We have apologies from Deputies Michael McGrath and Mary O'Rourke and Senator John Hanafin. We shall proceed to the first item on the agenda, namely a discussion in advance of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. We extend a warm welcome to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, and his officials and wish them well in the negotiations that are likely to take place between now and the end of the autumn. It is a busy time and a great deal of responsibility rests upon the Minister and his ministerial colleagues. I shall now call on him to address the meeting.
General Affairs and External Relations Council: Discussion.
I thank the Chairman, but he is making me nervous. We are making it a habit of attending meetings of the committee in recent times. In any event, I am pleased to have this opportunity to meet with the committee in advance of next week's General Affairs and External Relations Council. Before moving on to the Council agenda, I would like first to comment briefly on the position regarding the Lisbon treaty. In the wake of the outcome of the referendum on the treaty, the situation was reviewed by the Heads of Government at the European Council on 19 June. The Council agreed then that more time was needed to analyse the situation. It noted that the Irish Government will actively consult, both internally and with the other member states, in order to suggest a common way forward. The Taoiseach will make a report to the October European Council.
The committee will be aware that the Government has decided to commission a comprehensive research project in order to clarify the reasons underlying the referendum result and to provide insights into public attitudes towards the European Union. This research represents a first step in the Government's response to the situation created by the recent referendum. It will provide key input into the Government's analysis of the best way forward for Ireland in Europe.
I want to inform members that the contract to carry out this research project has been awarded to Millward Brown IMS. There was very strong interest in the contract and it attracted a very high standard of proposals. I am very grateful to all of the companies which tendered for the project. I look forward to receiving the results of this research in early September and to engaging in an intensive dialogue in the months ahead concerning Ireland's future direction in Europe.
Turning to the meeting in Brussels next week, this will be the first GAERC under the French Presidency and will be chaired by Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. France has set out a very ambitious programme for the Union over the next six months and has made a very energetic start. Indeed both the Taoiseach and my colleague in the Department, the Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, were in France this past weekend and a number of other Ministers have travelled there since 1 July for informal ministerial meetings. The Taoiseach and the Government are also looking forward to the visit of President Sarkozy to Dublin on 21 July, and to a discussion of the French Presidency priorities and the many challenges facing the Union.
The Director General of the World Trade Organisation, Mr. Pascal Lamy - in the context of the WTO talks - has called a ministerial meeting to take place in Geneva, starting on Monday next, 21 July, with the aim of achieving a breakthrough in the negotiations, which in turn would enable them to be brought to a close by the end of this year. Discussions are expected to focus on the detailed modalities for taking forward the negotiations on agricultural and non-agricultural market access, usually referred to as NAMA. There may be an opportunity at that meeting to shape the overall agreement which will also cover issues such as trade in services, trade facilitation - for example, promoting smoother customs clearance procedures - and questions related to geographical indicators and intellectual property. There are still many issues to be resolved between the different negotiating partners if a breakthrough is to be achieved. There are many commentators who consider that the chances of doing so are no more than 50-50. The Presidency has convened a special meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council in Brussels on 18 July, to be attended by trade Ministers, in order to prepare for the WTO ministerial meeting.
The Council will be chaired by the French Secretary of State for External Trade, Madame Anne-Marie Idrac, and most member states are expected to be represented by trade ministers. The Minister of State with responsibility for International Trade, Deputy John McGuinness, will represent Ireland. Arrangements have also been made to hold special meetings of GAERC in Geneva during the week starting 21 July. Secretary of State for External Trade, Madame Idrac, will also chair the GAERC at its meetings in Geneva.
Turning to external relations issues, the French Presidency has prepared a wide and varied agenda. The Presidency has indicated there may be a short discussion on the western Balkans at the GAERC, which will focus on political developments in Serbia in light of the formation of the new government after an extended period of coalition discussions following the parliamentary elections of 11 May. Ireland very much welcomes the formation of a pro-European government in Belgrade and hopes the new government will engage in practical co-operation with the international community on the Kosovo issue and avoid any action which will impede Serbia's future European perspective.
We continue to believe the future of Serbia and of the whole of the western Balkans region lies with Europe. Our clear support for the European perspective of the western Balkans, specifically for Kosovo, was demonstrated last Friday when Ireland pledged a total of €5 million over the next three years at a donor conference for Kosovo and its economic and social development convened by the European Commission and held in Brussels.
