Matt Carthy
Question:1. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will urgently set a date on which Ireland will officially recognise the state of Palestine. [11047/24]
Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions
Middle East
Will the Tánaiste outline when Ireland will finally set a date to officially recognise the state of Palestine in line with the wishes of both Houses of the Oireachtas and the call from virtually all Palestinian political and civil organisations and in line with international law?
I thank Deputy Carthy for raising the question. In Gaza, Palestinian civilians are living in conditions that no human being should have to endure. Gaza is on the brink of a man-made famine. Every day without a ceasefire brings this truly horrific prospect ever closer. I share the deep concerns of this House about the current war and it must end. This is why, every day, my focus remains on achieving an immediate ceasefire.
I remain equally focused on the unconditional release of hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, and on a massive and sustained increase in humanitarian aid, with full, safe and unhindered humanitarian access. I remain hopeful that the talks between Israel, US, Qatar and Egypt will deliver a ceasefire in the near future, and in advance of Ramadan. While we are focused on ending the current brutal war, we cannot lose sight of the need for an urgent and comprehensive political track to end decades of conflict.
In terms of recognition of a state of Palestine, the commitment in the programme for Government states that we will "recognise the State of Palestine as part of a lasting settlement of the conflict, or in advance of that, when we believe doing so will progress efforts to reach a two-State solution or protect the integrity of Palestinian territory".
There are intensive ongoing discussions about how the international community can develop and support a credible pathway to the implementation of a two-state solution. In this regard, we have been actively engaged with regional partners on the finalisation of a peace plan currently being developed by a core group of Arab states. I discussed this with the Jordanian and Palestinian foreign ministers in the Munich security conference and senior officials from my Department have travelled to the region in recent weeks at my request to further consult with key partners on the details of this plan and how Ireland, with a number of European partners, could support this initiative.
Recognition is a step Ireland can only take once, a step which should be taken with a group of European partners, and a step which should be calibrated to best advance a two-state solution and-or protect the integrity of Palestinian territory. This is, and will remain, my focus and that of my Department.
I thank the Tánaiste. The closing summary of his remarks have been read into the record of the Dáil hundreds of times over the past decade. When the Tánaiste says we have to look at recognition on the basis of what is the most optimal way possible for the benefit of the Palestinian people, I often wonder if those who cite this realise how patronising they sound. Every Palestinian political representative and every Palestinian civic organisation is asking states such as Ireland to officially recognise their state before it is too late. We are saying in response, apparently, that we will figure out and decide when it is best for them. It recalls Parnell's words that "no man has a right to fix the boundary to the march of a nation". We have to step up. As I said to the Tánaiste last week, if we do not do so, there will be no Palestine left to recognise. I ask the Tánaiste to set a date and send out the word to the world that others are welcome to join us in doing this.
That reply was not one that has been issued for the past number of months or years. If Deputy Carthy listened to it carefully he would see that. All of us in the House have to make a decision on whether we just want to be performative or we want to be impactful. I believe we want to be impactful. The Arab peace initiative is fairly imminent. I believe it is dependent on a ceasefire and we need a ceasefire urgently. We have been working with our colleagues, in terms of those who have been putting together the Arab peace initiative, with the Palestinian Authority, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others. The view is that if we could work with other European countries and with those Arab states in the context of an Arab peace initiative that would also have US endorsement, it would potentially be an optimal and impactful time for a number of European states at that juncture to support the initiative through the vehicle of recognition. We have had discussions with a number of our European colleagues in this regard.
I ask the Tánaiste to stop accusing every Opposition Member who asks a question on this issue or urges him to take action on this issue of being somehow disingenuous, and to accept that every one of us has a bona fide rationale for raising these matters. This rationale is that we want to see, in the first instance, an immediate ceasefire and, in the second instance, lasting peace.
Of the 193 members of the United Nations, 139 recognise the state of Palestine. This is not somehow about showing great initiative. It is about the rest of the world catching up with what international law clearly states. I welcome any peace initiative. I welcome Ireland's engagement on those peace initiatives. Palestinian organisations and political representatives, including the representatives of the Palestinian Authority, say to us that a meaningful thing Ireland could do today is to set a date on which it will recognise the state of Palestine and then encourage and put pressure on others to join, and I would hope they would. When they say this, we have to listen. Does the Tánaiste not accept this?
