Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 19 Oct 1995

Vol. 457 No. 3

Defence Forces UN Service: Motion

Minister for Defence (Mr. Barrett)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves of the report by the Minister for Defence pursuant to section 4 of the Defence (Amendment) Act, 1993.

In accordance with section 4 of the Defence (Amendment) Act, 1993, I wish to report to the House on Irish military participation in United Nations missions in 1994. The compilation of this report has afforded me, as a relatively new Minister for Defence, a very welcome opportunity to acquaint myself more fully with the various overseas operations in which Irish military personnel are involved. Two periods of service as Minister of State at the Department combined with my position as opposition spokesman on Defence and membership of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs had already given me a considerable knowledge of and keen interest in our overseas commitments. In my capacity as a member of the UN sub-group of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, I have visited the Middle East where most of our overseas troops are concentrated and I intend to visit the area again at the earliest opportunity.

I will speak first on the second United Nations operation in Somalia — UNOSOM II — in which our involvement ceased early this year.

As the House is aware, the then Government decided in February 1994 to replace the transport unit serving with UNOSOM II on completion of its tour of duty. The Second Transport Company took up duty on 7 March 1994. Concern for the security of the contingent led to the dispatch to Somalia of two SISU armoured personnel carriers held by the Defence Forces. These arrived at the Irish camp in Baidoa on 9 May.

The Second Transport Company continued the duties of the first Irish contingent operating a weekly supply convoy between Baidoa and Mogadishu, providing fuel, food, water and medical supplies to the military components of UNOSOM II in the Baidoa area. It also assisted in the movement of the stores and equipment of units deploying or redeploying in the mission area and provided assistance to non-Governmental humanitarian organisations.

Following a full scale review of the question of continued participation in UNOSOM II, the military authorities recommended against the provision of a further contingent from September 1994. The matter was considered by the Government on 20 July 1994 and it was decided not to replace the transport contingent serving in Somalia on completion of its tour of duty in September.

During 1994, the security situation in Somalia became increasingly unstable. Irish convoys came under attack on two occasions. The House has already been informed about the first incident which occurred on 15 March 1994 and was almost certainly unpremeditated. The second attack, which occurred in Baidoa on 12 August, was an attempted hijack which was frustrated by the alertness and rapid reactions of our personnel. We can consider ourselves very fortunate that, over a period of 12 months' service in Somalia, Irish troops escaped injury. The bulk of our UNOSOM contingent returned to Ireland by air on 20 September 1994. Six personnel accompanied our vehicles and equipment by sea, arrived home on 14 October and the three officers who held staff appointments at Force headquarters completed their tours of duty in January 1995.

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon — UNIFIL — is our largest single overseas commitment. The present contingent of 664 consists of a battalion of 574, a Deputy Force Commander, an element of 47 in UNIFIL Headquarters Camp Command, 13 staff personnel, 12 military police at UNIFIL Headquarters and 17 members of the Force Mobile Reserve. As part of an overall reduction in the strength of UNIFIL, in which eight other countries participate, the Irish contingent strength will be reduced by 33 in October 1995 and by a further 9 in April 1996. Since 25 April last, the position of Deputy Force Commander has been held by Brigadier-General Pearse Redmond.

The Irish battalion is deployed in south Lebanon with its headquarters in Tibnin. In 1994 it continued to carry out its mission by operating observation posts and checkpoints, by conducting extensive patrolling and maintaining a village presence and by providing humanitarian assistance to a variety of worthy causes such as the orphanage in Tibnin and some village medical clinics. The battalion carried out a number of controlled demolitions of explosives.

While 1994 was quieter than 1993, there was an upsurge in activity by armed elements in the latter half of the year and a number of serious firings occurred close to Irish positions. These resulted from attacks by armed elements on positions held by the Israeli-backed de facto forces. In one incident, on 17 July, a mortar round impacted within an Irish position causing a fire which destroyed the medical aid post, the company administration office and caused superficial damage to the canteen. The canteen had already been damaged earlier that day by two tank rounds impacting within the position. A billet and two defensive walls were also damaged in the first incident. On 3 November, there was a co-ordinated attack by armed elements on three compounds held by the de facto forces. The retaliatory fire resulted in four instances of heavy machine gun fire into or near Irish positions and in five shells impacting within one post. One round failed to detonate, the other four caused widespread and significant damage to buildings including eight accommodation units and also damaged three vehicles. The Government's grave concern regarding these incidents, which could have had very serious consequences for Irish personnel, was conveyed to the Israeli authorities by the Department of Foreign Affairs.

The Lebanese Army made further progress last year in deploying southward and established two permanent checkpoints in the UNIFIL area of operations, one in the Irish sector, for controlling the flow of goods into their country. The remaining Force to which Ireland provides a contingent is the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus — UNFICYP. Twenty-five Irish military personnel are currently serving with UNFICYP. Two officers and five NCOs are filling staff appointments at Force headquarters and a camp command component consisting of three officers and fifteen NCOs has been serving with the mission since 16 February 1994. From 10 April 1992 to 31 July 1994, the force was under the command of an Irish officer, Major-General Michael Minehane. Fifteen members of the Garda Síochána are also serving with the force.

In 1994, UNFICYP — which has a total military strength of 1,171 — continued to carry out its mandate "to use its best efforts to prevent a recurrence of fighting and, as necessary, to contribute to the maintenance and restoration of law and order and a return to normal conditions." The principal task of UNFICYP is the maintenance of a buffer zone between the lines of the Cypriot National Guard and the Turkish — Cypriot Forces. The force is also involved in humanitarian activities.

Apart from two Lieutenant-Colonels filling the appointments of personnel officer and supply officer in the field operations division of UN Headquarters, the remaining 43 personnel currently serving with the United Nations are attached to a total of seven observer missions of which I will speak shortly. Irish military involvement in ONUSAL — the United Nations Observer Group in EI Salvador — ended on 31 May 1994. The mission continues. From 24 August to 4 December 1994, 37 Irish military personnel served, as volunteers on special leave with pay, with UNHCR in Goma, assisting with the Rwandan refugee crisis.

