§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy 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 agree that the USSR imposed on itself a unilateral moratorium on the further deployment of SS.20 missiles in March 1982 and that the effect of the American deployment of medium-range missiles in Europe has been to cause the USSR to lift this moratorium and further to increase the number of SS.20 missiles in the European part of the USSR, and whether they will encourage the United States to ratify and observe the treaties they have previously agreed with the USSR so that new discussions may begin.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)My Lords, no. The Soviet Government continued to instal new missiles at existing SS.20 bases until 1983 and the installation of SS.20s in Asia was unaffected by their so-called moratorium. About 1,100 SS.20 warheads were in place, over 700 of them facing Europe, before NATO installed a single comparable missile. New arms control discussions are blocked by the Soviet Union's refusal to return to the negotiating table. NATO is ready to negotiate balanced limitations on SS.20, cruise and Pershing II missiles, or to agree to their elimination altogether, at any time.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that, while it may be a pity that we disagree about our interpretation of what happened in the immediate past, it may be more important that we should try to seek some agreement to halt the arms race in the immediate future? Is she aware that, if it is not halted, the present race in the deployment of land-based missiles must end in disaster? Is she aware that the Dutch decision to go to Moscow may provide a possibility of a freeze agreement? Will she ask the Foreign Secretary to examine this ray of hope in the knowledge that it may be the last chance?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I would not accept the first part of the noble Lord's supplementary question. On the second part, he may have noticed that in the statement that followed the London economic summit, in regard to the declaration on East-West relations and arms control it was said by the seven powers which took part:
We wish to see early and positive results in the various arms control negotiations and the speedy resumption of those now suspended".
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, is it not the fact that the Soviet Union has a large lead in nuclear weapons at the moment and shows no signs whatever of negotiating to reduce that lead?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I entirely agree with what my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter says. We wish very much that the Soviet Union would return to the negotiating table.
§ Lord Boston of FavershamMy Lords, will the noble Baroness the Minister accept that what she said about the reference to nuclear disarmament at the London summit last weekend is very welcome? However, can she say whether any concrete and precise proposals were discussed at that summit meeting to try to get the Geneva talks resumed and to try to get the Soviet Union back to the negotiating table?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, it must be borne in mind that in October 1983 the NATO defence Ministers announced reductions of 2,000 nuclear warheads in Europe, and that followed upon the reduction of 1,000 in 1980. At present the Americans and the West have proposed concrete measures to build security at the CDE conference in Stockholm; and the MBFR negotiations continue in Vienna. The noble Lord will have noticed from the London economic summit that the United States has offered to re-start nuclear arms control talks anywhere, at any time, without pre-conditions.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, is it not becoming clearer and clearer that when negotiations are resumed, as indeed they must be, short of a disaster, the British and French so-called nuclear deterrents must be discussed at the same time as the discussions on the question of intermediate nuclear missiles, because really that is what they are?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, it must be remembered that the British and French nuclear missiles are only a very small percentage of the total nuclear missiles in Europe.
§ Lord Elwyn-JonesMy Lords, as there is enough nuclear power on each side of the great divide for the total destruction of one another, is it not time for us again to have an urgent look at this whole problem which could lead to the annihilation of the human race?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, we should like to negotiate. The unfortunate fact is that the Soviet Union has left the negotiating table at both the INF and the START negotiations. We want to get the numbers down, but we can do this only with a balanced agreement.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, can the Minister of State tell the House what is the really important figure; namely, how many SS.20s were deployed facing Europe between the date of the Soviet moratorium, when they said they would stop deploying them, and December 1983, when the negotiations broke down?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, as I have indicated, the total numbers of SS.20s went up at that period. The moratorium was on the numbers of bases.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, can the noble Baroness say by how many they went up during that time?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, those were the figures that I gave in my original Answer. In fact there were about 1,100 SS.20 warheads in place, over 700 of them facing Europe, before NATO installed a single comparable missile.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, that was, presumably, just before December 1983 when the NATO deployment began. Would it be possible to have the number of missiles that were deployed before that date, but after the Russian declaration of the moratorium which, as I remember, was a couple of years before 1983?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, if we have the figure, I shall write to the noble Lord on that.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that by playing the numbers game it is possible to prove either that what the Soviet Union believes is true, or even what the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, believes is true, and that the numbers game is a futile operation? Would she not therefore agree that the problem at the moment is to get the parties talking?
Is it not also true that while the Soviet Union has left one particular negotiating table, it has repeatedly stated its willingness to negotiate on other points? Does the noble Baroness not agree that it is time that the Government of this country took a step to break down the impasse and to examine, as I suggested in my first supplementary question, the Dutch decision to go to Moscow? Will she ask the Foreign Secretary to see what he can do along those lines?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, this is a very serious matter. It is not, and should not be described as, something like the "numbers game". The fact is that in Stockholm we have proposed concrete measures which would build security and confidence, which could then lead, we hope, to some prospect of disarmament. The Soviet Union has left both the INF and the START negotiations. We should like it to come back and we should appreciate any influence that can be brought to bear on this matter. Perhaps the noble Lord might discuss with his friends in Moscow who perhaps would have influence—
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, may I say that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is going to Moscow and I have no doubt that these serious matters will be discussed then.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, I hope that the Foreign Secretary returns from Moscow thinking that he has made some friends.