§ 11.16 a.m.
§ Lord MolloyMy 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 what is their view of the Russian offer to cut their nuclear arms 480 programme by more than 25 per cent. in return for a halt in the American strategic defence initiative.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)My Lords, the aim at the Geneva talks should be to make maximum progress in each of the three negotiating groups. It would be wrong to make progress in any one group dependent on that in another. The suggestion of a 25 per cent. reduction in nuclear weapons appears to be a repetition of an earlier and inadequate Soviet proposal. We believe that American efforts at Geneva offered scope for agreement on significant reductions in United States and Soviet strategic forces.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, I wish to thank the noble Baroness for her reply, although I am somewhat amazed that there is a system of priorities in the reduction of nuclear weapons. Frankly, I do not care what sort of nuclear weapons are going to be abandoned, it is bound to be a good thing. Is the noble Baroness further aware that since the tabling of my Question the Chief of Staff of the Russia forces, Marshal Akhromeyev, has made even further proposals which will involve the abolition of almost 30 per cent. of nuclear weapons held by Russia and the Americans and has offered a system of verification, and that his aim is to stop the militarisation of space and to make the western allies feel safe about what is being proposed? Ought not our Government to consider at least the marshal's proposals and discuss them with our allies, the United States of America?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, our consistent objective at Geneva has been to negotiate a balanced and verifiable agreement to limit and reduce intermediate range missiles in Europe. A freeze, or indeed a reduction, would mean either a massive imbalance in favour of the Soviet Union, or would still mean an imbalance in favour of the Soviet Union if the reduction was just, as it were, across the board.
§ Lord Orr-EwingMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the Soviets, having pushed the free world and NATO alliance off the neutron bomb, have tried to push them off deploying cruise missiles, and are now pushing to a large extent to abolish the strategic defence initiative? Is it not a fact that if this becomes successful, these conventional weapons will knock out nuclear weapons and thus not only reduce the nuclear weaponry by 25 per cent. but actually neutralise it altogether; and nothing could be better for the peace of the world than that this should happen?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, the fact is that the Soviet Government is continuing its research programme on ballistic missile defence. The United States is continuing its research because there is a clear need for it to match the Soviet efforts. But I believe that our immediate task is to maintain alliance unity and to work for results in Geneva.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, would not the Government agree that these great matters can hardly with profit be discussed at Question Time?
§ Baroness YoungYes, my Lords.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that I totally disagree with the last intervention? I believe that the saving of the human race and my nation is a matter which should constantly be debated in this House, whether it is for hours or for minutes. I do not share the appalling myopia of the person who made the last remark.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, the noble Lord. Is the noble Baroness aware that one cannot abolish the SDI because it is not yet invented? It is on the research into trying to achieve the militarisation of space that the marshal has made his recommendation. Political commentators in the United States have considered this proposal and have said that if we examine it, particularly the verification aspect, we may find ourselves returning to the situation in the 1970s when the SALT II Treaty first brought the Americans and the Russians reasonably together to examine these frightening proposals on nuclear weapons that now exist.
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I should like to confirm the United States' decision to continue to observe the SALT II constraints, even though the Soviet record gives cause for concern. It is a decision which underlines the United States' commitment to the arms control process and its positive contribution to the Geneva talks. The noble Lord, Lord Molloy, should be aware of this from the Question that he asked yesterday, but as he has perhaps not read Hansard this morning to see my reply I shall repeat part of it:
President Reagan and the Prime Minister are in full agreement that the United States' and Western aim is not to achieve superiority but to maintain a balance, taking account of Soviet developments".—[Official Report, 20/6/85; col 367.]
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the noble Baroness—
§ The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)My Lords, the noble Lord has made two speeches in addition to his Question. That is enough for one morning. I think we should move to the next Question.