In 1994, we continued to provide 17 officers to the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation in the Middle East — UNTSO — in which we have participated since 1958. However, the United Nations is implementing a reduction in the overall strength of UNTSO and Irish participation will reduce to 14 from 18 October 1995 and to 13 from February 1996. Our UNTSO observers are currently based in Israel, Syria, and Lebanon. UNTSO's main tasks today are concerned with the conflict between Israel and Lebanon and Syria, working closely with UNIFIL and UNDOF — the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force. It also maintains a presence in Egypt and Jordan although these fronts are now quiet.

Since February 1992, an Irish Colonel has been serving with OSGAP — the Office of the Secretary-General in Afghanistan and Pakistan as senior military adviser to the Secretary-General's personal representative. This mission is concerned with confirming violations of the Geneva Accords on the Settlement of the Situation Relating to Afghanistan and facilitating a comprehensive political settlement.

Irish participation in UNIKOM — the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission — continued in 1994. The number of officers serving with the mission increased from six to seven in July, all of whom are based in Kuwait in both staff and observer appointments. The mandate of UNIKOM involves monitoring the demilitarised zone established on the Iraq-Kuwait border following the Gulf War.

We also continued to provide officers to MINURSO — the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara. An additional three took up duty in June 1994 bringing to nine the total number of Irish officers serving as observers with this mission. In 1994, the officers continued their tasks at the Force headquarters in Laayoune and at sector and team sites throughout the mission area. Progress towards holding the referendum for which this mission was established has been very slow due to disagreement between the interested parties on the composition of the electoral register. The date for the referendum, originally planned for January 1992 is not yet known. Fifteen members of the Garda Síochána are also serving with this mission.

The number of Irish military personnel involved in UNPROFOR — the United Nations Protection Force in the former Yugoslavia — in 1994 varied between nine and ten employed on staff officer and observer duties. The force has now been retitled the United Nations Peace Forces (UNPF). Nine Irish military personnel are currently serving with the force in which 18 members of the Garda Síochána also participate. A further six members of the Permanent Defence Force are serving with the EU Monitor Mission in the former Yugoslavia.

On 2 October, 1994, two Irish officers were deployed for service, in a civilian capacity, with the International Conference on the former Yugoslavia. The role of this mission, which is co-chaired by the UN and EU, is to monitor the delivery of humanitarian aid across designated border crossing points between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Bosnia-Hercegovina.

The remaining UN mission in which Irish military personnel are involved is UNMIH — the United Nations Mission in Haiti. In September 1994, a request was received from the United Nations for two officers to serve as observers with the Advance Team of UNMIH. On 21 September, two officers took up duty as observers with the mission. The primary role of the advance team was to assess requirements and prepare for the deployment of UNMIH on completion of the mission of the multinational force. When this operation commenced, two officers were deployed, on 22 February 1995, to serve as staff officers with the mission and the two observers completed their tours of duty on 31 March 1995.

In 1994, there was a considerable reduction in the amount due to this country by the United Nations in respect of Irish participation in UN operations. Arrears payments totalling approximately £4.7 million were received. The amount currently outstanding, including the sum of £10.3 million due in respect of UNIFIL and a claim for approximately £1 million in respect of UNOSOM which will be presented shortly, amounts to about £12.4 million.

The annual extra cost, net of reimbursements, of our current UN commitments, is about £3.6 million. Normal pay and allowances of the 734 personnel involved amount to a further £13.9 million.

Notwithstanding the considerable undertaking which it represents both in financial and personnel terms, the Government remain committed, with due regard to the safety of our troops, to the principle of military participation in UN operations in the cause of international peace. As the UN celebrates the 50th anniversary of its foundation, we can reflect with justifiable pride that for 37 of those 50 years, Irish military personnel have been actively and continuously involved in UN missions, often in very senior positions. I am confident that our personnel will continue to serve the United Nations with distinction demonstrating, in practical ways, our support for the highest ideals of that organisation.

Mr. Power

I thank the Minister for outlining the position on our Defence Forces taking part in operations on behalf of the United Nations throughout the world. The extent of our participation may come as a surprise to many. While most people would be aware of our participation in Lebanon, our participation extends way beyond that. For 37 years Irish military personnel have played a full role in peace keeping throughout the world and I hope that can continue.

In 1993 when Deputy David Andrews was Minister for Defence we had a very interesting debate on the Defence Forces. For the first time we asked the Defence Forces to change their role from peace keeping to peace enforcement. While a number of amendments were tabled the only party who opposed the measure was Democratic Left. In fairness, we were asking our Defence Forces to take a big step which could have had serious consequences.

However, as the Minister has outlined there were no casualities during that period in Somalia although there were a couple of incidents that could have had serious consequences. For that reason it is important to have an annual look at the functions of our Defence Force and its participation with the United Nations. It is important not to commit people to vulnerable areas where death is the likely outcome.

If my memory serves me correctly soldiers who participated in UNOSOM II had to volunteer. That made participation much easier. The transport company worked well in very difficult circumstances during that operation. When the Irish military personnel became aware that the security position was becoming unstable they decided not to renew their operation. That was the right decision at the time.

As I live close to the Curragh I meet many of the military personnel who have served overseas and most soldiers look on serving in the United Nations as an opportunity to put into practice what they have been trained to do. While I understand there will be a reduction in the number of personnel serving in the Lebanon we must continue our involvement with the United Nations and peace keeping throughout the world. Our soldiers want to do it, it is good for them and they have been well received around the world. The character of our soldiers and the way in which they conduct themselves is acceptable in the United Nations.

