Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Oct 1957

Vol. 164 No. 1

Private Deputies' Business. - U.N.O Action on Partition—Motion.

Mr. McQuillan

I move:—

That Dáil Eireann is of the opinion that our permanent delegate to the U.N.O. should be instructed to seek in the Assembly of that body (a) the immediate dispatch of U.N.O. observers to the occupied part of the national territory, and (b) the setting up of the necessary machinery whereby a national plebiscite of the whole people of Ireland on the question of Partition may be held under U.N.O. auspices. — Jack McQuillan, Patrick Finucane.

It can be accepted that for a long time the general public and those people who are interested in solving the problem of Partition have looked anxiously to the various Governments that have been in office here for a practical approach towards this problem. On numerous occasions in this House suggestions have been made of a practical nature, suggestions which if adopted would, in the opinion of many, help towards solving Partition.

I have only to remind members of some of the motions which appeared on the Order Paper over the past four or five years, motions which called upon the Government and the Dáil to allow the representatives from the Six County area, from occupied Ireland, to take their rightful places in the National Parliament. That motion was discussed here on at least two occasions within the last four or five years. The extraordinary thing about it was that at the first time it was discussed the inter-Party Government was in office. On the second occasion the Fianna Fáil Government was in office.

Neither Government showed any welcome whatever for that approach to the problem. Both Governments produced the same arguments against allowing in the representatives of occupied Ireland. The argument they used was that it would lead to jealousy in internal politics down here and that it would do more harm than good. I do not propose to go any further on that matter except to point out that many of the events which have taken place in the past two years would not have taken place if this House had seen fit to make a practical constitutional approach towards solving Partition. When that motion was discussed, the Leader of the inter-Party Government, Deputy Costello, said that, while he would disapprove of the motion, at the same time he was prepared to consider an alternative, namely, the setting up of a unity council, a council on which the representatives from the Six-County area would have an opportunity of meeting representatives of his Government to discuss matters of importance relating to occupied Ireland.

As a matter of fact a number of members of the Six-County Parliament, if I should so describe it, met the then Taoiseach and the Minister for External Affairs here in Leinster House in January, 1955. They discussed for a period of three hours the possibility of setting up such a council, and they expressed themselves, both Government spokesmen and the spokesmen for the Six-County area, on the necessity for such an arrangement. That was in January, 1955, and that was the end of the unity council.

We had a position in which the younger generation were becoming more disillusioned with regard to the political Parties. The younger people began to feel there was no possible opportunity of seeing the Border going in their time if they were to depend on the constitutional approach of the politicians in office. The result of their disillusionment has been seen in no uncertain fashion. The responsibility for the recent events in occupied Ireland, tragic though they may be, can to a great extent be laid at the door of the Governments of this country for the past 35 years.

I could have put down a motion again appealing to the Government to give representation to the representatives of occupied Ireland, but I felt that we had insulted the people in that part of Ireland sufficiently without having their case once more thrown out. I felt instead that it was up to me and other members of this House to impress upon the Government as firmly as we could the necessity of taking our place in the United Nations Assembly so that there we could plead the case for Irish unity. Deputy Costello, the then Taoiseach, on a number of occasions in this House, confirmed to me that the Government themselves were anxious to take their place in the U.N.O. It may be that Deputy Costello and I disagree on the reasons why we should be admitted, but I am firmly convinced that the first duty our delegates should have in the United Nations is to put forward Ireland's case for unity.

Since Ireland has been accepted as a member of the United Nations, we have had a change of Government. The former Minister for External Affairs, Deputy Cosgrave, spoke at length last year in that world assembly. He made what was described in this House and outside as a statesmanlike speech. I think that in the course of his criticism of various nations of the world and of their activities he did mention in a passing way that a problem did exist here in Ireland. That is as far as he went.

I had hoped that when a change of Government came, the leader of the new Government, the Taoiseach, Deputy de Valera, would himself go on this occasion and there use his high prestige and the esteem in which he is held abroad — and note the word "abroad"— for the purpose of gaining support from other freedom-loving nations for Ireland's case for unity.

In case that proposal would slip the Taoiseach's mind, I raised a question in the Dáil some six months ago and urged him to lead the Irish deputation to the United Nations. In the course of a parliamentary reply, I was told that the team had not been selected yet for the United Nations meeting. I still hoped that when the team would be selected, the leader of the team in this House would see fit to go himself.

