§ The Earl of KIMBERLEYMy 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, having regard to the global nature of the Russian threat, what steps they are taking to ensure the safety of British interests outside the NATO area.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, we have frequently expressed concern about the external policies and actions of the Soviet Union. The Russians seek to exploit instability in the developing world. It is therefore important that we and friendly countries should continue to try to settle regional problems and to promote stability outside the NATO area.
§ The Earl of KIMBERLEYMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Bearing in mind the massive build-up of the Warsaw Pact countries which may perhaps encourage the Russians, or the Soviet Union, to expand in the South and the East, would my noble friend consider that it might be worth negotiating with South Africa to reopen the naval base at Simonstown? Secondly, would he consider it perhaps pertinent to get together with some of our Western allies to help China with modern defence equipment?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, as my noble friend knows, we are of course already discussing with the Chinese the possibility of supplying them with some defence equipment. As for the suggestion 958 that we should reopen the base at Simonstown, that is a matter that we should clearly have to discuss with our NATO partners.
§ Lord BOOTHBYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether, in view of the global strategic policy now being pursued by the Soviet Union, it is any longer possible to define a specific NATO area, and whether there is any British interest in the world which is not dependent on the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, the NATO Treaty does not in fact include any precise definition of the NATO area, but we understand it as meaning the countries of the NATO Alliance including, of course, North America, together with the Mediterranean and the Atlantic as far South as the Tropic of Cancer.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, is it not increasingly clear that the point is being reached where the arms race, especially in the nuclear field, is not going to resolve the differences between the NATO countries and the Warsaw Pact countries? Is it not therefore necessary to effect a radical reappraisal of our approach to both the Soviet Union and its allies in relation to the whole range of problems throughout the world, including those the Minister has mentioned; the need for stability, which is an equal interest and concern for East and West, and the need to tackle jointly, East and West together, the points of contention and of difficulty, economic and security, that arise in so many parts of the world?
§ Lord TREFGARNEYes, my Lords, we certainly agree with that. Of course both East and West are participating in the mutual balanced force reduction talks, as they are called—MBFR—at Vienna. It is a matter for great regret that those talks are not making more progress than they are.
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, would the Minister give the House an assurance that, when Her Majesty's Government decide to take action involving the movement of equipment, they have the capacity to carry it out, bearing in mind that last week when it was announced that we wanted to send Pumas, of which we have 959 some 40—they are battle transport helicopters—to Rhodesia it was found that we had not the means of conveying them and had to borrow a Starlift, a C141, to carry them out? This is an exact parallel of what happened at Suez, and other dubious occasions when the Conservative Government were responsible for defence.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I am afraid that my memory does not go back as far as that of the noble Lord, Lord Wigg. I certainly agree that we ought to maintain and, so far as we can, improve our transport facilities within the availability of our resources.
§ Lord HALEMy Lords, does the noble Lord recall that it is not so many years ago since the Tory Party were engaged in supporting the American view that Taiwan had to be fully armed to deal with China? Now that we have established apparently friendly relations with that great country of China, with its need for expansion, might we not reflect that the continual use in this House of Russia, the Soviet Union, as an essential potential enemy rather overlooks the fact that the USSR has made considerable progress in its foreign alliances, has an expanded connection, but does itself face grave internal problems? Might we not consider not stimulating hostility against that country which, with all its lack of democracy, in which it has never believed, has a contribution to make to the reduction of armaments and to the promotion of a general understanding? Finally, may I suggest—
§ Several noble Lords: No! Order!
§ Lord HALEFinally, my Lords, would the Minister consider the remarks on the BBC last night made by Lord Carver on our present military policy and its complete impracticability?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Carver, is of course entitled to his views, but we have to formulate our policies in accordance with circumstances as we find them, not as we would wish them to be.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, is the Minister aware that the USSR today is training terrorists from all over the world and 960 that the PLO and its affiliates are actually being trained in the USSR for terrorist and murderous actions? Will he try to do something about this menace, a menace not only to Israel and other countries but to NATO and throughout its European section?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, answering Questions, as I do from the noble Lord so often, I could hardly fail to be aware of the matters he raises.