there is any kind of sustainable peace it ensures that children are at the heart of any kind of reconstruction and recovery.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I agree completely with the noble Lord. In fact, we have announced £112 million this financial year, including £41 million for UNRWA, which is supporting the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Palestinian refugees in the region. This support has meant that half a million people have received essential healthcare funding and medical support. More than 300,000 people have been treated. The noble Lord is also right to focus on children. Some 14,000 children now have access to education materials and welfare support because of UK intervention. However, this is only the beginning. It is a huge process that we must commit to, but if we can work with our partners across the globe, we can do that.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, I commend the work that His Majesty’s Government are doing in seeking reconciliation and reconstruction in Gaza. Given that there might now be the possibility of temporary urgent medical evacuation, in particular for children who are in the most serious situations, will the Government consider bringing some children to the UK on the clear understanding that they will return to their homes in Gaza, whether those are temporary or, ultimately, permanent?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

It is vital that Israel ensures that there is sustained passage for patients who need treatment that is not available in Gaza during the first phase of this ceasefire. That means working with neighbours, because speed and distance are important factors in receiving treatment. However, I reassure my noble friend that officials across Whitehall are looking at all options to make sure that we are doing everything in our power to help and to explore all avenues to support those who are critically ill in Gaza. That is why we have also announced £1 million for the Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population, delivered through WHO Egypt, to support Palestinians who are medically evacuated from Gaza.

[Baroness Altmann (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that Israel has, for its entire existence, sought a two-state solution and to live in peace alongside a Palestinian state? Unless and until the Palestinians themselves accept Israel’s very right to exist and stop indoctrinating their children that the only thing that matters is recovering, “from the river to the sea”, the land that they have claimed ownership of but which has been disputed for so long, it will be very difficult to see a sustainable path to peace for Israelis and Palestinians, especially with the ongoing international involvement in the indoctrination of children via UNRWA schools.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think noble Lords will appreciate that we have an opportunity to focus on the broader issues when we come to the Statement. The United Kingdom is ready to play a leading role with international and regional partners in the process towards that next stage of the two-state solution. It is predicated on tangible progress towards a Palestinian state, with Gaza and the West Bank united under one Government. The PA’s role in Gaza must therefore be front and centre. Planning needs to advance security for both Gazans and Israel, as the noble Baroness pointed out.

[Baroness Hayman (CB)]

The Prime Minister’s support and leadership on setting up an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace has been welcomed by those involved in civil society peacebuilding, brought together by the Alliance for Middle East Peace. There was talk of a conference to launch this fund in this country early in the new year. Can the Minister give us any details on when that conference might take place?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Sadly, I am not able to give details at this stage, but since the ceasefire agreement we have been assessing how we can build that stronger alliance across allies and, in particular, the Gulf states to ensure that we can focus on the issues. When I get more information, I will write to the noble Baroness.

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

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Lords Chamber

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

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton of Hyde, for securing this long-overdue debate and I congratulate him on his opening remarks, which set the right tone for a comprehensive debate.

As everyone says, this is a challenging time for the Arctic. High co-operation and low tension remain this Government’s long-term objective. Yet there is no doubt that the region is at an inflection point. Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has undermined the peaceful co-operation that has characterised the Arctic Council, including collaboration on science and research, since its inception in 1996. Climate change is impacting the region, warming places up to four times faster than the global average, fuelling mass wildfires, and melting ice. Greenland alone is losing 30 million tonnes of ice every hour, while growing global interest in the Arctic from state and non-state actors threatens a new era of competition for resources.

All these things put the region’s stability, security and environment at risk and threaten to replace its reputation for co-operation with competition. These are, of course, huge issues for its 4 million inhabitants, and the wider ripple effect has profound implications for the United Kingdom as the nearest non-Arctic state. As noble Lords know, that includes impacts on our weather, climate, ecosystems, fish stocks and domestic resilience, along with wider threats to the United Kingdom’s regional and global security.

This Government recognise the gravity of these issues and their significance for UK interests. As the Minister for the Polar Regions, my honourable friend Stephen Doughty, noted at the Arctic Circle Assembly in October, we are determined to navigate the challenges ahead in a spirit of co-operation and respect with our partners in Europe and elsewhere. We will put internationalism and multilateralism at the heart of our work and be guided by the Arctic policy framework, which we will continue to update and develop in the light of the science and the strategic challenges we face.

Critical to this co-operation, as the committee’s report identifies, is the Arctic Council, which we consider the pre-eminent intergovernmental forum in the region. Following a pause in relations with Russia, the council has re-established collaboration at a technical level over the past 18 months, as noble Lords have mentioned. While challenging, such efforts have seen progress in science and research co-operation for the benefit of the region as a whole. We commend and support Norway’s work as chair of the council in bringing these developments about, because effective governance, characterised by co-operation and constructive dialogue under its auspices, is key to building a secure and peaceful region.

To address the contribution by the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, and others in relation to some of the statements currently being made, we will offer our support to the Kingdom of Denmark when it takes the chair of the Arctic Council in May.

Constructive progress in the council has been a welcome development, but our objective for an Arctic of high co-operation and low tension depends on more than that alone, and of course there are some who may seek to undermine that objective. That is why we have been clear that we will protect and, if necessary, assert our rights to support wider regional governance and security. This includes protecting the centrality and integrity of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which I addressed recently at the United Nations General Assembly, in the face of attempts to undermine stability, disrupt critical infrastructure and restrict freedom of navigation in the region.

