---

Nuclear Proliferation

My Lords, like other noble Lords I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, for securing this all-too-short debate and for highlighting the continuing relevance and value of the non-proliferation and disarmament regime, albeit a more fragile regime than we all would wish. Her excellent analysis has illustrated why the non-proliferation treaty must remain the cornerstone of the UK’s counter-proliferation policy. But clearly the non-proliferation and disarmament regime continues to face real and pressing challenges, as outlined so recently in the excellent report by Hans Blix. I can assure the noble Lord, Lord Garden, that the Government are carefully examining the Blix report in relation to calls for a world summit. As the UK is certainly committed to progress in a multi-disarmament forum, a world summit could be considered. As noble Lords will be aware, our efforts last year were focused principally on the review conference and on the Millennium World Summit last September. In both, the United Kingdom worked tirelessly to achieve ambitious and balanced outcomes with strong commitments on non-proliferation and disarmament. The final result was disappointing. However, the lack of a formal outcome should not detract from the real gains. There was a lot of good and detailed discussion of ways in which the treaty could be strengthened and we intend to take those forward in the different international forums. The EU, for example, put forward ideas on measures to discourage withdrawal from the treaty and those drew widespread support. The very fact that the EU reached a common position on the NPT continues to be useful. On the Millennium Review Summit, noble Lords will recall that the then Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, was personally involved in an initiative led by Norway that would have offered a substantive strengthening of international commitments on non-proliferation and disarmament. In this instance the UK was operating in a purely national capacity. We were prepared to work with six other countries, including South Africa, that have wide-ranging positions on these issues and we were successful in finding much common ground on which we could proceed towards the shared aim of strengthening international non-proliferation. However, while it was not possible at the summit to make substantive progress, more than 80 countries openly supported the initiative. We continue to be engaged with the initiative and look forward to further opportunities to take forward the group’s agenda. The nuclear non-proliferation regime will continue to face new challenges, but we believe that these challenges serve to bolster support for it rather than to undermine it. We share that commitment with an overwhelming majority of states and we will continue to use all available international forums to build consensus to strengthen and reinforce the regime. For example, we are taking every opportunity to encourage all states to adopt the IAEA’s additional protocol. The UK supports the 2006 EU joint action in support of the IAEA, as we did last year, and this provides substantial EU funds for pursuing nuclear safety projects in target countries. I recognise, of course, that it requires further money. We have also been at the heart of negotiations for a new and strengthened mandate for the committee reporting on UNSCR 1540. We are actively working with others to formulate appropriate incentives for countries to forgo fuel-cycle facilities. We fully recognise the right of states that comply with their obligations under the NPT to use and benefit from nuclear technology as set out in Article 4. As the noble Lord, Lord Alderdice, said, you cannot stop knowledge. It is clear that the nuclear fuel cycle presents particularly acute proliferation risks. We are currently working with the US and other international partners to develop a fuel supply mechanism that we hope to put before the IAEA for approval before the end of this year. We are also working with G8 partners towards more technically advanced solutions that would allow states to reap the benefits of civil nuclear energy without the risk of further transfer of proliferation-sensitive technology. Connected to this is our work to strengthen the Nuclear Suppliers Group. These are all significant steps to counter the dangers of nuclear proliferation. But our record also demonstrates that we have made progress in nuclear disarmament. We take our disarmament obligations under Article VI of the NPT very seriously. As noble Lords have said, we have an excellent record in that area. Since the end of the Cold War we have reduced the total explosive power of our nuclear forces by more than 70 per cent. We are the only nuclear weapon state to have reduced its deterrent capability to a single nuclear weapons system, Trident. I assure the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, that full account will be taken of our commitments under the NPT when the forthcoming decision on Trident is taken. We continue to press for multilateral negotiations towards mutual, balanced and verifiable reductions in nuclear weapons. Of course, we remain fully committed to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). We promote its entry into force bilaterally at every relevant opportunity. We will continue to pursue what we see as the next step in achieving progress on disarmament; namely, the immediate commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). We welcomed the draft FMCT text and mandate for an ad-hoc negotiating committee, tabled in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva by the US on 18 May. We also welcome the fact that India has committed to work with the US on an FMCT. Naturally, we watch with interest the discussions in the US Congress on India. We believe that there are clear benefits to be gained from bringing India further into the broader nuclear non-proliferation framework. This will strengthen this broader framework, which is underpinned by the NPT. We have strongly supported the initiative from its inception and have been actively involved throughout. The Government welcomed the 19 September statement of principles by the parties to the six-party talks. We have consistently urged North Korea to return to the talks so that these principles can be converted to real progress. We greatly regret that progress has not yet been made. But, although we are firm supporters of the process, the UK is not one of the six parties, so we have limited influence on the progress of the talks. Many noble Lords understandably referred to Iran. The Government warmly welcomed the announcement by the US that it would be willing to participate in negotiations with Iran provided Iran resumed its suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. This explicit statement, and the support expressed in Vienna last week by the Foreign Ministers of China and Russia, greatly enhances the attractiveness and weight of the proposal presented to the Iranian authorities in Tehran this morning by Javier Solana. I was pleased to see BBC reports that, according to the Iranian negotiator, today’s talks have been constructive. But if Iran fails to re-engage, it must be clear that there will be consequences. We have worked to clarify thinking among key partners on the measures that the Security Council might take to further increase pressure. I assure noble Lords that, following the Foreign Secretary’s Statement last week, there has been no strategic shift in our policy. The noble Lords, Lord St John of Bletso and Lord Dykes, referred to Israel. We have consistently urged Israel, as a non-nuclear-weapon state, to accede to the NPT. We have also consistently supported UNGA resolutions calling for the establishment of a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction. That would, of course, include Israel. Today, as the noble Lord, Lord Astor, clearly stated, we must also consider the possibility that the threat of WMD proliferation and international terrorism will one day converge. The G8 global partnership against the spread of weapons and materials of mass destruction has committed to meet this challenge through raising up to $20 billion for the threat reduction projects the noble Baroness has described. The UK has demonstrated our willingness to shoulder our share of responsibility for countering this threat. In 2002, the Prime Minister pledged up to $750 million to the global partnership. Almost four years on, the UK programme is fully operational and delivering £43 million worth a year of measurable progress on the ground. In the past year alone, the UK has finished dismantling three nuclear submarines, constructed a new £20 million facility to deal with spent nuclear fuel as well as establishing projects to create 1,000 new jobs for former weapons scientists in the closed nuclear cities. The noble Lord, Lord Hannay, asked about progress under the G8 this year. As noble Lords will know, Russia has chosen to focus on energy security, and while G8 leaders are expected to agree a non-proliferation statement, it will focus on present challenges such as Iran as well as the non-proliferation implications of energy security. In closing, I reiterate that despite the many and varied challenges that the non-proliferation regime faces, the Government fully support and will continue to seek every opportunity for forward movement to uphold and strengthen the non-proliferation and disarmament agenda.