HL Deb 27 April 1984 vol 451 cc258-9

11.21 a.m.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will describe the Air Land Battle Plan of the US Forces and say how this differs from NATO strategy; and whether cruise missiles located in this country are part of the American plan.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, Air Land Battle sets out the operational doctrine for the contingencies which the US Army might face worldwide. It is not agreed NATO operational doctrine and is therefore not directly associated with NATO's strategy of flexible response and forward defence. The answer to the second part of the Question is, No. The basing of cruise missiles in the country stems from NATO's twin track decision of December 1979.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware, however, that it has been stated in the United States Congress that, under the Air Land Battle Plan, cruise missiles allocated to NATO may be not only used but used on the authority of a field commander alone? Is he further aware that under this authority there is no specific exclusion of cruise missiles based in Britain? Will the noble Lord urge the Government, therefore, once again to insist on British operational control of these missiles, because the safety of our people cannot reasonably be left in the hands of an American field commander? Are not the Government guilty of a grave dereliction of duty the longer they leave the situation as it is at present?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I agree that the Air Land Battle concept does countenance the possible use of nuclear forces in accordance with NATO strategy, but I can assure the noble Lord that the arrangements for the use of the nuclear weapons in this country which he and I have described on a number of occasions are such as I have stated on many occasions; namely, only in accordance with the wishes of both the British Prime Minister and the American President.

Lord Gladwyn

My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that the whole idea of an Air Land Battle Plan is a highly controversial strategy? Will the Government see to it that their consent, if they ever do give their consent to its adoption by NATO, will not be given except after full discussion of its implications in the Parliament at Westminster?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, there are well established procedures for establishing NATO doctrines. I can assure the noble Lord that there is no question of overriding those procedures, either for this purpose or for any other.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, may I urge the Government to look again at this issue of British operational control? May I also ask the noble Lord to believe that concern about this matter is not confined to these Benches.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I am not sure that I can go further than I have already gone. If there is concern, I believe that that concern is unfounded. I do not know whether the noble Lord has seen the document to which he has referred. I have a copy of it here, and I understand that it is readily available from United States authorities.