Ministers will also discuss Ukraine and its relations with the EU in the context of the ongoing negotiation of an EU-Ukraine enhanced agreement on co-operation. Ukraine is an increasingly important partner for the Union and the French Presidency is keen to settle the principles and objectives of the new enhanced agreement at the 9 September EU-Ukraine summit in Evian. Ireland supports the new enhanced agreement as an opportunity to further deepen the EU-Ukraine relationship and encourages efforts to develop relations with Ukraine within the framework of the European neighbourhood policy.
There are a number of African items before the Council this month, with considerable attention likely to focus on Ministers' consideration of the ongoing serious political and humanitarian crisis in Zimbabwe. I have repeatedly made clear the Government's deep disquiet at the situation in Zimbabwe and the fact we do not recognise the outcome of what can only be regarded as the election charade on 27 June. There may be a need for a transition mechanism in Zimbabwe, but the 29 March election, in which Tsvangirai and the MDC won more votes than ZANU-PF despite conditions of intimidation, must serve as the basis for any political settlement. Ultimately, the right of the Zimbabwean people to choose their own leaders in a free and fair election must be respected.
I am very disappointed at the failure of the UN Security Council to adopt the proposed resolution at the weekend. I believe measures to put pressure on the Zimbabwean leadership would have been fully justified by the situation on the ground in recent months, and there are reports of continuing violence. I support further EU action against those who have been responsible for state-sponsored violence and intimidation in recent months. Work is ongoing within the Council to identify appropriate further EU measures to adopt.
The Government will support any measures which can be identified which will increase the pressure on Mugabe and his regime without unduly impacting on ordinary Zimbabweans, who have suffered enough. At the same time, we also support the continuing work of Zimbabwe's neighbours and of the African Union to exert influence for change. Despite the failure of mediation so far to lead to positive results, I sincerely hope the current discussions under way in South Africa will lead to an agreed transitional outcome and one which fully respects the wishes of the Zimbabwean people. However, the effect of these discussions should not be to offer Mugabe a fig leaf for procrastination.
Somalia is provisionally included on the Council's agenda and conclusions are under preparation. A discussion of the serious political and humanitarian crisis in Somalia would be appropriate given the dimensions of a major humanitarian crisis which has, due to the serious insecurity prevailing in the country, not received anything like the attention which it should from the international community. There have been some recent positive developments, including the signing of a peace agreement in Djibouti on 9 June between the transitional federal government and some of the more moderate Islamic opposition groups. However, the overall security situation remains dire and a growing related problem is the numerous incidents of piracy off the Somali coast, which led to the UN Security Council adopting a related resolution last month.
Ireland and the EU continue to believe a purely security approach to Somalia's problems, in the absence of dialogue, is unlikely to be successful. Pressure needs to be put on all sides to ensure the Djibouti peace deal survives in order to alleviate the human suffering being endured by millions of Somali people and to allow unrestricted humanitarian relief be delivered to those who need it most.
The Council is also due to consider Chad-Central Africa Republic in the context of the mid-term review of the EUFOR mission, the mandate of which runs until next March. Council conclusions are likely to be adopted which will recall that the force is a transitional operation and note that EUFOR has had a significant role in securing areas where it is present, especially during attacks by rebel movements in the Goz Beida region, where Irish troops are stationed.
EUFOR, under the operational command of Lieutenant General Pat Nash, is making excellent progress towards implementing its mandate and I am particularly pleased to note the excellent co-ordination that has developed between the force and the UN, as well as the good relations between EUFOR and the humanitarian actors in the area.
A key issue in the coming months will be the likelihood of transition to the United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad, MINURCAT, by the time EUFOR's mandate expires next March. In this context, further planning for MINURCAT and co-ordination with the UN remains critical. While initial work is under way, much remains to be done. Overall, it is evident that EUFOR is playing a key role in ensuring the security of refugees and displaced persons living in camps along the eastern border of Chad and in facilitating the provision of humanitarian relief, as well as in protecting the UN policing mission in the area.
The Council also will discuss developments in the Middle East peace process and will hear from the quartet representative, Tony Blair, on his impressions following a further round of discussions in the region this week. The EU remains strongly supportive of the negotiations under the Annapolis process, which are being led by Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas. However, there is a growing sense of concern that events on the ground are undermining the prospects of a final status agreement by the end of 2008 and, to an extent, the very credibility of the political process.
As the joint committee will be aware, I visited Egypt, Israel and the occupied territories last week. I held discussions with political leaders in Cairo, Tel Aviv and Ramallah. I also visited Bethlehem and held discussions with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, and local Palestinian representatives on conditions in Gaza and the West Bank. It was clear to me that this is a time of some opportunity in the Middle East.
