Vol. 404 No. 4
8 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if a request has been received from the Government of the United States for the use of Shannon Airport, County Clare, for refuelling US air force aircraft; and the Government's response to such a request.
9 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach whether any communication has been received from the Government of the United States in the context of the meeting held in Geneva on 9 January 1991 between James Baker, US Secretary of State and the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Azis; and the Government's response thereto.
10 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he has contacted or plans to contact any other heads of Government in neutral or non-aligned countries with a view to a possible joint initiative in the Gulf War; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
11 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will seek an urgent meeting of EC Heads of Government to discuss the war in the Gulf and to consider any possible peace initiatives; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
12 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the purpose of his meeting at Government Buildings on 16 January 1991 with the United States Ambassador, Mr. Richard Moore; the matters discussed; if the question of landing and refuelling facilities at Shannon for US military aircraft was discussed; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
13 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if, prior to the announcement by the Government on 17 January 1991 that they would agree to any request for landing and refuelling rights at Shannon Airport by the United States and its allies, he sought any clarification from the United Nations as to the meaning of the terms used in Security Council Resolution 678, especially the term "necessary means" in relation to the implementation of Resolution 660, and the term "appropriate support" which all member states are requested to provide; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
14 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he discussed or plans to discuss the Gulf War and any possible peace initiatives with the Secretary General of the United Nations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
15 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if he will give a report on the meeting that he had with the American Ambassador prior to the debate in Dáil Éireann on Friday 18 January; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
16 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if any approach has been made to him by either the United States or the United Nations in respect of Ireland's participation in the Gulf War; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
17 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the arrangements being made to facilitate American aircraft to land and refuel at Irish airports; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
18 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if Ireland will be making any financial contribution towards the cost of maintaining the allied forces in the Gulf War.
19 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach the arrangements he is making in co-operation with other Ministers to ensure additional security in Irish airports arising from the Gulf War; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I wish to take Questions Nos. 8 to 19 together.
I have dealt with many of the issues raised in these questions in my statement to the House of 18 January.
The Government have been briefed by the US authorities on the meeting between the US Secretary of State and the Iraqi Foreign Minister. As is by now well known, that meeting did not result in the commitment which everybody had hoped for on the part of Iraq, to comply with its UN obligations and international law. During my meeting with the US Ambassador, we exchanged views on the situation. It has not been the practice nor would it be appropriate to give details of confidential discussions of this nature.
During the course of my statement to the Dáil I dealt with the question of refuelling US aircraft at Shannon and with the request to allow six American aircraft to refuel there in August of last year, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. With the outbreak of military conflict I do not consider it would be appropriate for security reasons to give further details at this stage, other than to say that the number of requests for landing rights for US military and other flights is not abnormal.
I did not feel it necessary to seek any clarification from the United Nations of the meaning of the words, quoted by Deputy De Rossa, in the UN Resolutions as the meaning of these words is clear to everyone who reads them. Apart from the request expressed in Resolution 678, Ireland has received no request from either the United States or the United Nations in respect of participation in the Gulf War.
As a member of the United Nations, we maintain contact with the Secretary General and follow closely developments in the Security Council and in the other member states. We continue to be alert to any reasonable prospect that might result in a peaceful settlement on the basis of compliance by Iraq with the Security Council Resolutions. In the absence of any such indication, I do not consider that an initiative on my part, at this stage, with the heads of Government in neutral or non-aligned countries, would be likely to meet with any success.
We of course keep in close touch with our partners in the European Community about any possible diplomatic or other initiatives that might be taken to shorten the conflict.
As I said in the Dáil, on 18 January, Ireland will not participate in the Gulf War.
The Government are at present considering two appeals which have been received, one from the UN Disaster Relief Organisation and another from the International Committee of the Red Cross.
As I said in the Dáil on 18 January, had in advance of the outbreak of war made all possible arrangements to cope with the situation that would arise for us in this country. It would not be appropriate to give details of the security aspects of these arrangements. The Government are satisfied with them and they are being kept under constant review.
One can agree with the Taoiseach in relation to the Government's wishing for a peaceful resolution as soon as possible in this catastrophic war that is taking place in the Gulf. I am aware there are certain matters which may be confidential between the Taoiseach and the US Ambassador, and even the US Government, but could I seek some clarification from the Taoiseach on when the request was received by the Government in relation to the use of Shannon by US military aircraft? Was it before the Dáil debate or since the Dáil debate? Secondly, are the Government going to respond to the request they received from the United Nations Disaster Relief Organisation or the Red Cross for humanitarian aid either in Ireland or the Middle East which I would say will be not only acceptable to everybody in the House but indeed will be commended by all Members?
