Arms Control (Hansard, 23 January 1985)

§ 3. Mr. Corbett
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on arms control talks.

§ 8. Mr. Chapman
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will report progress at the various disarmament conferences taking place.

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister told the House on 9 January, we warmly welcome the agreement to resume US-Soviet negotiations. We fully share the objective of working out effective agreements aimed at preventing an arms race in space and terminating it on earth, and limiting and reducing nuclear arms and strengthening strategic stability.
At the Geneva conference on disarmament, our priority is to achieve a complete chemical weapons ban. We also hope for serious negotiation to begin at the Stockholm conference. On MBFR, the East continues to reject the West's latest initiative on force data.

§ Mr. Corbett
As we approach the 40th anniversary pf VE day, will the Foreign Secretary acknowledge the heroic role played by the people of the Soviet Union and the Red Army in the allied defeat of Hitler and Fascism? Will he bear that in mind in the arms control talks and take seriously the new Russian determination to try to secure nuclear and general disarmament?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I certainly subscribe to the hon. Gentleman's first point. One of the matters very much in my mind during my visit to Moscow last summer was that the Soviet Union suffered massive casualties in the second world war and, with the rest of the alliance, played a notable part in securing victory.
With regard to the negotiations, the fact that both sides agreed at Geneva to begin the negotiating process now in train is confirmation of the genuineness of both sides in that search. We have certainly done everything that we can to convince them of the necessity of sustaining it and we shall go on doing so.

§ Mr. Chapman
Should not the United States research programme into space weapons be commended, if only because it raises the prospect, however remote, of an antidote to nuclear weapons being found? Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that in any case that research programme has been principally responsible for bringing the Russians back to the negotiating table on the question of long and medium-range nuclear weapons?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The United States research programme is to be considered alongside the research into precisely the same kind of technology already undertaken by the Soviet Union. In so far as that research contributes to a strengthening of defence as part of the balance of armament, no doubt it is to be welcomed. The existence of that programme was no doubt one of the factors which the Soviet Union had in mind in agreeing to the resumption of the talks.

§ Mr. Winnick
Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that it would help to create the right atmosphere for the arms control talks if representatives of the Soviet Union and the United States were invited at the appropriate time this year to celebrate the 40th anniversary of victory over Fascism? Does he appreciate how concerned we were at the original answer given by one of his junior Ministers that VE day would not be celebrated? Will he try to exercise greater control over his Department in the future?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The Government's position on that is quite clear. Together with, I think, all the other Governments concerned, we recognise the case for commemorating the fact of 40 years' peace in Europe and 969 doing so in a fashion that takes account of the interest in the future of peace and conciliation in Europe, not only of our allies in that conflict, but of all who participated in it.

§ Mr. Walden
Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that on 13 January Mr. Gromyko said in a television interview that he did not at all insist that Britain and France should eliminate their nuclear weapons? Will my right hon. and learned Friend find a tactful way of explaining to the Opposition the implications for unilateralism of that statement?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
I entirely agree about the importance of that point. Mr. Gromyko's observation was in line with that made by Mr. Andropov, and recently quoted by a Soviet spokesman, that the concept of unilateral disarmament could not be contemplated by the Soviet Union because we are not naive people.

§ Mr. Healey
As the Foreign Secretary is now aligning himself more and more closely with Mr. Gromyko, and bearing in mind that the refusal of the British and French Governments to allow their missiles to be counted in the INF talks was one important reason for the failure of those talks, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that in the statement to which the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Walden) referred Mr. Gromyko insisted that British missiles should be counted in the forthcoming talks on strategic weapons, especially as the British Government regard them as strategic weapons and they are committed by treaty to NATO, and that if the British Government completed the Trident programme they would be capable of destroying 10 times more Soviet targets than would the present Polaris force?

§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The right hon. Gentleman will not be surprised to hear that I do not agree with that proposition. Our view on the position of the British nuclear force in arms negotiations is as stated by me in my speech to the United Nations two years ago, and is very closely in line with the statement made to the same assembly by President Mitterrand. If Soviet strategic arsenals and those of the United States were substantially reduced, and if there were no significant changes in Soviet defensive capabilities, Britain would review its position and consider how best to contribute to arms control in the light of the reduced threat.