Alongside our resolute support for Ukraine, we are working tirelessly with partners, including the Nordic states and beyond, for peace, security and stability. I reassure the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that the UK’s commitment to NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force and the Northern Group is ironclad, because while we recognise Russia’s rights and role as an Arctic state, we are not naive about the challenges we face in the High North or their importance for the UK. There can be no global security without Arctic security. The recent reports of damage to electricity and telecommunications cables in the Baltic Sea connecting Finland, Estonia and Germany underline the importance of partners, including the United Kingdom, continuing to work together on these shared challenges. The Foreign Secretary made these issues a focus of his first 100 days in office with visits to Sweden and Norway, where he discussed Euro-Atlantic security, and the Prime Minister joined leaders of other Joint Expeditionary Force nations in Tallinn last month to discuss the security threats and challenges in the Baltic, north Atlantic and High North and reiterate our commitment to the security of the region.

It is also clear, as we have heard in the debate, that climate and environmental change are exacerbating the growing geopolitical competition, including for the critical minerals necessary to power the green transition, while being critical issues in their own right. The committee’s report rightly identifies the United Kingdom as a world leader in polar science. The UK has invested over £135 million in Arctic research over the last decade, including through UK centres of expertise. The UK’s Royal Research Ship “Sir David Attenborough” paid its first visit to Greenland last summer. The Minister with responsibility for the polar regions, Stephen Doughty, took the opportunity to engage with many British and international polar scientists on his visit to Norway and Iceland in October.

Additionally, the United Kingdom’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency recently launched an £81 million call for proposals for research around Greenland to explore the potential for an early warning system for climate tipping points of global importance. Given that this is the critical decade for climate action, and as we head towards the next International Polar Year, in 2032-33, our efforts and collaboration have never been more important. We will work closely with Arctic state partners, wider allies and, critically, indigenous people to better understand and assess climate and environmental change in the region and beyond.

However, to address the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Stevens, while we expect other countries to deliver their climate commitments, we also respect their right to determine the routes they take to meeting these goals, including how they regulate the production and use of hydrocarbons. To address the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, the UK continues to actively encourage UK polar science. In addition to our bilateral Arctic science research partnerships, the Government have recently committed additional funding to support engagement of UK researchers with the Arctic Council working groups. In total, government support for this engagement now amounts to £710,000.

On the other issue that the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, raised, which I have just mentioned, I reassure her that Minister Doughty met a number of Arctic state representatives and representatives of indigenous people, among others, on his recent visit to the Arctic Circle Assembly. In respect of indigenous people, he conveyed that we are committed to better recognising the vital role that they play in the region and to working with them in genuine partnership to tackle the challenges we face. We have much to learn from their experience and knowledge.

Noble Lords will understand that the committee’s report also highlights the need to give the Arctic sufficient attention, and I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton, for his questions on this point. As I have sought to highlight, what happens in the Arctic has wide-reaching implications for the United Kingdom, thrown into ever sharper relief by the climatic, environmental and geopolitical challenges it faces.

The Minister for the polar regions has established a cross-governmental ministerial group on those regions, involving Ministers from nine other departments. This will meet for the first time in February and play an important role in supporting the agreement and delivery of a strong and co-ordinated Arctic policy. This is how we can ensure that we are best placed to support the long-term peace, sustainability and prosperity of the region and protect the UK’s long-term interests. The group will also help to ensure that the Government tackle the issues of climate change, nature and security in a joined-up way across the polar regions.

To address the point made by many Lords, including the noble Lords, Lord Teverson and Lord Hannay, this is not something to be delivered just from the United Kingdom. As I have highlighted, FCDO Ministers are actively engaged in the region, with support from wider ministerial colleagues and at official level by the head of the polar regions department and the senior Arctic lead, part of whose role is to represent UK interests with partners in the region. With UK interests co-ordinated through a lead Minister for the polar regions, we consider this an effective way of co-ordinating and delivering our Arctic policy. That is a specific answer to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton.

I am also grateful to the noble Lord for his further questions. I hope that I have already given a flavour of the Government’s position on key areas of Arctic policy, but let me highlight three key things. First, there is our desire to see strong collaboration under the auspices of the Arctic Council, as part of our commitment to multilateralism and deepening our relationships in Europe and beyond. We see the council as key to binding together the growing global interest in a region characterised by ever increasing economic competition. Secondly, there is our steadfast commitment to the security of the Arctic, including through NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force and the Northern Group. Thirdly, there is the centrality of action on climate and nature to the Government’s work. There are few places where the impacts of climate and environmental change are more clearly seen than in the Arctic. We will continue to press for action to reduce emissions and build collaboration through the United Kingdom’s contribution to Arctic research, including with indigenous people.

In relation to the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, we support the objectives of this agreement, which came into effect in 2021. It seeks to prevent unregulated high seas fishing in the central Arctic Ocean. As noble Lords have said, it places a moratorium on commercial fishing in the area covered by the agreement until 2037. We remain committed to joining the agreement at the earliest opportunity. This requires an invitation from existing parties. However, there is currently no formally established accession process. The United Kingdom recently attended the third CAOFA conference of the parties in the Republic of Korea in June 2024, where a discussion on the United Kingdom’s accession took place for the first time. All parties but one were supportive, but the parties agreed to discuss an accession process. In the meantime, we continue to engage as an observer.

I turn to some of the other questions raised in the debate but that I have not addressed so far. Noble Lords particularly asked about my noble friend Lord Robertson’s strategic defence review. While the UK is not an Arctic state, our capabilities in the Arctic and the High North are being considered as part of the strategic defence review, the outcome of which is due to be published in the first half of this year. We have strong relationships as allies with seven of the eight Arctic states, with which we will co-operate to ensure the stability of the region. The SDR will help to determine the nature of that co-operation, but our commitment to our allies through NATO and the JEF will remain steadfast. That review will precisely address those priorities that noble Lords have raised in this debate.