For reasons best known to himself, the Taoiseach decided that the Minister for External Affairs would represent him. Many people have objected to the speech made by the Minister for External Affairs before the United Nations Assembly. Many people at the moment are critical of the terms of the speech and some people are trying to make political capital out of his remarks. As far as I am personally concerned, he was welcome to talk as long as he liked on the matters to which he referred, but my criticism of his action there is that he did not put Ireland's case first. He spoke at length of the position in Algeria. He gave the Russians and the Americans the benefit of his experience and advice in regard to the Iron Curtain.

Mr. Loughman

On a point of order. While the Deputy's speech is very interesting, I am wondering if it is relevant to the motion we are discussing.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not inclined to be too rigid. I am giving the Deputy an opportunity to bring himself within the ambit of relevancy. I hope he will.

Mr. McQuillan

If the Deputy has not the intelligence to follow the debate, he should wait outside.

Mr. Loughman

I am entitled to ask that question. I am interested in the motion, but I am waiting to hear the Deputy talking about it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The motion is broad enough for any Deputy to satisfy himself on it.

Mr. McQuillan

We will put the Deputy up in the next Sputnik that is made. My main concern with the Minister's action in the United Nations Assembly is that he spent quite a considerable amount of time dealing with the position in Algeria and Hungary, in advising the Russians and the Americans to withdraw their forces from Central Europe and, having dealt with that wide sweep of country, disappearing behind the bamboo curtain to see what job he could do on China. All this, I am sure, was very interesting to the big nations of the world. I feel sure that the gadfly activities of the Minister for External Affairs for Ireland will galvanise into action the Governments of these great nations. It is a tragedy, however, that while he could see what evils there were in other countries, while he could offer suggestions about the danger of world wars, and so on, he could not see his way to offering any solution or looking for any aid in the United Nations Assembly for the problem that lies on his own doorstep.

There is no need for me to develop the theme of the problem that lies at his own doorstep, but surely it is not too much to expect that, when the Government have seen fit to invoke legislation of the nature of the Offences Against the State Act, in their own words: "in order to ensure that peace is preserved within the State," they would use the forum of the United Nations in order to gain support from other nations that would help us to get the British out of the Six Counties.

I think all Deputies, whether they belong to Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or Labour, or are Independents, are in agreement with me. If the motion is left to the individual Deputy and his conscience, there is no doubt as to the way he will vote. I should like to ask at this stage that the Whips should be left off and that each Deputy should be allowed to make his own decision on this motion.

If the Minister for External Affairs takes part in this debate, I know that he will state that the Government intend, in their own time and when the opportunity presents itself, to bring Ireland's case before the United Nations. At least, that is the text of the remarks he made to a group of Pressmen in Boston three or four days after delivering his major speech in the United Nations Assembly. It is indeed a pity that the Minister had to wait until he went to Boston and meet the Pressmen to make his case against the British occupation of the Six Counties. When he was cross-examined by the Pressmen in Boston he said that as far as Ireland was concerned he was hoping the question of a plebiscite would be considered and that Ireland's proposition on that would be brought in due course before the United Nations.

I do not know what the Minister means by "in due course". All the nations of the world that are members of the U.N.O. that have internal problems or problems arising from occupation forces are anxious to use the machinery of the United Nations to right their wrongs, and I do not think that it would be unfair to suggest that Ireland should not take second place to any nation when she wants to have her case heard.

I do not believe that, the mentality displayed by certain Deputies in this House should be tolerated, namely, that we should not be a sore thumb in the United Nations Assembly. It is the nations that have shown themselves to be sore thumbs that have got results. The nations that are members of U.N.O. have enough problems on their minds without dealing with the Irish problem if they can afford to shelve or evade it. There is no use in approaching a representative of another country and saying: "I should like to tell you all about our problem." He may listen kindly but that is as far as he is prepared to go unless we are prepared to bring the matter on to the floor of the House. Many countries, especially India, are very anxious to help Ireland in its problem. Have we sought the aid of India?

We are spending about £80,000 a year in keeping a permanent delegate and staff in U.N.O. I do not know what we spend on the annual Government delegation. There should be some return for the money that is spent. Surely we have more practical things in mind, as far as U.N.O. is concerned, than advising other countries about how to run their affairs. If our representatives continue to pursue the line that they have adopted over the last two years they will get little or no heed in years to come from the members of U.N.O.

