asked the Taoiseach whether the indication given by him in the Dáil on 23rd July, 1969, that it was not Government policy to enter into military commitments, either by joining NATO or otherwise, still represents the position.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Government Policy on Military Commitments.
1.
As pointed out in the White Paper of April, 1970, we would, as members of the Community, be prepared to assist, if necessary, in its defence. The European Economic Community is still at an early stage in its political evolution. As it evolves towards its political objectives, we must be prepared to play our part as members.
May I remind the Taoiseach of the words used by him in the Dáil on 23rd July last when I asked him whether we could enter into military commitments otherwise than by joining NATO? The Taoiseach said: "We can, of course, but it is not our policy to do so". Policy implies something long-term.
That is the position at present. We are applicants for membership of the European Economic Community. As of now, the EEC have developed in an economic way but in the background of the Treaty of Rome there is the desire to develop towards closer unity between the member countries. When that time comes we hope there will be an opportunity for us to participate in the development of these political objectives and to have our say in them.
In this matter of potential military commitments of one kind or another, is the Taoiseach aware that there is widespread anxiety and confusion about the various equivocal and conflicting statements made by him, members of the Government and the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party? Some of them apparently envisage, as the Taoiseach now does, our eventually entering into some form of military alliance which would necessarily include alliance with Britain; others encourage military and para-military activities directed against Britain. Which way are Fianna Fáil going? Are we to find ourselves allied with Britain——
We cannot have a speech on this.
——and at war with Britain through the other wing?
The Treaty of Rome, as established, contained no references whatever of a military character. We have applied for membership of the EEC. We did so because we believed in the objectives of the Community and in the objective of a unified Europe. Therefore, having become part of a unified Europe we would be prepared fully to play our part in that unified Europe.
Has the question of an eventual military alliance which would include Britain ever been discussed at Cabinet level with the deposed Ministers?
There is no question of a military alliance in this respect. From the word "go" we made it clear that we were in favour of accepting the full obligations of the Treaty of Rome once we became members. Our membership and the terms of our membership will be the subject of negotiations. If the terms are satisfactory and if it is in our best interest to join then we will become members. As the Community moves towards closer unity we will have a say in these developments. If that ultimately involves political obligations we will honour those obligations once we become members.
Taking the trend of negotiations as stated, it is conceivable that we would find ourselves eventually in a military alliance which would include British forces. This is a logical, obvious conclusion to draw from the Taoiseach's remarks.
The words "military alliance" are out of line with what I have in mind. We hope we are moving towards an integrated united Europe and that we will be part of that united Europe. Therefore, we will be involved in the territory embracing the Community. There is no question of alliance in that. An alliance would envisage an association between different countries with independent foreign policies. In the Community there will be a unified policy——
Are we accepting the present territorial position in this country——
Nonsense.
Let Deputy Boland make his statement.
Order.
The question of the defence of Europe has been mentioned by certain other speakers. May I ask the Taoiseach is a precedent not being established? There are various trading organisations in Europe; there are EFTA, GATT and there is the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement. Surely it is a new principle that one should have to give, as a condition to entering into a trading relationship, an undertaking that one would accept defence commitments? In the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement there was no understanding that we would at any time assist the British in any defence commitments and, therefore, why should it arise on this occasion?
We cannot blind our eyes to world conditions generally. The whole concept of a united Europe arose out of the last world war when it was considered that a strong united Europe would be the best safeguard against another world war. We are totally committed to the avoidance of another world war and if we can assist in the achievement of that objective by becoming part of Europe, and we are committed to the ideal of a unified Europe, then we are prepared to play our full part.
In reference to the remark of Deputy O'Leary, may I say that I answered a question in relation to Partition and becoming members of the Common Market some time ago when I said that any move to be made in that direction would involve no commitment that might impede fulfilment of the national will to restore the territorial unity of Ireland. That is quite clear as well.
Would the Taoiseach not agree——
I am calling Question No. 2. We cannot debate this question all afternoon.
I want to make it quite clear that any commitment does not imply in any way acceptance of existing territorial boundaries.
I am calling Question No. 2. Deputy Desmond.