Asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool To ask His Majesty’s Government
what their priorities are in respect of the conduct of
British-Iranian relations. Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB) My Lords,
in thanking all noble Lords who are to speak today, I wish that
more time was available for an extended parliamentary debate. I
should also record for the sake of transparency that the noble
Lord, Lord Polak, and I are both sanctioned by the Iranian regime.
Key issues that...Request free trial
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what their priorities are in
respect of the conduct of British-Iranian relations.
(CB)
My Lords, in thanking all noble Lords who are to speak today, I
wish that more time was available for an extended parliamentary
debate. I should also record for the sake of transparency that
the noble Lord, , and I are both sanctioned by
the Iranian regime.
Key issues that the Committee will want the Minister to address
include Iran’s reported ability to have enriched uranium to
levels just short of the threshold for making a nuclear bomb. We
will want to hear about its supply of drones to Putin for his use
in the illegal war in Ukraine and its support for regional
proxies destabilising the region—not least for the Houthis in
Yemen, where an estimated 150,000 people have been killed in the
war, including 10,000 children. We will want to hear about the
malign activities of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,
inside and outside Iran, and the continued lamentable and dismal
failure to proscribe it; about abductions and extrajudicial
killings, including of UK citizens, and the increasing use of the
death penalty; about the decision this week of the independent TV
station Iran International to leave London because of threats to
its staff, along with similar, systematic targeting of BBC
Persian staff and their families; about the shocking ill-timed
cuts to the BBC Persian services when widespread protests are
sweeping the country, heroically initiated by defiant women, and
when the need for the flow of reliable news rather than
propaganda has never been greater. We will also hear about the
systematic abuse of human rights, not least for political and
religious beliefs, including those of Baha’is and Christians
whose beliefs do not conform to those of Iran’s repressive
theocratic regime.
I turn first to nuclear proliferation. The inspectors for the
International Atomic Energy Agency say that levels of enriched
uranium at Iran’s nuclear sites are now just 6% below the
threshold for a nuclear weapon. In a week during which North
Korea launched an intercontinental ballistic missile, it was
disturbing to read that their brothers in arms in Iran are also
developing comparable technology, with direct application to
intermediate and intercontinental-range ballistic missiles.
Back in 2021 in the integrated review, the United Kingdom
asserted that with its allies it would
“hold Iran to account for its nuclear activity”.
I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us when the update
of the review will be completed and explain what we mean by
accountability, how we intend to respond to these most recent
developments, and what it meant when we said we remain
“open to talks on a more comprehensive nuclear and regional
deal”
—not least in the context of President Biden’s reported remarks
that the JCPOA is dead.
In any event, why should we believe anything this regime says or
promises? It told the world that its centrifuges could enrich
uranium only to a 60% level of purity. As its total enrichment of
uranium stockpiles now exceeds JCPOA limits by at least 18 times,
it is patently clear that this is not a regime whose word counts
for anything.
The risks to world peace, including an existential risk to the
State of Israel are obvious. On
12 September, Israel’s Defence Minister Benny Gantz displayed a
map depicting the Syrian location of 10
“production facilities for mid- and long-range, precise missiles
and weapons”
that Iran had
“provided to Hezbollah and Iranian proxies.”
In commenting on that, can the Minister also tell us how we have
responded to Iran’s provision of unmanned aerial vehicles,
Mohajer-6 drones and Shahed 131 and 136 drones, which target
civilians and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine, aiding and
abetting Putin’s brutal war crimes, in which Iran is now
implicated and complicit and for which it should be held to
account and ultimately prosecuted?
An Iranian delegation was in Moscow last month discussing
building a factory to mass-manufacture drones. Are we seized of
the urgency in recognising the deepening military and economic
ties between Russia, Iran and the PRC on everything from
satellites to grain, drones and joint military exercises in the
Gulf? As for the axis with Putin, it was reported in the Guardian
last week that:
“The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) has been at the
forefront of the growing bond, with senior leaders, Khalil
Mohammad Zadeh, Suleiman Hamidi and Ali Shamkhani, playing
central roles in the drone exports to Russia.”
How effective does the Minister believe that the more than 50
sanctions designations imposed because of military support for
Putin or as a consequence of human rights violations have been?
Are we considering further sanctions? Beyond sanctions, is it
correct that the FCDO has blocked a Home Office attempt to
proscribe the IRGC? Is that because of German reluctance to do
the same? As I asked in the House on 18 January following the
execution of Alireza Akbari, what has to happen and what further
evidence is needed before it is proscribed?
Such executions and death penalties are not new in Iran. It has
long ranked among the world’s top executioners, often on the back
of hasty sham trials. In 2021 it executed 314 people, 20% more
than in 2020. Estimates differ for 2022, but dozens are facing
protest-related executions. Perhaps the Minister can give us the
FCDO estimates, including the numbers of children who have been
executed. As for the sham trials and what passes for justice,
Tara Sepehri Far of Human Rights Watch says:
“Defendants are systematically deprived of access to lawyers …
are subjected to tortured and coerced confessions and then rushed
to the gallows.”