I am critical of the way in which the United Nations is being taken over by one country. We cannot allow that to continue. The United Nations is made up of a number of nations, all of whose voices must be heard. The Minister referred to the financial implications, an area which deserves greater scrutiny. If the United Nations is to have continued success in its peace keeping operations throughout the world, it is important that it is funded properly. The position which obtained until now is unsatisfactory and must be changed. Recently, attempts were made to ensure that countries were paid pretty well on time for any expenses incurred. According to the figures presented by the Minister, arrears amount to almost £12.5 million. My information is that the United Nations has not made any contribution in the past six months. The United States is the biggest culprit in this regard. It appears the President of the United States is coming under severe pressure at home and has proposed a reduction in funding to the United Nations.

We have a proud record of serving for the United Nations right around the world. It costs us £3.6 million annually to participate in peace-keeping activities throughout the world on behalf of the United Nations and the least we can expect is to be compensated financially for that contribution. A shortfall of £12.5 million is serious for a small nation such as ours and I ask the Minister to indicate what is being done to recover that shortfall.

In the past 12 months there has been much debate in this House about the restructuring of our Defence Forces. There is widespread agreement that restructuring is necessary and while I do not want to make any political points about the way the matter is being handled, leaks occurred on the restructuring. Many rumours were circulating, for which there was no foundation, and, as the Minister knows, such rumours affect morale in a serious way.

Some years ago there was much unease among the members of our Defence Forces and morale was at an all time low. That was rectified to a large extent by the then Minister for Defence, Deputy Lenihan, who made enormous changes which created a better spirit within the Defence Forces. I would like to see that spirit restored.

I know the Minister's intentions are honourable and I wish him well in his efforts to restructure the Defence Forces but he has referred on many occasions to consultation taking place. I am not sure whether the average soldier would agree with the Minister in that regard. Many soldiers feel decisions are being made about their future with little or no consultation with them.

An Ceann Comhairle

I hesitate to interrupt the Deputy but I must remind him, and the House, that the report with which we are dealing relates largely, if not solely, to the operation of the Defence Forces overseas under the aegis of the United Nations or the European Union. I ask Members not to stray too far from the subject matter of this debate.

Mr. Power

I ask for your indulgence, a Cheann Comhairle, as I am about to ask a question. Part of the restructuring of the Defence Forces will involve a reduction in the overall strength of the force from approximately 13,000 to 11,500. Is it possible to maintain our UN commitments with such a reduction in our force?

An Ceann Comhairle

I understand the Minister will be replying in due course.

Mr. Power

UN duty provides an opportunity for members of our Defence Forces to put into practice what they have learned in training. I would not like our UN commitments to be reduced as a result of a reduction in the strength of our Defence Forces.

I agree with the Minister that it is important to maintain our policy of military participation in United Nations operations in the cause of peace throughout the world. We have a proud record in that regard. The members of the Defence Forces we have sent overseas have been great ambassadors for Ireland and they have portrayed a very favourable image of this country.

I thank the Minister for outlining the way in which our Defence Forces have served overseas and the wonderful job they have done. I wish to thank all the members of the Defence Forces who have participated in United Nations operations during the past 37 years. They brought great credit to this country. We are proud of them and long may it continue.

Mr. Clohessy

I welcome the Minister's contribution in which he gave a breakdown of the various forces overseas and I ask him to express our sincere thanks to the members of the Defence Forces who have done a great job participating in UN operations over many years. We are extremely proud of them and the work they have done.

As spokesperson for the Progressive Democrats, I welcome the Minister's report which arises out of the commitments made in the Defence (Amendment) Bill, 1993. In accordance with the provisions of the Bill we are in a position to debate the deployment of Irish troops on UN duty in peace enforcement operations in many of the world's trouble spots.

The transition from our traditional peace-keeping role to one of peace enforcement has been accomplished in the past year and while some concerns had been expressed about the move to enforcement, and all it entailed, the reality is that we must play our part in world security.

While some observers may feel that the change to enforcement from the traditional peace-keeping role is a significant step for a small country, we have to acknowledge the function of the United Nations in the world today. The UN is currently celebrating its golden jubilee so it is timely that we debate the role of the agency and how we see its future direction in relation to our Defence Forces.

The recent amendments to the Defence Act, which we are debating, authorised the commitment of Irish troops to any international force or body established by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations. In fact, the legislation allowed the participation of Irish Defence Forces in military operations sanctioned by the UN.

The organisation has come a long way since it began as the Moscow Declaration in 1943 when the allies agreed to establish an international agency to maintain peace and security in the wake of World War II. In 1945, the war ended and the United Nations was founded. Today there are 185 member states of the UN and it is a force for conflict resolution throughout the world.

The fact that Ireland as a small country is linked to such a vast organisation indicates our concern for world peace and security. The past 50 years have not been peaceful. While we in the west and in Europe generally reaped the benefits of peace in the post-war years, conflicts and confrontations flared up in many other parts of the world.

While many political and humanitarian observers may direct their criticism at the UN, the reality is that the organisation is, a force for peace among warring nations or states. The main criticisms now being levelled at the UN is that the agency does not act swiftly enough to prevent death and destruction in the world's trouble spots.

The organisation has also been criticised for being over-staffed, wasteful and engaged in questionable activities in some parts of the world where conflict continues. However, the question we must ask in this debate is, what value do we place on the saving of human life? There is no doubt that the actions of the UN have saved the lives of countless people in many parts of the world. As the UN celebrates its golden jubilee we must acknowledge its role, however limited or curtailed, in bringing hope and peace to many troubled nations.

The involvement of our Defence Forces with the UN goes back approximately 40 years. During that time we have played a significant role in UN operations in different parts of the world. As a nation with a proud history of independence and freedom, the participation of Irish troops in UN duties has a special significance to other states and people who value democratic principles and the right to self-determination. As the UN celebrates 50 years in existence it is important to remember that peace has not come to the world and trouble spots such as Bosnia, the Lebanon, Rwanda and the Middle East are still a cause for great concern.

One of the major changes in society over the past 50 years has been the rise in the power and influence of the media. Today we are instantly made aware of the major trouble spots throughout the world through the power of television, radio and the printed media. Within hours, television screens, the airwaves and news columns are filled with accounts of the latest war or outbreak of violence. We have seen the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, the mass murder of countless people in Rwanda and, even years after the conflict, the death of children who walked on leftover land mines in Cambodia.

