TNAG-0721-FCO40-919-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 35

DEFENCE EXPENDITURE AND NUCLEAR MATTERS:. LETTERS FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE

10. The International Committee considered letters from Mr Mulley dated 31 January and 2 February on defence spending, nuclear weapons and arms sales respectively. Mr Allaun said that he had been so incensed by the tone of the letters that he had circulated some comments. Ms Little said the Secretariat had also prepared a paper (texts of Mr Mulley's letters, Mr Allaun's comments and the Secretariat paper are attached). Mr Allaun described Mr Mulley's arguments as disingenuous; Mr Mikardo described the references to alternative employment as "derisory and risible". It was agreed that the meeting of the NEC with the Cabinet on 13 March to consider defence policy was not the occasion to request a detailed explanation from Mr Mulley, but that the proposal should be made that a small working group of the NEC and the Cabinet should look at defence spending. The confusion between actual spending, spending in real terms and planned spending was such that in a large open meeting little progress could be made.

BRITAIN AND SOUTH AFRICA

11. The Committee deferred consideration of a policy paper on Britain and South Africa until the next meeting. I took the opportunity to point out that the reference in paragraph 36 of the paper to the UN Security Council resolution was wrong. It was not the "South African régime" that had been declared a threat to peace but the "acquisition by South Africa of arms and related materiel", The Committee said that they would be interested to have the Government's views on a future occasion. The Secretariat would be in touch with me.

- 3