Not that we should be surprised, given the role of President
Ebrahim Raisi in 1988 in the massacre of 30,000 political
prisoners, predominantly from Mrs Rajavi’s pro-democracy
resistance.
Executions have been used to try to frighten people who have been
protesting since the death in September of 22 year-old Mahsa Jina
Amini while in the custody of the nation’s morality police—the
spark that ignited a nationwide revolt against the theocratic
regime, in many cases led by young women, turning on its head the
stereotype about the nature of opposition within Iran. Mahsa had
been arrested for “improperly” wearing her hijab and, according
to her family and local media, severely beaten. She died three
days later while still in police custody. Protests then erupted
across Iran, led by women who tore off their hijabs, cut their
hair and adopted a rallying cry of “Women, life, freedom”. How
bitterly ironic that Iran, until it was expelled in December, had
a place on the United Nations women’s committee. According to the
UN human rights office, protesters are facing the so-called crime
of “waging war against God” or “moharebeh” and “corruption on
earth”.
Agnès Callamard of Amnesty International says:
“The Iranian authorities knowingly decided to harm or kill people
who took to the streets to express their anger at decades of
repression and injustice.”
She said that
“countless more face being killed, maimed, tortured, sexually
assaulted, or thrown behind bars”
and that the international community
“needs to go beyond mere statements of condemnation”.
The sheer courage is striking. Reports of what happened to Mahsa
Amini emerged in part thanks to reporters Niloofar Hamedi and
Elahe Mohammadi, whom the Iranian regime then subsequently
jailed. These brave young women could now themselves face the
death penalty. But their journalism is not a crime. By the end of
2022, there were 363 known cases of detained journalists. Article
19 is abused every day in Iran; as it tops the world’s league of
executioners, Iran also tops the league for jailing
journalists.
That takes me to the BBC. I sometimes wonder whether Ministers
truly understand the smart power of the BBC World Service.
Certainly, the Iranian regime must do so, or it would not be
threatening BBC journalists and their families. Following the
debate that I secured on cuts to the BBC’s global news services,
and a meeting along with the noble Baroness, , with the FCDO Minister
this week, I met Liliane
Landor, the director of the BBC World Service. On each occasion,
I raised my concerns about the despicable treatment of BBC
Persian journalists, which is of a piece with the driving out of
Iran International from London. I have also contested the FCDO’s
shocking decision to cut the BBC Persian radio service. BBC
services being cut does exactly what the regime wants the FCDO
and the BBC to do and, in the scheme of things, it makes very
small savings. I know that my noble friend Lady Coussins will
return to that issue.
In summary, 1.6 million Iranians still get their news via radio,
and dictators can far more easily close down internet services.
Long-term funding of the BBC World Service must be addressed, but
in the short term the Persian radio service should not be allowed
to close. Its voice and the voices of those who want to see the
emergence of a more just and democratic society based on the rule
of law must not be silenced. In this debate, we must reiterate
our support and raise our voices for the people of Iran.
3.11pm
(Con)
My Lords, for many years I have been associated directly and
indirectly with Iran. I have visited many Iranian cities and have
a great affection and respect for the Iranian people. I am very
keen to try to help them in getting them medicines, essential
equipment and other humanitarian help. It is my understanding
that the acute lack of essential food and health commodities in
Iran is in great part due to the gap between the Iranian and
international banking systems. This is reflected by Iran’s
non-adherence to recommendations of the Financial Action Task
Force, which is one of the main obstacles preventing the Iranian
banking system joining the global banking community.
As it appears unlikely that this problem can be resolved in the
short term, the need seems obvious for an approved secure banking
channel to be established for the uninterrupted supply of
essential goods to the Iranian population, regardless of the
international political environment. Multiple solutions have been
proposed over recent years that have not gained much traction or
success. However, I am aware of a Swiss proposal, initiated by a
former senior United States oversight official in the Washington
area and his Swiss-based colleague, which has received the
preliminary blessing from the relevant US department that handles
such issues. Would the Minister agree to sit down with me and the
sponsors of the Swiss proposal to understand its merits? My
understanding is that this proposal could easily incorporate
other interested actors, such as Qatar, to which an invitation
has already been extended to participate, and would be
operational in a matter of days, provided that appropriate
approvals are received. This could mean the possibility of
delivering medicines and other essential goods during the Iranian
new year period that starts next month, which would make an
immediate and meaningful impact.
3.14pm
(LD)
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, , for this
debate.
The United States Government classify the Islamic Republic of
Iran as the foremost state sponsor of terrorism, alleging that
Iran provides a range of support, including finance, training and
equipment, to terrorist groups around the world. How else can we
explain the use of Iranians drones in Ukraine or the security of
some of the countries in the Middle East?
In recent days, we have seen a democratic revolution fully
supported by the Iranian people. This is a revolution against the
mullahs, the likes of which we have never seen before. More than
750 people have been killed, according to the Iranian opposition
People’s Mujaheddin Organisation of Iran. I have seen similar
evidence of the attacks on resistance fighters in Camp Ashraf,
where they had sought shelter. I have seen video evidence of the
hanging of women and children on cranes in Tehran. There is one
change in the protest marches that are now taking place: it is a
revolution carried out mostly by Iranian women.
Democratic rule is perfectly possible in Iran. Mrs Maryam Rajavi
leads the pro-democracy Iranian opposition coalition, which has
produced a 10-point plan and has widespread support in both
Houses of the UK Parliament, as well as in Parliaments in many
parts of the world. She mentions the rule of law and proper fair
elections as essentials. Briefly, she talks of establishing a
democratic, secular and a non-nuclear republic. I make a plea to
our Minister: invite Mrs Rajavi to London to meet our Government
and Iranians living in the United Kingdom.
3.16pm
(Con)
My Lords, the people of Iran are entitled to have good relations
with the people of the United Kingdom. However, I would argue
that the current Government of Iran are absolutely not entitled
to have good relations with His Majesty’s Government.
I commend my friend Hillel Neuer, who is the indefatigable
executive director of UN Watch, a human rights NGO based in
Geneva. He has been holding the Iranian regime to account;
indeed, he headed the campaign to remove Iran from the UN
Commission on the Status of Women in 2022. I thank my noble
friend the Minister for taking such a strong lead on that issue.
I hope he will forgive me for not having enough time to list all
the reasons why the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps should be
proscribed as a terror group; perhaps I could just ask him in his
response to furnish the Committee with the reasons why the
Government have not done so.
Hillel is rightly campaigning for UN delegations to walk out in
protest when the Iranian Foreign Minister addresses the UN Human
Rights Council next Monday, on 27 February. Global figures have
joined that campaign, including Masih Alinejad, the exiled
Iranian women’s rights activist whom the regime attempted to
assassinate in New York last summer. I urge my noble friend the
Minister to lead once again and take a strong stance against a
regime that tortures, kills and hangs its own people. If we stand
for the protection of human rights as we say we do, my noble
friend should stand up and leave the room when the Iranian
Foreign Minister begins to speak.
3.18pm
(CB)
My Lords, I also congratulate my noble friend Lord Alton on
achieving this very important debate.
I will use the short time available to give a personal message
from Christian Iranian asylum seekers based near my home in
Witney, who have become friends. These are their words, not
mine:
“Our Iranian friends are losing their lives for the simplest
human rights of a person. At the risk of making their voice known
to the world, they have come to the streets and they only
protested. But the answer to their protest was gunshots, prison
and execution. In the last four months, more than 1,000 people
have been killed in Iran. Many of their bodies have not been
handed over to their families; many have been executed and
several hundred innocent children have died. Now, we have only
one request to the British people: please help us so that the
voice of the people of Iran is heard because, in our country,
there is nothing but oppression, torture and imprisonment; the
oppression of women; and shutting the mouths of young people. My
country smells of blood—the smell of the blood of my brothers and
sisters, who only wanted nothing but the cry of freedom in the
street.”
These poignant words provide a painful, powerful endorsement of
the purpose of this debate. I hope that the horrific persecution
of minorities by the regime in Iran is something that the
Minister can address in his reply.
3.20pm
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Alton, for obtaining this
debate, for his superb introductory talk and not least for his
powerful call that we should oppose the persecution of Baha’is
and Christians. I will raise just two issues in the few moments I
have.
First, as we conduct British-Iranian relations, it is vital that
we support loudly and clearly those who are demonstrating for
their freedoms, in particular those who face the most opposition:
the young and the women who are being opposed by their own
Government. They are rightly demonstrating for freedom of speech
and for their rights to an education and a job.
It is difficult to know exactly how many people have been caught
up in the demonstrations although it is widely reported that, so
far, between 600 and 800 protesters have been killed, more than
30,000 have been arrested and more than 40 have been executed.
Those are probably very modest figures. I echo the question to
the Minister from the noble Lord, Lord Alton: what attempts are
being made to record the regime’s crimes so that they can be
taken to the UN Security Council? What representations have His
Majesty’s Government made to the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran? Does the Minister agree that Supreme Leader
Khamenei and President Ebrahim Raisi should be held to
account?
Secondly, I want to say just a few words about the vital
importance of the BBC Persian service, to which the noble Lord,
Lord Alton, referred and which has a weekly estimated audience of
1.6 million people. The BBC Persian radio service costs only
around £800,000 a year. It is appalling that BBC Persian staff,
especially women journalists, are being targeted. Iranian
journalists working here in the UK are finding that their
families back in Iran are being threatened and sometimes arrested
and interrogated.
