| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Bosnia (Implementation Force)
4. Mr. Winnick: If he will make a statement on the future of IFOR in Bosnia. [11737]
Mr. George Robertson: The NATO-led stabilisation force, SFOR, will remain in Bosnia until the completion of its mission in June 1998.
Mr. Winnick: First, I pay tribute to the way in which the IFOR contingent, including British Army personnel, has carried out its duties. In certain circumstances, will the mandate be extended, bearing in mind the situation that existed up to the time IFOR went into the former Yugoslavia? Since my right hon. Friend's last statement to the House, has he had any further information about the two notorious criminals and mass murderers who remain free?
Mr. Robertson: It is too early to talk of post-SFOR options, but our view remains that any follow-on force can only be NATO-led, with the risks and burdens shared equally by all allies.
I was in Bosnia last week, and having seen the superb job being done by our armed forces with the other 33 countries involved in the alliance, I doubt whether anybody in this country would want Bosnia ever again to degenerate into the genocide and ethnic cleansing that existed before intervention.
On my hon. Friend's second point, the United Kingdom, with the rest of the international community, remains determined to ensure that all indictees indicted on war crimes are sent to The Hague for trial. What happened at Prijedor in July this year is proof of our national resolve. The responsibility for handing over indicted persons to the tribunal lies with the Bosnian authorities. We therefore very much welcome the recent decision of 10 Croat indictees to hand themselves over for trial at The Hague.
Mr. Martin Bell:
Will the Secretary of State assure us that he is studying what the possible consequences might be of a withdrawal if it is decided not to renew SFOR in June next year?
Mr. Robertson:
I give the hon. Gentleman my assurance that that matter is being looked at on an almost daily basis. We take it extremely seriously. What matters now is what progress is being made in Bosnia. During my visit it became obvious that substantial progress was being made in creating some new democratic institutions in that country. The existence of a renewed debate, especiallyin Republika Srpska, between the two elements is encouraging. There is also a growing realisation by people throughout the country that there is no military solution to the problems in Bosnia and that foreign forces cannot remain there indefinitely.
I repeat that I do not believe that the people of this country or of the wider international community want Bosnia to degenerate yet again into the sort of ethnic brutality that characterised the period after the fall of the former Yugoslavia.
Mr. Key:
Most people agree that our excellent Bosnia operation is very good value for money, the cost being
Mr. Robertson:
It is too early in the financial year to establish the precise cost of the Bosnia operation to the defence budget. [Hon. Members: "Oh."] That is exactly the same answer as was given by my predecessor in the previous Conservative Government. As and when we know the precise cost to the UK of the Bosnia operation we will determine how much of that cost can be absorbed by the Ministry of Defence; anything over that sum will have to be the subject of discussions between my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and me. I have no intention of starting that discussion at the Dispatch Box.
Madam Speaker:
I call the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay).
Mr. Mackinlay:
He has dealt with the point, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker:
How splendid; in that case, I call the hon. Member for Chichester (Mr. Tyrie).
5. Mr. Tyrie:
If he will make a statement on progress towards NATO enlargement. [11738]
Mr. George Robertson:
The Madrid NATO summit invited the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland to begin accession talks with NATO. NATO's goal is to sign the accession protocol in December. At the same time, NATO is working with the three countries concerned to facilitate their effective military and political integration into the alliance.
Mr. Tyrie:
What will the cost of NATO enlargement be? I note that, after the NATO summit, the Prime Minister said that the cost would be zero. There have been reports in the press, however, that the Pentagon and the NATO military command estimate that the cost will be between £3 billion and £6 billion. What will be the United Kingdom's share of that cost?
Mr. Robertson:
Those are not NATO figures. A variety of sources have produced a number of figures, few of which we consider reliable. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister did not say that the cost would be zero; he said that it would be manageable. The cost of NATO enlargement will emerge from the detailed plans that are being produced, based on the decisions made at Madrid. It would be misleading to present figures at this stage. A good indication of where the costs are likely to fall should be ready for NATO Ministers when they meet in December.
Mr. Corbyn:
Will the Secretary of State say what assessment his Department has made of the costs of NATO enlargement to the new member states in raised taxation or cuts in their social programmes, and what
Mr. Robertson:
Immediately after today's Question Time, I am going to Russia to meet my opposite number, General Sergeyev. The Russians' opinion is not that they have a new enemy on their borders and the NATO-Russia founding charter was a new chapter in the developing relationships between NATO and Russia. We do not believe that the new applicant countries will have to pay a price that will have to come out of their social expenditure.
We will not allow expansion to bankrupt the expanding economies of the applicant countries, because their continued economic health and market economies are an important element in European security. We expect that there will be costs to them--of course there will be--and that they will have responsibilities, but we and the applicant countries believe that every penny that has been spent on NATO has been worth it and that any necessary future expenditure will be in their and Europe's interest.
Mrs. Ewing:
Will the Secretary of State advise the House how critical the issue of the NATO nuclear capability has been in those discussions?
Mr. Robertson:
Given that there is absolutely no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of the new members, it can be taken that that was not a major factor in the discussions on NATO enlargement.
6. Mr. Ian Taylor:
When he will publish the first annual report on UK strategic exports. [11739]
Mr. Spellar:
The content and timing of the publication of the first annual report on the state of strategic export controls and their application is currently under discussion between the Departments concerned. An announcement will be made in due course.
May I, Madam Speaker, take this opportunity to withdraw unreservedly remarks I made about the hon. Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) during the defence policy debate last week when responding to his point about delays in the issuing of defence export licences? I very much regret that I was misinformed about representations my Department had received on this matter. I have, of course, already written to the hon. Gentleman to apologise, but I wanted to take the earliest opportunity to correct my inadvertent error on the Floor of the House.
Mr. Taylor:
On behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key), I thank the Minister for his personal statement and clarification, which the House will welcome. We are grateful to him. Nevertheless, will he clarify for the benefit of the Defence Manufacturers Association why there is such a delay in the granting of export licences? Export orders are massively important for British business and I should be grateful if the Minister would confirm just how important the defence industry is to British export performance.
Mr. Spellar:
The defence industry is a substantial exporter, which is why we stressed its importance so
Mr. Barry Jones:
Does my hon. Friend agree that previous Governments did not invest sufficiently in research and development to enhance strategic exports? What plans have our Government to invest in this vital sphere?
Mr. Spellar:
My hon. Friend is well aware from previous answers that we are examining the interchange between the civil and defence sectors in defence manufacturing and the interchange of research that that involves. We are also considering much wider dissemination of the work undertaken by the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. We understand that much of the benefit that we are now deriving stems from previous research and we appreciate the need for future research to sustain our industry.
Sir George Young:
The House will have heard and welcomed the Minister's apology for his unwarranted attack on my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key)--no doubt that particular weapons system will not be deployed again from the Government Front Bench. In view of the implications for jobs and, indeed, for foreign exchange, is the Minister able to give the House a date by which the Government will have reached the previous Government's target for processing export licences?
Mr. Spellar:
As I told the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Mr. Taylor), we are working with other Departments and taking up the matter with them urgently to ensure that there are no undue delays--we are seized of the potential difficulties, which I outlined, if we are not able to improve matters. We certainly take the issue seriously and are taking action on it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |