HL Deb 12 March 1987 vol 485 cc1134-7

3.8 p.m.

Lord Molloy

My 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 will attempt to persuade the USA to agree to stop development of SDI and thereby promote further negotiations between the USA and the USSR on nuclear disarmament.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)

My Lords, no. We fully support the SDI research programme which is permitted by the ABM Treaty. Mr. Gorbachev's proposal that a separate agreement be concluded on LRINF demonstrates that the SDI need not be a block to progress in nuclear arms control.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is not the noble Baroness aware that Mr. Gorbachev's relaxed view on these matters augurs for some form of civilised negotiations to take place, perhaps in line with the statement by the British Foreign Secretary when he said something quite contrary to what the noble Baroness has just said when speaking to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He said: We have to accept that not everything technically possible may be affordable or prudent. Meanwhile—all the more important that both sides should adhere strictly to their obligations under the ABM Treaty". Is that the Government's policy, or is it not?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I have set out the Government's policy on this matter on many occasions. I have answered the noble Lord's Question on the Order Paper. If I may say so, it is really an own goal in view of what Mr. Gorbachev has said.

Lord Gladwyn

My Lords, in view of the well-known agreement between the Prime Minister and the President at Camp David, do the Government welcome the very considerable opposition which is building up now in Congress against a so-called broad interpretation of the ABM Treaty of 1972?

Baroness Young

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn, has asked me a question in similar terms on many occasions. I agree that he has hitched this particular one to a recent press report. However, the position cannot be other than I have stated it: namely, that we have no locus in interpreting the ABM Treaty; secondly, deployment is clearly a matter for negotiation; thirdly, we have received satisfactory assurances from the United States that there will be consultation about any significant changes of policy in relation to SDI research; fourthly, the Government fully support the SDI research programme which is permitted under the ABM Treaty.

Lord Mellish

My Lords, is it not a fact that in his latest proposals Mr. Gorbachev made it absolutely clear that the star wars issue is no longer relevant? Therefore would it not be very dangerous to start those kinds of negotiations at the present time? If we are to get the best out of Mr. Gorbachev, why not leave him alone and see how genuine he is on these issues?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Mellish. In his statement, Mr. Gorbachev delinked SDI from negotiations on INF.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, will the Minister say whether there is any evidence that during the past five years the 10,000 Russian scientists who have been deployed on research and development of their own SDI are either increasing or lessening in view of the more relaxed attitude which Mr. Gorbachev is now showing?

Baroness Young

My Lords, it would be difficult for me to answer my noble friend's question in the form it was put. However, it has been demonstrated by SDI that progress can be made if both sides adopt a reasonable attitude to negotiations. It is clear that the link between INF and SDI is unreasonable, and it is totally unreasonable to ask the United States to drop SDI research when Russia's activities into BMD research would continue.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, we support the Government's response to the Gorbachev proposals. Will the Minister say what action the Government have taken to discuss this important development with the United States Administration? Have the Government pressed the United States to introduce this matter into the disarmament negotiations in Geneva, and if so, when is it likely to be discussed? Secondly, what will be the Prime Minister's objective when she visits Moscow in a fortnight's time?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, for his support of our response to what Mr. Gorbachev has said. I do not think that the noble Lord would expect me to go into detail about what my right honourable friend will say when she visits Moscow in April. However, I have no doubt at all that there will be discussions on arms control talks. As regards our relations with the United States, we discuss these matters regularly with the United States.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, it is a mistake to say that Mr. Gorbachev has delinked progress on SDI from progress on disarmament in general. Is it not correct to say that he has delinked progress on SDI only from progress on intermediate-range nuclear forces, and that it remains firmly linked in the Russian mind with progress on strategic offensive nuclear forces; and not only in the Russian mind but in the nature of things?

Baroness Young

My Lords, yes. The position is that Mr. Gorbachev has suggested that there can be the zero-zero option on INF. In his recent statement Mr. Gorbachev made it clear that that was not dependent on the United States giving up its research into SDI.

Lord Chalfont

My Lords, in the interests of strict accuracy and the best use of time in your Lordships' House, will the Minister confirm, first, that there is no development taking place in SDI; that there is only research; and that therefore there is no development to stop? Secondly, will she confirm that at the moment there is no projected arms control negotiation that relies upon any conditions on SDI? Therefore is not the original Question on the Order Paper totally irrelevant?

Baroness Young

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont, puts the position very clearly. The answer to the first two parts of his question is yes. As I indicated earlier, I think that the Question on the Order Paper has been overtaken by events.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, will the noble Baroness agree that whatever Mr. Gorbachev may think on the matter, or even whatever the noble Lord, Lord Chalfont, may think of it, the Government have embarked upon a course which her own chief, the Foreign Secretary, has described as leading to something which, if my memory serves me correctly, is not affordable or prudent? Why are the Government persisting in a policy so described by a leading member of the Cabinet and widely thought to be undesirable throughout the West?

Baroness Young

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins, is quite mistaken if he thinks that there is any disagreement in the Government about the part that Britain is playing in the research programme on SDI. A number of British firms are taking part in the programme, and I believe that there is much to be said for our keeping in the forefront of technology.

Lord Strabolgi

My Lords, has the noble Baroness anything to tell the House concerning the meeting the other day between her right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence and M. Giraud, the French Defence Minister, about mutual defence matters? Did those matters include nuclear defence, considering that French nuclear arms are supported by all parties there, including the Socialists?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I believe that the noble Lord's question is outside the terms of the Question on the Order Paper. However, I can confirm that we and the French were glad that when Mr. Gorbachev made his proposals he did not refer to either the British or the French independent nuclear deterrent.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, will the noble Baroness agree that the Prime Minister's visit to Moscow, for which we all wish her well, would be greatly assisted if she could take with her the considered views of the British Foreign Secretary, which I quoted, and for that matter the views of the Secretary of State for Defence, who said, in effect, on 16th February that he does not believe that the case is made for any deployment of star wars and that it is wiser to stick to an ABM Treaty?

That could help the Americans; it could help us; it could help the Russians and perhaps make the great progress for which we all fervently wish after the Prime Minister's visit.

Baroness Young

My Lords, the noble Lord's question is based on a completely false premise. My right honourable and learned friend the Foreign Secretary and my right honourable friend the Prime Minister are entirely agreed on this matter; that is to say, that Britain is taking part in the research programme into SDI, which is what the Americans are doing. No one at all is talking about or taking part in deployment.