Iran has a systematic programme of media censorship. It blocks
Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, among other sites, and, at
critical times, it shuts down the entire internet. So the only
source of independent reporting comes via the radio. The official
state media do not report on the demonstrations. If the BBC
withdraws its service, as it is reported it will, the media will
be delighted that one further voice has been removed. Surely this
is the very time when we need to continue to support those who
are beleaguered by their own state by ensuring the unbiased
reporting of events in that country. Will the Minister make
urgent representations on behalf of His Majesty’s Government to
reverse this very unfortunate decision about the BBC Persian
radio service?
3.23pm
(CB)
My Lords, I am delighted to follow the right reverend Prelate and
also talk about the matters he talked about. My noble friend Lord
Alton’s welcome and timely debate invites us to address the issue
of what the Government’s priorities for British-Iranian relations
should be. I would have no hesitation in naming the reversal of
the lamentable decision to close down the BBC Persian radio
service as the short-term top priority.
Why so? First, it would be one of the few actions that our
Government could take of their own volition to reach out to
Iran’s citizens in a period when they are going through great
stresses and difficulties and are deprived of fair and accurate
information.
Secondly, although I have listened carefully to the BBC’s and the
Government’s explanations justifying the closure of BBC Persian’s
radio broadcasts, I find them totally unconvincing. It is true
that the radio audience is smaller compared with that of other
media channels but, when they are deprived of radio, what
alternatives will that audience have that do not put them at
increased risk and cost?
Thirdly, and most importantly, why on earth is a step being taken
that will only give delight to those who oppress Iranian citizens
and deprive them of objective information—a step that they will
surely hail as a victory? I very much hope that the Minister will
tell us that this regrettable closure will now not proceed and
that the cost of maintaining the radio service will be met as an
addition to the FCDO’s block grant to the BBC’s overseas
services.
In conclusion, I will mention another long-standing priority: the
currently stagnant negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme
aimed at reviving the JCPOA. In my view, the Government are to be
congratulated on persevering with this effort, unpromising though
the present circumstances are. To abandon the JCPOA would merely
give pleasure to the hard-liners in Iran who have always sought
to undermine it. To abandon it without any alternative course to
ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon would be
folly.
This debate certainly should not pass without paying tribute to
the courage and determination of those in Iran who continue to
demonstrate their rejection of oppression. Can the Minister say
why refugees fleeing Iran are not on the list of those receiving
expedited treatment for asylum claims? Surely they should be,
irrespective of how they get here.
3.26pm
(CB)
My Lords, freedom is a precious commodity but nobody knows with
any degree of certainty where and when the situation in Iran will
finally end. However, its people have sent an indisputable
message to the mullahs and the revolutionary guard that enough is
enough and their time is up. The people must always come first;
the indicators are that the wind is in their sails. Arabian and
Middle Eastern near-neighbour states are already pushing back
against regime change but now is the time for the Government in
London to become more assertive and be on the right side of
history by supporting root-and-branch change away from
corruption, illegal imprisonment, capital punishment, the
confiscation of homes and the pillaging of the wealth of the
nation.
Since the regime controls the economy, joining the revolutionary
guard is an assured way to advance in a difficult life
exacerbated by crippling sanctions. A long-term necessity is that
the conditions are such that the economy can be opened up, to the
benefit of all. The new generation in the IRGC is far removed
from the original purpose of the Islamic revolution; given the
incentive to do so, lower ranks could come out as sympathetic to
the uprising given that the regime is now recognised as being so
unpopular. The flight of capital from the country by senior
members of the Government is testament that the end could be
near.
However, I make a note of caution: the Islamic Republic has a
strong lobby outside Iran, most particularly in Washington. A
certain leftist ex-Prime Minister is being groomed to take over
the mantle and, if this ploy is successful, will serve as a
puppet of the regime by implementing cosmetic change only. The
“Woman, Life, Freedom” movement has not yet found a single voice.
It should be encouraged to do so post-haste in the same manner as
the way in which Khomeini orchestrated the uniting of disparate
factions in 1979. There is a consensus in Iran that the West is
not doing enough. However, I remain of the belief that the
leadership will buckle when faced with continued condemnation and
pressure. Frankly, everything hinges on the strategic support
that the uprising receives from the United Kingdom Government and
others.
I join others in saving my concluding remarks for matters
relating to the pending BBC closure. I can do no better than join
the dots with what I said the other day in the Chamber:
“Our foreign policy and strategy should deem this an entirely
illogical move … closure will send conflicting messages about the
support we have in this country for the uprising.”—[Official
Report, 21/2/23; col. 1616.]
3.29pm
(Con)
My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Viscount. I join
others in thanking the noble Lord, Lord Alton, for securing this
important debate.
Which of us can ever forget the inspiring inauguration of the
first black President of the United States only 14 years ago or
the soaring rhetoric of that momentous day when, in reference to
the unalienable rights enshrined in the American constitution, he
declared:
“Today we continue a never-ending journey to bridge the meaning
of those words with the realities of our time. For history tells
us that while these truths may be self-evident, they’ve never
been self-executing”?
