Vol. 373 No. 8
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the reasons for his agreeing to the establishment of a South Korean embassy in Dublin at the same time refusing to respond to requests for full diplomatic relations from a number of countries including Nicaragua and Cuba.
20.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if it is intended to open an Irish Embassy in South Korea to coincide with the holding of the Olympic Games; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Priority Question No. 42 and Oral Question No. 20 together.
The proposal of the Republic of Korea to establish a resident embassy in Dublin was considered in the light of Ireland's foreign policy interests and approved by Government on that basis. There are no proposals for the opening of an Irish Embassy in Seoul to coincide with the holding of the 1988 Olympic Games in that city. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations with the Republic of Korea in 1984, the Irish Ambassador in Tokyo has been concurrently accredited to the Republic of Korea. No change in this arrangement is at present contemplated, for obvious financial reasons.
As I stated in this House last month, the principal criterion applied to proposals to establish diplomatic relations with other countries is the extent to which such moves can assist in the achievement of the State's foreign policy objectives in the political, economic, consular and other fields. The availability of the financial and personnel resources necessary to implement a proposal is also an important factor. While it would be inappropriate for me to engage in public speculation on proposals received from specific countries in relation to the establishment of diplomatic relations, I can say that when such a proposal is made the Government of the country concerned are always made aware, through normal diplomatic channels, of our position in the matter.
There is a section of the Minister's reply which refers to my question, that is, that it is in the Irish interest that a South Korean Embassy be established in Dublin. Perhaps the Minister would tell us exactly what is that interest. Also, in view of the fact that the President of South Korea has suspended democratic reforms until after the Olympic Games in 1988, does the Minister not agree it is precipitous of the Minister's Department to go ahead and acknowledge the correctness of establishing such an embassy? Is the Minister further aware that 13 Opposition leaders, including the Deputy Leader of the main Opposition party, are currently in jail in South Korea? Furthermore, is he aware that 10,000 people were on the streets yesterday and that 60,000 members of the public have protested against the régime there? What are the reasons for the establishment of an embassy from such a country of military dictatorship in Dublin?
As the Deputy is well aware, no country inquires into the nature of the political structure in another country with which it establishes diplomatic relations ——
I never heard such a suggestion.
We have diplomatic relations with the USSR, with Turkey. We have diplomatic relations with a number of countries throughout the world. I might add that every country throughout the world has such diplomatic relations with countries with which it does not agree in terms of political philosophy. The reason for this precise decision is that the Industrial Development Authority have representatives in Seoul. They have developed business investment interests here as a result of which substantial employment has recently been created in certain towns, notably in Sligo. Further investment can be expected to take place from that region of the Far East. It was felt expedient that, when they requested it, they should have an embassy here. We can extend the mandate of our Ambassador in Tokyo to Seoul to look after our interests there, in an expanding community in the economic sense, whatever about the Deputy's views in regard to the political structure of that State.
Will the Minister acknowledge that it is not my opinions on South Korea that are important but, for example, those of Cardinal Kim, the 13 Opposition leaders who are in jail, the 60,000 people who demonstrated this week and the 3,000 students who took refuge in a cathedral? All of the policy considerations which we heard earlier are important in evaluating whether or not we should open embassies, not diplomatic relations. We should consider the appropriateness of allowing an embassy to be opened in Dublin even though the President of that country has said he will not consider democratic reforms until after April 1988. Am I to address my questions about when embassies will open in Dublin and in Ireland to the IDA and to ask them what are the criteria for investment decisions or when we might expect another one?
The Deputy might also address a similar supplementary question to me in regard to a number of other countries throughout the world which I mentioned to the Deputy, with whom we have diplomatic relations and who have diplomatic relations here also. The question of the political structure of a country with whom we may have diplomatic relations is a consideration, but it is not the primary consideration. That applies to diplomacy in respect of every country throughout the world, ranging from Soviet Russia, Turkey, Iraq and right through the continent of Africa. The Deputy is well aware of the countries with whom we have diplomatic relations and who have diplomatic relations with us and I am certain he would not share the ideology or the political structures of those countries.
May I ask ——
I regret that I can only entertain supplementary questions from the questioner under the rules of order in respect of priority questions.
The Minister can correspond with me about my views about other countries but this priority question deals with South Korea. Following the logic of the Minister's argument, is he satisfied that he can balance the human rights aspects, for example, the record which we have abroad and the political aspects? Can he say if these can be happily overridden as he told this House in the light of an investment decision on the recommendation of the IDA? Does this not represent a serious erosion of Irish foreign policy and a major diminution of our standing in relation to human rights all around the world?
I have dealt at reasonable length with this question and I want to get on to another question.
I have replied very adequately to this matter. I am a strong believer in the more liberal approach, that having diplomatic exchanges with people in countries of that kind can do a lot to moderate their attitude to human rights. Freezing them in the cold will do nothing to moderate their attitude to human rights to which the Deputy alluded. The Deputy is well aware of that from his visits to Cuba and other countries in Central America where, I am sure, his presence has been of enormous value in furthering the interests of human rights.
That does not answer ——
Private Notice Question. I am sorry, Deputy Higgins. I must move on to the Private Notice Question in the name of Deputy Hussey.
