NATO Defence Ministers (Hansard, 25 January 1977)

§ 11. Mr. Luce
asked the Secretary of State for Defence when he next proposes to meet NATO Defence Ministers.

§ 14. Mr. Banks
asked the Secretary of State for Defence when he next expects to meet the Secretary-General of NATO.

§ Mr. Mulley
I expect, as usual, to meet the Secretary-General and my colleagues at the NATO ministerial meetings. The dates for the next meetings have not yet been fixed, but I hope it will be possible for one to be arranged next month.

§ Mr. Luce
In view of the warnings from the Secretary-General of NATO, General Haig, and now this week from Vice-President Mondale, that the position of NATO in relation to the Warsaw Pact is weakening and that the Allies must pull their weight in the Alliance, will the right hon. Gentleman take the opportunity at his next meeting with the Defence Ministers to assure them that Britain will play its full part in defending the West, even if that means reversing the three defence cuts of 1976?

§ Mr. Mulley
The next meeting, which I hope will be arranged next month, will be arranged at my request because I want the Alliance to come to an early decision about the most urgent military requirement, namely, to have an airborne early warning system against the possibility of surprise attack. The fact that we have taken the lead in this matter is an indication of the contribution that we are making to the Alliance.

§ 17. Mr. Goodhew
asked the Secretary of State for Defence when he last met the Defence Ministers of the other member countries of NATO.

§ Mr. Mulley
I have nothing to add to the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) on 1161 13th December, except that I met Herr Leber yesterday.

§ Mr. Goodhew
Should the right hon. Gentleman not take early measures to meet these defence Ministers in view of the statement made by the Vice President of the United States in which he was reported to say that President Carter is committed to the NATO Alliance"—

Hon. Members
Reading.

§ Mr. Goodhew
I am reading President Carter's words— and wants to make it a more effective fighting force and deterrent in the face of continuing growth in Soviet military power".

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman was not here when I pulled up another hon. Member for quoting at Question Time.

§ Mr. Goodhew
I apologise, Mr. Speaker. I hope that I have made it clear to the right hon. Gentleman that President Carter is on record as saying that he wants to make the NATO Alliance a more effective fighting force and a deterrent, in view of increasing Soviet armaments. The President has also said that he is anxious to help with investment if the European Governments are prepared to follow him. Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to follow the United States President, and will he tell the Defence Ministers so?

§ Mr. Mulley
I take every opportunity of meeting my colleagues in NATO. I think the question was directed at a collective meeting of the Defence Ministers. I shall certainly wish to renew my acquaintance with Dr. Brown at the earliest opportunity, but since he has been in office for only five days it has beeen a little difficult to see him so far. I remind Opposition Members that, as I recollect, President Carter also talked about substantial economies in his defence budget.

§ Mr. George Rodgers
When my right hon. Friend meets his fellow Defence Ministers in NATO, will he urge that they do not lightly reject the proposition from the Soviet bloc that members of the NATO Alliance and Warsaw Pact should sign an international agreement that no nation will be the first to use the nuclear weapon? Is my right hon. Friend aware that this has created some 1162 interest in this country and that many people entirely reject the notion that we should use this weapon as a first strike? To reject the proposition entirely would be a great propaganda victory for the Soviet Union.

§ Mr. Mulley
I do not know whether my hon. Friend was present when I answered my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Allaun). This is not a new proposition. As I said, it would not be right to enter into a categorical commitment of that kind, because it is necessary for NATO to retain its option, although there is no question whatever of NATO initiating any aggression against the Warsaw Pact or anyone else.

§ Sir Bernard Braine
Bearing in mind that reducing the impact of air attack upon the civilian population increases the strength of a country's defence posture, will the Minister ask his ministerial counterparts when he meets them why the Soviet Union is devoting so much attention to building large underground shelters, why the Chinese are doing the same, and what is the lesson for this country and its Western allies?

§ Mr. Mulley
These questions are under study within NATO. To a limited extent arrangements are made in the NATO infrastructure programme for such provision, for example in airfields and other key installations.

§ Mr. Crawshaw
Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we were to sign an agreement not to be the first to use nuclear weapons we would have to strengthen our conventional forces to such an extent that my hon. Friends would turn pale at the prospect of what they would have to pay?

§ Mr. Mulley
It is important that NATO should retain a substantial conventional capability, but at the same time it is necessary in present circumstances for the three levels of defence forces—conventional, theatre nuclear and strategic nuclear—to be retained. The proper way to get disarmament is by international agreement on the lines that the United States Administration is pressing in SALT and that NATO is seeking to achieve in the mutual balanced force reductions negotiations in Vienna.

§ Mr. Churchill
Is the Secretary of State aware that on 8th December he lent his name to a defence communiqué on behalf of the NATO Defence Ministers to the effect that the Ministers, including himself, concluded from that meeting that there was a need for real annual increases in defence expenditure by allied Governments? Within one week the right hon. Gentleman was at the Dispatch Box announcing cuts. Whom does he think he is fooling?

§ Mr. Mulley
I know that the hon. Gentleman is taking a great interest in and studying defence. He should read the communiqués that have been issued over a number of years and recall that Conservative Ministers put their names to communiqués in which it was said that there was a need for 60 divisions in NATO although we are nowhere near getting them. We would all like to increase the strength of NATO. As a collective defence organisation it is growing in strength every year, not least from the improved equipment that is available, and we are playing our part by modernising our forces.

§ Mr. Banks
The Secretary of State failed to answer the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Shoreham (Mr. Luce). Will the right hon. Gentleman give our NATO partners through the Secretary-General, a cast-iron guarantee that we shall not have any more cuts in our level of contribution to NATO without balanced force reductions with the Soviet bloc?

§ Mr. Mulley
I have made clear that it is our intention to sustain our contribution. A good deal of misunderstanding takes place because, as the House expects we quite properly give all our figures on a basis of constant prices, while Supplementary Estimates take care of wage and other price increases during the year. But a lot of the figures of other countries are given just at the current rate and there are no adjustments during the year.
This is an area where we are naturally not doing as much as we should like, but we are still making a substantial contribution to NATO. Talk of an absolute guarantee, cast iron and all the rest, is not the kind of language that serious and responsible people can take on board.

§ Mr. Corbett
Will my right hon. Friend find time to have talks with the new Secretary for Defence of the American Administration to see whether they can jointly fulfil President Carter's inauguration pledge to do all that he can to rid this planet of nuclear weapons?

§ Mr. Mulley
I very much welcome President Carter's firm commitment to the Alliance, which we heard about today. Along with my hon. Friend I very much hope that the new Administration, both in the SALT talks and in Vienna, will give a new impetus to arms limitation and disarmament. That is the way to deal with the very serious problem to which my hon. Friend drew attention.