Warsaw Pact Forces

HC Deb 22 March 1977 vol 928 cc1072-4

17. Mr. Cronin

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what increase he expects in the military capability of the Warsaw Pact forces by 1980 if their present rate of increase of military expenditure is maintained.

Mr. Mulley

The Soviet Union accounts for most of the military expenditure in the Warsaw Pact. I would expect a substantial improvement in its military capability if it persists with its high rate of such expenditure.

Mr. Cronin

Bearing in mind the current progress of mutual balanced force reduction negotiations and the heavy defence burden that Britain is now carrying, is there not a strong case for persuading our NATO allies to spend more on the defence of the Alliance?

Mr. Mulley

It is right that we should not in any sense be complacent about the increasing capability of the Warsaw Pact. At the same time, the most urgent and important way to approach this matter is as the United States President has indicated, namely, by increased activity to seek the reduction of forces at both strategic and conventional levels between East and West.

Mr. Wall

Is it not a fact that the most significant development in Warsaw Pact countries is not the increase in size but the fact that they are now at instant readiness, which means that NATO will get virtually no warning time?

Mr. Mulley

The hon. Gentleman is right. It is not the increase in numbers that is the most impressive aspect of recent years' developments but the increasing sophistication and high technology involved. In that sense, NATO's advantage in technology has been eroded. At the same time, it would be wrong to feel that the whole of the political considerations that have been explained from time to time are necessarily changed as a result of these developments.

Mr. John Mendelson

Is my right hon. Friend aware that those who have been the firmest supporters of détente for many years are appalled at the continued increases in the high level of armaments in the Soviet Union, for which no justification can be seen by friends of peace throughout the world? Will my right hon. Friend give the strongest possible support to the proposal made by President Jimmy Carter that when the next meeting between America and Russia takes place a start should be made to the reduction of armaments and not merely an agreement on a new ceiling that will be more fantastic than the last?

Mr. Mulley

I can assure my hon. Friend and the House that the Government will give maximum support to President Carter's initiatives in these matters. I agree that it is time that we saw the colour of the money of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries in terms of an agreement in this area. We cannot go much further without having some definite and tangible arrangements.

Sir Frederic Bennett

Figures have already been published indicating that the Soviet Union is spending between 12 per cent. and 14 per cent. of its GDP on defence. Are there any comparable per capita figures within the Soviet Union? If the right hon. Gentleman cannot give me those figures, what is the absolute sum, in comparable terms, that is being spent—GDP always being a misleading figure?

Mr. Mulley

I agree with the hon. Gentleman and the Committee of which he is a distinguished member that it is extremely difficult to make these comparisons, because, for example, of different standards of national incomes. It is quite impossible to give a realistic per capita figure. It is estimated that 12 per cent. and not 14 per cent. of the Soviet Union's gross domestic product is devoted to defence purposes. That indicates the high priority given to these purposes by Soviet and Warsaw Pact countries.

Mr. Churchill

Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that the British Socialist Government, by their policy of five successive unilateral cuts in defence expenditure, are undermining the whole basis of getting an arms control agreement with the Soviets?

Mr. Mulley

No, I do not understand that. What I understand quite clearly—this is borne out by SACEUR, who stated recently that the equipment that is coming now is the result of decisions taken a decade or more ago—is that the previous Conservative Government cut defence expenditure every year they were in office, and three times in the last year.