With regard to the first matter, the original requests were made as far back as August for six landings. Prior to the Dáil debate there were no requests. Any requests since have been and are dealt with on their merits in accordance with the Resolution, so there is no question of blanket cover or anything of that kind. It is a question of requests being made from time to time and being acceded to or rejected. In regard to the two appeals we have had, I am sure we will give favourable consideration to both because that is the best possible way we can contribute to the situation and, so to speak, participate in a humanitarian way.
Unless I am mistaken the Taoiseach said the UN Resolution allowed that all means may be used. In fact, the Resolution said that "all necessary means" may be used. This is where the question of interpretation arises. What precisely does, "all necessary means" mean? To what extent may the forces who are involved in the action against Iraq pursue that? At what point will the actions they take become unnecessary, particularly in view of the statement by Mr. King, the Defence Minister in Britain, that the withdrawal from Kuwait in line with Resolution 660 will not be sufficient as far as Britain is concerned? Does the Taoiseach agree with that view and that that view is covered by Resolution 678? Has he become aware that there are experts on the UN Charter, both Irish and international, who have thrown doubt on the validity of Resolution 678 in view of its very wide-reaching effects and permissions it has provided? Has he taken an opportunity at any time since 16 January to inform the United Nations under paragraph 4 of Resolution 678 with regard to the support the Irish Government have provided? Is he aware whether any of the other participants in the attack on Iraq are keeping the Security Council informed of what is going on?
With regard to the last point, no, not specifically. Of course, we have an Ambassador to the UN who is in constant touch with the Secretary General and would keep him informed of all these matters as far as we are concerned, but it is up to us to interpret what is appropriate support. We have not at all been concerned in the "necessary means" aspect of Resolution 678. What we are concerned about is the call on member states to provide appropriate support. We are interpreting that and acting accordingly.
With regard to disagreements on the extent of the powers conferred by the UN Resolutions, that would be a matter for the UN itself. I do not know that it would be a matter for us, if any member state goes beyond something purported to be conferred on it by a UN Resolution, to deal with that other than in the UN. As far as we are concerned the whole situation in the Gulf is governed by the UN Resolutions and our complete support for the UN Resolutions. That is the answer to the Deputy's question about what others may be deciding to do or how they interpret "necessary means". We support the resolutions primarily in that they call for a withdrawal from Kuwait. We also respond to the call in Resolution 678 for appropriate support by us. We are doing that and no more.
I should like to put four brief questions to the Taoiseach. By whom are decisions taken with regard to particular requests? Are such decisions taken by the Government, by an individual Minister or is responsibility delegated — in the event of decisions having to be taken quickly — to an official? Have any requests been rejected for landing at Shannon? Are these landings commercial arrangements for which the relevant Irish authorities are paid and approximately how much are they paid? Finally, have the Government themselves considered any support they believe they could give — from their knowledge of what Ireland can do — to the United Nations efforts, or are they simply taking the view that we will respond to requests from others without considering what we ourselves can do to assist the United Nations?
With regard to the last question raised by the Deputy, I should say it is an international situation. My own view is that we had better operate through the United Nations.
I agree, but have we considered what we can do practically to help the United Nations?
There is an implication in the question about taking initiatives with non-aligned, neutral states and so on. In a situation like this history tells us that all sorts of people wish to get involved in initiatives of one kind or another and usually they do more harm than good. Therefore, I think our best code of behaviour, as good international citizens, is to work exclusively and as far as possible in support of the United Nations. If there is any other way in which we can be of assistance to the United Nations, certainly we will do so but, as of now, I do not think there is. Unfortunately we are in a war situation. At this stage what we should concentrate on, first of all, is doing what we can in the humanitarian area and, secondly, through EC political action, being alert to take any initiative that the European Community can take. I do not think in this type of situation one-off, individual——
That was not what I was suggesting.
No, I understand that but I want to take this opportunity to say — I know that was not what Deputy Bruton had in mind; he was asking specifically if there was anything more we could do to help the UN — I do not think there is at this stage but, if an opportunity does offer, we will certainly take it.
