Fergus O'Dowd
Question:65 Mr. O'Dowd asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the role the EU has taken regarding India and Pakistan and conflicts between these states. [21537/02]
Ceisteanna – Questions (Resumed). Priority Questions. - Foreign Conflicts.
Tensions in the regions referred to in the question have eased since my last statement on this issue in June. Deputies will be aware that India and Pakistan seemed to be on the brink of war in January and again in May and June of this year. While the situation remains serious, there have been positive developments recently.
The Seville Council issued a strong message of concern in June, calling on Pakistan to take further concrete action, in accordance with assurances it had given, to stop infiltration across the line of control and to prevent terrorist groups from operating from territory under its control. The Council encouraged India to be ready to respond with further de-escalatory steps if Pakistan took the necessary actions. The importance of free, fair and inclusive elections in Jammu and Kashmir this year was noted. The Council called on India and Pakistan to implement confidence building measures to defuse the immediate crisis and encouraged both countries to achieve a lasting settlement through bilateral dialogue. The EU high representative, Mr. Solana, visited Delhi and Islamabad in late July and an EU heads of mission troika to Jammu and Kashmir followed between 6 and 10 August. The EU has offered at every opportunity to assist both countries in finding a way out of the present stalemate. The EU Presidency welcomed the assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir in October and called on India and Pakistan to resume diplomatic dialogue as soon as possible.
In recent months, Ireland has made its concerns known at every opportunity to representatives of India and Pakistan in Dublin, New York, New Delhi and Islamabad. Our ambassador to Pakistan presented his credentials in Islamabad to President Musharraf and the former Foreign Minister, Mr. Sattar, in June, and took that opportunity to outline our views. I met the new Foreign Minister, Mr. Ul-Haq, at the United Nations in September and reiterated our hope that Pakistan will accede to the non-proliferation treaty. I also urged increased co-operation on terrorism issues and support for bilateral dialogue.
Following the recent elections in Jammu and Kashmir and the encouraging subsequent withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani troops from the line of control, there is a growing hope that talks may resume. The new government of Jammu and Kashmir, a coalition of the two largest parties in the assembly, the Congress Party and the People's Democratic Party, was sworn in on 2 November. The proposed visit of the Prime Minister of India, Mr. Vajpayee, to Pakistan next January to attend a meeting of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation is being seen as an encouraging development. The composition of the Government in Pakistan after last month's elections is unclear. Ireland, along with its EU partners, remains fully committed to supporting the next stages towards this critical dialogue.
One wonders why any country feels the need to become a nuclear power. This is especially true of India and Pakistan, as large swathes of the populations of those countries live in abject poverty.
Yes.
What steps have been taken by the EU and the UN to encourage Pakistan and India to engage in a mutual reduction in destructive armaments? What has been Ireland's role in the matter? It is to be hoped that the mutual reduction to which I refer will, in time, lead to a destruction of nuclear armaments in the subcontinent. Will the Minister outline the steps being taken by the EU, the UN and other international organisations in which Ireland participates to monitor nuclear safety in the region?
This is a matter of ongoing concern. The missile testing that took place in January of this year was regarded by Ireland as being contrary to Security Council Resolution 1172. Our support for the aims and objectives of the non-proliferation treaty has been continually expressed in the actions of the New Agenda coalition. New Agenda submitted a working paper after the first preparatory meeting for the 2005 review cycle of the treaty. The working paper, which was the basis for a resolution in the UN General Assembly First Committee in October 2002, highlighted the need to implement the steps towards nuclear disarmament, agreed by consensus at the non-proliferation treaty review conference in 2000. The Government continues to call on India and Pakistan to accede without delay to the non-proliferation treaty, as non-nuclear weapons states. The situation in south Asia underlines the importance of the early entry into force of the comprehensive test ban treaty. We have maintained a consistent view during all the multilateral discussions on disarmament.
About 50 years ago, the United Nations recommended the holding of a referendum in Kashmir as a means of resolving the problems there. The referendum was never held. Does Ireland support the holding of a referendum in Kashmir under the aegis of the UN, as part of efforts to find a solution to the political problems in the region?
We have always believed in the primacy of the UN as regards the resolution of international disputes. The Indian Government regards the Kashmir dispute as an internal matter, however. The dialogue we have engaged in has been geared towards reaching a situation where the Security Council might be allowed to discuss the situation, let alone start to resolve it. This difficult and seemingly intractable problem can be traced back to foundation of the states of India and Pakistan. Given the fact that high tensions are involved and that both countries possess nuclear weapons, it is important that we continue to try to encourage bilateral and multilateral dialogue. The events of the last 12 months demonstrate that this is an issue of international concern and not one that can be simply handled as an internal problem for India.
Does the Minister agree that if the visit of Hans Blix to Iraq in regard to weapons inspections is a success, it would be a useful initiative to extend the inspector's remit to India, Pakistan and all countries preparing weapons of mass destruction?
As has been said, the mandate of the Security Council would be required for that to happen. That has not happened to date. Clearly we have a consistent view of successive Governments. We got what we thought was a major advance at the review of the non-proliferation treaty when some impetus was put back into the disarmament debate. People are already resiling from these commitments. It is a matter of regret to us that that has happened. We are continuing, using whatever means we have available through the new agenda coalition, to push for non-proliferation and for countries to meet their responsibilities in the event of a successful disarmament process in Iraq. I am open to consider ing circumstances whereby disarmament can be availed of in other countries which are a threat to international peace and security.
Given the current focus of American foreign policy and the status of Pakistan as a country without a democratic government, with weapons of mass destruction and with intent to using such weapons, and still harbouring terrorist groups within its territory, it should be as likely as other countries to be attacked by the US Government. Will he address with representatives of the US Government why this anomaly exists?
It is important to point out, regardless of what one may think about the legitimacy or otherwise of the Government of Pakistan, based on the military government previously in place, it took courageous decisions in regard to the international war on terrorism. It cannot be disputed that courageous steps were taken. What one would like to see is a commitment by that military Government to democratic elections in Pakistan. In the meantime, we must deal with those who are in authority in Pakistan. While I do not agree with its form of Government, I give credit to those who showed courage at a time when the international community needed it.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.