The opportunity is now ripe for a representative group such as would be selected from the U.N.O. to examine thoroughly the condition of affairs in occupied Ireland. We all know that at the moment the ordinary laws are suspended there. We know that internment without trial is an everyday occurrence. We know that that artificial Border is manned day and night by British troops, by B Specials and by the regular police units of the Six Counties. We know that the Nationalist population there, which has always unswervingly held to the idea of a united Ireland, are hounded, arrested, searched and have no means of redress. We know that in public life gerrymandering has deprived the Nationalist population of its due share of control in local government and other spheres. We know that in all aspects of government the Nationalist population is getting anything but a fair share. Surely it is not unfair to suggest, then, that, under the auspices of the U.N.O., a group of trained observers should be brought into the Six Counties to examine as neutral persons the conditions which obtain there at the moment. In addition and at the same time our permanent delegate to the United Nations should seek the necessary machinery for the holding of a plebiscite of all Ireland. Now it is very important at this stage that we emphasise that it is not a plebiscite of occupied Ireland but a plebiscite of all Ireland on this question of Partition.

From what I know of our permanent delegate in the United Nations, I cannot think of an abler individual, a more capable man, to put Ireland's case lucidly, clearly and effectively; and I have the utmost confidence that if our permanent delegate is instructed on the lines I have suggested in this motion, he will be successful in obtaining support from other nations for the two parts of this motion, namely, the dispatching of U.N.O. observers to the occupied part of Ireland and, secondly, the setting up of machinery whereby a national plebiscite of the whole people of Ireland on the question of Partition will be held under U.N.O. auspices. I feel that if the Government move at this stage, it will help to lessen tension in this part of Ireland. I feel that if the youth see that our Government is really serious in its approach to this problem of ending Partition, we may be able to channel into constitutional avenues their energy and enthusiasm to-day.

The illness which affects the people, the young people, to-day is an illness which shows itself in cynicism about public life, in distrust towards politicians, in a feeling of hopelessness, that various Governments can do nothing to improve conditions economically, socially and so forth. That cynicism can be wiped out if the Government at this stage give a lead, a practical lead, on the question of ending Partition.

I do not know whether other Deputies have better propositions in mind. If they have, then I hope they will let us hear them in the course of this debate. This one which I have here is not new in the sense that it was only thought out recently. Many very responsible people outside this House have given considerable thought and time to this problem. There are thinking people, outside this House, who, as peaceful citizens, with a constitutional approach to all problems, deplore the use of force for the solution of partition, but they are the very people who are anxious that the Government of the country should give the lead on a constitutional line.

It is a tragic thing to say that over the past 35 years no real effort on constitutional lines was made to end Partition. I make that statement and if Deputies do not like it, they have an opportunity here in this House on this debate, and I would like them to challenge that statement of mine and contradict it, if they have evidence to the contrary. I am speaking now from the point of view of the younger people. I know that men and women in Ireland who are younger than I am, a good deal younger, do not believe for a moment that any effort was made by a Government to solve Partition.

It is a waste of time for any politician in this House, from the most senior down to the most junior, to try to convince the youth to-day that any practical step has been taken towards solving Partition. When that is the case, surely it behoves this House to give some proof and some evidence of sincerity? One immediate step that can be taken is unanimity in this House in support of this motion.

There are many things that I could say in criticism of the various Governments here, on their lack of a practical approach over the past 35 years. I am not going to say them. I am trying to point out the feelings of the young people to-day, and any Deputy — to put it bluntly — who has his ear to the ground, realises that what I am saying is perfectly true. The tragedy of it at the moment and for the past few years has been that the youth who were so anxious to achieve the freedom of this country and willing to sacrifice their lives in the effort to achieve freedom, have become so disillusioned that they are getting out of the country as fast as they can.

Many of the evils apparent in Ireland to-day stem from Partition. There are many people in Ireland, and many Irishmen outside Ireland who seem depressed and who have the feeling that they have lost confidence in the nation. It is due in great measure to a feeling of frustration which has come about as a result of the division of this country.

