Ukraine (Hansard, 18 December 1991)

§ 3. Mr. David Evans
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has on how the nuclear weapons in Ukraine are going to be controlled by the Soviet Union following the independence vote.

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Douglas Hogg)
We welcome assurances from the leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia that they intend that effective unified control is maintained over the Soviet Union's nuclear weapons. We are discussing with the relevant authorities how this will be taken forward in practice, and consulting closely with our NATO allies.

§ Mr. Evans
I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. Is he aware that the people of Welwyn and Hatfield 258 are concerned that three republics have a larger nuclear capability than the United Kingdom? Does he agree that British people should he told that if the Labour party were in control and there was a nuclear attack on Britain, there would be no response because the Leader of the Opposition has said that he would not push the button? Is not that the true face of the Labour party—no heart, no brains and a leader who is not only a joke but a jerk?

§ Mr. Speaker
A what? That was overdone again, I am afraid.

§ Mr. Hogg
In deference to you, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I had better not respond to the last part of my hon. Friend's question, but I entirely agree with the spirit of his comments. On the first part of his question, we are anxious to ensure that the republics of Ukraine, Byelorussia, Russia and—my goodness, I have forgotten the other one ——

§ Mr. Tony Banks
Kazakhstan.

§ Mr. Hogg
Kazakhstan—enter into the nonproliferation treaty as non-nuclear states, if that can be achieved.

§ Mr. Tony Banks
The Minister obviously does not know his head from his Kazakhstan. Given the need to rid the world of nuclear weapons, is not this a wonderful opportunity to approach the republics, particularly those that want to declare themselves nuclear-free zones—something that used to be sneered at by Conservative Members—in order to eliminate those weapons from the world? Should not the Government grasp that opportunity?

§ Mr. Hogg
It is indeed an opportunity. The Republic of Russia will probably seek to remain a nuclear state, but there is a reasonable prospect that the other three republics —Kazakhstan, Byelorussia and Ukraine—will be prepared to accept non-nuclear status. The western powers have an interest in seeing how we can assist with dismantling the nuclear arsenals of those three republics. One thing is plain: they do not wish to return the nuclear arsenals to the Republic of Russia.

§ Mr. Shersby
Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that it is the wish of many Ukrainian people that the nuclear weapons on their soil be dismantled and destroyed? What discussions is he having with President Kravchuk on that matter?

§ Mr. Hogg
I am aware that the President of Ukraine has made the point that he would like his republic to be a non-nuclear state and that he would like the west to assist with the process of dismantling and destruction. We should like to be constructive and we shall consider with our allies how best we can respond. There is, however, a problem: the judgment of the republics of, for example, Byelorussia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan may alter if the Republic of Russia chooses to remain a nuclear state. We cannot regard the present statements as necessarily being set in concrete.

Mr. Robertson
Does the Minister agree that perhaps a more urgent problem than the control of nuclear weapons in the republics of the former Soviet Union could be the vast amounts of conventional weapons that are in the hands of highly discontented and underpaid armed forces that have serious problems? Will the Minister assure us 259 that the Government will give the maximum assistance with those weapons as well as with nuclear weapons and that in granting full diplomatic recognition to those republics the acceptance of full international obligations, including the Helsinki process and those features that relate specifically to human rights, will be a priority'?

§ Mr. Hogg
On the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question, he will know that the Foreign Ministers of the European Community considered the subject earlier this week and made it plain that, when considering recognition, regard would be had to the extent to which the republics were ready to undertake the treaty obligations to which the hon. Gentleman referred. The most worrying problem about conventional weaponry relates to the implementation of the conventional forces in Europe treaty, because, as the hon. Gentleman will know, there is a mismatch between the military districts as defined in the CFE and the republics. We hope that the republics will be willing to ratify the treaty and implement its terms. But there is a serious problem here.

§ Mr. Sillars
Does the Minister agree that to resolve the problem it is very important to engage those countries in the United Nations and that as Byelorussia and Ukraine are already members of the United Nations it becomes imperative—in view of his earlier answer about Russia remaining a nuclear power—for them to obtain membership of the United Nations and of the Security Council in their own right?

§ Mr. Hogg
I shall not deal with the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question because it raises difficult issues which will no doubt be the subject of discussion later. Clearly, these republics will apply for admission into the United Nations in due time and we shall define our views at that time. However, the most recent statement of our approach to the question of recognition, which is also likely to guide our attitude to the adherence of these countries to the United Nations, was that set out in the meeting of Foreign Affairs Ministers earlier this week.

§ Miss Emma Nicholson
Does the Minister agree that Chernobyl probably happened because of incompetence rather than by a deliberate action? Will he assure the House that proper British expertise in all matters—in the provision of food as well as nuclear issues—will be made available to the republics to help them towards full and truly free independence?

§ Mr. Hogg
I cannot answer in the unconstrained sense in which my hon. Friend asked the question, but, clearly, we are prepared to play our part—bilaterally through the provision of know-how and technical assistance in appropriate matters and, of course, through the European Community to which we are a substantial subscriber.