The noble Lord, Lord Willetts, raised a really important point in regard to space. We are supportive of the ambition to launch satellites from spaceports across the United Kingdom. Assured access to launch capability is important to the MoD, and we will seek to achieve the greatest value for money from providers which can meet this requirement. We are supporting our partners and allies, as the noble Lord said, as a participant in the STARLIFT programme, which will create a network of space launch capabilities across the alliance. He also asked about Northlink. We will continue to engage with NATO to understand the vision and concept of Northlink.

The noble Lord, Lord Stevens, asked about biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. The ratification of that agreement is in line with the Government’s determination to reinvigorate the United Kingdom’s wider international leadership on climate and nature, and we are completely committed to ratification. Precisely when is a question of parliamentary time, as he knows.

There was a question about search and rescue in the Arctic, which of course rests with the Arctic states. We are ensuring that the rescue agreements allow for co-operation to ensure timely and effective response. HM Coastguard works closely with them in the North Atlantic Coast Guard Forum, as well as other multilateral research projects. Certainly, HM Coastguard also represents UK interests in search and rescue discussions in the Arctic Council.

The noble Lord, Lord Mountevans, raised the issue of increased shipping across the Arctic, which, of course, is not risk-free. As such, the United Kingdom will continue to advocate for the highest possible shipping standards and adherence to the polar code. New technology will be required to regulate and predictably meet the challenges of operating in the Arctic.

Despite the delay in considering the report in the Chamber, this has been a timely opportunity for us to consider all these challenges. I certainly welcome the attention that noble Lords have given to this at this critical time. The Government are committed to working together with partners and allies in a spirit of collaboration and co-operation to ensure effective governance, underpinned by a strong Arctic Council; to support regional security and, more importantly, uphold international law; and to strengthen our science and research collaboration to tackle and respond to climate and environmental change, for a more stable, secure and sustainable Arctic for the future.

Northern Gaza

Lord Collins of Highbury 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.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, it is an outrage that the innocent hostages are still being detained. Yesterday, Minister Falconer said in the House of Commons of the Israeli military:

“Air strikes within the designated humanitarian zone show there are no safe spaces left for civilians”.—[Official Report, Commons, 7/1/25; col. 733.]


The most pressing threat is to the 50,000 pregnant women and the 17,000 unaccompanied children. There is now hunger and no health facilities at all. Not only that, in December, we saw the lowest levels of aid getting into Gaza, and the Israeli Government, as an occupying power, was blocking its distribution within Gaza, contrary to international law, and contributing to the looting and criminal activities by gangs and Hamas. Notwithstanding the Minister’s concern and the number of times that Ministers have expressed their frustration with the Israeli Government, what consequences will there be for the relationship between the Israeli Government and His Majesty’s Government? There now need to be consequences; otherwise, nothing that Ministers say about their concerns will have any influence on the Israeli Government.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows that when this Government were elected, we took specific action. We have not been complacent here. On the mounting civilian deaths, we are absolutely determined to ensure that Israel does much more to comply with international humanitarian law and provide protection for civilians.

The Foreign Secretary continues to raise issues of international humanitarian law compliance in Gaza with the Israeli Government and since 2 September there have been no extant UK export licences for items to Israel that we assess are for use in military operations in Gaza. We have also restored funding to UNRWA to ensure that humanitarian aid can get in. I repeat to the noble Lord that we have not been complacent. We have acted and continue to act and put pressure on the Israeli Government and work with all our allies, as we have shown in our votes at the United Nations and the Security Council. I refute the suggestion that we have not taken action.

[Baroness O’Loan (CB)]

My Lords, I recently met Dr Omar Alshaqaqi, who works in the cancer centre in Belfast City Hospital. He and his wife Dalal have seen 80 members of their two families killed in Gaza. On 4 December, Dalal was able to speak to her mother and sister in the camp that they had moved to on the instructions of the Israelis. As they concluded their conversation so that Dalal could go and collect her children from school in Belfast, she heard a bomb explode. When she returned with her children she learned that her mother and 34 year-old brother had been killed, and her three sisters and two of her three brothers had been seriously injured. All the hospitals have been destroyed. There is no anaesthetic and no medication to treat their terrible injuries. We all accept that Hamas must return the hostages but what more can be done after the destruction of all the hospitals to allow such injured people to get out of Gaza to a safe country?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness for her contribution and her question. The situation in northern Gaza is absolutely dire and reports from Kamal Adwan Hospital have continued to shock and distress the international community. The United Kingdom has repeatedly raised concerns about the impact of this conflict on Gaza’s healthcare system and medical staff, including reiterating the requirement for all parties to comply with international humanitarian law. We are looking at all ways that we can ensure that proper health facilities are made available to those who need them and I hope, in the near future, we will be able to make certain announcements about that.

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, three days before Hamas’s horrendous attacks on Israel I was in Gaza visiting the Anglican Al-Ahli Hospital. That hospital was struck again on 29 December by an Israeli artillery shell—the fifth strike it has had. Earlier this afternoon, I asked the archbishop in Jerusalem for an update and he provided me with a list of things that are urgently needed by his medical director at that hospital. They include antibiotics, anaesthesia drugs, sterile gloves, plaster of Paris, surgical knives, abdominal swabs and much more. All of that is in a container that has been in Amman for two months, held up because the Israeli Government will not allow it in. What might His Majesty’s Government do to try to enable that medical equipment to get to the Al-Ahli Hospital urgently?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Both the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have raised the issue of access to humanitarian aid and medical supplies with the Israeli Government. We are also giving support to UNRWA to try to get those supplies through. I think the right reverend Prelate makes an extremely valid point. It is unacceptable that such supplies should not be able to get through to those who need them. We are certainly making the strongest possible representations to ensure that they do get through.