In spite of all its powers, the media's ability to shock fades as war continues. During the debate on the 1993 Defence (Amendment) Act the situation in Somalia was headline news. Even though the images of conflict between the warring factions and the pictures of gunmen in open top transport, waving their weapons for the television viewers, have now faded one must ask if peace has been fully secured for that troubled country. Shortly afterwards, the new horrors in Rwanda took over the international agenda. The Irish troops were still in Somalia. It must be remembered that peace has not necessarily been secured in a country because it is not featured in the media.

We have been reminded of the horrors of Rwanda by the recent visit of President Robinson who made an eloquent plea for world action to defuse the time bomb resulting from last year's genocide. During her visit President Robinson visited two camps which house more than 800,000 Rwandan Hutu refugees. She said that while the conditions had improved since last year the underlying problems had still not been addressed and no effort had been made to restore justice. We take many of our democratic rights for granted and it is sobering to ponder on the plight of the many hundreds of thousands of people whose lives have been wrecked by civil and military strife.

I join in paying tribute not only to the Irish troops for their courage and concern for those affected by war but to all Irish aid workers who labour under the most trying and difficult conditions to bring comfort and hope to people traumatised by terror, weapons and conflict in many parts of the world. The Irish aid agencies are widely recognised as being very professional and well organised and they enjoy the widespread and wholehearted support of the public. Their work in the trouble spots of the world is vital for the restoration of peace. During the debate last year I said that it is all very well having policy documents and strategic plans but we must ensure that the troops who take part in peace enforcement missions are equipped on a par with the best in the world, that they are provided with the resources and equipment necessary to enable them to do a difficult job to the best of their ability.

It was with some disappointment, therefore, that I noted the Government's attempts to reduce the establishment strength of the Defence Forces which will undoubtedly affect our ability to take part in peace enforcement operations. It is proposed to reduce the establishment strength from more than 16,000 to 11,500 through a voluntary early retirement scheme. The danger is that the retirement terms will not be attractive enough to encourage soldiers to leave and as a result of the age profile of the Defence Forces will continue to increase. Under the present plans 1,300 soldiers will be made retire early. The decision to set the establishment figure at 11,500 means the military authorities will face pressure from the Department of Finance to achieve those cuts. The inference is obvious: if the cuts are not achieved then the finance for training and equipment may not be forthcoming. The objective of enabling the Defence Forces to become a more mobile and leaner organisation by revamping the command and brigade structure may be in serious doubt because of a lack of finance. I urge the Minister to ensure that the Defence Forces are given adequate finance to uphold an acceptable level of training and participation in UN operations.

Prior to the debate I consulted with my party colleagues who in general are satisfied that the provisions of the Defence (Amendment) Act, 1993, are working well. I welcome the information given to the House by the Minister and pay tribute to him in that respect. However, there are broader questions of national and Government policy which will flow from our participation in UN operations, be they peace keeping or peace enforcement. While I acknowledge that there is a certain amount of danger involved in peace keeping there is also national prestige to be gained and, more importantly, our membership of the European Union is underlined to the world. As I have said in the past, we must play our full part as the EU moves towards a collective security approach.

The founding principle of the UN 50 years ago was the desire for peace and security in the world. That is still a noble and achievable concept. I hope that the International Law Commission will present a final draft code of crimes against peace and security to the UN. It is only through a truly global approach that we can hope to win peace and security for all people.

Mr. Bell

I thank the Minister for his most interesting report. In many respects it is a progress report on the role and administration of the Defence Forces which are deployed in many countries. On my way into the Dáil this morning I passed a number of young troops who obviously have just returned from duty in the Lebanon — they were wearing dress uniforms and UN berets. As a former member of the Defence Forces who served with them for 29 years at almost every rank I felt a great sense of pride when I saw those young soldiers who carry out their work at great risk and sacrifice to them and their families. The few extra pounds they receive does not compensate them for this work which requires them to be constantly alert, highly trained and highly motivated or for the sacrifice they make by being separated from their wives, children and families. This House and the public generally do not fully appreciate the sacrifices made by these men and women who work in isolated and dangerous areas in the interest of securing peace throughout the world. They are highly thought of in every country in which they have served and have never been in conflict with the native populations. They have always been able to bridge the gap between the warring factions. They have suffered the loss of comrades at officer, NCO and private rank who gave their lives in the interests of peace.

I thank the Minister for presenting a detailed report of the operation of the Act. It was necessary for him to do so. People talk about the cost involved in sending troops abroad, but there is a more important element. The Defence Forces have gained valuable experience under war conditions while serving abroad. This cannot be gained on training manoeuvres in the Curragh Camp, the Glen of Imaal or Aiken Barracks in Dundalk. Within the financial constraints imposed on the Minister, we should respond favourably to as many requests as possible to provide troops because the officers, NCOs and privates of the Defence Forces are the greatest ambassadors we can send abroad. I have seen at first hand the valuable contribution they made and continue to make in the interests of peace throughout the world.

Although they lost a sizeable number of officers, NCOs and privates in the Congo this did not deter the Defence Forces; they did not run away simply because they had lost some comrades in that bloody battle, rather they have consistently sought permission to participate in peace keeping and observer missions in areas of conflict when requested to do so by the United Nations.

There was a reference to the reorganisation of the Defence Forces and the Price Waterhouse report in particular. It has been suggested that if the recommendation of a three brigade structure, consisting of approximately 11,500 men, is accepted the operations of the Defence Forces will be affected not alone here, but abroad. I do not accept this. It has to be recognised that the average age of personnel within the Defence Forces is rising beyond what would be considered reasonable in normal circumstances. There are many reasons for this, one of which may be that members of the Defence Forces now feel that their employment is more secure than it was 20 years ago when rates of pay and conditions were appalling. Having served in barracks in Cork, Waterford, Kilkenny and along the Border I am aware of the conditions under which they had to serve. Thankfully, those conditions have been substantially improved primarily because successive Governments began to recognise the value of the Defence Forces.

