Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Oct 1996

Vol. 469 No. 3

Written Answers. - Trade with Cuba and Libya.

Ray Burke

Question:

6 Mr. R. Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the differences which exist between the EU and the United States on trade with Cuba and Libya; and the implications, if any, these differences may pose for the EU and Ireland. [17466/96]

Tánaíste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Spring)

The European Union and the United States share a common desire regarding the promotion of democratization, respect for human rights and economic reform in Cuba. The EU also supports the efforts of the US to combat international terrorism.

Nevertheless, the extraterritorial effects of the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity (Libertad) or Helms Burton Act and of the Iran and Libyan Sanctions or D'Amato Act are a matter of serious concern to the European Union and its member states.

Title III of the Helms-Burton Act provides that companies or individuals deemed to be "trafficking" or engaging in commercial activity in expropriated property in Cuba may be the subject of compensation suits in the US from US citizens who claim title to such property. Title IV of the Act allows for the exclusion from the US of non-US citizens and their families deemed to have trafficked in such property, or who are corporate officers, principals or shareholders of any entity that has done so. The D'Amato Act, inter alia, penalises foreign investment in the Iranian and Libyan petroleum sectors. Such extraterritorial legislation is contrary to international law and harms the rights and interests of the EU and its member states in the trade and investment field.

The 15-16 July General Affairs Council adopted conclusions re-affirming the EU's deep concern over the extraterritorial effects of the Helms-Burton Act and the then pending D'Amato Act and identifying a range of measures which could be deployed by the EU in response to the damage to the interests of EU companies resulting from their implementation. These could include: the use or introduction of legislation within the EU to neutralise the extraterritorial effects of such legislation: moving to a WTO dispute settlement panel; changes in procedures governing entry by representatives of US companies to EU member states and the establishment of a watch list of US companies filing actions under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act (Title III came into effect on 1 August but the right to sue has been suspended by President Clinton until 1 February 1997 when it may be waived for further six month periods. This is a welcome decision but the extraterritorial aspects of Title III remain in place as does Title IV).

Measures identified by the 15-16 July General Affairs Council to counteract the effects of extraterritorial legislation are currently being examined in the appropriate EU fora. Yesterday's General Affairs Council reviewed progress in this connection and decided to take rapidly all the necessary measures to counter the extraterritorial effects of these laws.

It is important that EU-US differences over the Helms-Burton and D'Amato Acts, serious though these differences are, should not be allowed to deflect either side from their shared commitment to develop and strengthen the transatlantic partnership, notably within the comprehensive framework of the New Translantic Agenda and the accompanying EU-US Action Plan agreed last December.