§ 2.44 p.m.
§ 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 have completed their study of Mr. Gorbachev's proposals to free the world of nuclear weapons within the next 15 years, and, if so, whether they consider that they provide an opportunity to rid humanity of the fear of nuclear disaster.
§ The Minister of State for Defence Support (Lord Trefgarne)My Lords. Mr. Gorbachev's proposals are still under examination. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister will be replying to him shortly.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is it not the case that it is somewhat urgent that the Prime Minister should now do so? Is the Minister aware that Mr. Gorbachev in his speech yesterday seemed to be deeply depressed by President Reagan's response in so far as there has been one, from his point of view? He said, as I understand from the press notices, that Western politicians will have to answer the question: are they prepared to part with nuclear weapons at all? Is it not the case that the suspicion is arising that so far as the West is concerned there are no circumstances in which they would be prepared to part with nuclear weapons? If that is the case, is it not understandable that Mr. Gorbachev is becoming a little depressed?
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, I was not able to listen to all Mr. Gorbachev's speech yesterday but I understand that the Russians have indicated they would prefer a substantive rather than a quick reply to their recent communication. Of course we have to consult thoroughly with our allies, and I expect that my right honourable friend will be in a position to reply soon.
Lord Paget of NorthamptonMy Lords, surely this is a most reckless proposal by Mr. Gorbachev. It is the non-nuclear powers which have been practically continuously at war. The nuclear powers have enjoyed an interval free from nuclear conflict for 40 years. That is unprecedented. Surely this is not the stage to so recklessly down-price the cost of war.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, it is of course the case that our nuclear deterrent has kept the peace, in Europe at least, since the Second World War. That is the situation which is sometimes lost on those opposite.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, does not the noble Minister agree that that is just not the case—neither what he has 1045 said nor what the noble Lord, Lord Paget, has said? Tens of thousands of Americans and Vietnamese were slain during the Vietnam War, and America had the hydrogen bomb. Also, during the time when we supported the United Nations, when we lost something like 20,000 soldiers, we possessed nuclear weapons. It is quite wrong to say this sort of thing. May I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that there are proposals made now by Mr. Gorbachev in which he has acknowledged that he can agree on many things with President Reagan and on many things with the West? Does not the noble Minister agree that we might be talking about the future of all mankind and that we ought not to dismiss with an absurd, so-called hilarious answer—
§ Lord Molloy—a speech made by the Leader of the Soviet Union? We should acknowledge that just as much as we would acknowledge a speech made by President Reagan.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, we do acknowledge that there are some new elements in Mr. Gorbachev's proposals, but there are also some ambiguities and inconsistencies and some familiar difficulties. They will all need careful study.
§ Lord BeloffMy Lords, is it not the case that it is not Mr. Gorbachev who should be depressed but the people of the Soviet Union? After a five-hour speech from Mr. Gorbachev, no hope has been offered to them for alleviating the burdens under which they suffer, including self-imposed isolation from the rest of the world.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, that was a thought which had occurred to me, but I suspect that it strays a little far from the Question.
§ Lord Graham of EdmontonMy Lords, given the importance of the British and French independent deterrents in the nuclear disarmament debate, what has been the nature of the participation by the British Government in the discussions between the super powers? Are we invited to comment, and what do we say?
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, as the noble Lord knows, the United States consults very closely with its Western allies in connection with the various bilateral discussions it is having with the Soviet Union. In regard to Mr. Gorbachev's letter to my right honourable friend, the noble Lord may have noticed that the demand for British and French weapons to be counted in compensation has been dropped, though there are some equally unacceptable no-transfer and no-build-up conditions which we shall have to consider as well.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, can the Minister confirm that in fact the Soviet Union has more nuclear weapons than any other country in the world and that if it wishes to talk about genuine disarmament all it has to do is to set the example? I think that if it were 1046 prepared to get rid of its atomic weapons completely and utterly, every other country in the world would be thrilled and delighted and would follow.
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, the British Government have always made it clear that we support the objective of general and complete disarmament, not just nuclear disarmament. But the noble Lord is quite right, particularly with regard to the balance of intermediate range weapons.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the Minister aware that the noble Lord who has just spoken from this side of the House is entirely mistaken? Is he aware that the Soviet Union has imposed upon itself for several months a unilateral test ban which has not been followed in the West? Does he not agree that the best way of resolving this matter would be to ask the West to imitate the Soviet Union in this respect?
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, that strays a little far, if the noble Lord will forgive my saying so, from the Question on the Order Paper. The noble Lord who has just spoken was referring to the numbers of nuclear weapons presently in place and I replied in the affirmative, particularly so far as intermediate range weapons are concerned.
§ Lord BrockwayMy Lords, may I ask the Minister, if the Government are serious in their desire to prevent a nuclear disaster and bring about peace, should they not seek the points of agreement when proposals of this kind are made and emphasise them, rather than seek the differences and difficulties which are involved?
§ Lord TrefgarneMy Lords, we shall continue to support balanced and verifiable proposals in respect of disarmament, but particularly where they contribute to rather than detract from our security.