§ 11.15 a.m.
§ Lord BrockwayMy 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 what progress has been made at the Geneva START talks between the USA and the USSR on strategic arms reduction.
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, the START talks, and the briefings which the Americans give to us and their other allies about them, are confidential. We have noted and welcomed the serious intentions with which the United States has entered these negotiations. We must hope that the Russians reciprocate.
§ Lord BrockwayMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether we can have an assurance that the Western Governments, supplementing the efforts of the unaligned Governments, will exert the fullest pressure, both on the American Government and on the Soviet Union, to make the necessary compromises in these discussions to enable a satisfactory solution to be reached?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, the United States, of course, has proposed to concentrate in the START talks on the most destabilising elements—the ballistic missiles, including, particularly, land-based ballistic missiles—but the Americans have also made clear their 452 willingness to include in the negotiations other classes of system. Now we await the response of the Russians.
§ Lord PeartMy Lords, is the Minister aware that this matter was raised during the recent defence debate? I also noticed that at an international gathering the Prime Minister stressed it, as well.
§ Lord BelsteadYes, my Lords, I also had noted the reference to this in the debate.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, do the Government agree that the START talks are very closely related to the intermediate-range nuclear force reduction talks, that progress in either is very unlikely without progress in the other, and that both concern this country crucially?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord, Lord Kennet. The two sets of negotiations are proceeding in parallel, and, of course, they are proceeding together in Geneva. There is close co-ordination between the delegations.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that all sane people would wish to see, urgently, a massive reduction in all sorts of arms, strategic and otherwise, but that the thought in the mind of everyone is that when Governments agree, at whatever level, on talks about reductions, ordinary people ask themselves, "How do we know that they will honour what they have agreed at conferences?" Is it not now about time that the way in which agreements on the reduction of arms reached at summits or elsewhere are going to be made a reality, should be the main subject of discussion in all these debates on the reduction of arms? It is: Will the agreements be honoured, and how can they be proved to be honoured?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, the noble Lord's question gives me the opportunity to record that in the three sets of talks which are taking place at the present time—the START talks, the intermediate-range nuclear force reduction talks and also what are known as the MBFR talks (the mutual and balanced force reduction talks) in Vienna—the West has made proposals for reductions in force levels, and we await a response from the Russians. But those proposals rely, as the noble Lord so rightly says, upon the agreement as to what everybody has—in other words, data—and also verification, to see that both sides are playing the game in undertaking their reductions; and the talks will not be successful unless the questions of data and verification can be agreed.
§ Lord BrockwayBut, my Lords, is it not the case, as indeed was indicated from the Front Bench, that the Soviet Union has now agreed to on-the-spot verification in relation to chemical weapons? Was that not welcomed from the Front Bench, and does that not give us hope that a system of verification may be completed?
§ Lord BelsteadMy Lords, as the United Kingdom disposed of all its chemical weapons 10 years ago, naturally I agree with the noble Lord that we welcome this move by the Russians.