[Lord Pickles (Con)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, I do not underestimate the difficulty of what I am going to ask my noble friend but on Monday I asked whether His Majesty’s Government could possibly consider the urgent temporary medical evacuation of children facing death, very serious illness and terrible injuries because clearly there are no medical facilities in northern Gaza which can deal with the situation they are facing. I repeat: is it possible for His Majesty’s Government to consider urgent temporary medical evacuation?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I tried to answer that question earlier, because there was a specific point raised. We are looking at all possible ways to ensure that there is access to medical assistance. I am not in a position to make any announcements today, but we are working with allies to see how this can be facilitated urgently.

Pro-democracy Campaigners: Arrests

Lord Collins of Highbury 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.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, the wholly unacceptable issuing of bounties for the arrest of innocent British residents and citizens is contrary to the promotion of and respect for democracy, the rule of law and good governance in the United Kingdom. That is one of the criteria for Magnitsky sanctions. Will the Government act and ensure that those who issued those bounties will now be sanctioned by this Parliament as a statement and signal of that being completely unacceptable behaviour? In the light of these actions just before Christmas, will the Government now move with pace on the designation of China under national security legislation for the enhanced mechanisms, so that it cannot interfere in our democratic processes?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows I am obliged to say that I am not going to respond by predicting future sanctions. To come back to his point about FIRS, we have not yet made any decisions on which foreign powers or foreign power-controlled entities will be specified on the enhanced tier. The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme will further strengthen our national security, while maintaining the UK as an international hub for business. Announcements will be made after due consideration. Certainly, we have been clear, and we believe that our approach of engaging directly and robustly with China where it is in the UK’s national interest is the right one. It is firmly in line with our G7 and Five Eyes partners.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, in another place yesterday, the Minister, Catherine West, said that we have to “balance” national security with the need to be

“an outwardly facing … trading nation”.—[Official Report, Commons, 7/1/25; col. 760.]

Can the Minister explain what that means in the context of the 19 year-old young woman, Chloe Cheung, who now has a £1 million bounty on her head, along with several other young people, including Nathan Law, a former legislator in Hong Kong, whose own family have been threatened regularly, as he is now here in exile in the United Kingdom? Chloe said:

“Fear cannot restrain me. Suppression cannot silence me”.


Can the Minister tell us what more the Government will do to support people in her position? As the Joint Committee on Human Rights has decided to hold an inquiry into transnational repression, I hope the Minister will agree that that is an inquiry to which he will make a significant contribution as the Human Rights Minister.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am certainly willing to do that. Let me reassure the noble Lord that our position is quite clear. China is our fourth-biggest trading partner and the second-biggest economy. Trade between these countries has existed for some time. The United Kingdom Government, under both parties, have been very clear and robust about these breaches of international law. To suggest that we have done nothing that the Chinese Communist Party has been annoyed about is not true. The noble Lord can grimace, but the fact that we have given BNOs the right to come here was very much a concern of the Chinese Communist Party. We have acted—this has included sanctions for four Chinese officials and one entity for serious systematic human rights violations—and we continue to act. The idea that we can simply conflate our very strong condemnation of human rights abuses and then say that therefore we are not going to have any economic ties is simply not in the interests of this country or of the global economy.

[Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Con)]

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that last answer. He is quite right that we should not be pivoting on the basis of headlines; we should have the closest relationship compatible with our national security and the principles that we uphold. None the less, I am sure the Minister will recognise that there was a substantive change in Chinese policy towards Hong Kong from 2020. Until then, the letter, if not always the spirit, of the Sino-British declaration had been honoured. With the national security law and the cancellation of the LegCo elections and change in the rules, China is now blatantly in violation of the “one country, two systems” deal, which was the basis on which the transfer of sovereignty was made. Whether it is by the kind of targeted sanctions suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, or by some other mechanism, surely there must be some response from the British Government when we see such an overt violation of a treaty to which we are one of the two parties.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Ongoing breaches of that agreement have been registered with the United Nations. As I have said, one of the biggest consequences of those was the United Kingdom Government’s actions in facilitating BNOs being able to come to this country—a very successful operation, on which I congratulate the previous Government. It was the right decision. It certainly annoyed the Chinese Communist Party, which saw it as a breach of the agreement, whereas it was a reaction to its ongoing breaches of the agreement. We are taking every possible step to raise our concerns about human rights violations, not only the introduction of the security legislation in Hong Kong but the ongoing breaches of human rights in other parts of China.

[Baroness Falkner of Margravine (CB)]

My Lords, will the Minister accept that there are consequences for not upholding international law and not sticking by treaty obligations? I remind him that our capitulation in the light of the violation of the Budapest memorandum vis-à-vis Ukraine led to certain inevitable actions. I suggest to him that exactly the same may happen if the Government appear to be so relaxed about signing up only to bits of international law that they rather like and not enforcing obligations internationally elsewhere, particularly as a UN Security Council member.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I totally refute the noble Baroness’s suggestion that we are not being robust in our response in defending human rights. The actions of the United Kingdom Government have been very clear. I repeat that the biggest response to the introduction of this law in Hong Kong was the facilitation of BNOs coming here, and we are making the strongest possible representations. I also refute the idea that we have not used sanctions; we have, and I could go into examples of upholding international humanitarian law and human rights. I do not accept for one moment that we failed to show a robust response. But we are living in a global world and we face global challenges, not least as one of the biggest economies in the world. We have to co-operate with China to address our biggest threat, which is climate change. That is what I hear from people when I attend international fora. I refute the noble Baroness’s suggestion.

Syria

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

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

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement that was made fairly recently in the other place. The Statement is as follows:

“My Lords, 10 days have passed since Assad’s departure. This Government welcome the fall of his cruel and barbaric regime and the opportunity that this offers for the Syrians. However, while there is some cause for celebration, fighting and violence continue across the country.

