Download Mar 1984 - DISARMAMENT

Keesing's Record of World Events (formerly Keesing's Contemporary Archives),
Volume 30, March, 1984 International, Page 32773
© 1931-2006 Keesing's Worldwide, LLC - All Rights Reserved.
Mar 1984 - DISARMAMENT
Other aspects of NATO meetings Appointment of Lord Carrington as NATO Secretary-General
As well as dealing with INF matters, the NATO defence planning committee at its Dec. 6–7,
1983, meeting also considered in particular the modernization of Warsaw Pact forces, the
position of Greece, Portugal and Turkey within the Alliance and the question of developments
outside the NATO Treaty area.
The Defence Ministers noted with concern the pace of modernization of Warsaw Pact forces
“across the entire spectrum-strategic to conventional” and recorded that “in the face of this
steady accumulation of Soviet military power” the Alliance “must take the necessary measures to
preserve the security of its peoples”. After again stressing the importance of Greece, Portugal
and Turkey having “adequate Allied assistance to carry out their missions more effectively to the
advantage of all”, the ministers “again acknowledged that developments outside the NATO
Treaty area might threaten the vital interests of members of the Alliance” and “recalled their
agreement to take full account of the effect of such developments on NATO security, defence
capabilities and the national interests of member countries and the need to consult and to share
assessments on the basis of commonly identified objectives”.
The main topics covered by the Dec. 8–9 meeting of the North Atlantic Council apart from INF
are described below.
East-West relations. ‘The Allies… remain firmly committed to balanced and verifiable arms
control at the lowest possible level of forces, and will work for greater stability and progress
towards genuine detente in East-West relations. (They) remain resolved to deter aggression and
attempts at intimidation. They will meet their legitimate security requirements with the
conventional and nuclear forces necessary…. (They) note with great concern that the Soviet
Union continues its military build-up, which far exceeds defence needs, while promoting a
concept of its own security which is unacceptable because it rests on maintenance of inequality
in its favour. (Greece expressed its views on the second part of this last sentence.)
‘The Allies call on the Soviet Union to act with restraint and responsibility in its international
behaviour and to co-operate with the West to promote a more constructive East-West dialogue
aimed at reducing international tension…. While maintaining a firm and realistic attitude, the
Allies would welcome any serious proposal aimed at restoring confidence between East and
West….
‘The Soviet Union bears a heavy responsibility in the current state of international relations. By
its behaviour, as in Afghanistan and towards Poland, and by recourse to persecution of human
rights supporters, it has created serious obstacles to the normal development of relations. (Greece
expressed its views on the contents of this paragraph.)
Poland. ‘The situation in Poland continues to give cause for serious concern. Some of the steps
taken by the Polish authorities, such as the lifting of martial law and the amnesty for most
political detainees, contrast with the introduction of other measures which reinforce a repressive
system….
Afghanistan. ‘The Allies condemn the Soviet Union's continuing and intensified aggression
against Afghanistan in violation of the UN Charter and in flagrant disregard of repeated calls by
the UN General Assembly…. The withdrawal of (Soviet) forces is essential for a political
settlement to restore Afghanistan's independence, sovereignty and non-aligned status; to permit
the voluntary return of refugees; and to provide the opportunity for the Afghan people to exercise
freely its right to self-determination.
Trade. ‘Trade conducted on the basis of commercially sound terms and mutual advantage, that
avoids preferential treatment of the Soviet Union, contributes to constructive East-West
relations. At the same time, bilateral economic relations with the Soviet Union and the countries
of Eastern Europe must remain consistent with broad Allied security concerns. These include
avoiding dependence on the Soviet Union, or contributing to Soviet military capabilities. Thus,
development of Western energy resources should be encouraged. In order to avoid further use by
the Soviet Union of some forms of trade to enhance its military strength, the Allies will remain
vigilant in their continuing review of the security aspects of East-West economic relations…. ‘
(Greece recalled its position on various aspects of this paragraph.)
Disarmament. After referring to the Madrid CSCE and the forthcoming Stockholm conference
on confidence- and security-building measures and disarmament in Europe, the decision to
withdraw 1,400 nuclear warheads from Europe and the INF, START and MBFR talks (which are
all treated separately above), the communique continued:
‘In the (UN) Committee on Disarmament, the Western participants continue to strive for
concrete disarmament agreements. They consider as a priority task for this committee the
elaboration of a verifiable agreement banning the development, production and stockpiling of all
chemical weapons.
‘The Allies remain gravely concerned about strong evidence of continued use of chemical
weapons in South-East Asia and Afghanistan, in violation of international law, and of Soviet
involvement in the use of such weapons. (Greece recalled its position on this topic as it had been
expressed during previous ministerial sessions.) They welcome the fact that the UN is continuing
to develop procedures to investigate allegations of the use of chemical weapons.
