HC Deb 29 May 1957 vol 571 cc407-10
51. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will now make a statement on his negotiations with the West German Minister of Defence on the number of British troops to be retained in Germany.

52. Mr. Chetwynd

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement on his discussion with the Federal German Minister of Defence.

Mr. Sandys

The German Defence Minister came over here last week to discuss defence matters of mutual interest. We had a very frank and valuable exchange of views. This showed that there was complete agreement on the principles on which the collective defence of Western Europe must be based. We also decided to set up machinery for closer co-operation between our two countries in military research and development.

There were no negotiations of any kind about the number of British troops to be stationed in Germany. That would be a matter for discussion with all our allies collectively.

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT the text of the communiqué issued at the end of the talks.

Mr. Shinwell

Was there not some previous discussion with our allies about the number of British troops to be retained in Germany? Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the report, credited to Herr Strauss, that a decision has now been reached to retain a larger number of British troops in Germany than was originally intended? Would he clear up this confusion?

Mr. Sandys

I have certainly seen no statement to the effect that it had been agreed that a larger number of British troops should be stationed in Germany. Anyhow, I think I cleared up that matter in my Answer when I said that there were no negotiations and that no commitments of any kind were entered into in those talks in regard to the number of British troops to be retained in Germany. So far as the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is concerned, those discussions took place at an earlier date, within the framework of the Western European Union and the N.A.T.O. Council, and statements have been made in this House about them.

Mr. Chetwynd

Are we to understand that there was no discussion about the level of our forces in Germany at these talks? Is not that rather an incredible thing to ask us to believe?

Mr. Sandys

I said that there were no negotiations and no commitments. Of course, that question was one of the matters which was discussed. That is quite obvious. What I wanted to make quite clear, as I thought I had done in my Answer, was that there was no question of negotiating or entering into any commitment in regard to the number of British troops to be retained in Germany on a bilateral basis between the two Governments. That would have been wholly improper.

Mr. Bellenger

Can the right hon. Gentleman state whether these joint research investigations between the two countries included atomic weapons?

Mr. Sandys

No, certainly not.

Mr. Shinwell

Will the right hon. Gentleman clarify one point, which I think is of some substance? Originally it was intended to withdraw a certain number of British troops from Germany, and that is what we understood from the White Paper and the proceedings during the defence debate. Now it appears that we do not intend to proceed with the application of that original decision. Will the right hon. Gentleman state how many troops we are going to withdraw from Germany? Is it the number originally suggested, or the number mentioned by Herr Strauss, who said that it was intended now to retain at least 50,000 of our forces in Germany?

Mr. Sandys

The number of troops or, rather, the number of divisions and equivalent fighting power to be retained in Germany is a matter on which an agreement was reached with our allies in the Western European Union. The first thing I want to make clear is that we had discussions both in the North Atlantic Council and also the Council of the Western European Union some months ago at which it was agreed that, as a first step, 13,500 troops should be withdrawn. We also said that it was our desire to withdraw another 13,500 in addition, and it was agreed that that matter should be further discussed in the autumn of this year. That remains the position. There has been no change whatsoever. I should, however, be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would send me the Press cutting which states that an agreement was reached to station a larger number of troops in Germany. I have seen no such statement attributed either to myself or to Herr Strauss, and if it has been made I should like to see that it is denied.

Mr. Gaitskell

Are special arrangements to be made for the exchange of information on defence matters with Germany alone, or do these arrangements also apply to other members of N.A.T.O.? Would the right hon. Gentleman explain why there should be a special bilateral arrangement with Germany?

Mr. Sandys

As will be seen from the context of the communiqué which I shall circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT, these arrangements are made strictly within the framework of Western European Union. I had similar talks with the French Defence Minister a month or two ago, and there again we set up this kind of machinery—again within the framework of Western European Union. I have no doubt that when a few of these bilateral talks have taken place it will be decided whether we should consider the possibility of doing it on a Western European Union basis, but there are certain reasons which make it more convenient in the first place to have direct talks with Governments which are specially active in these fields.

Mr. P. Noel-Baker

When the right hon. Gentleman says that there was complete agreement with Herr Strauss on all principles of defence, does he mean that there was also agreement about the use of nuclear weapons?

Mr. Sandys

I think that I had better ask the right hon. Gentleman to look at the communiqué— which is a very balanced statement—which makes it quite clear that the central aim was the prevention of war and that, pending the conclusion of a satisfactory disarmament agreement this purpose can be achieved only through the deterrent power of the strategic weapons which are possessed by the United States and the United Kingdom and by the maintenance of strong shield forces on the Continent of Europe. I think that that answers the right hon. Gentleman.

Following is the text: