§ 17. Mr. Martenasked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement 452 on the balance of naval power in the Mediterranean.
§ 19. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Secretary of State for Defence what increase in British naval strength has now occurred in the Mediterranean; and what additional units he now proposes, having regard to the continuous increase in Russian strength.
§ 24. Mr. Mayhewasked the Secretary of State for Defence what further steps he is taking to increase Great Britain's naval contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in the eastern Mediterranean.
§ Mr. HealeyThe Soviet presence in the Mediterranean averaged 20 warships, including submarines, together with support vessels, during 1968. Our latest assessment is that it currently consists of 1 cruiser, 7 destroyers/escorts, 2 submarine depot ships, 2 landing ships, about 6 submarines, and supporting auxiliaries. Allied maritime forces in the Mediterranean, which include the United States Sixth Fleet, are considerably superior, both in numbers and fire power, to those of the Soviet Navy. As far as the Royal Navy is concerned, I have nothing to add to the reply by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence for Administration on 14th November, 1968, in reply to a Question from my hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Alexander W. Lyon).—[Vol. 773, c. 146–7.]
§ Mr. MartenAs the right hon. Gentleman has told Der Spiegel that all Russian ships would be sunk in minutes, did he include in that rather snappy naval appreciation the sinking of missile-carrying submarines belonging to Russia?
§ Mr. HealeyYes, I was including all ships. The House ought to understand that the function of warships in war—and I was taking a warlike situation—is to survive and sink the enemy before the enemy sinks them. N.A.T.O. warships in the Mediterranean outnumber Soviet warships there by greatly over 10 to 1. In addition, Soviet ships operate without any air cover whatever, while N.A.T.O. ships operate with hundreds of strike and fighter aircraft available from land bases in addition to the seaborne forces of the American Sixth Fleet.
§ Mr. MayhewIs my right hon. Friend aware that he is perfectly correct about the vulnerability of the Soviet ships in the Eastern Mediterranean? Is he also aware that their real importance is their political influence in the Eastern Mediterranean? What measures is he taking to increase the British naval presence there, and what programme has he for flag-flying this year around the Mediterranean ports?
§ Mr. HealeyI am aware of that, and I said it in my interview with Der Spiegel. I also said it in the House last autumn. The main function of the Soviet ships in the Mediterranean is not a military but a political function. One reason why we have already secured a very substantial naval presence in the Mediterranean is precisely to serve the purpose to which my right hon. Friend refers.
§ Sir G. NabarroWould the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the functions of warships in war require effective naval bases? Would he renegotiate the Malta agreement to allow for the return of substantial naval establishments to Malta which would be highly welcome to the Maltese as well as to the British elements in the Mediterranean?
§ Mr. HealeyThe hon. Gentleman's information is grossly out of date. Nearly all the naval vessels operating in the Mediterranean operate without bases in the Mediterranean but with afloat support. That applies to the United States, British and Soviet navies.
§ Mr. ShinwellIn view of my right hon. Friend's statement about the balance of naval power in the Mediterranean, is it not now clear that we do not require an aircraft carrier there?
§ Mr. HealeyWe do not require an aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean to provide maritime support for the British fleet. It was never planned, even by the previous Government, to keep an aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean for this purpose. But as long as we have an aircraft carrier its capability in many other rôles in the Mediterranean is valuable, and that is why we have decided to deploy an assault or commando ship or strike carrier in the Mediterranean during the next two years.
§ Sir A. V. HarveyIn making his statement, did the right hon. Gentleman 454 consider the possibility of the Soviet Union basing military aircraft in Egypt or Algeria?
§ Mr. HealeyNot only did I consider it, but I referred to it in my interview in Der Spiegel. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will read it before our next Question Time.
§ 20. Mr. Dodds-Parkerasked the Secretary of State for Defence what Western European Union member countries other than the United Kingdom have assigned aircraft for reconnaissance in the Mediterranean.
§ Mr. HealeyThe assignment of forces to N.A.T.O. for use in particular N.A.T.O. areas is a matter for the N.A.T.O authorities and the countries concerned, and is not for me to answer in respect of other countries.
§ Mr. Dodds-ParkerWould the right hon. Gentleman press on all those concerned, and our allies in particular, that it is important to assign forces and not merely to earmark them so that they may be properly trained in existing patrols in the Eastern Mediterranean?
§ Mr. HealeyEarmarked forces are properly trained and are trained in the Mediterranean. I think that the hon. Gentleman will be reassured when I tell him that he can safely assume that N.A.T.O. countries with frontiers on the Mediterranean seaboard have a reconnaissance capability committed in some way or other to N.A.T.O., but not all members of W.E.U. have frontiers on the Mediterranean and not all members of W.E.U. are members of N.A.T.O.