HL Deb 21 October 1997 vol 582 cc610-3

3.8 p.m.

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What progress has been made towards NATO enlargement since the Madrid Summit of 8th July.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I am pleased to report that good progress has been made since Madrid on a wide range of practical issues, with a view to ministerial agreement at the North Atlantic Council in December. Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary have all submitted details of their forces to NATO planners and have begun discussions with NATO on the political, military and financial aspects of acceding to the North Atlantic Treaty. We expect that the ratification process for all three countries will be completed by April 1999, which, incidentally, is the 50th anniversary of the Washington Treaty.

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. I should declare an interest here as chair of the Atlantic Council of the United Kingdom. Will my noble friend comment on the costs of enlargement? Does he agree that, on present figures, the costs seem manageable; and also that the benefits are enormous? As the Prime Minister said, the benefit of a generation not going to war in Europe in their lifetime, nor sending their children to war, is a prize beyond value.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I think that the whole House will concur completely with the latter sentiments of my noble friend. Clearly, the extension of NATO is one symbol of the end of the Cold War in Europe and one reason that the next generation will not live in fear of a European war.

Clearly, there are costs involved in enlargement. NATO is currently analysing requirements with a view to assessing those costs in time for the December meeting to ensure that NATO's continued military effectiveness operates with the new members. Those costs will be divided over a long period of time among 16 existing allies as well as the three new members. The UK currently contributes nearly one-sixth of NATO's common budgets, and the European allies together account for about 70 per cent. of those budgets. We expect that those shares will apply equally to the NATO budgets of the enlargement process. But as my noble friend says, those costs give us the great prize of peace in Europe.

The Earl of Lauderdale

My Lords, can the Minister tell the House what progress has been made in assuaging Russian anxieties in this respect?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the House will be aware of the founding act agreement between Russia and NATO. It is the intention of the British Government, and indeed our allies in NATO, to ensure that the new security process in Europe is an inclusive one to which the Russians are party. Therefore, we are attempting to establish a positive relationship for the new security regime in Europe. On the other hand, there is no Russian veto over acceding countries to the NATO Alliance.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords—

NobleLords

Cross-Benches!

Lord Richard

My Lords, we have just a few minutes left of Question Time. I wonder whether my noble friend will allow the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Craig, to ask the next question and then my noble friend can ask his afterwards.

Noble Lords

Oh!

Lord Craig of Radley

My Lords, given the much increased workload that Central Region headquarters is undertaking to integrate the armed forces of the three new NATO nations, and given the amount of work which AFNORTHWEST undertakes in "Partnership for Peace" and liaison with the Leningrad Military District, do the Government now agree that this is not the time to be considering the closure and disbandment of the latter headquarters?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the whole matter is under review both within NATO and, in terms of our own contribution, within our own strategic defence review. We certainly do not expect the additional cost of enlargement significantly to increase the size of the British contribution from our defence budgets to the common NATO budgets.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire

My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether any study is under way?

Lord Richard

My Lords, I intimated that I thought the best way to proceed would be to hear first the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Craig, then my noble friend Lord Jenkins, followed by anyone else.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for intervening on my behalf. Does my noble friend agree that enthusiasm for NATO's enlargement, irrespective of party and whether within or without party, is far from being widespread or unanimous?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, what is pretty widespread and unanimous is the whole process of ending the Cold War within Europe. Indeed, the extension of NATO to those who were not that long ago facing each other across the Iron Curtain is an important symbol. NATO enlargement of itself does not bring that security, but it is part of the process which brings that very welcome security to Europe.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire

My Lords, can the Minister say whether any studies are under way regarding the implications of enlargement for NATO itself? Is it the assumption of Her Majesty's Government that three new members within the next 18 months, and possibly a further group within the next four to five years, will leave NATO unchanged? Alternatively, do the Government expect that NATO itself will be transformed by this immense increase in membership?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I believe the realistic assessment is somewhere between not changed and transformed. Clearly NATO's structures have served us well, but the adhesion of three additional countries will lead to some change. I expect that to be manageable within those structures.

Lord Moynihan

My Lords, given President Chirac's statement that France will not share any of the new members' accession costs and prevarication on whether to join NATO's integrated military structure, can the Minister say how far the Government think that the disagreements between the American and the French within NATO will cause future problems and delays for NATO expansion?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I do not expect them to cause delays. It has been the view of Her Majesty's Government that it would be better if France were part of the military structures of NATO. As regards the reported remarks of President Chirac in the French press, we believe that the consensus in Madrid was that there would be a sharing of the costs of enlargement among all the European allies, including France.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, can my noble friend confirm my memory—I am sure that he can—that the Prime Minister has said that he would not expect any increase in British defence expenditure to result from this enlargement? Further, can my noble friend say how the most interesting proportional figures that he has just given compare with the allocations which are at present under discussion between the American Secretary of State and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, first, I can tell my noble friend that the Prime Minister indicated that our contribution to the common NATO budgets, which of course is less than 1 per cent. of our total defence costs, would not be expected to rise significantly as a result of enlargement. Secondly, in relation to the American position, I should point out that all sorts of figures are being discussed in America at present. We would expect the cost of enlargement to be shared approximately as per the current division between America and the European allies.