How right he was, because passivity never pays. He also said that
war does not need to be “perpetual”; again, he was absolutely
right, of course. But surely, if the last 14 years teach us
anything, it is that vigilance and resolve do need to be exactly
that—perpetual—because appeasement always comes at a price, and
what a price the world could be about to pay for the audacity to
hope that diplomacy would work with a regime so disdainful of any
values, any truths, other than what the ayatollahs decree.
Whether it is terrorism abroad or even at home against its own
people, as we have already heard, the threat to our values is
real.
All eyes may be on Ukraine as the criminal invasion by Russia
enters its second year on Friday, but the global destabilisation
threat posed by Iran is potentially even more dangerous. As we
have heard, Iranian nuclear breakout is imminent. That is the new
reality of our time, which, sadly, no amount of rhetoric will
bridge.
In conclusion, given that global security must be our number one
priority, I hope my noble friend the Minister knows that he and
the Government can count on the support of many noble Lords when
appropriate military action to prevent that threat materialising
is taken. For all our sakes, I hope it is taken swiftly.
3.32pm
(CB)
My Lords, my noble friend Lord Alton is our moral compass in
international affairs, and how fitting is his choice of subject
today. This is a regime that has rewarded the attacker of Salman
Rushdie and teaches its children to engage with martyrdom and the
Islamic revolution and to call for the death of America
and Israel
But the gravest danger is its nuclear programme, in violation of
the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. It is not joint because
the US withdrew; it is not comprehensive because there are
loopholes and sunset clauses, such as only a 10-year limit on
centrifuges; it is not a plan because there is no strategy to
prevent the development of an Iranian bomb; and it is not action
because the IAEA cannot monitor or obtain accurate intelligence
about Iran’s nuclear activity. It has amounted to a waste of time
because Iran has never given up on its plan to develop nuclear
weapons, and it seems to us that it is not bound by that
agreement. Uranium purified to 84% has reportedly been traced.
Even at 60%, there is no peaceful use for that uranium.
If Israel is provoked into
a strike, the consequences could be world-threatening. The
Government should be insisting on snap-back sanctions, albeit
that they too expire in 2025. Iran is in breach of UN Security
Council Resolution 2231 by supplying Russia with drones used to
attack Ukraine. It is the cause of destabilisation right across
the Middle East, supporting Assad, the rebels in Yemen, Hezbollah
in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. How tragic that Syria appeals for
assistance in the aftermath of the earthquake yet is funded for
warfare by Iran to the tune of billions.
Unfortunately, snap-back sanctions would not hit Iran’s dealing
in oil with China, but sanctions hitting the Iranian people may
lead to the day when the Government are finally overthrown due to
the miseries inflicted on their own people. Will our Government
assure this Committee that the JCPOA is dead and that pre-JCPOA
international arms restrictions should be restored? Will they
downgrade diplomatic relations and close the Islamic Centre of
England, which allegedly in effect represents Iran’s Supreme
Leader?
3.34pm
(CB)
My Lords, I endorse everything that my noble friend Lord Alton
said in opening this debate about the treatment of protesters in
Iran, especially women and girls. I shall use my time to support
and re-emphasise what has already been said so forcefully by
other noble Lords about the importance of preserving the BBC
Persian radio service and the need to step up our intervention in
order to stop the threats, persecution and violence being
experienced by its staff in London and their families in
Iran.
I know that the Minister has heard it all before—not least from
me—but I make no apology for repeating a little of what I said in
our debate on the World Service in December because, first,
things have got significantly worse and, secondly, there is an
immediate window of opportunity to do the right thing and reverse
the decision to scrap the BBC Persian radio service on 26 March.
I get the overall case for going digital but there are situations
in which digital-only cannot be right, and surely this is one of
them. The latest review of the BBC World Service asserted that it
would
“serve audiences during moments of jeopardy”
and ensure
“access to vital news services, using appropriate broadcast and
distribution platforms.”
Jeopardy in Iran includes the internet being restricted or
blocked, so reliance on old-school radio may be the best or only
way to provide access to those vital news services.
We know from the most recent data that 1.6 million people a week
get their news from the Persian radio service—around 8% of its
total audience. However, the impact of that service is far more
significant than those superficially modest figures suggest
because it is the morning radio output that feeds the TV and
digital news content. Closing the radio service would mean BBC
Persian TV not having any scheduled live news programming for 17
hours a day, creating the space for other, less balanced outlets
with rather less palatable values and interests to fill the
gap.
As others have asked, why hand the Iranian authorities a gift on
a plate? Closing down BBC coverage of what is going on in Iran is
exactly what they want. It would be a victory for them but the
tragic loss of a lifeline of information and hope to the millions
of Iranians who suffer under their regime—and all for the cost
saving of only £800,000 a year. Will the Minister commit today to
three clear actions: reversing the decision to close the radio
service; funding the shortfall; and stepping up the diplomatic
measures and the hard measures to protect Persian service staff
in London and their families in Iran? This would give the Iranian
resistance what they—and, ultimately, we—need and value.
