I raised this matter on the Order of Business this morning, but I had failed to get a copy of the paper which alleged that the Libyans were supplying explosives to the Provisional IRA. Again, I tried to raise this matter by Private Notice Question but you were unable to give me permission because you said the matter lacked urgency — a point with which I respectfully disagree because the levels of killing and the atrocities committed by the IRA in the North makes it incumbent on all of us to do what we can as quickly as possible to cut off the supply of explosives and arms to that organisation. This House is the appropriate place to bring up matters of this nature and to try to get the Government to act as quickly as possible. While I am grateful to be given permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment, it is a less satisfactory way than by Private Notice Question where I would have the facility of asking supplementary questions, which is not available to me today.
Adjournment Debate. - Arms Supplies to Provisional IRA.
If time permits, you will be entitled to ask a supplementary question.
The history of the flirtation between the leader of the Libyan people and the IRA goes back a long way. To the best of my knowledge it first asserted itself with the Claudia arms deal 14 years ago. At that stage it was very firmly brought home to the Libyan leader the attitude of the then Government, and all previous Governments, to the IRA. He was told that the determination to find a solution to the Northern Ireland problem was a matter for the Irish people primarily — of course the British Government had an interest as well — and that we did not want outside interference, particularly when it took the form of supplying arms and explosives to an organisation who had demonstrated their complete lack of regard for human life or for democratic institutions, one of whose objectives was to achieve power by any means, and who subsequently articulated this objective with the ballot paper in one hand and the armalite in the other.
We obviously failed to get our message across on that occasion because there have been intermittent signs over the years of Colonel Gadaffi expressing support for the Provisional IRA. When I was Minister for Foreign Affairs the Libyan Prime Minister said last spring that his people supported the Provisional IRA. On that occasion the Government instructed me to send the Irish Ambassador immediately to Tripoli. First he was to call on the Libyan authorities in Rome — because it is there that the Irish Ambassador to Libya is primarily accredited — and explain our position. We wanted him to express our disquiet at the fact that the Prime Minister of a country with which we had diplomatic relations should express support for what is an illegal organisation in Ireland. Despite two visits to Tripoli by our Ambassador to get the Prime Minister to withdraw that statement, it was not withdrawn.
To bring home to the Libyan people how seriously we took this move and how determined we were to bring home to countries who may have been misguided about the Provisional IRA that we found it impossible to maintain normal relations with a country which supported this organisation verbally, politically and — if the catalogue of what has happened in this morning's paper is correct — materially, we decided we would not issue visas to Libyan students from then on. A number of organisations, individuals and politicians took issue with us about this and said we should not take it out on Libyan students. I explained that we do not have any difficulties with the Libyan people but we do have difficulties with the Libyan leader as long as he continues to give moral, verbal and material support to the IRA. However, we were not successful in our attempts to arrest this moral support for the IRA.
At a meeting in Herare in August, Colonel Gadaffi said he supported the IRA but that he was not supplying them with arms. In October he repeated his support for the IRA but when asked if he was still supplying them with arms, he refused to answer. In March 1987, in an interview with a reporter from The Observer, he again repeated support for the IRA. Last month at a rally in Tripoli Colonel Gadaffi's son said they still supported the IRA and would supply them with arms. Present at that meeting were two members of Sinn Féin, Noonan and McManus, and one of them is a very sinister figure indeed.
According to the reporter in this morning's paper the explosive which he alleges is being supplied to the IRA by the Libyans is made in Eastern Europe. It is highly sophisticated, much smaller quantities are needed to be effective, it has a longer life and therefore is less dangerous to handle. This is a very dangerous weapon to have in the hands of an illegal organisation, but this has not been categorically proved.
Deputies will remember that there was a large arms find in the north west last year but, as far as I know it has not been proved that those arms came from Libya, although they were labelled for the Libyan Armed Forces. According to this morning's paper, this new type of explosive, manufactured in Eastern Europe and supplied through Libya to the IRA, was responsible for the death of a soldier in Belfast last March, The murder of Judge and Mrs. Gibson last month, and was used in the letter bomb attacks on British civil servants in the last few weeks.
The time has come when Colonel Gadaffi and the Libyan establishment must be faced. This man can no longer be treated as a clown on the world stage whose utterances are thought to be off the top of his head and not seriously meant. The Government have an obligation to confront him immediately. The Irish Ambassador who is stationed in Rome should be sent to Libya to demand an interview with Colonel Gadaffi to bring it home to him that this country does not tolerate verbal, moral or material support from anywhere for this illegal organisation that has done so much damage to the aspirations of the Irish people for so many years.
Unfortunately, this is the second time this week we have had a debate relating to this organisation and the damage they are doing to the Irish image abroad, Irish nationalism and the aspirations of 99 per cent of the people on this island who want to pursue their political objectives by peaceful means. It is so dangerous that something must be done immediately. Loss of life is my primary concern but it is ironical that the publicity given to this in newspapers this morning will be picked up by the press around the world, when the Government are trying to promote tourism in America. I do not know if the Minister appreciates the damage which will be done to Irish tourism by the publication of this matter.
It is incumbent on the Minister to take every step open to him including calling in the ambassador accredited from Libya to Ireland to bring home to him in no uncertain manner the fact that we cannot and will not tolerate support for an illegal organisation by Libya or any other country. I hope he will have more success in this regard than I had.
I thank the Chair for affording me the opportunity to address the House on this matter. I wish to retain a sense of perspective in response to Deputy Barry's statement. I also wish to emphasise the Government's concern at any expression of support, moral or material, for the IRA and I made that quite clear in the House the night before last.
