South Africa: Membership of IAEA (Hansard, 7 December 1988)

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Glenarthur)
My Lords, we oppose moves to suspend South Africa from the rights and privileges of membership of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, is it not the case that, following the last meeting of the agency, the South African Foreign Minister boasted that South Africa now has the means of building atomic weapons? Is it not further the case that the South Africans have refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty? Does not their continued membership of the agency supply them with technological and scientific information which is valuable to them as regards the building of atomic weapons?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, yes, I am aware of the claim made by Mr. Botha. There is no firm evidence that South Africa has either conducted a nuclear test or that it possesses nuclear weapons. We welcomed President Botha's statement in September 1987 that South Africa was willing to begin negotiations on the possibility of acceding to the non-proliferation treaty. We have urged South Africa to accede to that treaty and place its nuclear facilities under the full scope of the IAEA safeguards.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, can the noble Lord say what South Africa's response has been to the pressure brought to bear by Her Majesty's Government? Is there a likelihood that South Africa will sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as Her Majesty's Government have indicated that they believe South Africa should do? Does the noble Lord agree that it is an extremely serious matter? While not dissenting from the basic proposition in his initial Answer, I must ask whether he will agree that it is an extremely serious matter that South Africa refuses to do this.

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, we hope that South Africa will sign and accede to the non-proliferation treaty. However, it is not the only country that does not accede.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, with respect, when the noble Lord says that, he implies that there 564 is a large number of countries which have not signed. Is it not the case that there is only one other country apart from South Africa which has not signed the treaty?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the fact is that South Africa has indicated that it may be willing to begin negotiations to that end. I cannot forecast whether or not the negotiations will be successful but we hope that South Africa will sign.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, the noble Lord has not answered my question again. Is it not the case that South Africa is only one of two countries which have not signed the nonproliferation treaty?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I should have thought that one or two countries were one or two too many.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, the Minister says that there is no firm evidence that South Africa has atomic weapons. Is he not aware that according to very widespread scientific evidence, including that at the highest level in the United States of America, the South Africans tested a nuclear weapon in 1979? Will the noble Lord answer the latter part of my first supplementary question? So long as South Africa remains a member of the agency, are not the South Africans being given technological and scientific information to assist them in building nuclear weapons?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, whatever the noble Lord says, there is no firm evidence about South Africa's possession of a nuclear weapon, despite the noble Lord's belief that he has such evidence. As regards the IAEA, we firmly believe in and support South Africa's membership of that agency. We do not imply by that our approval of the South African regime, nor do we believe that it gives rise to the kind of concerns which the noble Lord suggests.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, it is not a question of my words; it is the studied research done at the highest scientific levels, including those of the Administration in the United States. That research has shown that it is at least extremely probable that the South Africans tested a nuclear weapon as long ago as 1979. Again I ask: is it not the case that the South Africans are being given important technological and scientific information to assist them to build nuclear weapons? If that is the case, why is the noble Lord saying on behalf of the Government that they approve of the continued membership? Why do they approve of it?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the noble Lord used the words "extremely probable". That does not amount to firm evidence. I have said that there is no firm evidence that South Africa has nuclear weapons. As regards the application of IAEA safeguards in South Africa, the Koeberg nuclear power station is covered by the safeguards, as is Pelindaba nuclear research reactor, and any safeguarded fuel submitted for reprocessing. No agreement has yet been concluded with the agency on the application of 565 safeguards to the Valindaba pilot and semicommercial uranium enrichment plants. But I stand by what I said earlier; we do not have the concerns which the noble Lord expresses.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, will the noble Lord the Leader of the House—

Noble Lords
Next Question.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, I am not speaking on this Question. I am sorry; I give way to the noble Lord.

§ Lord Zuckerman
My Lords, while not wishing to controvert the noble Lord, Lord Hatch of Lusby, I wish to add my support to the Minister's Answer. There was no incontrovertible evidence that tests had been carried out by South Africa. I was in close touch with the inquiries which were then being made. The answer was totally dubious. No one to this day knows what that one pulse was about. In saying that, I obviously cannot say whether or not South Africa has or has not got nuclear weapons.

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord. He points to the difficulty of obtaining this evidence.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, will my noble friend remind the House how many supplementary questions are allowed for each Question? What sanctions are there against those Members of the House who totally disregard that generally agreed instruction?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, apparently there is an almost endless number of supplementaries.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, the answer depends on the quality of the Ministerial Answer, does it not!

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, that presupposes, of course, that those who ask the questions agree with the Answer that has been given. In this case, apparently, they do not.

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, it also depends on the quality of the questions.