§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether any decision on the follow-on force attack concept has been taken by the NATO Defence Planning Committee.
§ Mr. StanleyNo.
§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence what view of the follow-on force attack concept has been taken by the NATO Military Committee.
§ Mr. StanleyMilitary Committee business is by its nature confidential.
§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether the follow-on force attack concept will be on the agenda of the December meeting of NATO Defence Ministers.
§ Mr. StanleyThe business of the Ministerial Committee is confidential. A communique setting out the major conclusions of Ministers' discussions will be issued at the end of the meeting.
§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make a statement on the NATO follow-on force attack concept.
§ Mr. StanleyThe purpose of NATO's deterrent strategy is to prevent war by demonstrating to a potential aggressor that the alliance has the ability and determination to resist aggression by a military response at an appropriate level and that the risks to him of the use of force outweigh the gains. NATO is a defensive alliance but it is important to demonstrate to the Soviet Union that it could not attack NATO territory without putting its own homeland, and that of its' Warsaw Pact allies, at risk. The idea of striking deep behind the front line in response to attack is not, therefore, new. The interdiction of enemy airfields, follow-on forces and other high value targets has long been a feature of NATO tactical planning. The alliance is, however, currently examining ways of improving its conventional capability to deal more effectively with the growing Warsaw Pact land and air threat, including that posed by follow-on forces.
§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether the NATO Military Committee has indicated support for the deployment in Europe of 155 mm and 8 in enhanced radiation-capable nuclear shells by the United States.
§ Mr. StanleyAny advice provided by the Military Committee would by its nature be confidential.
§ Mrs. Clwydasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether NATO Defence Ministers support deployment in Europe of 155 mm and 8 in enhanced radiation capable nuclear shells by the United States.
855W
§ Mr. StanleyI refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement to the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Wareing) on 24 October at column630.
§ Mr. Dalyellasked the Secretary of State for Defence on what occasions the airland battle doctrine has been used on NATO exercises.
§ Mr. StanleyI refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement to the hon. Member for Wrexham on 31 July 1984 at column169.