asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will be making a statement on the proposal of the Italian Foreign Minister reportedly supported by the Foreign Minister of Belgium and the United Kingdom at the NATO Council of Ministers in Rome on 26th May last that European countries which are not members of NATO or the Warsaw Pact should participate in proposed discussions concerning the improvement of relations between NATO and Warsaw Pact countries and a reciprocal reduction of armaments; and whether he has taken any initiative in this matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - NATO Discussions.
2.
A communiqué and declaration were issued after the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ministerial meeting held at Rome on 26th and 27th May, 1970. These documents contain suggestions concerned with European security and mutual and balanced force reductions. They were formally conveyed by the Italian Government, as host of the NATO meeting, to the Government on 3rd June and they are at present being studied by my Department. The Government's position will be made known to the Italian Government in due course.
The Government's general policy as regards a conference on European security has already been stated in reply to questions on 16th and 23rd July, 6th November, 1969, and 10th February, 1970.
May I ask the Minister whether the documents he has received from the Italian Government include proposals that would bring us into any discussions of the whole subject of European security?
We are studying the implications of the documents put before us. I think the idea behind the instruction through the Italian Foreign Minister, who was president of the meeting, was to ask interested nations —and we are one of about 12 or 13 such States—for their views. At this time I cannot say whether it will lead to a discussion.
Can the Minister say how this will affect our own undertaking given recently that we would fulfil fully all defence commitments arising out of our entry into the Common Market? Can the Minister state how it will affect that attitude if there was a suggestion of a security pact which would include East European countries?
I do not think it will affect it at all. I think the commitment to undertake all our obligations would be as a full member of a European community which would have its defence system. This is a matter of reduction of armaments on a mutual basis and I do not think it would have any effect on the structuring of a defence of a European community.
We are hardly in a position to reduce armaments.
My predecessor took an initiative towards the reduction of armaments on both sides in Europe in 1967.
We are hardly in a position to do it ourselves.
I do not know if the Deputy has anything in particular in mind?
Since this suggestion was first put forward by the Italian Foreign Minister at an earlier NATO conference—about which I previously asked a question—may I ask the Minister if he has taken any diplomatic initiative in the matter, has he had any diplomatic contacts with the Italian Foreign Minister on this subject, or has the whole matter been left since then?
The Deputy is referring to the European security conference initiative?
Yes.
I discussed it with the Foreign Ministers of each of the countries I visited in relation to my EEC visits. We declared our own policy in the Dáil and I told the Deputy what was our attitude. I understand there is some continuous activity in relation to the arranging of a conference and those concerned are as fully convinced as we are that the preparation should be such as not to cause hopes to be raised which could not be fulfilled, and not to have pre-conditions. I also made it clear that we could not accept as a pre-condition the immutability of existing boundaries.
Could I ask the Minister whether he has indicated a desire on the part of our Government to join other governments in a similar position, not members of the Warsaw Pact, in taking the initiative with regard to this conference? I refer to countries such as Finland and Yugoslavia.
The initiative has been taken—I do not know if one can take it a second time—and we have expressed ourselves as favourable to the principle and stated our conditions.
Question No. 3.
But the Minister's role is a wholly passive one.
I do not think there is need to take the initiative from the people who have it because they are pursuing the matter with great vigour.