Monica Barnes
Question:12 Mrs. Barnes asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the new common foreign and security policy structures in the EU. [12853/00]
Ceisteanna–Questions. Priority Questions. - Common Foreign and Security Policy.
Trevor Sargent
Question:20 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on a recent document by the EU's High Representative on Common Foreign and Security Policy, Mr. Javier Solana, which would greatly increase the links between NATO and the EU; and the objections or amendments, if any, the Government has made to this document. [8822/00]
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:42 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the plans, if any, for the establishment of a European military committee and Ireland's attitude to this. [8779/00]
Ivor Callely
Question:55 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the evolving EU security and defence structures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7760/00]
Dick Spring
Question:64 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the decisions, if any, taken by the Government in preparation for Ireland's contribution to a new European rapid reaction force as agreed at the Helsinki Summit in December 1999. [9869/00]
Enda Kenny
Question:81 Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if it is intended that Ireland will take on peace enforcement and common defence responsibilities as a result of the evolution of the EU. [12835/00]
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 12, 20, 42, 55, 64 and 81 together.
European security and defence policy is the subject of ongoing and active discussion within the EU. As Deputies will be aware, these discussions focus on the Petersberg Tasks and not on mutual defence commitments. The basis of these discussions is the Treaty of Amsterdam. This work has two aspects, namely, the military dimension, embodied in the Petersberg Tasks and the related civil aspects of crisis management, for example, disaster relief and humanitarian support.
At Helsinki last December, the European Council called for the creation of new Brussels based bodies and structures to enhance the EU's ability to take informed and effective decisions in the area of the Petersberg Tasks, and to assist in taking forward the EU discussions on these points. These bodies have been established on an interim basis and are starting to function effectively.
The principal such body is the interim political and security committee. Ireland is represented on that committee by a senior official from my Department. An interim military body, which has been established to provide military advice as required for the political and security committee, is also meeting. Ireland is represented by a military officer with the rank of colonel who works under the guidance of my Department in close consultation with the Department of Defence. Following the establishment of these interim bodies, the EU is better placed to discuss issues relating to the Petersberg Tasks and to take informed and effective decisions in this area.
The Helsinki European Council also 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, is to be able to deploy between 50,000 and 60,000 personnel within 60 days and to be able to sustain this deployment for one year. This would equate roughly to a mission on a scale comparable to that of KFOR in Kosovo.
As the Helsinki conclusions make clear, we are not concerned with the creation of a European army. 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, with participation as appropriate by Defence Ministers, was mandated at Helsinki to take forward the elaboration of this target and to develop a method of consultation through which it could be met and progress reviewed. Member states will also use existing defence planning procedures which, in the case of Ireland and the other neutral and non-allied EU member states, would include the planning and review process of Partnership for Peace.
The EU will require access to NATO's transport and infrastructural resources and assets for carrying out substantial Petersberg Tasks and this requires consultation and co-operation with NATO. All EU member states are already co-operating with NATO both in the context of participation in the UN-mandated, NATO-led peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo and in the context of PfP. The UN and the OSCE have well established co-operation with NATO. In keeping with its mandate from the Helsinki European Council, the Presidency has chaired EU discussions regarding the principles and modalities for EU relations with NATO in this context. The question of mutual defence commitments does not arise.
The Helsinki European Council agreed to define appropriate arrangements that would allow interested non-EU states to contribute to the Petersberg Tasks. A draft Presidency paper on this issue has also been circulated. The recent Lisbon European Council considered a preliminary progress report by the Presidency on the follow-up to last December's Helsinki European Council conclusions. A more substantial progress report will be considered by the Feira European Council in June.
Progress is also being made in regard to the civil aspects of crisis management. In line with the recent Lisbon European Council conclusions, an EU Committee for Civilian Crisis Management is to be established in the near future. It is hoped that the Feira European Council will be able to agree on concrete targets which the EU would aim to meet in this area.
I am aware that not everyone in the House would agree with my views on European security and defence which I set out in my party's policy document, Beyond Neutrality. However, that is what this Parliament is about, namely, the accommodation of people with different views. When does the Government intend to put forward its view on this matter?
Does the Minister of State agree that the appointment of Javier Solana, former Secretary General of NATO, as Secretary General of the Council of Ministers, with special responsibility for common foreign and security policy, and Secretary General of the Western European Union is a clear indication of the direction in which European defence and security policy is moving? Does she further agree that the reason a European army is not being contemplated is because it has already been created and that an army numbering 240,000 soldiers would be required in order to put a force of 60,000 into the field and provide the necessary logistical support? Is it correct to anticipate that France, which assumes the Presidency of the European Union in the latter part of this year, is likely to attempt to advance these matters further? When can we expect the parties in Government to put before the House their position on European security and defence? Will they be led by the nose, as usual, by another government which will decide the pace and we will fall in line just as we did over the action taken against Austria?
As I said in my reply, we are not talking about the creation of a European army. 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 EU is not considering issues of mutual defence, rather its focus is on making a constructive reality of the Amsterdam Treaty's provisions on the Petersberg Tasks. The Government has made it clear that if the issue of common defence, which would involve a mutual defence commitment by Ireland, were to arise for decision in future, it would be put to the people by way of referendum. However, the reality is that the EU's focus is not on common defence, but on the Petersberg Tasks.
We must conclude questions.
A brief question?
We have gone beyond 3.50 p.m. The Order of Business of the House states that we must proceed to other business at this time. That is what the House decided.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.