I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for coming into the House. He will recall a visit we made to Baghdad before the Gulf War. We are familiar with the region.
I have raised this issue on the Adjournment because I feel that we are inexorably and silently slipping towards acceptance of a military solution to the Iraqi problem. Within the few minutes available I have to be economic with what I can say.
Lest there be the slightest misconstruction, I have always condemned Saddam Hussein's actions, even before the Gulf War when he used mustard gas against the Kurds. However, I am not satisfied that the non-military options have been exhausted. For example, the decision by the head of UNSCOM, Richard Butler, to withdraw personnel from Iraq was taken after a telephone call informing Kofi Annan and at the request of the United States. The UN is a representative body of the family of nations and is responsible to all nations. All Irish Governments have stressed non-military solutions and the importance of exhausting diplomatic solutions to conflicts, even to the point of tedium if necessary.
Irish parliamentarians who recently visited Iraq confirmed what we had suspected. Namely, that the Iraqi people, particularly civilians, children and those suffering from illnesses, including cancers, have been paying an enormous price for the war. I have been struck by the inappropriateness and crudeness of the mechanism which allowed Iraq to export oil under the famous oil for food aid agreement. Irish people do not necessarily know that from the revenue Iraq earns from these exports, it must deduct payment for the war, payment to companies who lost business during the war, and other commercial fines, before it can be used on humanitarian expenditure. As a result, some have suggested that only 40 cents out of every dollar is available for humanitarian aid expenditure.
On 29 October, I tabled a parliamentary question asking the Minister to make a statement regarding the circumstances which led to the recent resignation of the UN co-ordinator for humanitarian relief in Iraq. On another occasion I asked him to make a statement on the general situation in Iraq. I accept that he cannot comment in detail on the situation regarding the humanitarian co-ordinator and the UN. However, this raises an issue. What was unsaid in my question and not addressed in the Minister's answer, was that the co-ordinator was frustrated at the impossibility of delivering humanitarian relief in the most terrible conditions to those who did not initiate the conflict — ordinary civilians, women, children and those suffering illnesses. He more or less threw in the towel.
I believe we are witnessing a certain kind of macho insistence on utter compliance which is somewhat one-sided. It is difficult for me to say this, but I have a moral obligation to do so; this situation could be more easily resolved if it was known where the goal posts are to be. Are the goalposts to be changed and what is the end point of inspection? Is there a point at which relief can flow and exports can resume? The international community seemed to receive some evidence that if a definite end point or three month period were specified, both parties could reach agreement. I , the Minister and others are implacably opposed to war as a solution. We want to see a greater effort made, even at this late stage, to avert that through the methods to which I have referred.
