§ 8. Mr. James Lamondasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he is satisfied with progress at the Stockholm conference on security in Europe.
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweThere has been welcome progress on procedural matters, with agreement on an informal working structure, which has narrowed the focus of the conference considerably. Progress on substance has proved harder to achieve.
§ Mr. LamondIn view of the Soviet acceptance of the United States' idea of annual advance notice of military manoeuvres by the Warsaw pact and NATO and its suggestion that it should be extended to air and sea manoeuvres, is there not an opportunity, before the better atmosphere created by the Geneva summit disappears entirely, for us to take an initiative at Stockholm and try to press home the view that a good document should be presented to the world at the end of the conference?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweWe shall try to achieve a document that contains specific commitments to adopt confidence-building measures, including those relating to land manoeuvres. If one goes beyond that into sea manoeuvres, one is in danger of going outside the terms of reference of the conference. But we all agree on the need to achieve practical progress on confidence-building measures.
§ Mr. FormanWill my right hon. and learned Friend give some other examples of areas of substantial progress to which the Government attach importance? What are the realistic chances of their being achieved at Stockholm?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweOur proposals include provision for an exchange of information about the structure and deployment of military forces, the mandatory observation of regular military activities, site inspection and improved communications between states. They are examples of specific measures which can be agreed within the terms of reference. Progress on such matters would represent a worthwhile achievement after the great deal of work put into the Stockholm conference.
§ Mr. HealeyAlthough I welcome what the Foreign Secretary said about progress, at least on the procedural aspect of the discussions, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that, as both sides have agreed that there should be contact between the military staffs of the two alliances in limited areas, and since Secretary Weinberger has already proposed a regular exchange of views between 293 the American and Soviet military authorities on problems of European security, the Government should now press NATO to invite the Warsaw pact to a general exchange of views on achieving security for both parts of Europe through co-operation rather than confrontation?
§ Sir Geoffrey HoweWe all share the aim of achieving improved prospects for peace through co-operation and consultation. However, I hesitate to follow the right hon. Gentleman in calling for yet another framework within which such consultation should be conducted. There is no shortage of forums or frameworks, but there has been a shortage of progress. I am glad that Britain has put forward a significant and worthwhile proposal for progress in the MBFR negotiations, which is another example of where we are trying to make headway.