§ Lord Kennetasked Her Majesty's Government:
What information they have about recent reports of United States offers to the USS on the subject of ballistic missile defences, and whether similar offers have been made to the United Kingdom and/or to our NATO allies.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (The Earl of Arran)President Bush announced the refocusing of the near-term SDI programme as the Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (GPALS) in January this year. Its objectives are to protect against Soviet and third country accidental, unauthorised or limited ballistic missile attacks on the US and to protect against ballistic missile attacks on US forces and allies overseas. US allies, including the UK, have been kept closely in touch with this reorientation of US policy—including the US desire for allies to extend their co-operation on Theatre Missile Defence (TMD) work. President Bush recently proposed as part of his wide-ranging initiative on nuclear weapons that the Soviet Union also join with the US in considering the deployment of defences against limited ballistic missile attack. President Gorbachev has agreed to study the feasibility of such a proposal, and discussions will continue. The US will continue to consult with NATO partners as appropriate.
§ Lord Kennetasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether in his statement that "Soviet defences are increasing and will increase further" (H.L. Deb. 21st June, col. 339), the Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne was referring to Soviet anti-ballistic missile defences, and if so, whether increases in these Soviet defences are being anticipated in the light of the United States Administration's declared wish to amend the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which currently restricts such Soviet defences and, according to reports, to enter into negotiations with the government in Moscow on amending the treaty.
§ The Earl of ArranThe noble Lord is correct in assuming that my noble friend Lord Strathmore referred to the Soviet ballistic missile defence programme in his answer on 21st June. The USSR has for many years pursued a variety of both active and passive defensive measures against nuclear attack, ranging from hardening, dispersing and providing alternative locations for potential targets, to the construction and continuing improvement of an44WA anti-ballistic missile system to engage incoming missiles. The Soviet ABM system now includes two different types of interceptor missiles, even though it contains no more than the 100 ABM missile launchers permitted by the ABM Treaty.
§ Lord Kennetasked Her Majesty's Government:
What is the current level of British ABM or ATBM or other anti-missile-related activity and expenditure, and how much of this effort is co-ordinated with the United States strategic defence initiative and/or with the related Israeli programmes.
§ The Earl of ArranThe UK, like other US allies, has undertaken research work related to Theatre Missile Defence on behalf of the US and funded by them. The possible requirement for a UK programme for active defence against ballistic missiles will be addressed as part of NATO discussions on the need to consider the complementary approaches—such as export controls and missile defences—to dealing with the growing potential threat posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles. The UK at present has no national programme for defence against ballistic missiles.
§ Lord Kennetasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they support the Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (GPALS) anti-ballistic missile programme announced by President Bush earlier this year and whether in their view GPALS would be compatible with the provisions of the ABM Treaty.
§ The Earl of ArranThe UK's approach to anti-ballistic missile defence research and associated matters remains based on the agreements reached between the then Prime Minister and President Reagan at Camp David in December 1984 and November 1986. These are set out in paragraph 208 of theStatement on the Defence Estimates 1988. The Government are fully convinced that the 1972 ABM Treaty has been a valuable source of stability. Questions concerning the interpretation of the treaty are, of course, a matter for its signatories.