The situation in Syria has developed rapidly over the last week. In the north-east, the US-brokered ceasefire between the SDF and the pro-Turkish SNA has been temporarily extended but the situation remains highly fragile. In Damascus, HTS has appointed a Prime Minister to lead an interim Government until March 2025 but has given very little detail on the shape and focus.

This Government remain committed to the people of Syria. We support a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition process based on the principles of UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. We are hopeful that anyone seeking a role in governing Syria will demonstrate a commitment to the protection of human rights, including for women and girls; unfettered access for humanitarian aid; the safe destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles; and combating terrorism and extremism. The United Kingdom urges the transitional Government to adhere to these principles and build a more hopeful, secure and peaceful Syria.

On Saturday, Jordan convened an Arab Foreign Ministers discussion, followed by a meeting with EU, French, UN, US and UK representatives. All involved, including the United Kingdom, reiterated their support for an inclusive political transition process. It is critical that the international community works together in a co-ordinated and complementary manner to ensure the best outcome for the Syrian people. Along with our partners, we want to see a new political process that is comprehensive, representative, inclusive and, more importantly, determined by the Syrian people themselves. We must also ensure that chemical weapons stockpiles are secured, not used, and that the transition to new governance is peaceful.

For all these reasons, it is right that the United Kingdom seeks to use all the channels available to deal with HTS, where we have to. To this end, senior officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office travelled to Damascus. They have underlined the UK’s support for the Syrian people and discussed the pathway to a more hopeful, representative and peaceful future for Syria with the new interim Syrian authorities and civil society.

During their visit, senior officials also discussed the importance of an inclusive transitional political process that protects the rights of all Syrians and prevents further instability. Of course, these words are important but they must be supported by actions. The humanitarian situation on the ground remains dire, with over 16 million Syrians in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria alone. That is why, on Saturday, the Government announced a new package of international aid to help the most vulnerable Syrians, including in Jordan and Lebanon, coming on top of that announced by the Prime Minister on 9 December. The United Kingdom’s £61 million in aid will help to provide emergency healthcare and nutrition, and support displaced Syrian children. We call on more of our partners to join us in committing greater humanitarian support”.

That ends the Statement. There has been a summary of developments since, but I think that is for my briefing, so I will leave it there.

--- Later in debate ---

[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.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank both noble Lords for their contributions and questions.

I reassure the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that we are working very closely with all allies, not only the UN, US and EU but also all Arab Foreign Ministers, to ensure the stability and sovereignty of Syria. Of course, the situation remains incredibly fluid. We continue to monitor developments closely and we are co-ordinating that monitoring through our international partners. I reassure noble Lords about that. We remain, as the Statement said, committed to the people of Syria and to a Syrian-led, Syrian-owned political transition process based on UN Security Council Resolution 2254, leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. I reassure the noble Lord that that is what we will continue to do.

Both noble Lords addressed how we will judge that transition and the people involved in it. As the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, alluded to, the fact that HTS is a proscribed terrorist group does not prevent the UK engaging with it in our efforts to secure a political settlement; nor does it prevent engagement with any future transitional Government in Syria who include HTS. Its proscription will not inhibit the pursuit of our foreign policy objectives in Syria. We will be guided by a set of core principles in any diplomatic interaction with the interim Syrian authorities, with inclusion and protection of human rights being key considerations.

As I mentioned in the Statement, the information I have is that on 16 December senior officials travelled to Damascus to underline the UK’s support for the Syrian people and discuss pathways towards a more helpful and representative peaceful future for Syria, involving Syrian authorities and civil society. They discussed the importance of an inclusive transitional political process, protecting rights, and will continue to stand for the people. One of the things we have consistently underlined is the importance of protecting all civilians, including religious and ethnic minorities. We have done this publicly and in our engagement with regional and international partners.

On sanctions, and particularly on the accountability of the Assad regime, I remind noble Lords that, since December 2024, the United Kingdom has listed 310 individuals and 74 entities, including Bashar al-Assad, his associates, those complicit in committing the atrocities and individuals who have supported or benefited from the Assad regime’s behaviour. On 9 December, the Foreign Secretary said that he will do everything in his power to ensure that no one from the Assad family finds a place in the United Kingdom.

The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised the position particularly in the north-east of Syria and Turkey. We have been in close contact with both Turkey and the Syrian Democratic Forces since the start of the escalation and we urge all sides to refrain from activity that will lead to further loss of civilian life or damage civilian infrastructure, further destabilising the region. We are absolutely on top of that.

On our humanitarian support, as noble Lords reminded the House when we last discussed this, the United Kingdom—both the previous Government and this Government—has to date committed over £4.3 billion in aid, which is our largest ever response to a single humanitarian crisis. The support has reached millions of Syrians across Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt, helping them to meet the urgent needs of those suffering. On 15 December, we announced the further £50 million to support vulnerable Syrians across those countries, and this funding will enable an urgent scale-up of humanitarian assistance where needs are at their highest—in particular, support to Lebanon and Jordan—and will reduce the likelihood of Syrians having to make perilous journeys to leave Syria and the region.

Within the £30 million of humanitarian aid, up to £24 million will be provided to the UN, including to UN OCHA-led Syria pooled funds for multisector emergency needs, and UNICEF—for education, health, nutrition, water, sanitation and child protection—as well as through UNFPA, particularly for the prevention of sexual violence. The remaining funds—up to £6 million—will be provided to UK-supported emergency health NGOs for healthcare and mobile clinics. I am trying to show that we are supporting a multiplicity of delivery vehicles and agents, which will minimise the risk of the corruption and leaking that the noble Lord was talking about.

