John Gormley
Question:91 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Defence to report on the recent joint meeting in Brussels of EU Foreign Defence Ministers. [8820/00]
Other Questions. - European Defence Commitments.
Gay Mitchell
Question:136 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Defence the number of members of the Defence Forces which will serve in the European-led rapid reaction force in view of the commitments at the Helsinki Summit; the implications of the reduction in personnel in the Defence Forces for such deployment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8848/00]
Michael D. Higgins
Question:147 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Defence the proposals, if any, there are for the establishment of a rapid reaction unit in the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8800/00]
Trevor Sargent
Question:161 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Defence the number of troops he envisages Ireland will contribute to the EU's planned 60,000 rapid reaction force; and the additional defence expenditure this will entail. [8823/00]
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:211 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence if the EU or individual EU member states have approached him in respect of Ireland's anticipated commitments in respect of European defence and security; the proposals, if any, he has in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9158/00]
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:219 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence whether he had discussions with other EU member states in respect of Ireland's commitment under PfP and any other European defence or security structures, either current or proposed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9183/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 91, 136, 147, 161, 211 and 219 together.
On 20 March 2000 I, with my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, attended the meeting of the General Affairs Council in Brussels. On 28 February 2000 I attended an informal meeting of EU Defence Ministers at Sintra in Portugal.
As the House will be aware, the Helsinki European Council in December 1999 agreed on a voluntary target for establishing capabilities for the Petersberg Tasks. This target, known as a headline goal which member states aim to meet by the year 2003, involves the ability to deploy 50,000 to 60,000 personnel within 60 days and to sustain that deployment for one year. This would roughly equate to a mission of a scale comparable to that of KFOR in Kosovo. As there were no pre-existing structures within the EU which deal with military capabilities, the General Affairs Council, with participation as appropriate by Defence Ministers of the 15 member states of the EU, was tasked to progress the elaboration of this target and to develop a method of consultation through which the target could be met and maintained and progress reviewed.
The Council, at the meeting on 20 March, considered the issue of capabilities for the Petersberg Tasks. The Council also discussed progress in follow-up to Helsinki, addressing both the military and civilian tracks of the issue. In addition to considering a draft Presidency progress report to the Lisbon European Council, the General Affairs Council considered the way forward for elaborating the headline and capability goals set at Helsinki. The Council also considered the establishment of a committee for civilian crisis management, with a view to reaching a decision on the establishment of such a committee by the European Council in June.
What Helsinki agreed on was a capabilities target. As the Helsinki European Council Conclusions make clear, this does not imply the creation of a European army. Nor does it alter the fact that participation in the Petersberg Tasks under the Treaty of Amsterdam is on a voluntary basis and is a matter for sovereign decision in each and every case. The General Affairs Council will take forward work on developing methods of consultation through which the headline goal can be met and through which national contributions reflecting political will and commitment can be defined by each member state. Deputy Higgins asked whether there are any proposals for the establishment of a rapid reaction unit in the Defence Forces. The answer is no. Participation by any member state will be entirely voluntary as individual missions may arise. The informal meeting in Sintra, Portugal also discussed the issue of the Petersberg Tasks. Since the meeting was informal in nature no decisions were taken.
The White Paper sets out a comprehensive examination of the roles of the Defence Forces. One of these roles is to participate in multinational peace support, crisis management and humanitarian relief operations in support of the United Nations and under UN mandate, including regional security missions authorised by the UN. The overall approach to the participation by the Defence Forces in overseas peace support operations, including those that may arise in the context of developments in the EU, is contained in chapter six of the White Paper. The White Paper recognises that Ireland is a significant contributor to such overseas operations and Ireland will continue to participate at a significant level.
The proposals in the White Paper for the restructuring of the Defence Forces will ensure that Ireland is in a position to meet the challenges and opportunities of the emerging defence and security environment. The White Paper provides for a rebalancing of the pay to non-pay expenditure ratio and the reinvestment of these funds, some £20 million a year over the next ten years for new equipment and infrastructure, in addition to the £40 million armoured personnel carrier investment programme. These essential measures will ensure the Defence Forces are equipped to meet the requirements associated with participating in any emerging peace support missions.
Were documents submitted to the Brussels meeting which outlined a scenario where Irish troops would form part of a European defence force which would be forced to fight countries with access to nuclear weapons? What is the Minister's opinion on the establishment of a European military committee which was also discussed at that meeting? Has the Minister discussed with his counterparts the establishment of a rapid deployment force of 60,000 troops? How many troops could Ireland contribute to this force? Has the French Government suggested that 0.7% of GDP should be contributed to military expenditure? Does the Minister agree this is an enormous amount of money and has he given a formal response to the French Government?
I remind the Deputy that supplementary questions are limited to one minute. I will return to the Deputy.
At the meeting in Sintra, it was decided to transform without delay the Western European Union assembly into an interim European security and defence assembly. What is the Minister's response to this? Will we become full-time members of that assembly?