3.38pm
(LD)
My Lords, as always, it is a pleasure to follow my friend, the
noble Baroness, Lady Coussins. I endorse all the points that she
made and her specific request for information; I hope that the
Minister will be able to respond clearly to them.
I commend the noble Lord, Lord Alton, on securing this debate. As
he and others have pointed out, we are debating the Government of
Iran’s policy and practice of persecution, not the Iranian
people—many of whom have humbled us all, including those women
and girls who, as many noble Lords have said, have been
extraordinarily brave in the face of such persecution. We have
seen the death penalty and torture used as a policy of
intimidation; that is obvious.
It is welcome that the UN Commission on the Status of Women
expelled Iran. However, it was disappointing to see countries on
which the UK relies in many aspects of trade and diplomacy
abstain from that decision, including those that are part of the
Abraham Accords and our Gulf allies. It is also welcome that Iran
is now subject to a UN Human Rights Council investigation.
Similarly, countries that this country considers close diplomatic
allies abstained. What work are we doing with our Gulf allies to
ensure that their abstentions become positive votes when it comes
to sending signals on human rights and supporting women and
girls?
It is also worrying to have heard about Iran’s policy on Russia
now, with its drones and diplomacy on arms and fuel, and to have
the BRICS countries cited. It is alarming to see the BRICS
network becoming a de facto diplomatic network as a cover for
Russia. We have seen this from Iran within the recent military
exercises but we also saw it with the naval exercises of our
allies in South Africa. I hope the Minister can give clarity as
to what our diplomatic work is doing to ensure that Iran is
isolated, as it should be.
As the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, indicated, it is jarring to see
Iranians excluded from the amnesty on irregular routes announced
today. Why is this the case? Can the Minister state, in clear
terms, what the safe route is for Iranian women to seek asylum in
the UK? According to the Government, Iranians were the second
highest nationality of those who sought asylum in 2021, with
9,652. What signal are we sending if we have not put in place
safe routes for asylum for those who seek refuge in the UK?
Finally, on the point raised so well in the debate with regard to
the BBC, on 12 October—over four months ago—I asked an Oral
Question in the Chamber in which I sought urgent emergency
funding, even if temporary, to secure the future of the BBC
Persian radio service. This is now the time to ensure that the
people of Iran understand, benefit from and can receive
information from an independent, impartial and free media at
exactly the time it is being denied to them by their own
Government. I hope that our Government can at least provide
emergency funding to ensure that that service is not stopped at
the end of March.
3.41pm
(Lab)
My Lords, I, too, congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Alton, on
securing this timely debate when the spotlight is on
British-Iranian relations. We are again seeing a further
widespread wave of uprisings across Iran. My noble friend Lord
Collins has spoken fervently on a number of occasions on the need
for continuing support for the protesters and is sorry not to be
here today, due to his role on the Bill currently in the main
Chamber. This debate is about priorities for British-Iranian
relations, and we have had a number of expert and very moving
contributions from all noble Lords on those. I will underline
four key issues.
First, the regime’s brutal crackdown against protesters has been
an appalling response to extraordinary bravery. Viewed alongside
Tehran’s military threat to our allies, through its proxies and
arms sales, the UK Government must respond firmly and
consistently. As we have heard, the flow of Iranian drones to
Russia in support of its illegal war against Ukraine has been a
stark warning about the regime’s threat beyond its borders. The
continuing presence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
demonstrates that security threat right here in the UK, along
with the chilling MI5 evidence of threats by the Iranian regime
to British individuals, including British-Iranian journalists,
with at least 15 potential threats on British individuals in the
last year alone.
The Intelligence and Security Committee has warned of
state-sponsored assassination and is undertaking a report into
Iran. Can the Minister confirm that that committee is urgently
receiving all the information and support it needs from the
Government? The IRGC needs to be a proscribed organisation in the
UK, so why have the Government not yet done this?
Secondly, our policy towards Iran must be a reflection of our
values, as well as the national interest, and standing up for
human rights a priority for Britain’s diplomacy across the
region, particularly by standing unequivocally against the death
penalty in Iran and calling out the barbaric—and politically
motivated—treatment and execution of protesters, including that
of British national Alireza Akbari. We also stand with Iranian
journalists on freedom of expression, including here in the UK.
During questions on Tuesday’s Statement in the House, my noble
friend emphasised, in support of the
Government’s Statement, that we must make the UK a safe place for
journalists and others speaking the truth to power. We can never
allow tyranny or authoritarianism to be exported to the UK. In
the light of the summoning of the Iranian chargé d’affaires, can
the Minister update us on the meetings and discussions held with
Iranian officials and what has been said by Iranians as any
possible explanation for their actions?