In 1969 there was not even a platoon of regular troops serving along the Border when companies such as the 8th Battalion had to man all Border posts in appalling conditions. If memory serves me correctly, there were approximately 4,500 operational troops in total. In Aiken Barracks in Dundalk, then known as Dundalk Military Barracks, there were six regular troops responsible for administering the affairs of the FCA units. There were no barracks in Monaghan or Cootehill and only a non-operational military post — a Slua hall — in Castleblayney. There was nothing between Cavan barracks and Finner Camp in County Donegal. This was deplorable.

Much has changed since then. The conflict in the North during the past 25 years has focused the minds of successive Governments on the necessity of having a well trained and disciplined Permanent Defence Force. Service with the United Nations abroad is one of the best ways to achieve that objective. It should be borne in mind that non-operational troops account for 40 per cent of the total strength of the Defence Forces. I am convinced, therefore, that a total of 11,500 men in three well organised, well trained and properly equipped brigades would be adequate to meet our requirements at home and abroad for the foreseeable future unless there is further conflict in Northern Ireland.

I encourage the Minister to introduce an attractive early retirement scheme for members of the Defence Forces. The early retirement scheme for the public service introduced by a Fianna Fáil Government proved successful in that many public servants who had reached a certain age found it attractive to retire. This allowed the recruitment of many younger people when Government policy subsequently changed.

The Defence Forces are an integral part of the overall public service. The scheme would be attractive to encourage long serving members to opt for early retirement on a reasonable income. In this way the Government and the Oireachtas will have recognised the service provided by these men and women.

The members of the Defence Forces need have no worries about the intention of the Government. Having spoken to the Minister I am satisfied that every effort will be made to make the package as attractive as possible within the financial constraints imposed. We are talking about taxpayers' money and part of the public service. Public service schemes have been introduced by successive Governments and the scheme for the Defence Forces can be measured against those.

Many officers are half the age of NCOs and men serving in battalions overseas. Young men and women are appointed and trained as cadets and officers but the level of recruitment within the ranks is much lower. The age level should be reduced.

Three options were recommended in the Price Waterhouse report and the Minister opted for the third one proposed by the Defence Forces. I am delighted he did so because he will have the support of the majority of those in the force.

The closure of barracks is not directly related to this debate but the previous Minister met a delegation from a subcommittee which I chaired and gave a clear indication which was conveyed to RACO and PDFORRA that no barracks would be closed during the Government's term of office. I am sure that guarantee will be honoured. However, no Minister can say what will happen in the future if there is a change of Government. The Opposition should not dig its own grave because if there is a change of Government it might be called upon to fill it. This is such an important issue that we should reach a consensus.

Mr. Power

The Opposition will be very responsible.

Mr. Bell

If we disagree in the House there will be conflict about the matter. I am satisfied with the guarantee given by the previous Minister that no barracks will be closed during the term of office of this Government.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is not relevant to the issue before us which relates to the operations of the Defence Forces overseas. The Minister's speech homed in on that.

Mr. Bell

I mentioned that at the out-set but I feel passionately about the issue. However, I apologise for straying from the subject matter before us. Few Members served in the Defence Forces but it is important to those of us who did so. The last person in the House to serve as an officer was Mr. Charles Haughey and we saluted each other every morning for that reason.

Mr. M. Smith

How?

Mr. Bell

I was in Aiken Barracks at a stand down parade for a former colleague on Sunday morning. The media really only want to know about the Defence Forces if there is a conflict but they do not want to know about its mission and how it serves the country. If there was a row in the House about the Price Waterhouse report and what the Minister was or was not doing the Defence Forces would get plenty of bad publicity. This is good publicity and I hope it is recognised that this is the first time a Minister has put on record a detailed report on the operations of the force.

I visited the Western Sahara as a member of an all-party group. We went to the battle zone where the Polisario were fighting the Moroccans. I am glad there is an Irish presence there. The Moroccans are trying to populate their area so that the result of the referendum will be in their favour. This has not gone unnoticed by the Departments of Defence and Foreign Affairs. I would like to visit the area when the referendum is being held, if I can be facilitated.

Mr. M. Smith

I thank the Minister for his detailed statement to the House. It makes very sober reading and shows the extent to which this country has become involved in peace-keeping and to some extent peace enforcement in many places from Somalia to the Lebanon, Cyprus, Pakistan, Goma and so on. It reflects the conflicts and problems which have beset the world. It is an extraordinary feature of modern life that while there has been a major enhancement of educational facilities, a reduction in malnutrition, an increase in medical technology, major scientific advance and an explosion in information technology many small countries still face the raw struggle for independence or are involved in conflicts which are made worse by bigger countries pursuing their interests. Ordinary people are caught in the middle and are exposed to incalculable atrocities, suffering, starvation and death.

Any Government would be proud to be involved to whatever extent is possible in peace-keeping and peace enforcement. However, it is not an easy task and while I do not wish to dwell on the expense that might be incurred it is an outright shame that enormous sums of money are due to the UN from many big countries. I would prefer to concentrate on the extent to which changes can be made in an evolving world so that we can contribute towards making the UN more effective.

There has also been considerable acrimony about the failure of the United Nations, not least in Bosnia where many people believed it should be possible to take more decisive action to prevent the atrocities and promote peace there. I do not think the founders of the United Nations visualised some of the problems that would arise.

The end of the Cold War must be heralded as an outstanding and welcome development. There is however the other side of the argument, with the US being considered as policeman for the rest of the world. We must continue to contribute towards helping the United Nations to play a more effective role in discharging its responsibilities and bringing to an end the human trauma and tragedy of death, starvation and ever-increasing ethnic conflicts.

This morning the Minister referred to involvement in the UN by a relatively small unit of our Defence Forces. We should pay tribute to and congratulate all the members of the Defence Forces who have done this country proud in many parts of the world since our first involvement in the Congo in 1958, three years after we joined the United Nations. Tribute should also be paid to the wives and families of these people who often suffer when their loved ones are involved in conflicts and in great danger.