The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised refugees and asylum. We agree with the UNHCR’s recent assessment that large-scale forced returns are inappropriate at this time, due to the many challenges facing the Syrian population. Therefore, I repeat what I said last week: this is a temporary pause. The Home Office has temporarily paused decisions on Syrian asylum claims while we assess the current situation. That does not mean that claims cannot be made—they are and they are being processed—but decisions have been paused. So I repeat to the noble Lord that this is a temporary arrangement.

Can I just say, on a point that the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, made, that we are ensuring that we continue financing that critical work on ensuring accountability for the crimes? We have committed £1.15 million to accountability and documentation-related programmes this year alone, and we will continue that work, because it is important that we are able to show people that for such crimes they will not have impunity—so that will lead to more accountability work.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

I endorse particularly what the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, said about accountability, and thank the Minister for how he has just replied to that point. He will recall that, on the day after the fall of the Assad regime, when he spoke to your Lordships’ House, I asked him specifically about the position of minorities and about the Kurds. Will he comment on the attack that was made yesterday, when several gunmen opened fire on an Orthodox church in Hama? On the situation of the Kurds themselves, as we have reached the point of maybe having negotiations and discussions and a possible settlement, will he particularly take into account that the Kurds should be fully included in any settlement? Will he comment on the role that they have played in ensuring that people who committed atrocity crimes in northern Iraq and northern Syria have been held in prisons that have been run by the Kurds? What will happen now to those prisoners? It is an issue that the Joint Committee on Human Rights raised with the previous Government and which it is returning to in this Session. I would be grateful, if the Minister cannot give a full reply to that today, if he would write to me.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his contributions. As I said in my opening responses, we are absolutely focused on protecting civilians, including religious and ethnic minorities. We have made that clear publicly but, more importantly, in all our conversations with groups. The noble Lord is absolutely right to draw attention particularly to the religious minorities, which have been focused on, and on which we have been keen to focus. By the way, I am sure that the noble Lord will be pleased that we have now appointed a Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief. I have met him, and we are working together now. This is a key area that we will be particularly focused on.

The noble Lord’s other point came up in our last Statement, and I responded to the noble Baroness, Lady Helic, on it—but at the moment I cannot find it in my notes, so I shall write to noble Lords.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, first, in recognising and welcoming the Statement, I think that the sentiments in the Statement are reflected in what we all think—but the importance is in actions. Syria is in a very fluid situation, as the Minister acknowledged. I welcome his update on which Minister attended the Aqaba meeting, which Geir Pedersen also attended, along with US Secretary of State Blinken. What were the outcomes from that meeting on specific responsibilities on who does what, and what process will be taken forward, bearing in mind the situation with warring factions and the instability in Syria, as well as the notable challenges that neighbouring countries are facing; for example, from the drugs trade in Captagon, a major challenge for neighbouring states?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

On that last point, of course Captagon is a real challenge, and the Assad regime used it to fund many of its activities. Certainly, it has regional implications, and it has spread to countries in the region. Fortunately, there is no evidence that it has spread to this country, but we are acutely aware of the dangers of it in countries in regional proximity, and we are giving what assistance we can in challenging that.

The noble Lord asked specific questions about the post process. As I said at the beginning, it is very fluid—and it is clear that we need to engage a range of partners, including specific neighbourhood countries but also international multilateral institutions, as we are doing. We are also acutely aware that there are changes ahead in the new year, and we need to ensure that we have consistency of approach. We are working closely with all our colleagues and allies and all countries in the region to ensure that stability, peace and security remain at the forefront of all our efforts.

[Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for the Statement. On sanctions, I understand the fluidity of the situation—we all recognise that—but there is a prima facie case that sanctions were imposed on a regime that has now been deposed. Syria is the third most sanctioned country in the world. Can my noble friend outline the process by which we are making decisions about when and how to ease the sanctions that we impose? Of course, another feature of Syria is the number of other countries that have not just an interest but a direct military presence, particularly Israel in the south and Turkey in the north. What representations are we making to Istanbul and Tel Aviv, and the Governments in those two countries, about limiting their military interference as Syria faces such a sensitive and febrile moment?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

To answer my noble friend’s latter point—again, we addressed this in the past week—we are of course aware of the presence of Israel across the Alpha line in the Golan Heights. The UN Disengagement Observer Force agreement of 1974 is important for the stability of the wider region. The Foreign Secretary discussed developments with his counterpart on 8 December, making sure that Israel honoured all those commitments under that agreement. As I said earlier in relation to north-east Syria, we have done the same with Turkey regarding honouring those commitments and sticking to the agreements.

In terms of sanctions, as I mentioned, there are 310 individuals whom this country has sanctioned who remain accountable for their crimes. We are certainly looking at ways that we can ensure that we follow them and make sure that they cannot use any assets that they get out of Syria. In fact, my objective would be to see just how those illicit funds could be followed. The important thing is that we have given, and will continue to give, aid and support to the people of Syria. When things become more stable, we will be in a position to review sanctions.

[Lord Swire (Con)]

I thank the Minister for his earlier comments, which are reassuring, up to a point. I follow on from the comments of my noble friend Lord Ahmad. On Captagon, we are presented with a unique opportunity to interdict and to stop the spread of Captagon. The Minister said that it had not reached the UK, which is reassuring, but it has certainly reached mainland Europe through some Italian ports. This is a $57 billion a year industry funded by the Assad family and their wider relations, not least the Makhlouf family. Can the Minister assure us, first, that we will take a forward-leaning role in this? It has affected mainly countries in the Middle East, as he says, but the UK could play a serious part by bringing expertise to destroy this pernicious trade. Secondly, will he keep under review the sanctions list to ensure that all those involved in this trade are sanctioned?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his question. Let me be clear that, while we are unaware of Captagon reaching the streets of the UK, shipments have been seized in Europe, as he rightly points out. As I said before, it presents a wider threat in the region, which is why we are collaborating and working with our allies to ensure that this trade can be stopped. I hope that one positive result of the situation in Syria will be that it will be stopped. That is something to be positive about. I repeat, as I said to my noble friend, that we are committed to maintaining the sanctions that we have introduced to ensure that people are held to account for their crimes, including this illicit trade.