I never said Deputy Carthy was disingenuous. I do not know where he invented that from. I did not use it at all in my reply.
You used the term "performative". What was that about?
I did not interrupt Deputy Carthy. I have to correct a false assertion that he made. What I did say was that there is a difference between being performative and being impactful. I respectfully suggest, through the Chair, that Deputy Carthy's tendency is to the former. He is into performance on this and into rhetoric and soundbite. He does not give credit for, or acknowledge, the Government's genuine interest in developing this, in particular on the recognition question in terms of doing it optimally and with impact. We can only do it once. I have spoken to the foreign minister of the Palestinian Authority. We meet quite regularly with the Palestinian Authority. This week I met the secretary general of Fatah and so did Deputy Carthy.
The point is that I think they understand where we are. The fact is that we are pressing for the publication of the peace initiative because I think that would be significant, in the context of the question.
Human Rights
Brendan Howlin
Question:2. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he supports the call of the UN Secretary General for an independent investigation into the deaths of more than 100 Palestinians as they sought aid in Gaza; the action he has taken to avoid mass starvation in Gaza; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11215/24]
The spectre of famine looms over Gaza. Already, children and infants have died of starvation there and scores have been killed as they simply queued for food. Could the Tánaiste set out the Government's response to these issues?
I will firstly respond to the question Deputy Howlin has asked about an independent investigation into the deaths of more than 100 Palestinians as they sought aid in Gaza by saying that like him, I am appalled by the horrible deaths of Palestinians queuing for aid in Gaza City last week. I join the calls made by EU High Representative Borrell and UN Secretary General Guterres, among others, for a credible and impartial investigation to establish the facts of this appalling incident. Those responsible must to be held to account.
International humanitarian law is unambiguous on this point; Israel must protect civilians and ensure basic services in Gaza. The humanitarian crisis that is unfolding is man-made and is completely unacceptable. Civilians in Gaza, many of whom, as the Deputy says, are now on the brink of famine, urgently need the violence to stop. A significant and sustained increase in humanitarian aid is required. All parties to the conflict have a responsibility to ensure there is full, safe and unhindered humanitarian access.
Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance in Gaza. Since the ICJ made an order for provisional measures in this regard in late January, humanitarian assistance entering Gaza by land has halved and the World Food Programme, WFP, and UNRWA have had to withdraw from distributing aid in northern Gaza given the deterioration of the security situation.
In recent weeks I have consistently advocated for all partners who suspended funding to UNRWA to rescind this decision immediately. Last month, I announced €20 million in core funding to UNRWA to support the organisation's vital and life-saving work. I welcomed the announcement last week by the EU Commission that it was releasing €50 million of urgently needed funding for UNRWA, with more to follow. This will allow it to continue its essential work.
We continue to focus our diplomatic engagement on the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire, the unconditional release of hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, and a massive scale-up in humanitarian access.
I welcome the views set out by the Tánaiste, but I am anxious to know what is going to happen as a result of those actions. The situation is a crisis. It is like watching what happened in Rwanda where there were mass deaths. The world is outraged, but what is the world to do to prevent an absolute disaster unfolding in front of our very eyes? In terms of the first question, will there be an independent investigation? Have the Tánaiste's calls resulted in bringing that about?
Second, the air drops are obviously entirely ineffective. We have 34,000 or 38,000 meals being delivered to 2 million people from the air, and they are not even delivered where they are needed or accessible. Actually, sometimes they result in more harm because of the disruption that people desperate for food can cause. What are we going to do to ensure that food is delivered before people die in unimaginable numbers?
One of the factors in that appalling incident last week concerning the more than 100 people who were killed was a breakdown in the social order. In my view Israel bears responsibility for that. A number of Gazan policemen were targeted. They were there to at least try and organise the distribution of aid for the UN agencies and then they were targeted by Israeli forces, so they have withdrawn from that. People are desperate. What we are witnessing is understandable desperation on the part of many families. When they see an aid truck coming in, people desperately go to take the aid off the trucks. The UN envoy, Sigrid Kaag, said to the European Foreign Affairs Council that we are on the cusp not just of famine but also of social breakdown. Therefore, the pressure has to be kept on Israel to open more crossings to facilitate more aid going into Gaza. Deputy Howlin is correct that there is a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in front of the world's eyes. What is taking place is appalling.