Thirdly, when the UK pays tribute to the brave protesters, we
must also support their demands for the fundamental freedom to
live their lives as they choose. My House of Commons colleagues
have led the calls for the Government to bring forward extra
sanctions against the regime and we welcome the new sanctions,
announced earlier this week, in relation to the IRGC. Can the
Minister confirm that the FCDO will continue to engage with
international partners to ensure our sanctions reflect those of
our closest allies?
Finally, on the potential for the JCPOA, I want quickly to stress
our view that the Government are right to support a diplomatic
solution to address Iran’s nuclear escalation. I look forward to
the Minister’s response.
3.45pm
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office () (Con)
My Lords, as others have, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Alton, and
recognise his continued advocacy on important issues of human
rights; Iran is no exception. While I recognise the different
points raised, both on a personal level and as a Minister,
including in my capacity as Minister for Human Rights, I assure
all noble Lords, irrespective of their contributions, that the
principles they have articulated are very clear to me. While I
cannot speak in detail, my advocacy in my capacity as a Minister
in private, internal discussions that are taking place will
perhaps resonate with noble Lords. I assure noble Lords of my
best efforts in this regard.
The debate today has shown that we all recognise, as my noble
friend reminded us, that Iran’s
reprehensible and abhorrent behaviour has escalated in recent
months. It is very clear. Since the start of 2022, there have
been 15 credible threats to kill or kidnap British or UK-based
individuals by the Iranian regime. I recognise the point made by
the noble Lord, Lord Alton, about the sanctioning perpetrated
against both him and my noble friend . It is different now—in all my
time as a Minister, I have never seen the need to brief all
parliamentarians about the risks of the Iranian threat to us here
in the United Kingdom. Most recently, we have seen the brazen
behaviour of the regime in targeting journalists and their
families in the UK.
The noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, raised three important points,
which I will come to. On the last of the three, also articulated
by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, I can give that assurance. We
work closely with the families of journalists. If noble Lords
pick up particular instances or specific areas of concern, they
should first be flagged to the police, but if they are also made
known to us within government, while we cannot talk in detail, we
will seek to ensure that appropriate protections and advice are
provided.
Over the last six months, we have seen the regime’s brutal
crackdown on protesters fighting for their basic freedoms; many
noble Lords referred to this. At the same time, the regime
continues to provide support to Russia in its appalling and
brutal illegal war. I am sure I speak for all noble Lords in
saying that I hope we shall see another vote at the UN General
Assembly in favour of Ukraine later today. We have been lobbying
hard to ensure that many countries across the region where Iran
is based recognise the importance of Iran’s destabilising
actions, not just in the region but right here in Europe. As
noble Lords also articulated, Iran’s nuclear programme is now
more advanced than ever; I will come to that in a moment.
The noble Lord, , talked about Iranians in the
UK; I recognise the points he made. We take a measured approach
in engaging with both Iranian civil society and the diaspora in
the UK. We are clear that the choice of Iran’s Government will
ultimately be a matter for the Iranian people.
The noble Baroness, Lady Deech, was right to raise concerns about
the Islamic Centre of England. On 14 November 2022, the Charity
Commission approved and opened a statutory inquiry into the
charity due to serious governance concerns that were raised. We
are following that very closely. I note the points that the noble
Baroness raised.
I will address the repeated threats to UK-based individuals. Over
the past year we have seen credible threats, as I have alluded
to. These include very real and specific threats towards UK-based
journalists working for Iran International. While there has been
much speculation, I assure noble Lords that we are working across
government—and, as my right honourable friend said in the other
place, together with Iran International —to ensure the protection
of its activities here and the important work it does. This
hostile behaviour is unacceptable and we will not tolerate
attempts to threaten, intimidate or harm anyone in the UK. We
will also not tolerate direct attacks on media freedom, which are
threats to our fundamental values of freedom of expression and
the media.
I turn to the BBC Persian service. As the noble Baroness, Lady
Coussins, said, I could articulate what I said before about our
support for the broader service. I shall be very clear to the
noble Lord, Lord Alton, the right reverend Prelate the , the noble Lords, Lord
Hannay and Lord Purvis, and the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins.
Indeed, more or less all the contributions today have focused on
BBC Persian, which is right—and I recognise the valuable service
that it provides. I also recognise that we are in a very
different phase to where we were when certain decisions were
taken, even six to 12 months ago. Therefore, I shall of course
take note of the immense strength of feeling, although I cannot
give the assurances that the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, seeks at
this time. However, I shall take the issue back. As I said, I
share many of the concerns that have been raised, and I recognise
that, while radio is a small proportion of the service provided
by BBC Persian, it is an important service, particularly in the
current circumstances.
