Proceeding contribution from Ivan Lewis (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 4 March 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Global Security (Non-Proliferation).
Global Security (Non-Proliferation)
I begin by paying tribute to the Foreign Affairs Committee for the quality of its report. Members have been good enough to recognise that the Government took the report very seriously and ensured that our response was of a substantive and serious nature. There is much common ground between the Government and the Committee on the analysis of the current situation and on considerations on the future. I share in the comments made by the right hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Sir John Stanley) about how my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford, South (Mike Gapes) has chaired the Committee during this Session of Parliament. The Committee has further strengthened its reputation as a credible and serious scrutineer of the Government and a body that makes serious contributions to broader foreign policy debates. That is all to the good, particularly considering the votes in the House a few minutes ago, as the selection of Chairmen might take place on a very different basis in future. My hon. Friend has earned tremendous support beyond that of Government or party managers in relation to when choices need to be made in future, although it is not for the Government to decide who ought to chair Select Committees, or for the Whips—this is a unique and historic moment. I join my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East (Dr. Strang), my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) and others who remarked on how poignant it is to have such a debate the day after the passing of Michael Foot, who was such a great and powerful advocate for nuclear disarmament and peace around the world. It is also appropriate because tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the NPT coming into force. We could not have had the debate at a more poignant moment. As hon. Members have said, this year will be incredibly significant for such matters: there will be a nuclear security summit in Washington in April, the NPT review conference in May and the first preparatory committee for the arms trade treaty in the summer. This is the year when the world can come together and demonstrate its seriousness on creating a nuclear-free world. We must not raise expectations too greatly and must be realistic as well as ambitious, but 2010 could certainly be seen historically as the moment when the international community decided to go firmly down the disarmament route. Despite the positives, as right hon. and hon. Members have said, some states continue to play outside the rules of the international community. The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) raised the question of Iran and I want to respond directly to that point. The international community has made it clear that we want diplomatic and political engagement with Iran to resolve the nuclear file question. The President of America has made that clear, as many world leaders and international institutions have done consistently. As we meet here today, that door remains open. As we meet here today, that door remains open. There is a desire to resolve the matter in a diplomatic and political way. However, Iran's developing nuclear weapons has to be non-negotiable in terms of the stability of the international community and the middle east, but, paradoxically, also because of the arms race that would be triggered as a consequence of its developing nuclear weapons. Other middle eastern countries would feel that they had no alternative. Therefore, having made diplomatic and political overtures to Tehran, and having had a negative response and a complete lack of co-operation with the UN body charged with policing such matters, we have no choice but to say to Iran that we are serious. If Iran still refuses to come to the table, the next step in demonstrating our seriousness would be to introduce tough economic sanctions that particularly focused on the people in the Iranian regime who make decisions. It is important that any sanctions that are adopted keep the door open to political and diplomatic progress and to a resolution, but also engender as much unity in the international community as possible. That is why the preparatory work that we are doing to try to ensure that we have maximum unity—so that Iran cannot say that there are serious splits in the mainstream international community—is crucial in moving towards the sanctions stage.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 506 c344-5WH
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Decommissioning Arms control Nuclear weapons Nuclear disarmament Pakistan Proliferation Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Testing USA Russia Israel Iran Middle East Peace negotiations North Korea Trident
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:04:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_626916
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_626916
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_626916