[The Lord Bishop of Winchester]

I am very grateful to the Minister for repeating the Statement. I particularly welcome what he said about the appointment of a Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief, and what he said about north-east Syria. Forgive me for returning to that subject, given the reassurances he has given, but the semi-autonomous region of north-east Syria is an oasis of plurality in the region, where freedom of religion or belief is respected and women take a leading role in governance. It provides an exemplar for the whole region, yet it is under significant pressure from repressive forces supported by our NATO ally, Turkey. I believe that this is an asymmetric aggression, so can the Minister please assure the House that the UK will continue, along with other NATO allies, to bring pressure to bear on Turkey to desist from its destabilising activities in the region?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the right reverend Prelate for that question. I give him that reassurance: we are urging all sides to refrain from activity that will lead to further loss of civilian life or damage, and to avoid further destabilisation and damage in the region. Certainly, the Foreign Secretary has been talking to Turkey on this issue.

On the camps and detention centres in the area, raised by the noble Lord, Lord Alton, we continue to monitor conditions in those camps and will continue to promote security and stability and ensure that Daesh’s territorial defeat continues and that it can never resurge. As the present situation unfolds, we are working closely with partners to monitor the threat, including through our work with the global coalition against Daesh. As the Border Security Minister has said, the intelligence services are looking closely at the risk posed by terrorism and we will take all necessary action to protect the UK’s national security.

[Lord Hogan-Howe (CB)]

My Lords, I pick up on that point about terrorism. I cannot profess to have the same expertise as many people around the Middle East, but in 2011 to 2013, when the Syrian civil war started, we saw two immediate impacts. One was that around 1 million people left; they walked, sailed and swam across Europe. The second was that we saw a lot of those refugees based in the countries around Syria. We also saw an extremely large number of awful terrorist attacks. We particularly remember the Bataclan theatre attack. Many were instigated by ISIS within Syria and as it expanded its remit across Iraq.

Visiting Jordan at the time, we were all struck by the generosity of Jordan in looking after about 6 million refugees. It needs our support. I was told recently that about a third of the MPs in Jordan have now declared for the Muslim Brotherhood, which has a worrying and destabilising impact. What efforts are we making directly with Jordan? The Minister mentioned UN efforts, but what can we do with our friends in Jordan to help them stabilise and make sure that the children and young people who are growing up in these refugee camps have hope? Otherwise, other people will get their hope and direct them in a way that has an impact on our streets, as well as on the rest of Europe.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right. We have known for a very long time the huge impact that the situation in Syria was having on neighbouring countries, particularly the influx of refugees. We have been focused on giving financial and humanitarian support, not least to ensure that that support is not simply limited to the refugees but that the local population can accommodate and support them. One of the areas we were looking at previously was education and other facilities, and ensuring that people could work and contribute to the local economy. Even the recent further £50 million was also focused on giving support to those refugees in Lebanon and Jordan, and we will continue to do that. The real focus has to be on the causes of this refugee migration crisis, and one of the biggest causes has been the situation in Syria.

[Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)]

My Lords, I return to the situation in north-east Syria, which was raised by the right reverend Prelate and the noble Lords, Lord Alton and Lord Purvis. Al Jazeera and many others reported today that a Turkish official has denied yesterday’s statement by the US that Turkey was talking to the SDF, the group headed by the YPG. I applaud the Minister’s call for an end to military aggression in north-east Syria from the Turkish-backed forces and Turkey directly. What steps can the Government take to push Turkey to permit the Kurdish groups and the HTS-SNA alliance to talk to each other, and ensure that Kurdish interests are fully represented in the final destination for Syria?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I would not use the word “push”. What we are doing, with all international allies, is trying to push for an inclusive process that ensures that everyone forms part of the solution that leads to a Government decided by, and supported by, the Syrian people. We will continue to do that multilaterally, but also bilaterally, with all supporting countries.

[Lord Young of Norwood Green (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome what the Government have done, but we seem to have forgotten that a regime that was seen to be so solidly entrenched that it was incapable of being removed was in fact removed very swiftly by groups of people who fought to ensure that there was a free Syria. It is bound to be an imperfect situation, but we ought to welcome what those people did. We have ensured that the threat of Captagon being used as a weapon, as Assad was doing, is no longer as valid as it previously was.

My plea is that we recognise that this Government are going to take a while to establish themselves. We want to ensure that the freedoms that have emerged can stay. When the prisons were opened, people who probably would have faced more torture or death were released, so my plea is that we recognise what those brave freedom fighters achieved and monitor the situation. The point was made that we ought to monitor how we apply the sanctions, and I think that is right.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for that contribution. He is absolutely right that we need to judge the situation by deeds, rather than simply words, and we will continue to do so. I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, is in his place because he was one of the longest-serving Ministers in the last Government, as Minister for Foreign Affairs. He and I had debates on Syria in which we supported his Government’s position in not recognising Assad and not recognising that the situation was simple. We were as one in ensuring that we did not give support to Assad’s criminal actions. Some people felt that was the wrong position, but events have proved that both the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, and the then Opposition were absolutely right.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

I feel compelled to rise to my feet in the time left to thank the noble Lord. In the same way, we want to work constructively to ensure that the group that is HTS— Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, the ideological base of this—should not be forgotten. The fact is that it is an extremist organisation with terrorism roots. Yes, they say a leopard does not change its spots—the jury is out. We want to work constructively to ensure that ideological base is challenged. As the noble Lord rightly said, actions speak louder than words.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for that comment. I hope I can speak for the next six or seven seconds to ensure that I do not have to respond to any further questions.

