Government and Military

Minister of National Defence

Ministre de la Defense nationale

Ottawa, Canada K1A 0K2

Aug 24 1998

Dear Ms. Zelter

Thank you for your letter of July 1, 1998, concerning British and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) policies regarding nuclear weapons. I apologize for the delay in responding.

It would not be appropriate for me, as Canada’s Minister of National Defence, to comment on specific elements of British defence policy. I would emphasize, however, that Canada views Britain as a valued and trusted NATO ally. Our two countries recognize the need to maintain a strong Alliance, one which can deter potential aggressors, carry out peacekeeping missions like the current one in Bosnia, and support meaningful progress in a variety of arms control and disarmament fora.

In the new security environment, NATO has radically reduced its reliance on nuclear forces. Its role is political, that is, to preserve peace and prevent conflict of any kind. At the same time, nuclear weapons make the risks of aggression against NATO incalculable and unacceptable in a way that conventional forces alone cannot. In this sense, Alliance nuclear forces make an important contribution to overall deterrence and the stability of the Euro-Atlantic region.

For its part, Canada does not possess, produce, test, store or transport nuclear weapons or their components. As a non-nuclear weapons state, Canada is a strong supporter of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament efforts, and continues to argue forcefully for concrete measures to reduce nuclear arsenals and ensure the safety and security of current weapons stockpiles.

Canada’s overarching policy objective is the reduction, elimination and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Canada is pursuing this goal persistently and energetically, consistent with its membership in NATO and the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD), and in a manner sensitive to the broader international security context. Canada’s policy includes support for the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties and regional measures such as Nuclear Weapons Free Zones, practical assistance for the safe disposal of weapons-grade fissile material from dismantled warheads, and advocacy within the Conference on Disarmament for an ad hoc committee to discuss nuclear disarmament. Canada is also pursuing its efforts to strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in advance of the next review conference in 2000.

With respect to the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the legality of nuclear weapons, Canada has long held that the surest way towards a world free of nuclear weapons is through carefully negotiated, verifiable agreements. Canada had, and still has, fundamental reservations about the advisability and feasability of requesting the Court to give opinions on matters of national and international security that are essentially political in nature. In Canada’s view, these matters must be engaged and negotiated by governments. At the same time, Canada did welcome the Court’s reaffirmation of support for Article Six of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to pursue in good faith and bring to conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

Canada has strongly condemned the recent Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests, warning against any attempt to lend greater legitimacy to nuclear weapons or to cast them as instruments of power or prestige.

Once again, thank you for your letter and for your interest in these important matters. While my schedule precludes a meeting with your group, I hope the foregoing has been helpful in responding to your concerns.

Sincerely, Arthur C. Eggleton.

Printer friendly version

Home | Top