The Deputy occasionally fails to distinguish between propaganda and the real issues.
What are the real issues?
I have indicated on a number of occasions what is happening. An agreement was reached by the European Council in Helsinki on the military and civilian aspects of crisis management and humanitarian operations. Preparations for this are under way at EU level and later at national level, bearing in mind that each sovereign state can decide voluntarily whether to be involved. I have already said no decision has been taken on a rapid reaction force. Submissions have been made by the UK and the French authorities.
I remind the Minister that he is confined to one minute for his reply.
The Minister should answer the question.
These are not necessarily matters to which I should reply.
When will the ambassador to NATO be appointed? How many Irish Defence Force personnel does the Minister envisage will be involved in the European-led rapid reaction force? Will he elaborate on the training that is being planned to prepare for this and whether the Irish Defence Forces have the capacity to be involved in training for the European-led rapid reaction force? Are they not already so committed to Lebanon and elsewhere that they would be unable to do that training? If so, when does he expect training to begin?
I have already said no decision has been made on a rapid reaction force. To the extent that I want to ensure the Defence Forces are capable of meeting whatever decision the Government might take under the Petersberg Tasks, the Chief of Staff has assured me that he has ample scope among personnel for any training that might be required. My task is to ensure Defence Force equipment is upgraded to enable the Chief of Staff to perform the tasks required of him. The most positive response I can give to him is that I will ensure we will be able to meet whatever commitments of a voluntary nature are entered into by this Government in future.
Why does the Minister continue with the charade of pretending this has no implication for Irish neutrality? Did President Romano Prodi not say any attack or aggression against a EU member state will be an attack or aggression against the entire EU? Does this not have severe implications for our so-called neutral status which has been severely eroded? Every time the Minister comes into the House he pretends nothing is happening. Huge developments are taking place and the Minister is not being straight with the Irish people.
I resent Deputy Gormley's implication.
There is no implication in what I said.
(Interruptions).
The Minister is on his feet, therefore the Deputy should not interrupt.
This Government takes seriously its responsibility in that matter. There is no infringement of our military neutrality and there is no mutual defence commitment. Commitments were made in Helsinki in relation to the Petersberg Tasks. The Deputy does not wish to hear about them because it does not suit his thinking. He is the one who wants to scare the Irish people.
What about Romano Prodi's statement?
I ask Members to address questions through the Chair. I call Deputy Dukes.
Does the Minister agree it would be a rather comforting thought to know that, in the unlikely event of our being attacked, we would have the support of other European Union member states?
The Deputy should be serious.
That is serious. Deputy Gormley mentioned waffling. He is a prime exponent of waffle.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Dukes, without interruption.
Is it the case that the capacity for training in the Defence Forces, even with the equipment available to them, has been seriously eroded? Is it not the case that there are very few qualified instructors available to give instruction at the level required, even to train NCOs in the use of the existing equipment? Does the Minister agree he should be very sceptical if the Chief of Staff is saying there will be no difficulty in providing contingents for further tasks when the Defence Forces are already over-stretched in coping with what they are doing?
As far as our international commitments are concerned, we are over-stretched. If I had not introduced constant recruitment, we would be in significant trouble in terms of meeting our current UN commitments. I hope there will be significant changes in our commitment to UNIFIL in the near future. I received a report from the Chief of Staff three months ago giving a detailed outline of his training arrangements and the upgrading of training in the past three or four years. This did not begin under my Administration; it began under the Deputy's Administration and has improved consistently in the past three or four years. The purchase of equipment, training arrangements and better centralisation of troops has enabled this to take place. However, it must move a grade further. I am happy with the information I received in this regard. There has been a phenomenal reorganisational change in relation to fitness and so on to the benefit of the Defence Forces. This is readily admitted by troops on the ground.
I asked the Minister a question to which I would like a "yes" or "no" answer, if possible. Has he decided that Ireland will become a full member of the Security and Defence Assembly?
No.
Will the Minister elaborate on his comment that our commitment to UNIFIL and Lebanon is about to change substantially in the near future? Does he envisage a withdrawal of the contingent from there and, if so, what plans, if any, are in place for that withdrawal?
The Deputy will be aware that I have just returned from a trip to the Middle East where considerable planning is taking place at UN and UNIFIL level on the hopeful prospects of a comprehensive peace settlement in that area. Obviously this will have significant repercussions for us in terms of the numbers of troops required. The hope is that this will happen and if and when it does, it will relieve some of the pressure in maintaining our overall commitments abroad. We are involved in East Timor, Kosova and SFOR. However, we must await developments. My expectation and hope is that in the next couple of years opportunities will arise for significant deployment from UNIFIL. I can only hope the peace will be comprehensive and will afford me, or the Minister for Defence at the time, the opportunity to make that deployment.
What is the Government's official response to the parliamentary dimension of the Lisbon initiative on European security and defence?
I have already dealt comprehensively with that issue.