TV Interview for Channel 4 (visiting Moscow)

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Prime Minister, Soviet commentators complained before you came here that you had misconceptions about the Soviet Union which handicapped your understanding of this country.

Have your perceptions of this country changed?

Prime Minister

I do not think I had any misconceptions before. I knew the history of the Soviet Union under its different leaders; I knew how they had revealed the mass terror that went on under Stalin; I knew what Mr. Khrushchev had tried to do; and one had watched how things developed and one had, above all, read every word of Mr. Gorbachev 's two-and-a-half-hour-long speech translated into English before we came. I knew what he was trying to do; knew that that was the talking point on the lips of so many people; knew they were wondering what would happen, but knowing that they somehow realised they must try. [end p1]

I also wanted to talk about arms control agreements. I had no misconceptions about those. One mistake can be fatal and you have to be very careful when you are dealing with the details of such agreements.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Have your perceptions of this country changed at all in the last four days?

Prime Minister

I am fascinated, like most other people, with the move towards more openness and towards giving more responsibility to managers of industrial enterprises and giving more incentives. They have recognised that if you want people to work harder they must see the fruits of their own labour in their own pockets. I hope that will work.

It is not going to be the kind of society we have because communism is written into their constitution and democratisation does not mean the same thing to them as it does to us, but it is a very considerable change and I think they are right to call it a “turning point” . I hope they succeed and I am glad they have embarked upon the effort. [end p2]

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

In view of what you have discovered, are you modifying your views, your policies, towards the Soviet Union in any way?

Prime Minister

No. We are trying to reach arms control agreements, particularly on intermediate nuclear weapons which you know the Soviet Union stationed first, and we only deployed ours in response to theirs. It would have been better if they had not deployed theirs, but now they are prepared to move theirs we are prepared to move ours, subject to certain restraints and conditions.

It would be very nice if they would destroy their chemical weapons. We destroyed ours a long time ago, as I made perfectly clear, and we hope that they will be prepared to negotiate theirs right down to zero.

When it comes to the intercontinental ballistic missiles, I suggested—as indeed was suggested at Reykjavik—a 50%; reduction. They are still tying that to the Strategic Defence Initiative of the United States. Frankly, I do not think that link is necessary. 50%; could go and there would still be an enormous nuclear deterrent—it is terrific overkill.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Did you convince Mr. Gorbachev of that? [end p3]

Prime Minister

No. Mikhail GorbachevHe said that he still links it with SDI. I do not think that is a necessary link at all. A 50%; reduction I think would be very welcome and would still keep an effective deterrent on both sides.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

On the issue of medium-range missiles, you have just talked about your hopes of an INF deal by the end of this year. Did you get any kind of commitment or understanding from Mr. Gorbachev on the Western position of reducing short-range missiles and constraining short-range missiles in Eastern Europe?

Prime Minister

At Reykjavik, it was agreed that there would be zero-zero in Europe, so on the Russian side up to the Urals and zero in Western Europe, but beyond the Urals they would be able to have a hundred of them in the Far Eastern part and the United States would have a hundred. Frankly, that hundred makes it very very difficult indeed to verify. That is what they want. I would have preferred zero-zero globally.

Also a condition of that agreement was that there be constraints on the ones that are called “shorter range” , but they are still missiles of the same devastation and Britain is still within their range—so is France, so is Germany—so obviously there must be [end p4] constraints on those. There is some dispute about the nature of the constraints and so the draft treaty on the table provides for constraints upon them and immediate follow-on negotiations.

We would like—and I think the United States would probably like but Europe would certainly like—the right to match the shorter-range that they have got. They can either bring them down and we match up to them, but we think there ought to be equal limits. That at the moment is a subject of dispute.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Have you managed to get Mr. Gorbachev to understand the Western position? Is there a little ground that may be imminent?

Prime Minister

No, on that particular thing it has not been easy because they have said: “Whenever we propose taking the nuclear weapons down, you put up some extra condition!” but the fact is, as one has not hesitated to say wherever I have been in the Soviet Union, it was the Soviet Union that put up the intermediate range missiles first, the SS20s, without warning. We saw them. We saw more of them going up. We asked them to take them down. For four years we asked them to take them down and only when they did not did we begin to deploy Cruise and Pershing. Now they are prepared to take the overwhelming majority of them down. [end p5]

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

You say you hope for a medium-range deal by the end of the year. Could that jeopardise it in fact?

