HC Deb 22 February 1984 vol 54 cc809-11
8. Mr. Nelson

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his assessment of the principal obstacles to progress being made on the negotiations leading to mutual and balanced force reductions.

11. Mr. Leigh

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the mutual and balanced force reductions talks in Vienna.

Sir Geoffrey Howe

At the end of the last round of the mutual and balanced force reduction talks, the East declined to begin the next round in January, as usual. I am glad that they have since agreed to resume negotiations on 16 March. The main obstacles to an agreement remain the Eastern refusal to co-operate in resolving the dispute over their current force levels. This makes it impossible to determine the size of reductions necessary to reach the agreed negotiating goal of 900,000 ground and air forces on each side. They have also been reluctant to accept adequate verification measures.

Mr. Nelson

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that while the United Kingdom has made a number of constructive proposals for progress on the MBFR talks, it is disappointing to many people that for nearly 10 years no progress has been made on this front? Is he aware that many who take the defence of this country very seriously, at the same time strenuously believe that it will not be possible for us to face the electorate at the next general election with no progress having been made on this front, and that it behoves this country as well as the Soviet Union to press more strenuously for some consensus?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

I have no doubt about the importance attached by every hon. Member to the chances of making progress with the negotiations. We recognise the importance of the role that we can and should play. It was for that reason that Ministers who attended the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in December commissioned a review of the negotiations. That review is under way. We wish to find any justifiable method of making further headway.

Mr. Leigh

As the Soviet Union has claimed consistently that it has 150,000 fewer troops than it has in fact, will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that it is vital that any agreement is subject to watertight verification, something which the Soviet Union has rejected consistently, for obvious reasons?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

That is precisely the difficulty that has most bedevilled the talks so far. I am confident that my hon. Friend's figure for the Soviet Union's underestimate of its current force levels is correct. For that reason it is crucial to have an agreement on current force levels as a sign of the Soviet Union's willingness to make progress along the lines required.

Mr. Norman Atkinson

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that it is somewhat perplexing when he complains that the Soviet Union does not recognise the methods of verification offered by the West as being substantial and satisfying in respect of its demands? The right hon. and learned Gentleman, the Prime Minister and other members of the Cabinet refuse to answer Members' questions on the verification of nuclear weapons in Britain and of those held by NATO, and United States Congressmen cannot obtain verification of the weapons held by the United States. When British Members of Parliament and United States Congressmen cannot obtain the information that the Soviet Union requires, is it any wonder that it is not possible to secure agreement on verification?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

The hon. Gentleman raises a different question. We could only wish that the Soviet Union and its allies were as open in the presentation of their weapon and arms systems as the United States, the United Kingdom and their allies. Effective verification is crucial and it must be reciprocal. It is in that area that it has been most difficult to secure an effective response from the Soviet Union.

Dr. M. S. Miller

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman care to estimate when the day will arrive when mutually balanced force reductions will enable the United. Kingdom proudly to say once more that it spends more of its gross domestic product on education than on defence?

Sir Geoffrey Howe

In asking that supplementary question the hon. Gentleman is making a point with which we would all like to agree, for we would all love to live in a world in which the degree of expenditure on defence fell constantly. The percentage of the gross domestic product of the Soviet Union that is being spent on defence is about twice as large as that which is being spent in the United Kingdom.