That feeling of frustration and hopelessness is common to both parts. Let it not be thought for a moment that we have a monopoly of the feeling of hopelessness. It is quite apparent in the Six Counties, too. The figures of emigration, the numbers that stream through this part of Ireland on their way to Cork, is a proof that the same feeling is apparent there. Ireland as it stands to-day, whether one looks at it from the point of view of the Orangeman or from the point of view down here of the Nationalist, is like a bird with one wing. I do not care which wing you belong to — that bird will not fly on one wing, that bird cannot soar into the heavens or have a feeling of happiness in life, nor can it fulfil its purpose properly in life, unless it has two wings. The two wings of Ireland have been severed, and it is up to us on this side to take every possible step we can to get this country buoyant, to get a pride in it once more, to get a feeling in the people that there is a possibility, constitutionally, of bringing the whole of Ireland under the one Flag and under the one Government. If we sit here with a feeling of hopelessness and think it might be dangerous to do this or that, that it might be dangerous to let in representatives of the Six Counties, that if we go to the United Nations, they may say we are "a sore thumb", that we had better sit at home, then we are setting the example of hopelessness in this House.

No matter what may be said, the majority of our people still look to their elected representatives for guidance in matters appertaining to the welfare of the nation. If they do not get that guidance and leadership here, they will turn for it elsewhere and, if they do, then the members of this House can blame only themselves. I am asking Deputies to forget Party politics and to support this motion unanimously. Remember, this debate will be read many miles away from here and, if we want to bring our case with dignity and present a united front in the United Nations, we shall have to show that Dáil Eireann is behind the idea of observers in the occupied part of our territory and of a plebiscite amongst our people. I appeal to Deputies, irrespective of Party affiliations, to support this motion unanimously. If they show by their action here that they are in agreement with taking this first constitutional step, I have no doubt that it will help to relieve the tension that exists throughout the country at the moment.

Mr. Finucane

I wish formally to second this motion and I reserve the right to speak on it next week.

Mr. Desmond

I shall be brief. We in the Labour Party do not have to change our views because our views to-day are the views we have always expressed in relation to this subject. I am more than amazed, in view of the statement made by Deputy McQuillan, that the Minister has not seen fit to avail of his opportunity to speak in this debate. I would consider it more important to listen to his views, since they would be the views of his Government.

Deputy McQuillan has outlined the viewpoint he holds in relation to a possible solution of this problem. Other people may hold different views. Solving the problem of Partition would be a major achievement in our political growth and it would mean more to us than anything we can ever dream of achieving. It would mean much more to some of us than the speeches made by our Minister for External Affairs offering solutions for the economic and military problems of Europe and Asia. We have been tinkering with this problem too long. The policy over the past 30 years seems to have been to say as little as possible and to do even less — to do nothing at all, in fact. We give full credit to those who played a noble part in the liberation of the Twenty-Six Counties. The tragedy is that too many of those who played their part seem to be content now to live on the glories of the past. They forget that succeeding generations are not satisfied with merely hearing a tedious repetition of the history of the past. They are looking to the future. Just as their fathers before them were not content to bow their heads to an ascendancy, so the young boys and girls of to-day are not content to live under foreign domination.

It is incumbent on all of us to tackle this problem in a really serious manner. Our approach will have to be more direct than it has been in the past. I do not wish to say anything which might make a difficult situation more difficult still for some of our young Irishmen who are languishing in jails, both North and South, without any hope of reward. So long as our approach remains what it is at the moment, so long shall we have the problem of Partition.

I had hoped, like all the members of the Labour Party, that we would be able to avail of the platform offered by our membership of U.N.O. to bring before those who seem so anxious to solve the problems of other partitioned countries the fact that we have a Partition problem here. Many of these people seem to forget that we have that problem. Surely the Government could instruct our permanent representative in the United Nations to expose to the world a policy which is keeping in subjection our people in the Six Counties. The policy adopted here of loving one's enemy almost to extremes is not bearing fruit, and, in the long run, it will not prove of advantage to democratic government here.

We read in our Dublin daily papers of social events and we read the list of names of prominent people from the Six Counties who attend those events.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on the motion.

Mr. Desmond

Those are the people who are dominant in the political situation of the Six Counties. I would say the time has come for the coordinated efforts of all Parties to end the abomination of Partition in this country. It is about time that a democratic form of Government was appointed to look after the interests of all our national territories. It is a crying shame to see so many of our young people, from Cork and elsewhere, suffering in internment camps because of this abomination of Partition. It is about time that all our people realised that, though we may have Party ties, though we may redouble our efforts to secure better social conditions and a better economic life for our people here, we must also tackle this problem of Partition in an effective way. We must, in the very near future, end this problem which has been the ruination of the country during the past generation. I believe that the more pressure we can put through organisations like the U.N.O. the nearer we will get to having this problem solved so that all Irishmen living in our national territory will have the same measure of political freedom as we enjoy in the South.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If no other Deputy offers to speak, I must call on the proposer or the seconder to conclude.

Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Aiken)

Surely the seconder has something to say.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If the seconder speaks now, I take it he will be concluding.

Mr. Aiken

He could reserve his right to speak without concluding.

Mr. McQuillan

The mover of the motion can conclude the debate.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The seconder of the motion may intervene at this stage without concluding, but if no Deputy now offers, I must call on either the proposer or the seconder to conclude.

Mr. McQuillan

If that is the position, I shall conclude.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy McQuillan, I am afraid, did not address himself to the actual terms of the motion. He did go over the history of certain resolutions that were tabled here in the past relating to Partition and to various efforts that were made in relation to that problem. There is no necessity to urge the members of this Assembly to declare themselves against Partition or to declare their determination to see its end. In this House we are all agreed that Partition is a crime against the Irish people, that it is a wrong that must be undone and that it is against the whole trend of thought in the democratic world at the present time.

If we are to have peace in the world, true peace, it must be based on law and on justice. Peoples, whether they be small or large, must have allowed to them the right to determine their own future. We have, in the past year or two, seen how Britain has demanded that Germany should be reunited. We hope that the German people will be reunited before long. The British Prime Minister, in his communications to the Russians, declared that it was in the British interest that Germany should be reunited. He rejected the Russian plea that German reunification should depend upon the East German Government and the West German Government coming together and agreeing upon the terms upon which Germany should be reunited.

All we want from Britain for Ireland is what Britain demanded of Russia for Germany. We hold that the Irish people, the ancient Irish nation, is the unit for self-determination and that it was wrong that Britain should have selected six of the north-eastern counties to be cut off and held for herself. We have always rejected the idea that there should be self-determination for six of the Irish counties and self-determination denied to the 32 counties of which Ireland consists and which have been a unit from ancient times.

We trust that the considerations which brought Britain to reject the Russian plea that German unity should depend upon the conjunction of wills of the East German Government and the West German Government will bring them, some day, to admit that the unity of Ireland should depend, as the unity of Germany should, upon the free will of the whole people of Ireland expressed in a plebiscite or general election. It is a fact, as Deputy McQuillan said, that there are young men, and some not so young, who have arrogated to themselves the right to settle this question by force of arms.

Captain Giles

They were not the first to do that.

Mr. Aiken

They were not, unfortunately, and notwithstanding what we may say here or how much we may regret it, they will not, perhaps, be the last, unless good sense prevails. The reason they have taken up arms, despite the wishes of the vast majority of the people here, is that the propaganda made by Deputy McQuillan and others has been rendered effective by the neglect of the British people and the British Government to accept in our regard what they demand for Germany. It is wrong for Deputy McQuillan, or anybody else, to put the blame on this Government or any other Irish Government. The people responsible are the British Government. It is they who brought it into being; it is they who are keeping it in being. It is they who show by their actions that they regard it as in the British interest to keep Ireland divided just as they declared it to be their interest that Germany should be reunited.

It is wrong for Deputy McQuillan and others to be placing the responsibility for Partition on the lack of industrial or agricultural development in these 26 counties. There is also a great lack of development in the Six Counties which would maintain the population there in full employment, or reasonably full employment. There are as many people, proportionately, unemployed in the Six Counties as there are here.

Captain Giles

Because of Partition.

Mr. Aiken

I thoroughly agree. If we had been reunited, if this country had got freedom 20 or 30 years ago, we would have had this task — to keep pace with other highly industrialised countries. Divided, however, both sections suffered and suffer as they are suffering to-day. There are great efforts being made in Europe and other places to get large free trade units, or areas, and here this small country has been divided. The result has been that it has rendered it more difficult for industry in both sections to have that increased market that Irish unity would give and which would make for the prosperity of their industries. It is wrong to decry, however, and it gives a wrong impression to the people in the Six Counties to decry, the efforts that have been made there, and the success that has been achieved in industrial and other production. It is only foolishness to expect, and it is only the people who are foolish who will expect, the same rate of development here as in other countries. Twenty years ago we were practically altogether an agricultural community. We had practically no industry and we found ourselves competing, in the start of new industries, with countries that were highly developed.

