SALT II Agreement: Observance (Hansard, 19 June 1986)

§ Lord Molloy
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, as my noble friend Lord Trefgarne told the noble Lord on 6th June, we hope the SALT II agreement will continue to be observed by both sides. The United Kingdom is not a party to the agreement and consequently does not have access to the records of the standing consultative commission. Nonetheless, Soviet activities give cause for concern. We are not aware of any breaches by the United States.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the noble Lord did infer that there had been a certain amount of cheating, or whatever you may call it, in respect of the SALT II treaty by the Soviet Union? Is she also aware that this is completely and absolutely contrary to the views of people like Senator John Chafee, head of the bipartisan group which recently went to see President Reagan to urge him to ignore people making noises to the effect that the Soviet Union had been breaking the treaty? The breaking-up of the SALT II treaty would be very dangerous. Would it not be much better if the Government, instead of opting to side with those who support President Reagan, took a reasoned middle course and saw both points of view so that we do not find ourselves unnecessarily interfering in the politics of the United States?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, as I have already made clear, we regard it as important that the SALT II agreement should continue to be observed by both sides. The door is therefore left open for a positive Soviet response.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, how can there be a middle course between what appears to be the difference between right and wrong?

§ Lord Mayhew
My Lords, will the noble Baroness not agree that the breaches alleged by the United States are complicated borderline questions arising out of different interpretations of the treaty? Can she say what is the attitude of other European members of NATO to what amounts to the abandonment of the treaty by the United States, and whether these countries should not have met together to concert a common view?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord that this is a very complex matter. We trust that we shall get a positive Soviet response. We believe that 1032 the door has been left open for a positive response. We hope that this will be possible in this complex matter. This is a view, I believe, that would be shared by our colleagues in the European Community.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, what does the noble Baroness mean in saying that the door is left open? Will the noble Baroness be good enough to explain? Is there to be a Soviet response to this? Is it not a mistake to abrogate a treaty of this importance unilaterally? Would it not be better for the two countries to come together, as the noble Lord suggests, and discuss the matter, rather than that it should be the subject of public propaganda that never does any good whatever?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, on the general issue, we recognise, of course, the importance of arms control discussions and negotiations. Indeed, we hope that this will be possible. We want to see rapid progress made at the next round at Geneva. As to the particular point that the noble Lord raised, we trust that a positive Soviet response will make it possible for the United States to avoid exceeding the SALT II limits at the end of this year. This would leave the way open, we believe, for real progress to be made in arms control as envisaged by both leaders in Geneva last year. We would much regret it if the provisional decision of President Reagan to exceed the limits had to be implemented.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is the noble Baroness saying that Her Majesty's Government are taking a positive initiative to ensure that there is no abrogation and that the two sides are brought together? Is that what she is saying?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I am saying two things. We are not a party to the SALT II treaty, but we have made our view on the matter clear.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, may I return to the original Question relating to the issue of breaches of SALT II alleged against the Russians by the Americans? Although everyone is well aware of the American allegations, are the Government equally well aware of the detailed refutations publicly made by the Soviet Union? Most important of all, will the Government state unequivocally whether they are aware of any breaches by the Russians except in so far as they have been informed of them by the Americans?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I have just been asked whether we have been discussing this matter with the United States Government. Clearly, this is a matter that has been discussed. We are aware of their view of the breaches by the Soviet Union. What is important is that we hope that both the United States and the Soviet Union will comply with the treaty.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, would it not assist the House if the noble Baroness could state whether or not Her Majesty's Government are independently aware of Soviet breaches as opposed to having been informed of them by the United States?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I think that I have made the position of our Government clear on this point.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that, generally speaking, the attitude of the Government to try to save SALT II is absolutely correct? What the Government are doing wrong—it is the difference between right and wrong which I hope President Reagan will understand—is failing to recognise that there are important people in the United States, like Senator Chafee, who believe that wrong information is being given out. I refer to the words of congressmen in the United States. Is the noble Baroness aware (and, if not, she might like to check) of what was stated by Congressman Dicks, the key figure in setting the United States military budget, who stated that under SALT II the Russians had dismantled almost 10 times the number of missiles that had been dismantled by the United States? Is the noble Baroness aware that in advocating a middle course I was taking cognisance of what the senator said as well as what has been said by the extreme Right-wing in the United States? We want the truth, not so much to assist any particular party but for the benefit possibly of the whole of mankind through a system of verification.

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that it is really most objectionable that the noble Lord, however sincere his feelings, should so breach our rules of order at Question Time by making such a long speech?