The Minister briefly referred to reports published in the last 12 months on changing circumstances, difficulties that must be faced and extraordinary near misses in Lebanon, where in the last year thankfully no Irish lives were lost nor did injuries occur.

The review of the Maastricht Treaty at the Intergovernmental Conference next year will afford an opportunity to see to what extent this country will participate in a common defence policy. Our party has made it absolutely clear that while we see a continuing and distinctive role for this country, under no circumstances will we consider joining existing military alliances such as the Western European Union and NATO, particularly because of their policy on first attack nuclear warfare. There is need for flexibility and for decisions by the people on a case by case basis. The change in the Defence Act relating to peace enforcement will be a continuing feature in decisions taken by the Government on training and restructuring the Defence Forces in the future.

Notwithstanding what Deputy Bell said, the Minister can be satisfied that Fianna Fáil supports restructuring of the Defence Forces. We were in Government when the necessity for these changes was examined. The age profile of the Defence Forces needs to be considered. We support the retirement package and hope it will be generous and effective. However a recruitment drive must be undertaken simultaneously because a retirement package on its own would not be sufficient to deal with the age profile. A recruitment programme must be devised as soon as possible.

Commitments have been given but we are not sure whether they have been honoured in full, particularly in terms of consultation. It is important that Defence Forces personnel working in the United Nations who must carry out certain tasks and take risks in the performance of their duties are adequately consulted so that they understand where their future lies and have confidence that the Government will discharge its responsibility impartially. We do not wish to exacerbate problems. We are aware that changes must be made, but they must be made gradually to be effective. The Government can be sure of support from this side of the House provided the consultative process is developed in a credible way and has the support of the people working at officer, NCO and other levels.

Fianna Fáil supports our continuing involvement in the United Nations. On the basis of the figures given by the Minister there are problems in terms of finances, but we cannot allow them to inhibit our involvement in peace-keeping and peace enforcement operations. Many areas in the world cry out for peace-keeping measures. Originally the idea was that the United Nations would become involved only with the agreement of conflicting parties. Ireland, because of its non-colonial past, has been a welcome contributor to the UN. Unfortunately there are many areas to which the United Nations is unable to commit itself in terms of humanitarian aid and peace-keeping tasks which are essential for stability and security. The possibility of becoming involved in those areas must be enhanced and we will do everything possible to support the Government in providing resources, performing tasks and undertaking negotiations on delicate and sensitive areas. Fianna Fáil's support for these developments will continue.

Mr. Deasy

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Last week in a very interesting statement on RTE a Dublin man, who was interviewed in Villierstown, County Waterford, famous as the home of John Treacy, recalled past experiences and some of the proudest moments of his life. One was in the early 1960s when the Irish UN contingent paraded down O'Connell Street on their way to the Congo and were led by none other than the Captain of the Guard, Captain Cathal Ó Laoghaire. He remembers him as a striking figure who, shortly before that, had been the captain of the victorious Dublin All Ireland team — that is an interesting connection between the United Nations and Leinster House.

That is the nice part of my speech and now war breaks out. What I say is my own personal opinion and not necessarily a reflection on my party. My views probably reflect those held by some members of all parties but not the majority. I do not agree that the sole purpose of our UN membership should be peace-keeping activities. I speak as someone whose family has been in the armed forces for many years, going back to 1916 and 1921-22 and subsequently in the Army. My father and my two brothers were in the Army.

I make no apologies for my views but neutrality as we practise it is a cop-out and I would term it cowardice at times. People have a phobia about being neutral in all things military but I do not agree. We have a duty to protect the umbrella of civilisation under which we live and prosper. The one time I remember that our armed forces were given the authority by this House to act in a military fashion, if necessary, was when the Irish UN force went to Somalia and they had the right to fight back if attacked because it was a matter of life or death. The remit of peace enforcement as distinct from peace-keeping was taken on board on that occasion, which is the only occasion I can recall since the foundation of the State and it is a role we should be prepared to adopt at all times.

Yesterday the Foreign Affairs Committee received three delegations, first, a delegation from the Kuwaiti Parliament, second, the Croatian Ambassador and finally the Ambassador from Bosnia-Hercegovina to the United Kingdom, Professor Muhamed Filipovic. We talk about getting involved in humanitarian missions but when Professor Filipovic was in Ireland about six weeks ago he launched a blistering attack on Ireland for not taking a more active role in the situation in Bosnia. He is a Muslim but, as he pointed out, the conflict is not just Muslims against Serbs or Serbs against Croatians but a very complicated dispute. The fact that he is a Bosnian Muslim does not mean he does not represent Bosnian Serbs or Bosnian Croats. People do not align themselves simply according to their nationality, it is a more complex situation.

We have allowed ourselves to stand "idly by", to paraphrase a former Taoiseach, and watch hundreds of thousands of innocent people being massacred in former Yugoslavia and primarily in Bosnia. I do not believe we were right to do that and everything that the Ambassador said when he last visited Ireland is correct. We have been very remiss in not taking a stand and not protecting innocent people when they were being massacred. Perhaps we had an excuse during the Second World War — several excuses could have been put forward such as we were a new nation, we were not militarily prepared to fight and not sufficiently informed of the horrific crimes being perpetrated by Hitler and the Nazis. On this occasion we have no excuse. We have known of the concentration camps, of the massacres and the murder of men, women and children during the past four years and still we see fit not to take part in any military force which would attempt to assist those unfortunate Bosnian people. I do not believe that is right and the majority of Irish people do not believe it is right. I would welcome a referendum on this issue. Yesterday the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs when responding to questions, one of which I tabled, said there was no question of Ireland taking part in a European army because the question has not yet arisen. If the question does arise, and I anticipate it will, when the integration of Europe becomes more solidified I would be a proponent of those who wish us to be part of a greater European army, not for any aggressive purpose but to protect society and civilisation in western Europe. I do not have time for people with a contrary view——

Mr. Power

That is not very democratic.

