Defence
Planning
Committee

Brussels
6-7 Dec. 1983

---

Synopsis

1. The Defence Planning Committee of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization met in Ministerial Session in Brussels on 6th and 7th December 1983.

2. Ministers reaffirmed that NATO preserves the peace, freedom and security of its members through the maintenance of military forces sufficient to deter aggression and through policies designed to promote stable international relations. The strength of the Alliance derives from the cohesion and solidarity of its members in pursuing these common objectives.

3. NATO is a defensive alliance and is committed to preserve the peace at the lowest level of forces capable of deterring the Warsaw Pact threat. In this respect Ministers recalled the recent Alliance decision at Montebello to withdraw 1,400 nuclear warheads from Europe. This decision, taken together with the withdrawal of 1,000 warheads in 1980, will bring to 2,400 the total number of warheads to be removed from Europe since 1979. The resulting stockpile will be the lowest in Europe for some 20 years. Furthermore any deployment of land-based LRINF missiles will be matched by one for one withdrawals. This is in clear contrast to the relentless Soviet build-up. Ministers urged the Soviet Union to match NATO's restraint and to reduce rather than continue to increase the levels of its nuclear weapons.

4. Deterrence and arms control are integral and complementary parts of the security policy of the Alliance. Both are fundamental to NATO's long-standing objectives of safeguarding the peace and pursuing, through dialogue and mutually advantageous co-operation, a constructive East-West relationship aimed at genuine détente. Therefore, while seeking a stable balance at lower levels of forces through militarily significant, equitable and verifiable arms control agreements, NATO must continue at the same time to provide the capabilities necessary to ensure deterrence of aggression by means of a strong defence.

5. The security of the Alliance depends on the maintenance of a stable military balance: this balance has been gravely disturbed by the relentless Soviet deployment of SS-20 missiles. Ministers emphasized their determination to move ahead with the dual-track approach of LRINF modernization and arms control as offering the opportunity to redress this imbalance and reaffirmed that this approach remains the most effective way of safeguarding the security of the Alliance.
   • They noted with great regret that the Soviet Union had unilaterally ended the latest round of the INF negotiations in Geneva without agreeing on a date for their resumption. There is no justification for this action by the Soviet Union, which has, during the course of the negotiations since the United States proposed to eliminate this entire class of weapons, expanded its SS-20 force by over 300 warheads. Ministers emphasized their desire that the negotiations be resumed as soon as possible to achieve an agreement on equal global limits on United States and Soviet LRINF missile warheads at reduced levels, preferably zero for both sides.

   • They reaffirmed that NATO is prepared, in accordance with the terms of any INF agreement that may be reached, to halt, modify or reverse its deployments, which are now underway in conformity with the 1979 decision.

   • They welcomed the continuing close consultations within the Alliance on INF negotiations. The intensity of these consultations has reflected the cohesion of the Alliance. They stressed that Alliance firmness in resolutely carrying out the dual-track decision was a major factor in bringing the Soviet Union to the negotiating table and will continue to be a critical factor in inducing the Soviet Union to recommence INF negotiations in a serious fashion. (1)

6. Ministers welcomed the proposals the United States has made in the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks to reduce the most destabilizing weapons and to reduce substantially the level of United States and Soviet strategic arms, including the build-down concept recently tabled in Geneva. Ministers reemphasized their support for the United States position in the talks, on which they have been kept fully informed, and welcomed the United States initiatives to move the talks forward. Ministers reaffirmed the need to strive for a mutually acceptable solution to the issues still barring progress in the Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions (MBFR) talks in Vienna. They also stressed the importance they attach to the Conference on Confidence and Security Building Measures and Disarmament in Europe (CDE) as an opportunity to negotiate politically binding, militarily significant and verifiable measures which will cover the whole of Europe and which would increase confidence and security and reduce the threat of surprise attack.

7. Ministers noted with concern the pace of modernization of Warsaw Pact forces across the entire spectrum, strategic to conventional. 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. NATO's strategy of flexible response and forward defence remains valid and continues to be the basis for NATO defence. This requires a balanced triad of forces: the strengthening of the conventional component is particularly urgent. Against this background Ministers discussed the results of the 1983 Annual Defence Review and adopted the NATO Force Plan for 1984-1988. Ministers welcomed the progress achieved by nations, and agreed to do their utmost to make available the resources needed for the essential enhancement of their deterrent and defence forces.

8. They recognized that in current economic circumstances achieving the required improvements to NATO's defence posture constitutes a considerable challenge. It is imperative that national consideration of any change to existing commitments takes into account Alliance needs and priorities. The best use of scarce resources remains a central problem. Improvements to the combat capability and effective- ness of NATO's conventional forces must be achieved.

9. In this context Ministers emphasized the importance of making the most effective use of available resources and of exploiting the NATO's technological strength through greater emphasis on:
   • co-operation and co-ordination in defence planning and in the field of research, development and production;

   • improved co-ordination of NATO infrastructure planning to bring support facilities more into line with the projected needs of NATO forces, at the same time as providing an appropriate level of funding to ensure their operational effectiveness;

   • a more effective and balanced framework of transatlantic co-operation;

   • the potential offered by technologies, available or emerging, to make substantial and yet affordable improvements in the conventional defence of the Alliance particularly within the context of the two-way street;

   • the establishment of priorities based on the application of rigorous criteria of military value and cost effectiveness;

   • adequate use of the industrial capabilities of member countries in the field of defence equipment;

   • effective steps to restrict the transfer of militarily relevant technology to the Warsaw Pact.

   Ministers acknowledged progress made in the appropriate NATO bodies towards co-ordinating national efforts generally and in ensuring the successful exploitation of emerging technologies.

10. Ministers again stressed the importance of Greece, Portugal and Turkey having adequate Allied assistance to carry out their missions more effectively to the advantage of all. Ministers agreed that despite commendable efforts by some Allies more aid, and by more nations, is essential.

11. While the purpose of NATO is to preserve the security of the North Atlantic Treaty area, Ministers again acknowledged that developments outside the NATO Treaty area might threaten the vital interests of members of the Alliance. They recalled their agreement to take full account of the effect of such developements 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. They also recalled the Bonn Summit statements and reendorsed their communiqué of June 1983 which stated that on the basis of national decision: those countries, such as the United States, which have the means to take action, should do so in timely consultation with their Allies; there could be cases where other individual Allied nations would make an important contribution to the security of the Alliance by making available facilities to assist deployments needed to strengthen deterrence in such areas; and member nations, as they may decide, have a wide and diverse range of possibilities from which to choose in making useful contributions to promote stability and deterrence in regions outside the Treaty area involving vital Western interests.

12. Against the background of United States planning for its rapidly deployable forces and the implications for defence of the NATO area, Ministers noted work in progress to review measures necessary to maintain deterrent and defence capabilities within the NATO area and agreed that measures that could be taken by countries would be dealt with in the defence planning process, the next stage of which is the adoption of force goals in Spring 1984.

13. NATO's task of preserving peace and freedom and preventing war requires a full spectrum of credible military forces, a stable military balance and the strategy of flexible response. The firm support of the peoples of the Alliance and the provision and effective use of adequate resources are essential to fulfil these aims. While military strength alone cannot provide long-term security it provides the foundation for the development of peaceful relations through dialogue and communication.

The Minister of Defence of Spain informed the Defence Planning Committee about the review undertaken regarding Spanish participation in the Alliance and in consequence reserved his Government's position on the present Communiqué.

Footnote:

1. Denmark and Greece reserve their positions on paragraph 5.