I should be grateful for your answer to the three questions I posed in the Westminster Hall debate on British-US Relations on 25 April namely:

  1.  Please could you confirm that it remains the posture of the British Government that a change of regime in Iraq would be desirable but that as of now it is not a policy commitment of the British Government that the Iraqi regime should be changed.

  2.  Please could you clarify whether the British Government's policy on no first use of nuclear weapons remains as stated in paragraph 31 of chapter 5 of the 1998 Defence Review or not, and in particular, whether the states excluded from the Government's no first use policy now encompass not only states that possess nuclear weapons but those that possess any weapon of mass destruction ie nuclear, chemical or biological.

  3.  Please could you tell me what is the British Government's view, particularly from an arms control standpoint, of the US Government's conclusion that they need to develop a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons, and please could you tell me whether the British Government is participating, or intending to participate, in this US programme.

Sir John Stanley

8 May 2002

  Thank you for your letter of 8th May to Denis MacShane. I am replying as Minister responsible for relations with Iraq and non-proliferation issues. I apologise for the delay in replying.

  The answers to the questions posed in your letter, following the debate on UK/US relations on 25 April, are as follows:

  1.  A more sympathetic regime in Iraq is desirable. We have always said that Iraq would be a better place without Saddam Hussein. The real issue however is the threat that the Iraqi regime poses to its own people and the international community through its weapons of mass destruction programmes. We have made clear our determination to remove this threat.

  2.  The British Government's policy on the issues raised in paragraph 31 of the fifth Supporting Essay to the 1998 Defence Review remains the same. Both the UK and the US have recently reconfirmed our commitment to our negative security assurances. UK policy when faced with an assault by biological or chemical weapons is also clear. The UK seeks to deter use of these weapons by emphasising that use will not secure political of military advantage for an aggressor. On the contrary, it will invite a proportionately serious response, and we will hold personally accountable those at every level responsible for any breach of international law relating to the use of such weapons. Any state that chose to use them should therefore expect us to exercise our right of self-defence and to respond accordingly.

  On the general question of UK policy relating to the use of nuclear weapons, we have repeatedly stated that the United Kingdom would only be prepared to use nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances of self-defence. The UK would not use weapons, whether conventional of nuclear, contrary to international law.

  3.  You ask about speculation that the US is intending to develop a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons. It is, of course, for the US not for us, to set out and explain what is, and what is not, US policy. The US has emphasised, however, that there is no such programme. US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, made this clear on 10 March, when he said: "What we are looking at, and what we have tasked the Pentagon to do, is to see whether or not within our lowered inventory levels we might want to modify or update or change some of the weapons in our inventory to make them more effective. But we are not developing brand new nuclear weapons, and we are not planning to undergo any testing."

  I hope this is helpful.

Mike O'Brien, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

5 July 2002