Mr. Deasy

——as I think it is a cop-out, cowardice. We cannot expect to reap the benefits of membership of the European Union and the civilisation it brings with it and at the same time not contribute to the defence of people in the Union and people in other parts of Europe who are not in the Union such as those in former Yugoslavia. I hear representatives of certain organisations say they do not want to be involved in military conflict in spite of having been recruited to the Irish Army. I wonder why people join the Army. Why do we need an army if we are not prepared to fight? The peace-keeping role of the United Nations is praiseworthy but this is not what an army is constituted to do. We must be prepared to accept responsibility for protecting innocent people who are being slaughtered in our vicinity and, in my view, that extends to every country in Europe.

Deputies often mention the neutrality of countries like Finland, Austria and Sweden. Those countries have not always been neutral, some not even in modern times. It is but a couple of hundred years since the Swedes were on the rampage, and they were quite a potent military force. It is only 55 years since the Finns were at war and only 50 years since the Austrians were assisting Hitler. The neutrality of some countries, who purport to be neutral, is of recent origin and is very utilitarian.

I look forward to a referendum on this issue. The Irish people have much more backbone than many people suspect. They do not want to see another human tragedy, such as we witnessed in Bosnia over the past four years, while we sit on the sideline, impotent and unwilling to go to people's assistance.

However, I give the utmost praise to the aid agencies here and to the individuals in those agencies who have gone to Bosnia, to the dangerous areas of Sarajevo and other sectors to distribute aid and to nurse the injured and the dying. They have done wonderful work. A limited number of personnel from the Army and the Garda Síochána were also there as observers in Bosnia and other flashpoints.

We are observers at the Western European Union, military alliance. This is not sufficient. It is time we got involved and played our part in protecting the civilisation of which we are a part. We must have an army that is capable of playing its part on behalf of the innocent people of this world. If the Army is not used for the benefit of such people, would it be better employed aiding the civil authorities, particularly the Garda Síochána, in combating crime which is rampant. The question I pose today is why do we have an Army and if it is not prepared to fight and defend the innocent, do we need it? That question should be answered, and it is being evaded under the humbug of neutrality. We are living in different times. We are reaping the benefits of our membership of the European Union, but we are not prepared to do anything in return. By that I mean defending those people who are defenceless and who are being murdered everyday.

I ask the Government, the Members of this House and the people of this country to review their strategy and thinking on this matter, because we have not been playing our part as defenders of the weakest section of the communities in Europe.

Minister of State at the Department of Defence (Mr. J. Higgins)

On behalf of the Minister, and on my own behalf, I would like to thank all the Deputies who contributed to this very constructive debate. We welcome the opportunity to having a regular reappraisal of the role of our Defence Forces, in this case in the context of world service and world peace.

I will deal with Deputy Deasy's comments in a few moments but first I want to thank Deputy Power whose roots go back a long way in terms of service. His father had responsibility for the Department of Defence, and he comes from a constituency with a high military presence. Deputy Power mentioned the issue of funding from the United Nations which is of concern to the Government. The Tánaiste recently raised the matter with the United Nations and will continue to do so because peace does not come cheaply and the enormous efforts we are making entitle us to the financial assistance that is overdue.

The Minister recently spelled out in clear detail the stratagem for the development of the Defence Forces, and fundamental to that is consultation, dialogue and consensus. That is what the Minister will embark upon to ensure that any rationalisation does not lead to gross depletion of the efficacy and efficiency of the Defence Forces or infringe on our commitment to the United Nations. There is no question of any diminution of our commitment to the United Nations.

Deputy Clohessy is to be complimented for his support and for differentiating between peace-keeping and peace enforcement. We would like to think that peace enforcement, that is, peace-making, is a new definition of the role of our troops overseas. On the point made by Deputy Deasy, there is no question but that soldiers are trained to fight and it is in that context that they undertake their difficult missions. They will not flinch from any challenge. However, in terms of discharging their peace-keeping role, one hopes the conflict will be short——

Mr. Power

Unfortunately Deputy Deasy has not waited for the Minister's reply.

Mr. J. Higgins

——and that the number of times they have to go into action will be minimised. However, in the case of challenge or confrontation, there is no question but that our soldiers will fight as they have been trained to do.

I thank Deputy Bell for his valuable personal insight as a former serving member of the Defence Forces. We all share a sense of pride at the return of our troops. The 77th Battalion will be returning in three separate groups over the next few weeks, and one will see a definite bounce in their step, having successfully accomplished their mission in South Lebanon. In that regard it is important that Ministers and Ministers of State continue, as they have done, to visit our troops overseas. We are one of the few countries who send Ministers overseas to meet their soldiers and see what they do; seeing is believing. One must see the degree of commitment, skill and expertise with which they carry out their duties.

Mr. Power

Deputy Bell suggested extending that.

Mr. J. Higgins

We will consider that from the point of view of those who have an interest in, and have given a long service to, the Defence Forces. In regard to the morale of the force, it is important that personnel know they have the collective support of the people at home and that Ministers go overseas on a regular basis to see them in action.

The Defence Forces are part of the public service. Therefore, in endeavouring to make all agencies in the public service more effective, their operations must be examined. We are committed to rationalisation and effectiveness, there is no question of depletion.

I thank Deputy Michael Smith for his keen analysis of the consequences of conflict. As he stated, invariably the innocent suffer, the civilian population, those in the front line. He paid due tribute to the soldiers' wives who retain the stability of domestic life while troops serve overseas. I pay tribute to the women personnel who play a valuable part in overseas operations. This is an increasing aspect of the development of the Defence Forces. I also thank Deputy Smith for his support for the retirement package and for his constructive appraisal of the reality of the present position and the future role of the Defence Forces.