The problem is the pressure that is being applied is not only ineffectual, but is actually lessening the amount of food going in. The Tánaiste said himself that aid has halved since the International Court of Justice made a ruling. There is no obvious sign of any relenting on the part of the Israeli authorities in terms of the pressure they are keeping. As the Tánaiste also rightly said, they have destroyed any protection that was there to have law and order within Gaza. It is an extraordinarily difficult situation for anybody delivering aid. The international community has to take on that role. Does the Tánaiste not agree? What can we do to marshal that support now to ensure we are not looking back in horror at unimaginable numbers of deaths and wringing our hands that we did not act sooner?
I think we have taken every step open to us in this regard. We showed leadership when UNRWA first came under threat. We were one of the first to come out and say-----
Israel is still trying to destroy Gaza.
It is, and to undermine it. A significant decision was communicated to us by the President of the European Commission, and this happened directly on account of our stance on the issue. Canada has now followed in restoring aid to UNRWA, so the dial is shifting in that regard. The key issue is that the international community has to put as much pressure on as possible and keep the pressure on to get the trucks into Gaza and, if necessary, to come up with mechanisms - be they international UN forces or whatever - to ensure the safety of convoys into Gaza in order to end famine and the malnutrition that clearly is happening to so many children across Gaza.
I agree with Deputy Howlin on the aid drops. We will discuss that later in a further question. They can never be used as an excuse for not doing the obvious, which is to open up the borders and allow a sufficiency of aid in, at least on a par with what went in before this war started.
European Union
Matt Carthy
Question:3. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his position regarding the proposed reappointment of Ursula von der Leyen as President of the European Commission considering her interventions in respect of Israel's aggression against the people of Palestine. [11048/24]
When the President of the European Commission stood in Tel Aviv and declared that Europe stands with Israel on the same week as Israel announced it was going to purposely deny the people of Gaza food, water and electricity, she undermined Europe and she did not speak for Ireland. My question to the Tánaiste is if the Irish Government is seriously contemplating supporting her for a second term in office.
First, I continue to engage with my European Union counterparts on the crisis in the Middle East. I have made Ireland's position on the conflict clear at the Foreign Affairs Council. I have consistently urged the European Union to support an immediate ceasefire and to impose sanctions on violent Israeli settlers. I called on the European Commission and on European Union partners to restore funding to UNRWA and I welcome the recent announcement by the Commission to provide an immediate €50 million in funding to UNRWA. The Taoiseach and the Prime Minister of Spain have also written to the President of the European Commission on the subject of reviewing the European Union-Israel Association Agreement.
The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has been clear on the need for Israel's response to the attacks on 7 October by Hamas and other militant groups to be in line with international law. In a statement on 9 November, President von der Leyen expressed clearly the need to protect and save lives in Gaza while ensuring humanitarian access.
The European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the European Commission, Josep Borrell, has been consistent and unambiguous in efforts towards a political solution to this crisis and has maintained extensive engagement with both the Israeli and Palestinian leadership, as well as regional partners, to bring an end to the violence and commence a political pathway towards peace.
President von der Leyen has been a strong advocate for the protection of Irish interest throughout the Brexit process. She also provided important leadership in the European Union and support to Ireland during Covid. She has provided consistent leadership on the European Union's multifaceted response to Russia's aggression in Ukraine.
On 6 and 7 March, at the European People's Party congress in Bucharest, the President of the European Commission is expected to be officially named as her party's candidate.
Ireland will conduct extensive consultations, both internally and with our European partners, before deciding which nominee to support in the European Council.
I agree with the Tánaiste about the important and constructive role that Josep Borrell has played since the aggression against Gaza began. However, Ursula von der Leyen has seriously damaged the credibility of the European Union globally through partisan interventions in support of Israel during the onslaught in Gaza. She offered Benjamin Netanyahu unconditional and unqualified support at what was a pivotal and escalating point in Israel's onslaught against the civilian population in Gaza. The President of the European Commission provided political cover for what has become the genocidal destruction that has unfolded before our eyes.
As a neutral state with an independent foreign policy, Ireland can demand adherence to international humanitarian law and the UN Charter, and I have commended the Government on its consistency in that regard. The current President of the European Commission has not shown the same consistency and, in failing to do so, has damaged the potential of the European Union to play a constructive role in this region. Does the Tánaiste agree it is time for a change so we can rebalance that position?