On the question of the operations at Shannon Airport, I should say that anybody landing there complies with the normal aviation requirements, including fees and charges of all kinds. We have not had occasion to reject any particular requests made to us so far. I do not want to go too deeply into that because I do not want to be disclosing any security aspects.
May I draw the Taoiseach's attention to Question No. 19? I do not recall the Taoiseach referring to that question in his original reply. Whereas one might differ in terms of interpretation of the United Nations Charter and the various resolutions, the Taoiseach seemed to rely entirely on the fact that we are doing everything in accordance with the United Nations. Does the Taoiseach not consider it strange that the United Nations, and the Secretary General of the United Nations, seem to be playing little or no role in relation to the conduct of the war in the Middle East, that in fact the Secretary General of the United Nations informed the public that the war had commenced a number of hours before he had been so informed? Would the Taoiseach not agree that we should be insisting that the United Nations take a lead role in the conflict that has now arisen?
I do not know what the Deputy means by "lead role". Certainly I would not wish to see the United Nations take military action under its own aegis. Apart from that, I do not see anything specific that the United Nations can do at this stage other than make a general effort to exert diplomatic pressure to bring hostilities to an end and, of course, to contain their impact and try to stop some of the appalling atrocities taking place. Other than that I am not so sure that the United Nations can do any more. In general, let me just say that our ambassador is there and in constant touch with the Secretary General of the United Nations. If it emerges that we can be helpful in any way, of course we will be so.
I answered the Deputy's Question No. 19 in a general way when I said, at the end of my original reply:
As I also made clear, the Government had, in advance of the outbreak of war, made all possible arrangements to cope with the situation that would arise for us in this country...
in the event of hostilities taking place. I do not want to give any details but, of course, security at our airports would be high on that list.
May I pose a number of questions to the Taoiseach in relation to this matter. It has been said, not least by the Taoiseach himself, that he believed sanctions had not worked. Has he available to him a report from the United Nations on the sanctions, as they had operated up to the time the attack was launched on Iraq? As I understand it, the United Nations Resolutions require that reports be made to a special body of the United Nations in relation to how they were operating. Do the Government know and will the Taoiseach tell the House what reports are available to us so that we can form a judgment on that matter? Would the Taoiseach indicate whether the Irish Government have made reports to the Security Council in relation to Resolution 678 and the appropriate support being provided by the Irish Government under that resolution? That Resolution quite clearly states, in paragraph 4, that the states concerned should keep the Security Council regularly informed on the progress of actions undertaken pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of that Resolution. Would the Taoiseach indicate where or how he draws a distinction between providing facilities for military personnel at Shannon Airport, defining that as appropriate support and as not participating in war, but apparently he regards participation directly in the war itself as inappropriate? What rule of thumb does he use to draw that distinction?
I have to say the questioning is overlong.
I may have to ask the Deputy to repeat some of those questions. On sanctions, I do not think I ever said that sanctions did not work, or had not worked——
If I may intervene? The Resolution the Taoiseach proposed to the House the week before last indicated that war was necessary——
No, I beg the Deputy's pardon, I said war was inevitable——
——unavoidable——
——unavoidable, whichever word the Deputy wishes. That does not convey any opinion on my part that sanctions did not work. In fact, in so far as I am on record at all, I think I could claim that my view is that sanctions were not given enough time. But circumstances developed in which, in my view — and indeed in the view of the Secretary General of the United Nations — war did become inevitable, tragically, to the disappointment of all of us. Of course, we keep the Secretary General of the United Nations informed of what we are doing in these matters. But the thrust of what the Deputy mentioned was directed mainly at the member states that have undertaken military action; it is they who have an obligation to report to the Security Council. Perhaps the Deputy would remind me of the other points?
I must disagree with the Taoiseach because paragraph 4 of the appropriate Resolution says quite clearly——
That is an argument, not a question.
No, I am simply pointing out to the Taoiseach that paragraph 4 of Resolution 678 requests the states concerned — who are acting under paragraphs 2 and 3 — to keep the Security Council informed. I simply want to know whether the Government are complying with that requirement because it would appear to me that clearly they are not. Would the Taoiseach address himself to that issue?
May I ask the Taoiseach also how he draws a distinction between what is appropriate and what is inappropriate action? As I understand it, he indicates that the provision of over-flight refuelling and landing facilities at Shannon Airport for military aircraft involved in this war is appropriate support for Resolution 678 but apparently he draws a line in regard to actual direct involvement in the conflict itself as being inappropriate——
The question is tending to be argumentative and towards debate which is not appropriate at Question Time.