To turn to some specific actions, on 20 February, my right
honourable friend the Foreign Secretary summoned the chargé,
Iran’s most senior diplomat in London, to make a formal protest
about Iran’s intolerable threats in the UK and to warn against
any further activity. The noble Baroness, Lady Wheeler, alluded
to this. It shocks me. I have had various conversations with the
chargé, and I put it very bluntly to him that they are actually
killing their next generation. To put all other issues aside,
given some of the people who have been executed, in terms of age
and their contributions to Iran, it is shocking to see the regime
acting in the way it does. What answer does Iran have? To share
the answer, the answer is nothing. How can you respond to
that?
I assure all noble Lords that we will continue to work closely
with law enforcement to identify, deter and respond to emerging
threats. As my right honourable friend the Security Minister made
clear earlier this week, we will work closely with our allies in
a unified response. The noble Baroness, Lady Wheeler, and the
noble Lord, Lord Purvis, also raised those issues. Of course, we
are working hand in glove with our allies. This is a threat that
is real not just for those in the region but across the
world.
To turn to the protests in Iran, the noble Lord, Lord Alton, my
noble friend , as well as the noble Baroness,
Lady Coussins, and others, raised this issue. I have already
alluded to how you deal with a regime that is so brutal to its
own people—yet we shall stay focused and work with our allies in
this respect. Holding the regime to account was raised by the
noble Lord, Lord Alton, and others. Five months have passed since
the tragic incident and tragic death of Mahsa Amini, which we
have discussed in your Lordships’ House, after she was arrested
by Iran’s so-called morality police, which sparked protests in
which we have seen brave Iranian people stand up for their basic
rights and freedom.
The noble Lord, Lord Alton, asked about specific records. Of
course, it is difficult, but we have estimated that more than 500
people have now died and more than 18,000 people have been
arrested, with 1,500 injured. Tragically, some of those numbers
include about 65 children, if not more. Their demand is a simple
one—for a better future—and we stand by that. It is clear that
the Iranian people will no longer tolerate the violence and
oppression of the regime, which is putting its own interests
above theirs. The UK is working in international fora and
directly on this issue. On Monday, we sanctioned eight
individuals for horrific human rights violations, including the
killing of children, and last month we sanctioned the Basij
Resistance Force for its brutal repression on the streets of
Iran.
My noble friend , rightly, along with the noble
Baronesses, Lady Wheeler and Lady Deech, asked about the IRGC.
The UK maintains sanctions on over 300 individuals and entities
for their roles in Iran’s human rights violations. That includes
the IRGC in its entirety. Of course, further sanctions have been
imposed on key individuals. I am not going to speculate about our
future response, but I have heard again very clearly where noble
Lords stand on this. I can share with noble Lords that we are
working very closely across government on the issues that noble
Lords have raised, particularly in relation to proscription.
On the important issue of human rights more generally, I listened
very carefully to the contribution of my noble friend Lord
McColl. I reassure him that the sanctions that are
imposed—indeed, any sanction imposed on the Iranian regime—have
the appropriate carve-outs that allow us to provide that basic
humanitarian and medical support that is needed. As we are
increasing sanctions, they are being felt by the regime and
having an impact. At the moment, it is not the right time to do
anything that would seek to alleviate or recognise things beyond
humanitarian or medical support.
The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised asylum seekers and pathways;
I myself have been following this and asked that question. I
assure noble Lords that I will follow this up directly with
colleagues at the Home Office. Although it is a matter for them,
I recognise that Iranians are eligible for the resettlement
scheme, for example, which is a global scheme that started in
March 2021. The need for safe routes for asylum is crucial; we
need to remain focused on that.
The noble Lord, , talked about our human rights
work. He will know about the action that we have taken at the
CSW; I thank my noble friend in that respect. I assure all noble
Lords that we will use the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights
Council to make clear our views on Iran’s credibility on human
rights issues.
In terms of Iran supporting Russia, the illegal war continues and
Iran is profiteering from it. The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, made
an important point about BRICS. I assure him that we waste no
opportunity in the context of our G7 representations to make
clear to countries that perhaps do not share the same view the
importance of acting together.
On wider destabilisation, I met the Foreign Minister of Yemen
this week and was in the Gulf last week to align ourselves fully
in strengthening our alliance against Iran’s destabilising
influences. We will continue to work hand in glove.
The nuclear threat is ever increasing. I will write to noble
Lords on where we have got to specifically but I assure them that
we are watching this continuing threat. It is not in any way a
comprehensive deal, as the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, said. The
deal has been ready for signing for some months now but Iran has
not moved. The challenge on the issue of nuclear enrichment is
ever increasing; I particularly appreciate the valuable insights
of the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, on this. We will move forward
carefully with our partners because the ultimate objective must
be that we do not allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons. I will
write in further detail on that important point to say exactly
where we are.
I welcome this debate. Like the noble Lord, Lord Alton, I
recognise that we cannot cover a subject of such gravity in one
hour. I spoke to officials earlier today and before this debate;
we will look to see whether we can arrange an appropriate
briefing at the FCDO, perhaps including colleagues from the Home
Office, so that we can give noble Lords a more detailed insight
into our current work and, of course, listen to their valuable
advice.
|
