Vol. 559 No. 5
30 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the Government will continue to make airports and airspace available to United States forces if the US carries out an attack against Iraq without a United Nations mandate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26780/02]
In giving permission for foreign military aircraft to overfly or land in the State, the Government is acting under the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order, 1952, which allows the Minister for Foreign Affairs to grant permission to overfly or land in the State.
In the case of routine landings, confirmation is required that the aircraft is unarmed, does not carry arms, ammunition or explosives and does not form part of a military exercise or operation. Foreign military aircraft meeting these conditions have been granted permission to refuel at Shannon over a period of decades, under successive Governments.
The Deputy will also be aware of the decision, on an exceptional basis, to provide landing and refuelling facilities for foreign military aircraft pursuant to the State's obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 1368. This decision was adopted in response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. I am keeping these arrangements under review, in the light of progress achieved in the campaign against al-Qaeda and its Taliban protectors.
The question of landings of civilian aircraft carrying military personnel is a separate matter governed by civil aviation regulations.
I do not wish to speculate as to the conditions which will apply in the event of military action against Iraq. It is the view of the Government that any such action should be authorised by the UN Security Council. The Government believes diplomatic means continue to offer the best hope of resolving the current situation. We believe that every possible effort should be made to avoid the use of military force, which could have grave repercussions for the stability of the region. I am certain any decision to use force against Iraq and Ireland's position in regard to such a development will be fully debated by this House.
As regards granting overflight or landing permission, the Government's policy will be determined by our firm attachment to the United Nations and will take full account of the political circumstances applying at the time should that happen. Moreover, the House may rest assured that the Government will act in full accordance with our constitutional and legal obligations.
Unfortunately the Minister did not answer the question directly. Is he aware that there is a debate raging in Germany at present about this very issue? Germany is a member of NATO. It is discussing whether it should allow the Americans to use its airspace and airports, yet Ireland, as a so-called neutral country, cannot give a guarantee that it will not use our airports and our airspace in the event of not having a UN mandate.
Does the Minister consider that a false declaration by Iraq would constitute the grounds for military action against it? Could he indicate which section of the UN Charter allows for a military attack in such circumstances? I have put it very clearly.
Would the Minister agree that this needs to come before this House, as it did in 1990? There are precedents. It is vital – I hope the Minister agrees with me on this – that it comes before this House and is debated.
Is the Minister aware that there were polls published to indicate that the Irish people are opposed to US unilateral action in this regard? How can he justify giving the airport access?
We do not run the country by opinion polls.
I will talk about that in a few minutes. We do not run it by opinion polls, but I hope the Minister will agree, there is an onus on us to debate such an important matter in this House, not merely slip it through.
Where is there a reference in the UN Charter to justifying an attack on the basis of a threat? Is the Minister aware that we have already had a situation where the US, I think, condemned the attack in Suez in 1956 by the British, the Israelis and the French on the grounds that it could not be launched simply on the basis of a threat? I hope the Minister will agree that this latest threatened attack would be in clear breach of the UN Charter if it goes ahead, and I ask him to outline the Irish position.
I am not prepared to speculate on the possible events outlined by the Deputy on the basis that we are working extremely hard to ensure we have a peaceful resolution of this problem. The view of the Government is that any prospective military action should be authorised by the UN Security Council. Regarding the possibility of debate on this issue, I have already stated that I am certain that any decision to use force against Iraq and Ireland's position in regard to such developments will be fully debated in this House. I have given a clear reply in relation to all of these matters.
Regarding whether a false declaration will lead to a military response authorised by the UN Security Council, it will be a matter for the Security Council to determine whether a material breach has occurred. A material breach would encompass not only inaccurate information but also a continuing failure to comply with existing resolutions, as set out in paragraphs four and 14. I have already explained what the Government believes to be the proper legal interpretation in relation to all of these matters. It is a matter for the Security Council to decide on the appropriate action in the event of a report of the inspectors confirming that they are not receiving co-operation or are being denied the opportunity to fulfil their mandate from the Security Council. On all of these matters there is a position and procedure set out within the resolution, and the Government has clearly stated its position on them.