There have been different views across the European Union for a considerable length of time on the Middle East and particularly on the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Because of history going back to the Second World War, the Holocaust and so on, people, particularly in Germany but also elsewhere, look at the conflict through a different lens from others in Europe, including ourselves. We have worked within the European Union with others and with other like-minded states to change the narrative and to try to bring people to a greater consensus. I think we have been relatively impactful, along with others, in terms of moving the European Union towards calling for a humanitarian ceasefire. At the most recent meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council, 26 member states agreed on sanctions against the West Bank settlers. If someone said to me that would happen a month or six weeks ago, I would have been doubtful. That would certainly have been the case two or three months ago. The point is that we are having an impact. The decision of the President of the Commission last week to change the position with respect to UNRWA and to offer an immediate €50 million is a further sign that people are listening and we are having an influence. That is the best way to proceed now. What will happen after the European elections is that political parties will put forward nominees.
It is important to remind ourselves the competency for foreign policy at the European Union is at the European Council level. Each state has a veto and Ursula von der Leyen's actions were in clear and direct contravention of that fact. Of course there are different views, and everybody accepts that, but there are not different international laws. There is a single international law and Israel is in grave violation of it. Ursula von der Leyen has yet to call out Israel for that. My fear is that Ursula von der Leyen will get a second term. The European People's Party, EPP, of which Fine Gael is a member, is set to endorse her as the candidate this week. That means nothing, by the way. Manfred Weber was the EPP candidate five years ago and Ursula von der Leyen was part of manoeuvres to undo the Spitzenkandidat process. To ensure we are not isolated at the end of a process, what is needed now is for countries that value international law and have been consistent in demanding adherence to it, as Ireland has, to say clearly that Ursula von der Leyen is not the person to be the face of the European Union in the current circumstances.
It is not long since the Deputy and his party were making admirable comments about President Ursula von der Leyen in this very Chamber.
Yes. That is why I am saying it is important to be consistent.
I am not into the demonisation of individuals. I would say, on the credit side, that President von der Leyen was impactful in respect of the Covid-19 pandemic, which was very well handled by the European Commission and nobody can deny that. When I was Minister for Health in the early 2000s, Europe was at nowhere near that level of cohesion, as Deputy Howlin would agree, in terms of getting industry together and getting Europe together to have one vaccine production system of which everybody could avail. That was an enormous achievement. There has also been great unity in respect of the war in Ukraine.
The Deputy might volunteer at some stage, because I do not know, whether Sinn Féin will be in the same grouping or a different grouping in the next European Parliament. What nominee will it be supporting?
It will not matter what grouping we are in. We will not support somebody who has facilitated a genocide.
Are you changing? I heard you might be changing.
We will not support somebody who has facilitated and endorsed a genocide, regardless of which group we are in.
You are in a fairly dodgy group.
I remind both Deputies that there is a Chair here.
International Relations
Gary Gannon
Question:4. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the reason the Israeli ambassador has not been summoned by his Department after the killing of a person (details supplied) despite the Russian ambassador rightfully being summoned in the wake of another death in Russia; and the reason the same standards are not applied to both. [11135/24]
The Tánaiste has at several points today referenced the need for the international community to keep the pressure on Israel. One way we in Ireland can do that is to summon the ambassador, as would be the normal diplomatic convention. Why has the Tánaiste not done that to date?
I will answer the Deputy's full question as it is presented in terms of the killing of a journalist. Ireland is committed to upholding the UN Charter and the rules-based international order. These principles underpin Ireland's international engagement across the board, including in respect of media freedom, the protection of journalists and the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of expression.
Following the killing of the Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in Jenin in May 2022, Ireland was proactive in repeatedly condemning her killing and calling for an investigation, including in statements delivered in the UN Security Council during our term as a member. Ireland also took the initiative to shine a light on Shireen’s killing and on the urgent issue of the protection of journalists by convening an informal Security Council meeting just a few days after she was killed. By doing so, Ireland made sure that the Council was briefed by media organisations, including Al Jazeera, Shireen’s employer, and by the Committee to Protect Journalists on her killing and on the wider context of the dangers which journalists face in conflict situations every day.
