§ 5. Mr. Zilliacusasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has now caught up with the United States of America in the field of ballistic missiles, he will, at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Conference, propose the reconsideration of the policy of negotiation from strength and the cold war aims that policy is designed to impose, and propose instead the working out of proposals for negotiation based on a common interest in peaceful co-existence.
§ 22. Mr. S. Silvermanasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what initiative he proposes to take to ease international tensions and to what extent-Her Majesty's Government's policy is still based on deterrents and the need to negotiate from strength.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydWith regard to our relations with the Soviet Union we have no other wish than to live in peace with them. We are working for more trade and for greater contacts between us. We hope that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will take part in the work of the expanded Disarmament Commission. We are ready to discuss any proposals on Germany consistent with the agreed directive of July, 1955.
The purpose of our alliances is not to impose any aims in a cold war, which is none of our making. We remain ready to join in negotiations, whenever they would be fruitful. But we must maintain our own security and that of our partners, as long as the threat to it remains.
§ Mr. ZilliacusWhile I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for going as far as he did in his reply, may I ask him whether he believes that there is any possibility within a foreseeable time of either compelling or persuading the Soviet Government to agree to a solution which would allow Germany to enter N.A.T.O.? Alternatively, did not he himself admit in reply to Questions from myself and other Members on 27th November that a solution could be reached with the Soviet Union on the basis, recommended by the Opposition, of an all-European treaty outside the rival alliances and accompanied by disarmament and withdrawal of forces? Why does not he accept that solution?
§ Mr. LloydThe reason I do not accept that as a solution is that I do not think that it would lead ultimately to the peace and security of Europe. I do not think that in present circumstances such a treaty would be worth the paper it was written on. On the reunification of Germany, I do not despair of the possibility of persuading the Soviet Union to permit Germany the right of self-determination in this matter, always accompanied, as we have promised, by some sort of security assurance to the Soviet Union.
§ Mr. TurtonIs not any success the Russians may have in perfecting weapons of aggression surely a reason for increasing and not weakening the strength of the North Atlantic alliance?
§ Mr. BevanWhy should the Soviet Union in this instance rest content with paper assurances if we ourselves do not consider paper assurances to be sufficient? Is not it quite clear that there is no prospect whatever of a united Germany being permitted to enter a Western alliance? Ought not we to seek some other solution to the problem?
§ Mr. LloydIt is implicit in the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question that we also should not accept the paper assurances of the nature suggested by the hon. Member. In fact, there is quite a different set of circumstances. I see no reason why, remembering what the German Chancellor has said about the demilitarisation of Eastern Germany, there should not ultimately be a possibility of a solution along the lines I have suggested.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanThe right hon. and learned Gentleman will observe that he has not answered the latter part—nor, indeed, any part—of my Question, because he has said nothing about any new initiative. The last part of my Question was:
…to what extent Her Majesty's Government's policy is still based on deterrents and the need to negotiate from strength.Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whom, in the new circumstances, these deterrents are intended to terrify and whether he is quite sure that we can terrify them more than they can terrify us, and whether he does not think that in the circumstances the proper attitude to all these questions of mutual terror is the attitude of the first Duke of Wellington when he saw the recruits?
§ Mr. LloydWe have to make it absolutely clear that any act of aggression will call forth the ultimate retaliation, the complete retaliation. That is the deterrent—the fact that any aggressor should know that he will be met by the full force of the Western alliance. We have no intention of attacking the Soviet Union and therefore our policy must still be based on the major deterrent.