[Noble Lords]

Oh!

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

It has been a very positive exchange. It is a very fluid situation, and one in which all parties in this House can work together to support the people of Syria and ensure they have a better future. With those remarks, I wish everyone a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Georgia

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Brinton]

To ask His Majesty’s Government, following the Foreign Secretary’s statement on 9 December concerning attacks on protesters and journalists by authorities in Georgia, whether they plan to sanction those involved in the elections in that country.

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

My Lords, in his statement on 9 December, the Foreign Secretary called for violence towards protesters and journalists in Georgia to stop. Until Georgian Dream halts its move away from European democratic norms and freedoms, the United Kingdom is suspending programme support to the Georgian Government, restricting defence co-operation and limiting engagement with representatives of Georgian Dream. It would not be appropriate to speculate about future sanctions designations, as to do so would reduce their impact.

[Baroness Brinton (LD)]

I am grateful for the Minister’s response. Georgian Dream, the pro-Putin party of unconstitutional actions and democratic backsliding, last Saturday appointed a new President, having cancelled the people’s presidential elections. Protests continue to grow in towns and cities across Georgia, but security threats and police violence against protesters—including killings—are growing and worsening daily. Will the Government seriously consider following the examples of Estonia in sanctioning Georgia’s Prime Minister and 13 officials, and of the European Council, which yesterday agreed to suspend visas for all Georgian officials?

[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.

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

My Lords, we have close links with Georgia, and as a country we therefore have some clout. The European Union has more clout. What level and type of co-operation do we have with the European Union in respect of Georgia?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right and we are in regular contact with international partners, including the EU and the US. We are collaborating multilaterally, including on support for joint statements through the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations, where we have consistently called for human rights to be respected. We will work in consultation and in collaboration with our allies, because that is the most effective way we can ensure that they listen to us.

[Lord Harries of Pentregarth (CB)]

The scores of thousands of people peacefully protesting on the streets of Tbilisi are very impressive. They include religious leaders—Jewish, Muslim and Christian—walking together. Does the Minister agree that Georgia is a crucial tipping point and that Putin is doing all he can to manipulate the situation there? I was very glad to hear that His Majesty’s Government are prepared to do “all” things. Will he please keep us informed of what those things might be? We must keep on as hard as we can, as the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, and the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, asserted.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble and right reverend Lord is right. The people of Georgia are making absolutely clear their opposition to Georgian Dream’s decision to pause the country’s further moves towards a European future—a decision that directly undermines the constitution of Georgia. By the way, the Georgian people are making their position clear not just in Tbilisi but throughout the country. We will offer whatever support we can. I will keep the House informed of all our actions and ensure that we convey very strongly how we are co-operating with others to make our position clear. Russia and Putin have a reputation of interfering in democratic processes, and we need to challenge that.

[Lord Blencathra (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, to the Council of Europe, which she will join in January. Three weeks ago I led a debate in Gdańsk on how disabled people could observe elections in other countries. I did that myself four weeks ago in Georgia, where we ran into a little trouble—my vehicle was sabotaged and a bunch of heavies were not very happy at our observations. It was not so much the individual intimidation at the polling stations that mattered but the way it was orchestrated at a high state level by the Georgian Dream party—which said it would outlaw the opposition party, and therefore intimidated all those who voted for it—and criminals.

On the day there were 3,000 video cameras, featuring in every polling station. The report that my PACE team made stated that these cameras gave the impression, “We know who you are, we know who you voted for and we are coming to get you”. But trying to find the people to sanction is very difficult, so I ask the Minister to please keep looking to find the Georgian Dream leaders who were responsible for that high level of state-orchestrated intimidation. They are the guilty ones, rather than individual thugs at the polling stations.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his contribution. The important thing is that the United Kingdom supports the preliminary findings of the OSCE ODIHR’s report on parliamentary elections in Georgia on 26 October, for which we contributed 50 short-term observers in a monitoring mission. That report found “misuse of administrative resources”, a “highly polarized” campaign environment, as the noble Lord quite rightly pointed out, and widespread “intimidation” and coercion against voters. That, along with the impact on civil society of Georgia’s law on transparency of foreign influence, are not the actions of an open, democratic society and run contrary to international standards. More importantly, they run contrary to the constitution of Georgia itself.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

The Government were aware that the United States and the EU would be placing visa restrictions on these individuals. The UK now finds itself in the invidious position where these individuals would be able to travel here but not to the EU or the United States. Without prejudicing any decisions on future sanctions, surely the Minister can say that these individuals should not travel to the UK because that would not be conducive to our public good.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord has made the point precisely—of course it would prejudice any future designations. I will not be tempted into doing that, because it would harm the impact. I repeat what my honourable friend said yesterday: we

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

I repeat that we are absolutely working in collaboration with the United States and the EU to ensure that whatever we decide in the future has maximum impact.

[Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)]

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, asked an excellent question. With no disrespect to the European Union, does my noble friend the Minister not agree that it is the Council of Europe, of which Georgia is a member, that is important in dealing with this matter? Surely the Minister should work with the UK delegation to the Council of Europe, which is now headed by my noble friend Lord Touhig, and the Secretary-General, to see what pressure can be brought through that organisation.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. As I said in an earlier response, we have supported the joint statements through the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations, where we have consistently called for human rights to be respected. I am certainly prepared to sit down with our noble friend to talk about how we can take this matter further.