If we had got freedom for the whole of the country back in the 19th century, it would have been easy for us to keep pace with the developments in other countries. In those years, the increase in production throughout the world was at a very small rate. By the 1920s, it had got up to 3 per cent. per annum, but under the pressure of war and the high mechanisation that the war necessitated, some of the highly industrialised countries were able to reach an increase 10, 20 and even 25 per cent per annum. We have, in certain good years, reached the 3 per cent which the United States of America reached in the 1920s. If we preach the despair and the hopelessness which came in every other sentence of Deputy McQuillan's speech, we will not have the confidence and the determination to carry on until Partition is finished, however short or however long it may be. This hopeless type of approach of Deputy McQuillan, that we must get it by this date or another date, is completely and absolutely wrong. We must set no date by which we must end Partition or surrender. We must determine and say to Britain, and other people, that no matter how long it takes, it will be ended some day and that we will never as a people rest content until it is ended. We have a lot of work to do in this part of the country to increase our resources and to get our production going at a rate that will give all our people a rising standard of living. But the people in the Six Counties have an equally hard task. They must recognise that if the two parts of the country were together, it would be for our mutual benefit.

The question embodied in this motion is whether we should raise this matter at the United Nations and call for a team of United Nations observers to come to the Six Counties and call for the setting-up of a national plebiscite for the whole of Ireland. In making this a plea for that, Deputy McQuillan went as near as he could to saying that I had not mentioned Partition at the United Nations, that I had shown no interest in the question of Partition until I went to Boston.

In the speech in the United Nations, I referred to the case of Ireland. I pleaded for the acceptance of the principle of self-determination for all countries in the Irish situation that were divided or that were still altogether occupied. We could go to the United Nations and, every time we rise in that Assembly, speak about nothing but our own troubles. However, we would have, I am afraid, about as much effect on the general policy of that Assembly as a Deputy in this House who speaks about nothing only the smaller cases in his own constituency. If we want people to take a general interest in the policy that would serve our interests, in common with the interests of mankind, we must be prepared to take an interest in the affairs and troubles of other countries that are equally important to us as they are to them, and are equally important in the effort to get established a general rule of law based on justice. In speaking at one of the debates in the United Nations, I said this:—

"Like many of our fellow-members here, we are a young State but a people with a proud and ancient history. Our own outstanding national problem, the division of our country, must eventually be solved by the practical application of the principles of the charter and specifically the principle of self-determination of peoples. We have never ceased to demand the application of that principle in our own as well as in other cases and from it we have nothing to fear. Indeed, it would be useless to deny that in joining this Organisation the hope that our action might advance the attainment of this end was present in our minds. It is as such a country that we speak here to-day in the hope that our profound conviction, born of long experience of tragic frustration, may carry weight with this Assembly.

The principle of self-determination of peoples ought, we believe, to be the great master-principle by which this Assembly should be guided in its quest for a just and peaceful world order. That principle holds, for example, the key to the solution of the problem of German reunification, of the Cyprus question and also of one of the most acute and urgent of the contemporary conflicts which threaten world peace, the conflict in Algeria."

There are, as Deputies are aware, many cases throughout the world where a solution to the problems of certain powers has been sought through the partition of smaller and weaker countries. We have tried to show, whenever we got an opportunity of discussing these questions, that in fact it is no solution, that it is not only unjust but that in present circumstances it is most unwise. We have tried to show that in modern circumstances the "brush fire" idea, the limited war idea, is out of date and that to have revolutionary situations against occupying Powers may affect not only the country in which these revolutionary situations are but affect their neighbours, and that to expect that they can be limited or smothered is quite foolish—that the idea of the limited war, trusting that it will not spread, is as foolish as to allow a small boy to let off squibs in a powder magazine.

We have pleaded in private and in public that if we are to avoid total war, we must be prepared to make total peace based on law and justice; that we need not expect miracles but that we have to do from day to day and from year to year and from one United Nations session to another what is to our hand, and tackle the problems that come up for discussion.

Every thinking person in the world is aware of the danger which mankind faces at the present time. The world had never to face a similar danger. In times gone by, if war started, even between larger Powers, people could reasonably hope that more would survive than would be killed in the process of that war, but we have reached the stage with modern weapons when nobody knows if anybody would survive. It is up to us, therefore, to try to relieve all situations that cause trouble, situations that can be used by one big Power against another to stir up trouble in each area. It is up to us to use the interval before war becomes inevitable to settle questions such as the Partition of Ireland, such as the problem of German reunification, such as the situation in Algeria, such as the situation in Korea and other situations of that kind.

I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 30th October, 1957.