I do not want to embark on a theological discussion about deterrence, but does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the effectiveness of deterrence depends on the party against which nuclear weapons might be used being unwilling to accept the consequences of using them? To base the whole issue of non-proliferation in the middle east on something so uncertain—the regime is renowned for its uncertainty—would be very dangerous.

Thus far, our debate has concentrated on the political and the pragmatic, but does the Foreign Secretary feel reinforced in the attitude he has just expressed from the Dispatch Box by the fact that, under customary international law, there is an obligation to exhaust all possible political and diplomatic alternatives before embarking on military action? Is that not what we are engaged in?

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2012, Official Report, column 830W, on military bases, when the former Secretary of State for Defence discussed the creation of an Army base at Kirknewton with the Scottish Government and the First Minister of Scotland; and whether a written note was taken of the discussions.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2012, Official Report, column 830W, on military bases, when the former Secretary of State for Defence discussed the creation of an Army base at Kirknewton with the Scottish Government and the First Minister of Scotland; and whether a written note was taken of the discussions.