I have read the newspaper report published in London which gives rise to this afternoon's debate. I note it alleges that the plastic explosive Semtex has been supplied by the IRA by Libya. I also note, looking at the matter in a balanced way, that this allegation is not supported by any evidence. I assure Deputies, however, that the security authorities are well aware of the report and I also assure them that, should they uncover evidence to support these allegations, the Government will take whatever action is deemed appropriate. At the moment, this newspaper allegation is being investigated by the security forces and, depending on what emerges, I will decide on what diplomatic action should be taken. It would be unreal of me, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, to proceed at this stage on the basis of an uncorroborated newspaper report. It would be inappropriate to take diplomatic action of the kind suggested by Deputy Barry until investigations have been completed.
I am just as concerned as Deputy Barry about this matter. We have set in train, in conjunction with other security authorities, an investigation to ascertain the facts. Any unsupported allegation in a newspaper report, no matter how disturbing its contents may be, does not provide an adequate basis for the sort of action suggested by Deputy Barry. This applies particularly at present when the world media regularly reports all sorts of revelations in regard to security matters and when security forces themselves appear to be at odds with their own Government in several countries. There is a whole miasma of suspicion and uncorroborated evidence reported in many parts of the world in regard to the activities of security agencies and relevations about them especially in relation to Libya.
Deputies are well aware of the fact that successive Irish Governments have sought to bring home to the Libyan authorities their concern at any expressions of support for an organisation which has consistently sought to undermine the democratically elected institutions of the State. The previous Government protested to the Libyan authorities as late as 4 March this year and informed them of the statement issued on 1 March by the Taoiseach who was then Leader of the Opposition. We are ad idem in that respect. As Leader of the Opposition, Deputy Haughey made it clear that he saw it as his duty to prevent support being given to the IRA from any source and that he would take any possible steps available to him to ensure that this would not happen.
As I have made clear, the Libyan authorities are well aware of our position in this matter which has been frequently advanced by successive Governments. We do not, therefore, feel bound to repeat our view on the occasion of each new newspaper report. However, I will repeat it here. I say, quite categorically, that any support for the IRA from any source, if proved, is totally abhorrent to the Government. We reject any agency, Government, body or people responsible for furnishing material help to the IRA in their campaign. I have emphasised that point sufficiently here this afternoon and I am glad to have had the opportunity to do so.
Having said that, in the interests of balance and a proper perception of the matter it would not be appropriate for this or any other Government to take action on the basis of an uncorroborated newspaper report which only emerged this morning and which has to be investigated and examined by the appropriate security authorities. However, there is nothing in my approach to Deputy Barry's queries which implies any change in the fundamental opposition of this and previous Governments, including the Governments in which Deputy Barry participated, to any attempt to promote physical objectives by violence or the threat of violence. As I have said, the position of the Irish authorities in this regard has been made quite clear to the Libyan authorities.
I can assure the House that the Government will continue to monitor closely support for the IRA which may emanate from Libya or from any other part of the world. The Libyan Government can be in no doubt as to the principled and fundamental position of successive Irish Governments on the question of any form of support from whatever source for the IRA. The authorities in Libya are also well aware of the wider dimension of our policy and that of our partners in the European Community on the question of State support of any kind for international terrorism. There is no ambiguity, uncertainty or lack of resolve in our determination in this respect.
In conclusion, I reiterate that I am very glad to have had this opportunity to make this statement and that I welcome Deputy Barry's raising the matter in this manner.
That was a most disappointing reply to this very serious matter.
Has the Deputy got some questions?
If I heard the Minister correctly, he said three or four times that the Libyan Government are aware of our position. He must continue to repeat our objections until the message gets home to them. It is not enough to say that they are well aware. I gather from the Minister's silence on the matter that the Government did nothing about the outrageous statement which was made by Colonel Gadaffi's son last month at a rally which, as I said, was attended by two members of Sinn Féin, one of whom is a very sinister person.
May I interrupt the Deputy? The Minister has formally replied to the debate. I indicated earlier to the Deputy that if time permitted he would be allowed to put some pertinent questions. I am affording him that facility but he may not reopen the debate.
Did the Minister make any representations to the Libyan authorities following the statement which was made by Colonel Gadaffi's son in Tripoli last month?
No. Colonel Gadaffi's son has no place in the apparatus of the Libyan Government.
He is Colonel Gadaffi's son. He was speaking at a rally which was called for a specific purpose and attended by two members of Sinn Féin.
The Deputy is doing his case no good in this respect. There are ways in which you approach other Governments. We do have diplomatic relations with Libya and we trade with Libya as do most western European countries, including the United Kingdom. You do not do business with a country and deal with that country other than on the basis of exchanges at diplomatic level.
That is what I am asking for.
If it emerges that the newspaper report to which both the Deputy and I referred is authentic I will take up the matter on a diplomatic basis. The security authorities are now examining that report to see whether it is a report of veracity on which diplomatic action could be taken or whether it is merely the type of speculation which abounds in certain sectors of the press. It is either one thing or the other.
But you did not take diplomatic action in relation to the statement which was made at the rally last month.
If I took diplomatic action and the Deputy is well aware of this, on foot of every statement made at every political rally throughout the world I would be in and out of diplomatic offices seeing ambassadors on an hourly basis.
This is quite different and the Minister knows that well.
The Deputy ought to be well aware of the unreality of that question.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 19 May 1987.