Gay Mitchell
Question:4 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the action, if any, the Government proposes to take to indicate Ireland's abhorrence of India's recent nuclear testing. [12558/98]
Other Questions. - Nuclear Testing.
The Government views India's nuclear tests with grave concern. This concern has been intensified by reports that Pakistan has today conducted three nuclear tests. The Government is deeply dismayed at this latest development which, with the earlier Indian tests, constitutes a major threat to regional peace and stability and has serious implications for the non-proliferation regime. We are taking steps to make known our concerns to the authorities in Pakistan.
As regards India's tests, I summoned the chargé d'affaires of India to the Department of Foreign Affairs on 13 May to express the shock and concern of the Government at the five nuclear explosions India detonated. I had already made known the Government's grave concern in a statement I issued immediately after receiving reports of the first of these explosions on 11 May. I stressed to the chargé d'affaires the importance Ireland attaches to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and — in the light of our traditional role in respect of that treaty — our particular anxiety about the possible consequences of India's action.
I underlined the threat the emergence of another nuclear weapon state would represent to the prospect of achieving a world free of nuclear weapons. I recalled India's leadership in the non-aligned movement over the years and the disappointment which resulted among India's friends, including Ireland, at this action. For decades India has been a vocal advocate in the United Nations and elsewhere of nuclear disarmament.
Standing among the non-aligned has been a significant and defining element in the non-aligned approach to global nuclear disarmament. The credibility of India, and of that approach, has be irrevocably called into question. As a regional power in south east Asia, India has a particular responsibility in the maintenance of peace and the reduction of tensions in the region. By these latest actions, India is failing to live up to its responsibilities.
Over the past 40 years, India has been a most vocal advocate of nuclear disarmament. We hope and expect that India will take account of the universal censure of its actions. We hope, too, that it will refrain from any further negative steps, such as the weaponisation of its nuclear capability. Any such developments would have serious and long-term effects on the prospects for the achievement of global nuclear disarmament. The chargé d'affaires assured me that he would convey immediately the view of the Government to his authorities.
Ireland, for its part, will redouble its efforts to have the nuclear weapon states fulfil their legally binding obligations to eliminate nuclear weapons at the soonest possible date.
I discussed this matter further with my EU colleagues at the meeting of the General Affairs Council on 25 May. Following that discussion, the European Union issued a declaration condemning the series of underground tests of nuclear weapons and calling on India immediately to take a number of steps to reverse the course it has set upon, including the signing of the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. We also agreed that the European Union will follow closely the evolution of the situation and will take all necessary measures should India not accede to and move to ratify the relevant international non-proliferation agreements, in particular the CTBT.
As regards Pakistan's tests, so far we have seen only summary reports and I am not in a position to convey detailed information to the House. However, I can assure the House that we are actively addressing the issue in consultation with our EU partners and I will issue a statement later today.
Will the Minister tell the House if he spoke to the chargé d'affaires and why was the ambassador not called in? Was it because he was unavailable or absent? What view did the General Affairs Council take on the question of sanctions or effective action to persuade the Indian Government of the error of its ways? Is the Minister aware that Pakistan is threatening to have a nuclear test, perhaps in days? Will he tell the House if he has taken pre-emptive steps to call in the Pakistani ambassador to express to him the concerns of the Government and this House about the possibility of similar tests taking place in Pakistan? If he has not already done so, will he now undertake to do so?
Maybe the Deputy misheard my response to the question that was tabled. I did indicate that Pakistan has today conducted three nuclear tests.
Was it today?
On the Indian chargé d'affaires, I asked for the ambassador. I cannot say why he did not turn up. I do not even want to speculate. He may have been on holidays but I simply do not know. I spoke to the chargé d'affaires for half an hour in very civil terms and he responded very civilly. He was left in no doubt as to how this country felt, having regard to our history and the whole area of nuclear disarmament. We will continue the campaign and I will make a number of announcements in the very near future to give impetus to our concerns for the totality of nuclear disarmament.
The Deputy asked about the imposition of sanctions against India. A common European Union response to the Indian nuclear tests was discussed at the General Affairs Council last Monday. The series of nuclear tests carried out by India was condemned, as we now condemn the tests carried out by Pakistan. A number of steps were identified which India must take immediately. These include signing the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty and moving to ratify it, as well as giving a commitment neither to assemble nuclear devices nor deploy them in delivery vehicles.
We also agreed that member states would work for a delay in consideration of loans to India in the World Bank and other international institutions. The European Commission was asked to consider this question in its review of the general system of preferences.
The implication of the nuclear tests and India's progress in acceding to the international non-proliferation agreements will now be examined in regard to India's continued eligibility for GSP preferences. However it is not currently envisaged that comprehensive economic sanctions will be adopted.
