§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy 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 believe in the nuclear war theory of mutually assured destruction (MAD) or the newer doctrine of nuclear utilisation target selection (NUTS).
§ The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Viscount Trenchard)My Lords, the Government subscribe to NATO's strategy of flexible response, as have successive Governments over recent years. This strategy is designed to prevent the outbreak of war, either nuclear or conventional, between NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that preparations for nuclear war have been described by his own Secretary of State for Defence, Mr. John Nott, as essentially lunatic? Will the noble Viscount assure the House that no such lunacy is contemplated in the South Atlantic?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I think that the latter part of the noble Lord's supplementary question does not flow from the Question that he asked, but there is no question but that nuclear weapons are not applicable to the current situation in the Falkland Islands area. In relation to all other statements made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, so far as I am aware, they are in accord with my Answer to the noble Lord's Question stating the policy of deterrence.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, are the Government aware that the doctrine of flexible response is being increasingly questioned by great experts on both sides of the Atlantic?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I think that the whole area of defence strategy has always been an area in which experts question other experts. The majority of opinions which successive Governments have accepted are in line with those which this Government and NATO as a whole accept fully.
§ Lord Duncan-SandysMy Lords, does not the Question reflect the state of mind of the noble Lord?
§ Lord BrockwayAnd, perhaps, my Lords, my state of mind as well. May I ask whether the noble Viscount 378 has noted the movement that is sweeping America for a worldwide nuclear freeze, supported now by 178 members of Congress, and whether Her Majesty's Government will support that movement?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I am aware of the reflection of recent peace movement ventures which now is apparent in the United States. I am certainly not aware that 178 members of Congress support what he has claimed. The whole Congress, so far as I am aware, fully supports the policy and continuation of NATO and its deterrent strategy.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the doctrine of flexible response means that in certain circumstances this country could initiate a nuclear war? Will Her Majesty's Government not take better account of the proposals put forward by Mr. Macnamara and his friends in the United States for an agreement that neither of the super-powers shall be responsible for a first strike?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, the noble Lord's supplementary question assumes that NATO and the Warsaw Pact are in the same position and looking at it from opposite angles. NATO is a defensive pact of free democratic countries while the USSR and the Warsaw Pact countries consist of totalitarian régimes that recently again have proved their preparedness to use military force for aggressive purposes. NATO needs a range of options to make clear, as necessary, that no aggressor can get away with it.