The Taoiseach asked me to repeat the question and I am doing so.
Please, Deputy, the Chair decides such matters.
I am simply responding to a request from the Taoiseach.
The Deputy has made his point and has made it adequately.
I want to complete the question.
I have to dissuade the Deputy against the notion that we may debate this matter.
I am not debating it. I am repeating the question as requested by the Taoiseach so that he can respond to it.
This matter was fully and adequately dealt with by me during the course of the debate here on 18 January. I gave my opinion fully then, as to what was appropriate support. I have said we have decided that the refuelling of aircraft at Shannon came definitely within the terms of appropriate support and was something we were called upon by the UN resolution to do. I do not intend to go over that ground again today, except to repeat that we are not participants in the war and that we will give appropriate support as we interpret it, in accordance with Resolution 678. What we have done does not constitute participation in terms of the wording of the Constitution. We have been over all that before and there is no point in going over it again.
With regard to the UN, as I keep repeating, we have an ambassador there. This is a matter of major importance for the UN and for all our personnel at the UN, and naturally they keep the UN Secretary General fully informed of anything we do. Furthermore, we discuss regularly if there is anything further that he or we can do, or that the UN can do.
Can I finally ask the Taoiseach——
We have to come to finality.
As I mentioned earlier, the Minister for Defence in Britain has indicated that they regard the destruction of the Iraqi armed forces in Iraq and the destruction of Saddam Hussein as coming within the terms of Resolution 678 and they referred to the phrase "the restoration of international peace and security" in order to justify that——
Let us have brevity, please.
Does the Taoiseach agree with that interpretation of Resolution 678 and if he does not, at what point will the appropriate support which the Government are giving be withdrawn in view of what I would regard at any rate as a breach of Resolution 678, if such action were to be pursued?
I do not feel called upon and it would be unwise to comment on statements issued by all sorts of people at this stage. My duty and the duty of the Government is to make sure that we in our decisions and actions conform with the resolutions as we see them. Basically we see the thrust of those resolutions to ensure the withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait. That is the principal objective of the Resolutions and it is to that end that we offer appropriate support as called upon by Resolution 678.
And no more.
A brief question from Deputy Michael D. Higgins and Deputy Garland.
The Taoiseach in his reply made several references to our ambassador to the UN. Has the ambassador offered an opinion to the Government in relation to compliance of Resolution 678 with Article 28.3's conditions in relation to, for example, concurrence? Will the Taoiseach indicate to the House, if he is satisfied that Resolution 678 has a conditionality to it which arises from the other Articles, how he or how the Government would decide when it was appropriate to support or not support Resolution 678, or when the obligations to which he referred in Resolution 678 would cease, and specifically if he received a request, would he insist on such a request being from the UN, and will the Taoiseach differentiate——
I would ask for brevity.
If such a request came from the UN, would the Taoiseach ask whether the facilities referred to freeing Kuwait or to the destruction of Iraq?
I am afraid we are getting into rather abstruse semantics at this stage. With regard to Deputy Higgins' question about the ambassador, on an important decision like that the Government take advice from all possible relevant sources. We did that on this occasion but the ultimate decision is for the Government who are responsible to this House. On the question as to the extent of the Resolution, we interpret the Resolutions as giving authority for the use of force to ensure the evacuation of Kuwait. To that extent we accord appropriate support to the member states who have undertaken that military action. I know the Secretary General of the UN has expressed himself in similar terms.
Would the Taoiseach agree that a real effort should be made at this stage to arrange a ceasefire before the land war gets under way? Will the Taoiseach further agree that this country has a unique and enviable standing as a neutral country and that we have a particular obligation to bring forward some initiatives in this area?
I dealt with that earlier in response to other questions. We are all aware that in this sort of situation history tells us that all sorts of people wish to get in on the act, and all sorts of initiatives of one kind or another are suggested. Very often they are more detrimental than beneficial. We can act most beneficially in two directions, first, through the UN by giving full support to the UN, and in that regard being alert to any possibility which will arise for the UN to take action or initiatives to secure a ceasefire or a cessation of hostilities or whatever. The second avenue available to us is the European Community. We are keeping in close contact with our partners with a view to availing of any possibilities that may offer for the Community to exercise a useful role or take some useful diplomatic or political initiative.