Prime Minister

It is possible by the end of the year. There has to be a very careful negotiation on the shorter-range. After all, if something may hit you, you do not say: “Well it does not matter! It has not travelled as far as something else!” It is the fact that it is there as a threat, and there does need to be very careful and persistent negotiations.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Judging by last night's banquet speeches, you and Mr. Gorbachev do remain poles apart on many of the major issues.

Is that a fair assessment?

Prime Minister

Yes, I think it is. Inevitably, a system like the Soviet one has communism written into the constitution and nothing else is permitted. That is very very different from our system. Democracy to us means a plural society. We have freedom of speech, freedom of worship. The other two of the Four Freedoms: freedom from fear which we get by a sound defence, and freedom from want which we have in our country. As [end p6] you know, freedom of worship and freedom of speech is not fully practised in the Soviet Union and, indeed, when Mr. Dub&cek started it in Czechoslovakia you know what happened there.

There is going to be a more open society. It does not go as far as Mr. Dub&cek 's reforms in Czechoslovakia. It is going to be more open. Power will be more dispersed among the industrial enterprises and companies, but nothing like what we know and understand, nothing like the kind of market economy which we have.

I think perhaps the best way I can put it is if you look in one of their supermarkets on their shelves and then go look at one of our supermarkets, you see all the difference between the two systems. The one produces goods in abundance and the other really does not produce sufficient abundance for the Soviet people. They hope for more. Indeed, they will get more, but it will not be like the freedom which we tend to take for granted—we should not—in our own society.

So yes, there will be differences but there can nevertheless be considerable improvements in Soviet society which will be warmly welcome not only both to the people but also I think to the wider world. [end p7]

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

You say you have been moved and invigorated by this visit.

What kind of foundation has it laid for the future of British-Soviet relations and East-West relations?

Prime Minister

A very good one. I cannot remember ever having seven hours followed by two further hours over dinner and then over dinner tonight, that number of talks, with any leader on a visit of this kind.

We of course know the European leaders well. I know President Mitterrand well, Chancellor Kohl, Mr. Lubbers, Mr. Martens and so on, but that is over a series of meetings over a prolonged period.

I think when you know the approaches, the arguments, the objectives, the purpose, of someone you are talking to for such a long period, when you have openly tackled them on certain things and seen their reaction, seen the things that they will deal and seen the things which they will brush aside, yes, it gives you a much better basis for the future. Above all, if there should be any trouble or difficulty, you know enough to get on to a direct line and discuss it and that is very very valuable. [end p8]

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Because of this understanding though, are you prepared to now go home and change your view of the Soviet Union and change your policies in any way?

Prime Minister

We want to see the results of the more open society. We will wait to see the results of the armaments negotiations. Negotiations are in the small print, in the detail, in the verification, in the assurance you can get from that. We wait to see how many more people are released, whether people are free to leave the Soviet Union and go and rejoin their families or to go where they wish. We, as you know, do not put any constraints on people. And whether the people who will continue to live here—it is their home—whether they are Jewish in religion or Christian or whether they do not worship in any form, whether they will have more of the human rights which we enjoy and take for granted, more of the freedom of speech, more of the freedom of worship.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

And if that happens, finally, Prime Minister, when do you believe the West can have the confidence and trust you want in this country? [end p9]

Prime Minister

When it has been built up over a reasonable period and in the meantime you get the confidence and trust from the details in the arms control negotiations.

But I believe that there will be a better approach to those who hitherto have been prisoners of conscience and some who are now in for their political beliefs and some who are in mental and psychiatric hospitals who should not be there at all.

I believe that things will improve. One raises this question and has been assured that the questions will be looked at carefully and with a view to as positive a result as possible. I believe they know how much it means to the outside world.

What they are very sensitive about is intervening in their internal affairs. This is not that, because the Soviet Union freely negotiated the Helsinki Agreements and there are certain rights to freer movement of people and ideas in that Agreement, so we say that having signed that agreement that gives us the right to ask how they are honouring that agreement—so it is not internal affairs; it is how they are honouring an agreement which they put their signature to.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Did Mr. Gorbachev accept that? [end p10]

Prime Minister

I think Mikhail Gorbachevhe took the point.

Nik Gowing, Channel Four

Prime Minister, thank you very much indeed.