The question of aid is really a matter for my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell. In recent years India has received some aid from Ireland under the bilateral aid programme. While a number of countries have suspended or frozen their bilateral aid packages, there has been no agreement at European Union level to suspend aid to India. I would be against suspending aid to India because the aid we give — and this can be confirmed by the Minister of State — is targeted at the poorest of the poor in developing countries, through non-governmental organisations. Any suspension of aid would inevitably hurt the poor and would cause little discomfort to the Indian Government. In those circumstances, I am not considering the option of suspending bilateral aid to India.
I did not have in mind that the Minister might suspend bilateral aid, but there may be other ways to put pressure on the Indian Government to change its policy. At the start of question time, I did not realise the Pakistani test had already taken place. Will the Minister now call in the Pakistani ambassador and express to him the grave concerns of this House, the Government and the nation about this development? Will he announce in the House what initiatives the Government intends to take concerning nuclear non-proliferation.
I would be prejudicing what my intentions are if I replied to the last part of the Deputy's question. I do not want to give them away at this stage but the Deputy will find out in due course. I am not giving him a short answer. I can tell the Deputy privately, if he wishes. I am taking an initiative which I think will be helpful. However, it would prejudice that initiative if I gave details of it at this time.
I intend to call in the Pakistani chargé d'affaires. I will express to him the horror and concern of the House and the Government about what has happened.
I agree with the Minister that stopping aid would certainly not be of assistance in the current situation. Has he drawn the attention of the Indian authorities to the incongruity, to say the least, of being in receipt of aid and at the same time spending hundreds of millions of pounds on this kind of adventure, which is quite simply all it is? Has he had any response yet from the Indian authorities to the meeting he had with the chargé d'affaires ?
Has the Minister received indications from other member states of the European Union as to what unilateral or combined action they might consider, bearing in mind the considerable success of the EU's pressure on France which succeeded in having that country's nuclear tests stopped.
That was the first thing that occurred to me when the chargé d'affaires— who was a very courteous man — came in. I pointed out to him the very matter the Deputy raised concerning the extraordinary poverty which exists in that country which I know and like very well. They are a great people but there is huge poverty in the country and it is incongruous, to say the least, that they should set off millions, if not billions, of pounds worth of explosives in pursuit of some extraordinary aim to have a nuclear arsenal on the basis of having a regional balance of power in the event of attack. I pointed all that out to him. I am glad the Deputy supports me in ensuring that, despite that fact, the aid gets through to the poorest of the poor.
Is there any indication as to what steps other members of the European Union may take? It is not simply a question of sanctions but of how the European Union can assist in lessening the tensions or perceived threats in the region which obliges India to consider this type of action.
A number of things can happen. The EU, presumably on the direction or request of the Presidency, can withdraw its ambassadors from India for consultations, which is the formula used. Such action would be a grievous rebuff to the country concerned. However, that has not happened. Sanctions could also be imposed on technology and business and on many other areas of interchange between EU countries on the one hand and India on the other. Many areas could be mentioned but there is no intention of imposing such sanctions.
I agree with my colleagues and the Minister that it is important the aid we direct to India continues to go to the poorest of the poor.
As regards the strong stance which was taken rapidly by President Clinton, has there been a discussion in the European Union about introducing equal measures in terms of economic sanctions on India? I was astounded by the response and reaction of the Indian Government to the views expressed by the world leadership. It seemed to be totally distant and to be pursuing its own policies. We had difficulties a number of years ago with the French Government, our European Union partners. Ultimately, persuasion was effective, but it was a difficult time within the European Union. We should consider taking strong measures at European Union level to deal with the Indian Government. I regret the news announced by the Minister that Pakistan has also carried out three tests. This exacerbates an already difficult situation in the region.
I strongly support the Deputy's point of view. America was quick off the mark in this regard. The EU agreed that member states, the World Bank and other international institutions would work for a delay in considering loans to India. Member states asked the Commission to consider this matter in its review of the general system of preferences. The implications of the nuclear tests and India's progress in acceding to international non-proliferation agreements will now be examined in terms of India's continued eligibility for the GSP.
It is not currently envisaged that comprehensive economic sanctions will be adopted. I will articulate the strong feelings expressed in this House that there should be economic sanctions. Should we be at the top of the list in urging economic sanctions on a country like India? Perhaps we should take the lead in this regard.
As regards the replies given by the Minister, would it help if he asked his colleagues on the General Affairs Council of the European Union to request the European Commission to carry out a study of the aid given to India and Pakistan by the European Union and its member states and how that compares with the money both Governments have spent on nuclear testing? By focusing on that issue at a central European Union level, it would help to sober up the Indian and Pakistani Administrations which have taken this reckless path in reaction to each other.
That is a good idea which I will put on the agenda for the next meeting of the General Affairs Council. I am not sure if it will be taken but, if not, I will write to the Commission to find out how much is spent on aid to Pakistan and India. I do not know if they will have any information on the amount both Governments have expended on nuclear explosions. It is a helpful suggestion which will focus the minds of those people. They will be able to compare the amount of money given in aid and the amount paid for the type of nuclear explosions carried out in the past number of days.