Disarmament and Security: Consultations (Hansard, 8 December 1986)

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

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)
My Lords, the United Kingdom welcomes continuing close consultation with European allies on security and arms control matters which contributes to strengthening the alliance. Bilateral and multilateral meetings are frequent.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, the House will thank the Minister for that very general statement. However, has she nothing more to say about the quite concrete announcement made two or three weeks ago by Chancellor Kohl in the Bundestag to the effect that Germany would be seeking an increased German-French-British contact on these matters? Have they done so and is that to come about? Subsidiary to that, will the Government agree that the present inevitable disarray in Washington is a reason for more collaboration between the European NATO countries rather than less?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, of course major European states consult closely and it is sensible that they should do so. For example, WEU member countries recently agreed procedures to increase consultation on security and disarmament issues in order to strengthen the European contribution to the alliance. There is no question of a formalised inner group.
On the other point which the noble Lord raised, Europeans are committed to maintaining the solidarity of the Atlantic alliance. Exchanging views on matters of direct concern to Europe improves discussion within the alliance and strengthens the transatlantic bond.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, we welcome what the noble Baroness says about frequent meetings. Will she not agree that there is a general feeling in Europe that instead of formulating policy we appear to be reacting to events? Is there not a case for a more formalised arrangement in which NATO and Western European countries meet regularly to discuss these matters in the form, perhaps, of some kind of standing committee? It would create confidence if we felt there was a more formalised discussion of policy rather than the haphazard meetings which presently take place.

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I note the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn. I do not believe that I can add to the supplementary answer which I gave to the noble Lord, Lord Kennet. We do consult European states regularly and closely. As I indicated, the WEU recently agreed procedures to increase consultation on security and disarmament issues, which strengthens the European contribution to the alliance.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, can the Minister say how these meetings are arranged? There is no great security or intelligence point involved.
979 What prompts such meetings to be held? Why are they not held on a certain day at a certain time every month? Is there not a strong argument for that since it would make the people of this country feel safer if they thought that policy was being so formulated? We all realise that if a crisis takes place, meetings are called very quickly indeed as a reaction to the crisis. Would not meetings to decide permanent policy tend to create greater stability?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I note the point that the noble Lord makes. There is a difference between regular consultations between all the European partners of the NATO alliance and a triumvirate of three countries, which I believe lies behind the Question of the noble Lord, Lord Kennet. In answering the Question, I sought to deal with the specific point that he raised. However, I can assure the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, that there is regular and frequent consultation between the European partners of the alliance, as I indicated earlier.

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, perhaps I may ask my noble friend the Minister, as regards what influence European powers have upon the scene, whether or not the recent intervention by our own Prime Minister in meeting the President of the United States following the Reykjavik meeting did not undoubtedly restore the balance in retaining a sufficiency of nuclear weapons in order to keep the necessary balance against the Iron Curtain powers over and above the conventional weapons. Was that not entirely due to the Prime Minister's intervention, and is not a voice from Europe very effective indeed?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that point. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister and President Reagan agreed at Camp David on the way forward in arms control, identified as priorities an INF agreement, 50 per cent. strategic cuts and a ban on chemical weapons, and confirmed that the alliance strategy would continue to require effective nuclear deterrence. Reductions in nuclear weapons will increase the importance of eliminating disparities in conventional forces. Our main European allies have since told us of their full support for the outcome of the discussion between my right honourable friend the Prime Minister and President Reagan.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, I apologise for intervening again. Is it not the case that it was the lack of a clear, formulated European policy on this issue that led the Prime Minister to do the precise thing that I have been criticising and go to the United States after Reykjavik?

§ Baroness Young
No, my Lords, I cannot accept that interpretation of the events. As I have indicated to my noble friend, it was very valuable that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister had this opportunity to discuss with President Reagan the way forward on arms control; one of a number of meetings that she has held.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that the alliance would be greatly strengthened by a stronger European pillar but that such a European pillar for defence needs to be preceded by a well organised European foreign policy? Does she also agree that this enthusiasm for the European contribution coming from the Labour Front Bench, though somewhat unexpected, is very much to be welcomed?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, again, I think I have answered the point that the noble Baroness raises. The Europeans are committed to maintaining the solidarity of the Atlantic alliance. There are regular exchanges of views between the European members, as there are between the European members and the United States. We believe that these exchanges improve discussion in the alliance and strengthen the transatlantic bond.

§ Lord Beloff
My Lords, can my noble friend the Minister say whether the Government would wish to comment in this connection on the recent speech by Prime Minister Chirac before the Western European Assembly?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, we share many of the concerns that have been expressed by Monsieur Chirac. We welcome his support for the text which my right honourable friend the Prime Minister agreed last month with President Reagan at Camp David, and we concur wholeheartedly in his emphasis on the importance of nuclear deterrence and the role of the British and French nuclear forces. We welcome in particular his assertion that, deterrence in Europe requires a strategic linkage between the two sides of the Atlantic. This in turn requires the presence of American conventional and nuclear forces on our continent".

§ Lord Beswick
My Lords, when the Prime Minister made her statement after meeting the President of the United States and expressed complete confidence in the integrity of President Reagan, was she aware at that point that American arms were being sold to the terrorist government in Iran and that the profits from those sales were going to aid the terrorists who were fighting against Nicaragua?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I can hardly blame the noble Lord for trailing his coat in that way but he would agree that his question is quite wide of the Question on the Order Paper.

Lord Morris
My Lords, arising out of questions asked by the noble Lord the Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition in this House, would my noble friend agree that it is absolutely right and proper that any government should respond properly to events and not try to influence them—

Noble Lords
Oh!

Lord Morris
—as events invariably control governments rather than the other way round?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I really do not think that I can accept that statement from my noble friend, particularly in view of the answers that I have given. We would all agree that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister and my right honourable and learned friend the Foreign Secretary in discussions—in the case of my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, with President Reagan; and in the case of my right honourable and learned friend, in many fora around the world—have effectively put both British and European policy and have had the effect of influencing the outcome of the discussions which have taken place.

§ Lord Chalfont
My Lords, does the Minister agree that it might be wise to remember that in matters of disarmament and security the interests of the three countries mentioned in the Question are not always identical? Can she give an assurance that even when we are co-ordinating our views with those other two countries, we will bear our own special interests—disarmament and security—inside the Western alliance very much in mind?

§ Baroness Young
Yes, my Lords, I take the point of the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont. One of the considerations is our own security and the importance of our own independent nuclear deterrent.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, given that the fact remains that Chancellor Kohl told his Parliament that he would be seeking improved, extended (or whatever it was) contacts with Britain and France on disarmament and on military matters, can the Government state whether any approach has been received from Germany in this sense? If so, what answer has been made to it? If not, is it the Government's opinion that Chancellor Kohl was simply speaking empty words for the fun of it to his own Parliament?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, in my answer to the noble Lord's first supplementary question, I made it clear that there was no question of any formalised inner group.