‘In the context of efforts aimed at the prevention of an arms race in outer space, the Allies have
also proposed in the Committee on Disarmament that the existing international law concerning
the peaceful use of outer space be reviewed. [see also 31742 A page 32473]
Berlin. ‘The maintenance of a calm situation in and around Berlin remains of fundamental
importance to East-West relations. This continues to depend in particular on the strict observance
and full implementation of the Quadripartite Agreement of Sept. 3, 1971 [see 24813 A]. The
Allies hope that the further development of co-operation between the Federal Republic of
Germany and the German Democratic Republic will benefit Berlin and the people in both states
in Germany and will strengthen peace in Europe in the current state of international relations.
Other topics. ‘The Allies urge respect for the sovereignty of states everywhere and for genuine
non-alignment. They recognize that events outside the Treaty area may affect their common
interests as members of the Alliance. They will engage in timely consultations on such events, if
it is established that their common interests are involved. Sufficient military capabilities must be
assured in the Treaty area to maintain an adequate defence posture. Allies who are in a position
to do so will endeavour to support those sovereign nations who request assistance in countering
threats to their security and independence. Those Allies in a position to facilitate the deployment
of forces outside the Treaty area may do so, on the basis of national decision.
‘The Allies condemn terrorist acts, which are a threat to democratic institutions and to the
conduct of normal international relations. Recalling the relevant provision of the Bonn
Declaration (of 1982-, they reiterate their determination to take effective measures for the
prevention and suppression of such criminal acts… ‘
The Foreign Ministers also issued the following “Declaration of Brussels”.
‘We, the representatives of the 16 member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, reaffirm the
dedication of the Allies to the maintenance of peace in freedom.
‘Our Alliance threatens no one. None of our weapons will ever be used except in response to
attack. We do not aspire to superiority, neither will we accept that others should be superior to
us. Our legitimate security interests can only be guaranteed through the firm linkage between
Europe and North America. We call upon the Soviet Union to respect our legitimate security
interests as we respect theirs.
‘We are determined to ensure security on the basis of a balance of forces at the lowest possible
level. Faced with the threat posed by the Soviet SS-20 missiles, the Allies concerned are going
forward with the implementation of the double-track decision of 1979. The ultimate goal remains
that there should be neither Soviet nor United States land-based long-range INF missiles. The
deployment of US missiles can be halted or reversed by concrete results at the negotiating table.
In this spirit we wish to see an early resumption of the INF negotiations which the Soviet Union
has discontinued. (Denmark and Greece reserved their positions on this paragraph; Spain, not
having been a party to the double-track decision of 1979, reserved its position on this paragraph.)
‘We urge the countries of the Warsaw Pact to seize the opportunities we offer for a balanced and
constructive relationship and for genuine detente. In all arms control negotiations progress must
be made among the states participating, in particular in: START; the INF talks; the negotiations
on MBFR; (and) the endeavours for a complete ban on chemical weapons in the (UN)
Committee on Disarmament.
‘We are also resolved to use the forthcoming Stockholm conference as a new opportunity to
broaden the dialogue with the East, to negotiate confidence-building measures and enhance
stability and security in the whole of Europe.
“We shall continue to do our utmost to sustain a safe and peaceful future. We extend to the
Soviet Union and the other Warsaw Pact countries the offer to work together with us to bring
about a long-term constructive and realistic relationship based on equilibrium, moderation and
reciprocity. For the benefit of mankind we advocate an open, comprehensive political dialogue,
as well as co-operation based on mutual advantage.”
At their December meeting the Foreign Ministers noted “with regret” the intention of the NATO
Secretary-General, Dr Joseph Luns (72), to relinquish his post, which he had held since 1971
[see 24661 A; 24873 B], and invited Lord Carrington to succeed him.
Lord Carrington (64) was a junior minister at the Ministries of Agriculture and Fisheries and of
Defence in Conservative governments from 1951 to 1956, when he became UK high
commissioner in Australia; on his return to Britain in 1959 he was appointed First Lord of the
Admiralty, subsequently serving in 1963–64 as Minister without Portfolio and Leader of the
House of Lords. He was leader of the opposition peers from 1964 to 1970, Secretary of State for
Defence from 1970 to January 1974 and briefly Secretary of State for Energy in early 1974. On
the return of the Conservative government in May 1979 he was appointed Secretary of State for
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, but resigned on April 5, 1982, in connexion with the
Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands [see page 31531; 31537 A]. Lord Carrington was to
take up his new post on June 25, 1984.-(Times-Daily Telegraph-Guardian Financial Times-New
York Times-International Herald Tribune-Le Monde-Neue Zurcher Zeitung-US Information
Service Soviet-Embassy Press Department, London-NATO Information Department, BrusselsHansard-Canadian-News Facts-Norwegian Information Service, Oslo) ( Prev. rep. 32460 A;
NATO 32052 A)