Vol. 458 No. 7
7 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Defence if he has satisfied himself that our armed forces are adequately trained and equipped for duties as peace enforcers, and, if so decided by the Government and Dáil Éireann, as members of an EU controlled Army. [14991/95]
Traditionally our armed forces involvement in overseas missions, which began in 1958, has been limited to a peacekeeping or observer-monitoring role, under the auspices of the United Nations. The only departure from our traditional role occured when we sent a transport company to Somalia to participate in UNOSOM II. That mission had a peace-enforcement element. However, because our involvement took the form of providing essential supplies to the military components of UNOSOM II and assisting humanitarian agencies in the region, I believe that the departure from the traditional role was more apparent than real and that our involvement in Somalia was compatible with the traditional peacekeeping role. Our transport company performed with great credit in Somalia and without sustaining or causing any casualties.
Since UNOSOM II, there have been no further requests that Ireland participate in a peace-enforcement role. If any such request were to be received it would have to be considered in the light of available resources and the requirements at home. Furthermore, the question would arise as to the role envisaged for an Irish contingent in any proposed force with particular reference to whether and to what extent Irish troops might be expected to take part in operations of a belligerent nature.
The Tánaiste, in a reply on 18 October to a question from the Deputy, made clear that Ireland has not been asked to join a European army in the EU or any other context. The Government is not aware of any proposals for a European army, and even if such proposals were to be forthcoming, which is highly unlikely, they would not form the basis for the agreement in the 1996 Intergovermental Conference. The intergovernmental Conference will include a review of the Common Foreign and Security Policy provisions of the Maastricht Treaty, including, as specified in article J4 of the treaty, the "question of a common defence policy for the Union, which might lead in time to a common defence."
Discussions in the Intergovernmental Conference in this regard are likely to encompass the contribution that the EU might make to improving European capabilities in conflict prevention and crisis management, which would include such areas as peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, and co-operation on such matters as search and rescue tasks. The institutional relationship between the EU and the Western European Union will also be under review. Incidentally the Deputy might note that the issues I have just mentioned and all related issues will be addressed fully in the context of the forthcoming White Paper on Foreign Policy.
The Minister's answer begs the question: do we need an army? What purpose does it serve? Did the Minister, the Government and other Deputies feel any sense of guilt during the massacres in Bosnia for not attempting to intervene with a peace enforcement unit like most other countries in the civilised world? Did he offer at any time to help the innocents who were being massacred?
The Deputy is aware that requests come from the UN and we do not offer. The UN requests and we consider. As far as I am aware no such request was made.
I hope Ireland will continue to play an important role in peacekeeping and in other humanitarian missions. An army is like an insurance policy — we need it when there are problems and when there are no problems people wonder why we have it. I am proud of the fact that over the years the Defence Forces have carried out important tasks on behalf of the civil power — UN missions, Border duty and so forth.
We have been well served by people who have dedicated their lives to serving in our Defence Forces, whether it is the Army, the Naval Service or the Air Corps. The Naval Service has an important role in fishery surveillance while the Air Corps has an equally important role in aiding the civil power in search and rescue and in many other tasks, including carrying patients to and from hospitals. This important work is, perhaps, not noticeable on a day to day basis.
It is easy to ask if we need an army. I believe we do and I am proud that we have participated and will continue to participate in UN missions when requested. I do not know how peacekeeping or the relationship between the European Union and the UN will develop in the future. However, the Deputy is aware that our neutrality is built into our Constitution and it will not be for this House to decide, if we ever do, that we want to be part of European armies. It will be up to the people to decide that issue. That is not on the agenda at present and in the meantime we will continue to play an important role in peacekeeping and other humanitarian missions.
How was it that the Dutch, Danish, Ukranian, British, French and other armies were involved in peacekeeping and peace enforcement in Bosnia? Were they asked by the United Nations or did they volunteer? Were we asked by the United Nations or did we attempt to volunteer?
