HC Deb 19 May 1958 vol 588 cc859-61
2. Mr. A. Henderson

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now state to what extent Her Majesty's Government support the Rapacki Plan for Central Europe.

10. Mr. Healey

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now publish Her Majesty's Government's reply to the proposals of the Polish Government concerning the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in Europe.

The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd)

Her Majesty's Government have carefully examined the Rapacki Plan in consultation with their Allies. They sympathise with the Polish Government's desire to see progress in disarmament and the reduction of international tension. They have, however, concluded that the adoption of the Polish Plan would have such serious military and political disadvantages for the West that it would not achieve these objects. They hope that, either at a Summit Conference or in some other way, it will be possible to agree on different proposals for achieving the same purposes. These views were communicated in a Note to the Polish Government on 17th May. I will circulate the text of the Note in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Henderson

Does that reference to our Allies in the Foreign Secretary's reply mean that all the Governments of N.A.T.O. are rejecting the Plan? Further, are we to take it from his reply that Her Majesty's Government will not agree to include this particular proposal in the agenda of the proposed Summit Conference?

Mr. Lloyd

So far as the views of our N.A.T.O. Allies are concerned, I think that what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has said is correct, that none of them favours the Rapacki Plan in its present form. With regard to the agenda for a Summit Conference, that is, of course, under discussion, and I myself could not conceive of a conference meeting that did not consider the question of European security.

Mr. Healey

Has Her Majesty's Government drafted constructive counterproposals to the Rapacki Plan, and if so, will they not now publish them instead of waiting until the American Government have jumped the gun—as they did on the Rapacki Plan—and put forward less constructive proposals with less chance of success?

Mr. Lloyd

I think the question of what the hon. Member calls counterproposals must be under consideration, but I can offer no promise that we shall publish our proposals for a meeting. What we have to consider is proposals that will add to security.

Mr. Bevan

Is it a desirable state of affairs that proposals of this sort should be rejected before a summit meeting is held? If this sort of thing is done, the road to the summit will be paved by a whole series of prickly rejections and there will be hardly anything to discuss at the summit meeting when it takes place.

Mr. Lloyd

I think there may be something in what the right hon. Gentleman says, but I have been constantly pressed for our views on the Rapacki Plan.

Mr. Bevan

Would it not, therefore, have been perfectly proper for the United States Government, for ourselves and for any other Government involved that is asked the question to say that these are all matters to be considered at the summit and not to reject them out of hand beforehand and make a very unfortunate climate of opinion?

Mr. Lloyd

I do not agree with what the right hon. Gentleman says. If he studies the terms of the Note that we have sent to the Polish Government, I think he will regard it as being of a constructive nature.

Following is the Note:

NOTE TO THE POLISH GOVERNMENT ABOUT THE RAPACKI PLAN

Your Excellency,

I have the honour to refer to the plan for the establishment of an atom-free zone in Europe which Your Excellency outlined in the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 7th of October, 1957, and which was expounded in greater detail in Your Excellency's note and memorandum of the 14th of February, 1958.

2. I have now been instructed by Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State to inform Your Excellency that Her Majesty's Government have studied this plan with great care. Her Majesty's Government have every sympathy with the Polish Government in their efforts to ensure and to increase the security of their country and they share the desire of the Polish Government to see progress in disarmament and the reduction of international tension.

3. Her Majesty's Government consider, however, that the proposals of the Polish Government raise wider issues to which, nevertheless, they appear to offer no solution. Among these issues is the threat to the security of the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation which might arise, owing to the preponderant strength of Soviet conventional forces, if the Polish Government's proposals were accepted. If the security of Western European countries was to be maintained, it would be essential that any measures which might be taken to reduce nuclear armaments in central Europe should be accompanied by measures to reduce the Soviet preponderance in conventional weapons in the whole of central and eastern Europe. It would be necessary for all these measures to be subject to control and inspection of the most effective kind. It is also the considered opinion of Her Majesty's Government that the question of German re-unification would not be furthered by the adoption of Your Excellency's proposals.

4. Her Majesty's Government have, however, in no way diminished their interest in the solution of the problems of disarmament, European security and Germany. They have in conjunction with their Allies already made constructive proposals dealing with these problems both at the Geneva Conference in 1955 and in the Disarmament Sub-Committee of the United Nations. Her Majesty's Government hope that progress towards a solution of these major problems may be made at the preparatory discussions for a conference of Heads of Government at such a conference itself, or in some other way.

5. I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to Your Excellency the assurance of my highest esteem.

(Signed) E. BERTHOUD.