Russia: Conventional Weapons Export Policy (Hansard, 10 February 1992)

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, in October 1991 the Soviet Union joined the UK, the US, France and China in a declaration encompassing guidelines of restraint governing the export of conventional weapons. President Yeltsin renewed Russia's commitment to that declaration in his speech of 29th January. We welcome his assurance and intend to continue our dialogue with the Russian Government on those issues.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. What Mr. Yeltsin says and what he does seem to be completely different. For example, is the noble Lord aware that Russian arms bazaars already exist? Literally hundreds of fighter aircraft, tanks and heavy machine guns are being sold to India, Africa and the Middle East. Is that not a possible threat not only to world peace but also to the lives of people living in those areas?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, we are aware of reports of planned arms exports by Russia and other CIS states and about President Yeltsin's statement that Russia needs to sell arms in order to earn hard currency. However, so far there is little evidence of deliveries.
We are building a dialogue with the Commonwealth of Independent States and are 452 discussing the practical ways in which we can help; for example, advice regarding export control mechanisms. We expect Russia and other CIS states to abide by the obligations of the former Soviet Union, including those on arms control.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, we welcome the action which has been taken by the Government and other governments and the agreement that has been reached with President Yeltsin. However, does the Minister agree that there are considerable dangers in the sale of arms to unstable countries—dangers not only to us but to the whole world? Is he aware that the agreement which has been signed, and which we welcome, is not sufficient? In view of the friendly relations which now exist between ourselves and other countries of the CIS, is there not a case for bringing this matter before the United Nations Security Council so that a resolution can be initiated? That would be far more binding than the existing agreement.

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition. We have demonstrated the seriousness of the international community's commitment to arms control at the UN Security Council and we gave an important boost to all efforts to curb irresponsible arms sales.
I should draw to the attention of the noble Lord the progress with the permanent five at a meeting in London. Common guidelines of restraint were agreed. It was agreed to inform each other about transfers to the Middle East of certain major weapons and Russia has pledged to uphold commitments made by the Soviet Union at that London meeting. The next meeting will be in Washington next month. It is significant that is the first time that China and Russia have been engaged in constructive discussions on restraint and responsibility in the trade in conventional arms.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, does the agreement cover the export of nuclear technicians and scientists from Russia to countries like Libya, Iran and Iraq?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, not specifically, but I can tell the noble Lord that that is a source of great anxiety to the Government. We are discussing that issue with our allies. The Prime Minister agreed with President Yelstin that there would be further discussions on ways of helping Russia and the other republics to use the talents of their scientists for peaceful developments.

§ Lord Cheshire
My Lords, is there a distinction between authorised and unauthorised sales? In other words, does that dialogue include ways and means of looking for and prohibiting unauthorised undercover sales by criminal units which I believe are installed in the Soviet Union?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, there is a significant step forward in the attempt to increase transparency in the field of arms. Following an initiative by my right honourable friend the Prime 453 Minister last year, the Soviet Union co-sponsored the UN resolution establishing the UN register of conventional arms. All members states will be encouraged to participate.
The noble and gallant Lord asked how the various arms are defined. The agreement of the permanent five incorporated the careful consideration of a number of matters: the promotion of capabilities of the recipient to meet needs for legitimate self-defence; whether it served as an appropriate and proportionate response to the security and military threats confronting the recipient country; whether it enhanced the capabilities of the recipient to participate in regional or other collective arrangements or other measures consistent with the charter of the United Nations or requested by the United Nations. The same group agreed to avoid transfers which would prolong or aggravate an existing armed conflict or increasing tensions or which would contribute to regional instability. Arms sales would be avoided which introduce destabilising military capabilities in a region and many other issues. That is a public document and quite a powerful one.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, does the noble Lord not agree that part of the real problem now is non-adherence to the agreements which President Yeltsin has been speaking of and the lack of proper inspection? Does the noble Lord not agree that it is comforting that many of the republics which were formerly part of the USSR and which are now part of the commonwealth do not wish to carry on making those arms? They wish to produce goods for the civilian population both in their country and overseas. Should we not encourage and assist them to achieve that?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I do not wish to underestimate the anxiety with which we regard the possibility of proliferation of conventional or, indeed, nuclear arms. However, it is important to point out to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, that, whereas before there was no dialogue or meeting of minds, there is now active and ongoing dialogue with the Commonwealth of Independent States and other countries formerly not in dialogue. That must be encouraging.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I may have missed a matter which the noble Lord mentioned when he gave that long catalogue earlier. Are the Government satisfied that tactical and strategic nuclear weapons, which were formerly the property of the Soviet Union, remain under central control and will thus not be dispersed to other powers which may be irresponsible? If not, does he still subscribe to T. S. Eliot's view that the world will end not with a bang but with a whimper?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I cannot comment on the last part of my noble friend's question. I did not mention the matter of those arms. The leaders of the Commonwealth of Independent States agreed in Minsk on 30th December that the decision to use nuclear weapons will be taken by President Yeltsin with the agreement of the leaders of 454 Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine and following consultations with the heads of other member states. Long range strategic systems, which are believed to be most secure, are in Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Belarus. Short range tactical systems are more widely dispersed throughout the states. Those are now being withdrawn to Russia for dismantling. It does not follow from the location of nuclear weapons in a particular republic that the leaders of that republic are capable of using them.