As usual, Deputy Deasy made a thought provoking contribution and is entitled to raise the issue of neutrality. Neutrality has stood our Defence Forces in good stead. It has been the cornerstone of their acceptability as effective peace-keepers that has made them so popular overseas. It is a well known fact that the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Defence and the Government in general is inundated with requests from the United Nations and elsewhere for the participation of our troops in areas of conflict. The fact that we are independent, neutral, non-aligned and can discharge our duties without any taint of alignment to one side or the other, with total impartiality, is a major factor in the success of our troops overseas. To suggest we have stood idly by is not fair. We are not standing idly by in Cyprus or the Lebanon, nor did we stand idly by in the Congo. Our soldiers go to such places to discharge their duties in the manner in which Deputy Deasy wants, to protect civilian populations from massacre.

Deputy Deasy referred to the conflict in Bosnia-Hercegovina. On numerous occasions the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs made the strong views of the Government and country known in regard to our displeasure with what is taking place there. However, in terms of our size, we must put matters in perspective.

Having just returned from a visit to Irish troops serving with the United Nations in Lebanon, Cyprus and Israel I am fully aware of the tremendous value that service with United Nations missions has for the personnel of our Defence Forces. I was struck by the dedication of Irish military personnel to the important work they are undertaking in the cause of international peace.

Apart from meeting and observing the work of our personnel, which was the primary purpose of my visit, I had meetings with senior military and political figures. In Lebanon I had discussions with the force commander, Major-General Stanislaw Wozniak and the Deputy force commander, Brigadier-General Pierce Redmond. The fact that an Irish officer holds such a prestigious appointment in the force demonstrates the high esteem in which the Irish Defence Forces is held by the United Nations. General Redmond is, of course, only one of the many Irish officers to have filled very senior appointments in United Nations missions. In Beirut, I also met Mr. Muhsin Dalloul, the Lebanese Minister for Defence.

For the individual soldier, peace-keeping can present a major challenge. Potentially difficult situations are routinely defused by Irish soldiers using common sense and diplomacy, combined with the highest professional military standards. In keeping the peace in Lebanon, our soldiers have won the confidence and support of people who come from a very different cultural background. The success of Irish troops in the manner they relate to the local community is nothing short of remarkable.

Apart from peace-keeping and peace making, I was struck by the considerable humanitarian dimension of their work. I visited an orphanage in Tibnin sponsored mainly by Irish troops from their own resources and while I was there a new kitchen was being fitted. Those sponsoring and managing the orphanage pay great tribute to the Irish troops who sleep in the orphanage when shelling takes place.

While in Cyprus I met Mr. Gustave Feissel, Chief of Mission of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, Brigadier-General Ahti Vartiainen, force commander and Colonel John Powell, chief of staff. General Vartiainen's predecessor was an Irish officer, Major-General Michael Minehane, who held the appointment of force commander from April 1992 to July 1994. People who are under any misapprehension about the role of the Irish troops or believe that international peacekeeping involves a soft touch, they have only to walk the buffer zone between the conflicting Turkish and Greek forces, who are only yards apart, to note the tremendous work being done by the troops. As a result of their presence only trivial incidents arise. There is potential for enormous conflict in such areas if United Nations personnel were not present.

A total of 734 military personnel are currently serving with ten United Nations missions in 14 countries as follows: Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Cyprus, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Western Sahara, Croatia, Bosnia-Hercegovina — for Deputy Deasy's information — Macedonia, Haiti, Serbia and USA as well as in the United Nations Headquarters in New York. The number of Irish military personnel currently serving overseas with United Nations missions represents 5.6 per cent of our armed forces. This equates to 203 personnel per million of population. Irish military personnel have also rendered service in United Nations missions in Iran, Namibia, Zaire/Congo, West Guinea, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Angola, Cambodia, El Salvador, Iraq and Somalia.

The preservation of peace is not achieved easily or without cost to members of the Defence Forces and we are all very much aware of the sacrifices often required in order that the defenceless may be protected and made safe. We remember with deep gratitude the courage and heroism of those members of the Defence Forces who have died, or suffered injury, so that communities torn by strife can have an opportunity to live in peace and security. I recently had the pleasure of laying the first wreath at a memorial erected by a young private from Donegal at the command headquarters in Nakura in memory of those who lost their lives on overseas duties.

The professional advantages of services with UN missions are very substantial. The benefits in regard to training are particularly evident in the context of our UNIFIL contingent. In Lebanon our battalion personnel from junior NCO rank upwards have the opportunity to exercise command in dangerous operational situations. Valuable experience is gained in patrolling and defusing tension. There is much to be learned from holding staff appointments in force headquarters. Interaction with contingents of other countries and exposure to methods employed by them is also very beneficial. The wide experience gained from participation in UN peacekeeping operations is of benefit, not only to the Defence Forces in the discharge of their functions in aid of the civil power but also to various Government Departments and local authorities who, as occasion demands, have reason to avail of emergency services provided by the Defence Forces.

The wealth of expertise within the Defence Forces in UN peacekeeping led to the decision to establish a UN school at the Curragh which opened on 16 September 1993. The school was established with a view to filling a perceived need for a central institution to study and devise doctrine, determine training needs, conduct specifically designed peace-keeping training, study the operational implications of various UN mandates and analyse the training required to ensure troops in peace-keeping operations are properly prepared to fulfill the requirements of the specific mandate under which they operate. In addition to its education and training role, this school also maintains contact with developments in the military forces of other States involved in peace-keeping in order to exchange and update doctrine and procedures.

Numerous courses have already been conducted for Irish personnel going on overseas duty and an international observer and staff officer course was held for overseas students in the period 5-23 June last. Because of the well established reputation of the Irish in the field of peace-keeping, there was great interest in this course and we have already had inquiries about next year's international course.

On 21 September 1993, the Government approved a statement of the roles of the Defence Forces which included participation in United Nations missions in the cause of international peace. I assure the House of this Government's continued commitment to involvement in United Nations peace-keeping operations. I thank Members for their contributions.

Mr. Power

The Minister came into the House and gave us a detailed account of service by our Defence Forces with the United Nations and I thank him for the honest and frank manner in which he dealt with the questions we raised during that debate.

Question put and agreed to.