HC Deb 17 July 1990 vol 176 cc852-3
9. Mr. Mullin

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the defence implications of decisions taken at the NATO summit on 5 and 6 July.

Mr. Tom King

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. McKay).

Mr. Mullin

Now that it is alleged that our nuclear weapons are for use only as a last resort, are there any plans for doing away with our short-range nuclear weapons—I am talking about artillery and Lance—or am I being naive?

Mr. King

The hon. Gentleman would have done better to read the London declaration before he came to the House because it contains a specific proposal on nuclear artillery.

Mr. Wilkinson

Now that the NATO alliance has unambiguously extended the hand of friendship to the Warsaw pact and the Soviet Union, which leads it, will my right hon. Friend, in concert with the Foreign Secretary, see whether pressure can now be put on the Soviet Union to withdraw its remaining troops from Poland?

Mr. King

Certainly we wish to see the withdrawal of Soviet forces as soon as possible. My hon. Friend will know that Chancellor Kohl accepted that it will probably be three to four years before those troops can be withdrawn from East Germany. One should not underestimate the sheer logistical problems of withdrawal of the numbers involved, but we want it to happen as soon as possible. We should welcome the real progress that has been made.

Mr. John D. Taylor

Were the decisions taken at the NATO summit consistent with the decision taken yesterday in Moscow? If so, do the Government support the restriction on the size of German forces following a united Germany?

Mr. King

Not only were they consistent, but the very tone of the London summit was intended to make clear to the Soviet Union that a united Germany in NATO presented no threat to the Soviet Union. The success of that summit is borne out by yesterday's events, which have given President Gorbachev the confidence to proceed as he has, some might say courageously, to accept against the background of his domestic position the important step forward of a united Germany in NATO. The German proposals for the Bundeswehr and the Volksarmee were well anticipated and we have taken note of them.

Sir Bernard Braine

À propos my right hon. Friend's answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson), does he agree that the real test of Soviet sincerity about the new relationship with the west would be its withdrawal from a country that suffered grievously from both Germans and Russians during the war and that has suffered grievously since? The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Poland would be a great step forward.

Mr. King

I understand my right hon. Friend's feelings and wish to see that withdrawal as soon as possible. We must recognise the most remarkable landmark that emerged yesterday. A few months ago, no one would have thought it possible for the Soviet Union to accept a united Germany in NATO. Three months ago it was almost unthinkable in Moscow and it has now been confirmed. We should welcome that.

Mr. O'Neill

Will the Secretary of State confirm that a statement about the Government's reaction to the NATO summit will be made before the House rises for the summer recess? Will the document "Options for Change" be available for debate, or will it simply be published before the end of the Session?

Mr. King

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister commented on reaction to the summit in her statement to the House following the G7 summit at Houston. I cannot comment further today on a separate statement about "Options for Change".

Mr. Sayeed

If at the London summit the Government had made an immediate announcement to cut defence spendng by over a quarter, what would have been the effect?

Mr. King

That is a rather subtle question of which I would have liked more notice. The London summit showed the importance of the members of the NATO alliance working together. As I said, one factor that must have been important to President Gorbachev was that he was dealing with a united alliance and knew from talking to Chancellor Kohl that the Chancellor's views were consistent with those of the whole of the NATO alliance.