Under international humanitarian law, journalists are protected as civilians. The current conflict in Gaza has been described by the Committee to Protect Journalists as "the most dangerous situation for journalists we have ever seen". Of the 99 journalists killed worldwide in 2023, 72 were Palestinians killed in Gaza after 7 October. That is a shocking statistic. Journalists have a crucial role to bring us the truth. They must never be targeted.
In relation to the ongoing conflict in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory, I met the Israeli ambassador to Ireland in my office in Government Buildings last week and communicated Ireland's comprehensive approach to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. I stressed the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire, the unconditional release of hostages held by Hamas in Gaza and a sustained and massive scale-up in humanitarian assistance. I noted the clear legal position that under international humanitarian law, Israel must protect civilians in Gaza and ensure that the essential needs of the population there are met. I asked her to communicate all of those issues to the Israeli Government.
When the Tánaiste says he met the Israeli ambassador, was that a prearranged meeting or did he summon the ambassador? There is a distinction there that he might clarify. Was the ambassador summoned to relay a protest on behalf of the Irish Government? If that was the case, it is welcome because we should uphold standards. One thing that undermines the very nature of these international institutions is hypocrisy. The Tánaiste rightfully summoned the Russian ambassador to the Department of Foreign Affairs in order to protest the death of Alexei Navalny precisely because he sought to expose corruption. He was targeted by the Russian state of Vladimir Putin because of that. Some 97 journalists have been killed in Gaza since 7 October to stop them from telling the truth about the horrors that are happening there. The Irish State has stood out. I do not believe for a second that anybody has a monopoly on compassion or interest in the situation in the Middle East. We could go further and act unilaterally if necessary by summoning the ambassador, relaying a protest and beginning that process by which we outline our protest, which I believe should lead to us opening our own proceedings at the International Court of Justice, ICJ. That action all starts with a protest.
In respect of the death of Alexei Navalny, the summoning of the Russian ambassador was part of a Europe-wide co-ordinated action connected with his death, the suppression of any dissent in Russia and the manner in which he was treated by the Russian authorities that led to his death. Russia was responsible for his death. Diplomacy and diplomatic channels are about communicating the Irish position in no uncertain terms through an ambassador to his or her government. We know that Israel has communicated to our ambassador in respect of its perspective on Ireland and our position.
In light of that and of what is happening, I felt that a meeting with the Israeli ambassador in my office was the correct decision in order to allow me to communicate, in a very unambiguous and comprehensive way, why Ireland adopted the various positions it has adopted in the international courts, at the EU and the UN and in the public statements we are making. It also allowed me to stress that it is Israel's responsibility to protect Gazan civilians and make sure they have access to the basic essentials of life. We took that opportunity.
Could the Tánaiste outline whether he expressed that Ireland is protesting against Israel's actions in Gaza? The ambassador was summoned with that purpose in mind, namely, for us to outline that under the Geneva Convention Israel is obliged to avoid genocide, indicate that we feel that what is happening in Gaza meets the criterion in that regard and to ask Israel to account for itself. This is a specific obligation. Could the Tánaiste indicate whether we outlined our fears that a potential genocide is taking place in Gaza? Did he outline the fact that journalists are being wantonly targeted and that the bombing of hospitals has occurred? Will the Tánaiste give us more details about his conversation with the Israeli ambassador, because it is very important?
I have already given some details. In particular, we focused on the humanitarian situation, the responsibility of Israel and the 100 people who were killed seeking food and aid. There is no doubt that if there was gunfire, people were shot. We want an investigation into that. We asked Israel to stop undermining UNRWA and to understand that UNRWA is the backbone of humanitarian aid, including educational supports, medical supports and food, in Gaza, and that aid cannot be distributed in Gaza without going through UNRWA. We went through the need for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and I indicated that we wanted our position communicated to the Israeli Government. I spoke to the previous Israeli foreign minister and have communicated our views to his successor, Israel Katz. We wrote to him and sought a discussion.
Diplomatic Representation
Matt Carthy
Question:5. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the proposed new embassies and consulates that will be opened in 2024; if he will ensure that a new Irish consulate is opened in Australia in light of the growing Irish population there and the strengthening links between Ireland and Australia. [11049/24]
I welcome the announcement by the Cabinet that Ireland will be opening new embassies in Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Moldova, as well as a consulate in Malága. I particularly welcome the announcement that Ireland will open an additional consulate in Melbourne, something I have been advocating for some time. Will the Tánaiste outline a timeframe for the opening of those embassies and consulates and indicate what other embassies and consulates will be opened this year?
