Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they had full knowledge of the growing gap between the military capacity of the United States and the Soviet Union in trained men and weapons and the estimate that current Soviet expenditure on defence is approximate to an annual rate of 153,000 million dollars, as disclosed by the American Defence Secretary on 9th March, before announcing the latest cuts in defence expenditure.
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, the Government are well aware of Soviet military capability, and drew attention to improvements to it in the latest Defence White Paper (Cmnd. 6432). The figure of 153,000 million dollars is from a Press report, and I do not know how it was arrived at. However the latest estimates put Soviet defence expenditure in dollar terms substantially higher than United States defence expenditure. As to the cuts in the United Kingdom, these were of support, not front-line forces, and did not impinge upon the essential elements of our contribution to NATO. They were made only after taking into account all the relevant factors, including the military balance and the state of the economy.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I am grateful for that disturbing reply. Does it in fact mean that Her Majesty's Government accept the official American view that if current trends continue the serious imbalance between Warsaw Pact forces and NATO forces will get dangerously larger? If that is the case, what on earth is the explanation of paragraph 50 of Chapter 1 of the Defence White Paper which, to help the noble Lord, I will remind him states flatly that there have been no significant changes
in the political and military relationships between the Alliance and the Warsaw Pact"?What can be the meaning of that other than a denial of the American analysis that the gap between the Warsaw Pact forces and the NATO forces is very large and very serious and will grow if current trends continue?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, Her Majesty's Government are not complacent and not unconcerned. However, the noble Lord's original Question concerned the relationship between United States and Soviet expenditure, and his supplementary question was based on the NATO and the Warsaw Pact expenditure. These two are not the same. If I may refer to a statement made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence in the other place on 27th February, if we look again at estimated expenditure which is extremely difficult to estimate in precise terms, in 1974 NATO expenditure, not American expenditure, was 135,000 million dollars, whereas Warsaw Pact expenditure was 116,000 542 million dollars, and in 1975 the comparable figures were 149,000 million dollars and 125,000 million dollars. On this estimate the expenditure of the Western Alliance is still higher than that of the Warsaw Pact countries.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, if that is so, is it not somewhat surprising that there should be such an enormous gap in the capacity of the Warsaw Pact and the NATO forces on the ground—a gap so large that any contribution, large or small, that we may make is totally irrelevant?—the more we provide would only mean the more we would lose in the first week.
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, my noble friend is making his usual type of pessimistic statement. What we are doing is comparing not the position in Western Europe but the position overall throughout the world, and in my view there is no cause for undue pessimism.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, would the Government possibly consider inquiring of Mr. Gromyko, who happens to be here, why Marshal Grechko has recently stated that the armed forces of the Soviet Union, which admittedly already have a preponderance of power, should be further increased in view of the possible assault on the Soviet Union by the considerably inferior forces of the West?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, the statement of Marshal Grechko is certainly receiving the consideration of Her Majesty's Government.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that these figures now prove conclusively that a pacifist Britain would be militarily no weaker and morally much stronger?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, morals are fine, provided one can afford them. I would sooner we made our contribution to the defence of those values in which most of us believe.
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, would the Minister agree that the comparisons which have been bandied about this afternoon are quite ridiculous unless one takes into account the different rates of remuneration of members of the armed forces of the United States of America and of Great Britain and the remuneration paid to the Russian forces? And is it not a 543 fact that if the Conservative Party are now complaining of weakness of defence, they should be reminded that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones, because the weakness from which this country suffers is entirely due to that irresponsible, ridiculous and disgraceful Defence White Paper of 1975?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, I would agree with my noble friend in part of his question. Quantification is extremely difficult, particularly in terms of what one pays the private soldier. There are of course other factors which have to be taken into account. With regard to the second part of the question, I prefer to leave that until we have our defence debate.
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, the noble Lord criticised the noble Lord, Lord Paget of Northampton, for his pessimism. May I ask the Minister whether he agrees that there is cause for grave concern at the growing imbalance between the forces of the West and those of the Warsaw Pact, and is he not showing a certain amount of complacency about it?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, concern, yes; pessimism, no.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, I should like to return to my first supplementary question and ask the noble Lord to say straight out whether Her Majesty's Government accept the official American view, which I believe to be shared in NATO, that if current trends continue the serious imbalance between the NATO forces and the Warsaw Pact forces will grow dangerously larger? That imbalance is shown in Chapter 1 of the White Paper. In those circumstances, how can any responsible Government announce further defence cuts of more than £500 million over the next three financial years?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, we shall have an opportunity to debate this. The cuts were in the tail and not in the teeth, and this is something which the noble Lord should not forget when he considers the picture as a whole. It must be weighed in relation to the economic strength of this country at the moment.