There was a long debate in this House when the legislation was amended to allow our troops to go to Somalia. Traditionally, we have been involved in peackeeping and there were misgivings about the issue of peace enforcement.
Perhaps we are straying into foreign policy. We supply troops when we are requested to do so. Foreign policy decisions are taken by the Department of Foreign Affairs. We have a limited number of officers in former Yugoslavia monitoring on behalf of the EU and we will continue to carry out such tasks.
If troops go into another country they should know exactly what they are expected to do because the day we lose respect for the blue beret is the day the effectiveness of peacekeeping will be brought into question. The people of that country must accept that UN troops are there to assist them rather than regard them as the enemy. The UN cannot involve itself in other people's wars without knowing what result it is trying to achieve. I am anxious that our troops continue to involve themselves in peacekeeping exercises that are clearly defined so that we know what we are trying to achieve.
If there is a future request for Irish troops to be involved in UN missions in Bosnia Herzgovina we will consider it. We have not received such a request so the issue does not arise.
I am sorry to labour the point but I asked a simple question. Did all the countries which took part in peacekeeping and peace enforcement duties in Bosnia volunteer to send their armies or were they asked to do so? Did we receive a similar request or did we volunteer?
I have been advised that no request was received by us. I cannot answer the Deputy's question regarding what other countries did.
I understand Deputy Deasy's questions and statements. However, there is a big difference between peace enforcing and peacekeeping. Our history of peacekeeping has made us acceptable throughout the world. There was a lengthy discussion in the House when we changed that role — Deputy Andrews was Minister for Defence at the time. It would be highly irresponsible for us to send our troops to Bosnia. It is only when the body bags come home that the reality sinks in. The Deputy's line of argument is ridiculous.
So we let every other nationality take the rap.
I would not ask the Army to go where I would be afraid to go.
We should proceed by way of questions.
Do we need the Army?
Does the Minister believe there is a great deal of enthusiasm on the part of the officers and men and their wives and children for us to demand that we volunteer their services to play a peace enforcement role in Bosnia? Perhaps if the Minister found a great groundswell of public opinion he might be able to answer Deputy Deasy's question.
I can answer the question in a different way. Anybody who visits Lebanon will soon find out that the Irish troops are not in a holiday camp. They have risked their lives there in the interests of peace for 17 years. They are still in dangerous situations. I have no doubt that the Defence Forces if asked to serve on a peacekeeping mission will be pleased to do so.
My earlier remarks were general. One cannot compare the Irish Defence Forces with the American or British armed forces. We do not have the heavy equipment and military machinery that is necessary for peace enforcement. There is no real definition of peace enforcement. We are not interested in acting as aggressors; we are interested in peacekeeping.
It would be wrong to let this occassion pass by leaving an impression that our Defence Forces are not required. We have gained such a reputation in peacekeeping that even the US sends officers to our UN school to learn about it. People realise that if we want world peace we need to use the people who know how to bring it about to sustain it. The Irish Army has been exceptional in what it has achieved over the years. Its members have risked their lives and we are proud of them. I would not like to give the impression that we are not prepared to play our part in peacekeeping. We are prepared to play our part. We sent a transport company into Somalia as part of the peace enforcement exercise but our troops were mainly involved in peacekeeping in that they provided food for other troops and agencies' personnel who were there on humanitarian grounds. We could not have sent our troops into Mogadishu to free up the port because we did not have the fire power, but the Americans did. We do a good job in peace keeping and I am anxious that we continue that role.
I recognise and endorse the good work done by our Defence Forces. The Minister omitted to mention that they also provide a private taxi for the Tánaiste's trips to Kerry.
Is the Minister satisfied with the success of the UN in Bosnia?
That is not my responsibility. The Deputy should table a question on that matter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I am Minister for Defence, not Foreign Affairs. If I was asked to serve as Minister for Foreign Affairs I would be delighted to take the post.