On 5 March, the Government approved the opening of five new missions. This is the latest step in the expansion of the State’s diplomatic and consular network. The new missions are embassies in Belgrade, Sarajevo and Chisinau and consulates general in Malága and Melbourne. This expansion is being undertaken within the context of the Global Ireland programme, which aims to see Ireland’s global footprint and influence double in the period to 2025. These five new missions will bring to 27 the number of missions opened or announced under Global Ireland. We will also continue to work at strengthening and deepening our resources in strategic locations. For example, it is intended, in this regard to assign an additional diplomatic officer to the embassy in Cairo to work exclusively on our key relationship with Lebanon.
The mission openings announced on Tuesday reflect a number of key priorities, including the importance of the enlargement agenda during our Presidency of the EU in 2026, the consular needs of our citizens overseas and opportunities for trade promotion and diaspora engagement. I warmly welcome the decision to open a consulate general in Melbourne, which in addition to being an important commercial centre, is home to a large and thriving Irish community. A presence on the ground will assist the Government to deepen our engagement here, build political relationships, support Irish business and engage with Irish citizens and the vibrant Irish diaspora. This decision underlines the importance the Government attaches to strengthening our relationship with Australia as a whole building on the important work of the embassy in Canberra, the consulate general in Sydney and the offices of the State agencies. A new embassy in Islamabad and consulates general in Milan and Munich are expected to open later this year.
The Tánaiste was reading from a prepared script, so he did not include the dates of the openings for which I asked him.
This is up to date.
Will he give a timeframe for the openings of the embassies and consulates general that were announced this week, particularly the consulate general in Melbourne? I have been pressing the Government for some time on this. As the Tánaiste noted, Melbourne has a significant Irish community. Australia is a country with which Ireland has an ever-strengthening relationship but this relationship could and should be much stronger geographically and politically. There is a lot to be gained from even stronger relationships and connections between the two countries not least because the Irish diaspora is thriving in Australia and the Irish are central to virtually every facet of Australian life. We should be utilising that further. Essentially ,my question concerns the timeframe for the opening of the consulate general in Melbourne.
Resources have been allocated in this year's Estimates so we will do it as quickly as possible in terms of securing a premises and the allocation of personnel. It will take a normal timeframe. These are missions where we can establish a presence relatively quickly. I have been to Australia on a number of occasions. Melbourne will become the largest city in Australia before too long. It has a strong historic Irish-Australian community as well a new younger Irish community of whom thousands were born in Ireland. Australia has always been close to Ireland with a strong partnership. There are also significant economic ties between Ireland and Australia and great familial, historic and cultural ties so this is good news. Melbourne is a great sporting city and there is a resonance there with Irish people in terms of Melbourne and history.
I did not get a timeframe. We will continue to chase that. The establishment of new embassies and consulates is always welcome. I agree with the approach of expanding Ireland's diplomatic footprint. We are behind many similar-sized states in terms of our diplomatic reach. I welcome the fact that we have been improving that in recent times.
Apart from some of the high-profile postings like the UN, Brussels or London, a very small number of Irish diplomats are posted to individual missions with the number falling far below our peer nations. We have been blessed with the fact that most of our diplomatic core work incredibly hard and represent us very well but the likes of Sweden, Finland and Denmark have, on average, about 16 staff deployed per mission. Out of our 98 missions, 49 have just one diplomat posted and 73 have three or fewer. Has the Government any plans to review staffing levels to ensure that when we have embassies and consulates general, we are making the biggest impact from them?
We have having a great impact with the diplomats we have and value for money is very important. It is not about the numbers but about the quality. We have a very high-quality diplomatic workforce. I am glad the Deputy is coming to that view.
I said that our Presidency of the EU is key to the timeline. The new missions will open in 2025 or 2026. The embassies in Belgrade, Sarajevo and Chisinau will open no later than the second half of 2025 given their importance for our EU Presidency, which will be in 2026. That is the timeline. It is just a matter of identifying the property solution and allocating personnel to head up these new postings.
Numbers are tight in some areas, but it depends on the areas. If one looks at our development aid programme in Africa, for example, we have relatively larger numbers of embassy staff to reflect the enormous allocations we now give to different countries under the development aid programme and the need to ensure that this is done properly, both appropriately and in an impactful way.