All the political leaders I met remain sincerely committed to progress in the peace process and to the achievement of a two-state solution. Egypt continues to play a vital role in mediating between Israel and the Palestinians to build on the ceasefire which has broadly held in Gaza since 19 June. I was impressed by the courage being shown by all parties as they enter into sensitive contacts this week on the issues of prisoner and hostage releases and the re-opening of crossing points in Gaza.
It also is encouraging that indirect talks are continuing between Israel and Syria with the stated aim of moving towards a comprehensive settlement and that agreement seems very close on a prisoner-hostage exchange between Israel and Hizbollah. I understand the Israeli Cabinet took an affirmative decision in this regard this morning and expectations for tomorrow are high. We all warmly welcome the agreement reached over the weekend in Lebanon on the formation of a new national unity government and the important signal that Syria plans to establish its first embassy in Beirut.
Against this background however, in my talks with Egyptians and Palestinians, I sensed a growing disconnection between such positive political developments and events on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza. In my meeting with the Israeli Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, her continuing commitment to negotiations with the Palestinian Authority and to a two-state solution was clear. However, I told her frankly that the authority of moderate political leaders was being undermined by the experiences of ordinary Palestinians in their daily lives, such as the restrictions on movement, the effects of the security barrier and, above all, the increase in illegal settlement construction over recent months.
The European Union is extremely concerned about these developments and has stated clearly that all settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem is illegal, prejudges the outcome of final status negotiations and threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution. I strongly believe a genuine freeze in all settlement activity is an urgent necessity to sustain the political process and keep alive the prospect of the only viable solution available to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, namely, the establishment of an independent and democratic Palestinian state living in peace and security with its Israeli and other neighbours.
The Council also will discuss the Iranian nuclear issue. This will be the first opportunity to review developments since the receipt of Iran's written response last week to the important package of proposals presented in Tehran by High Representative Solana on behalf of the EU and the permanent members of the UN Security Council. High Representative Solana is scheduled to discuss the situation in detail with the chief Iranian negotiator later this week. The clear message to Iran at this stage, which I conveyed to the Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister during his visit to Dublin in June, is that the EU is determined to pursue a diplomatic solution on the nuclear issue. Iran must address the concerns of the international community, including all of its regional neighbours, about the direction of its nuclear programme. These concerns have been set out very clearly in four successive Security Council resolutions. If Iran is ready to meet its international obligations, the European Union has stated in specific terms that we are ready for a new and constructive relationship with Iran in all fields and in the interests of the Iranian people and of regional and international peace and stability.
The Presidency has also scheduled a short discussion on transatlantic relations at the GAERC to follow up on an earlier discussion by foreign ministers at last month's European Council. My Portuguese colleague, Luis Amado, has outlined some ideas for reinvigorating and strengthening this crucial relationship.
Clearly, there is a strong desire on both sides of the Atlantic for the US and EU to work more closely together in confronting the serious global challenges we face from climate change to the Middle East. It clearly makes sense for the Union to commence some internal reflections on how to achieve this in advance of a new US administration taking office next January.
I thank the Minister for his submission and welcome him and his officials to the meeting today. I will begin with the second last item raised by the Minister, namely, the Iranian question. To me, this is the single biggest issue and threat to security on the planet. Every other issue, be it Zimbabwe or the Lisbon treaty, pales into insignificance when one takes into consideration the possible impact of things going wrong with respect to Iran.
Only a few days ago, the Iranians carried out missile tests which were portrayed on Iranian television. In June, the Israelis did a dummy run for a possible strike on nuclear plants in Iran. We cannot overemphasise the importance of the EU taking a lead role in diplomacy on this issue. There are many external factors here, such as the Iranian elections, which will be held next year, and the US elections. It is in the interest of some international terrorist groups to destabilise the planet. Attempting to have an impact on the US elections is also a factor in respect of activity that may be undertaken.
The US and Israel cannot go down the road taken in respect of Iraq. A pre-emptive strike is not the answer. The EU is an honest broker and should put all its energies into trying to solve the difficulty in Iran. Although Iran has indicated that it is interested in entering into diplomatic talks, it has not indicated whether it would suspend its uranium enrichment programme. I would like to hear the Minister's view on that because it is the single biggest issue facing us. Aside from the economic aspects - some 40% of the world's trade in oil goes through the Straits of Hormuz - we must take into account the domino effect that a strike on Iran could have.
In respect of Zimbabwe, the Minister indicated he hoped that the African Union would exert its influence. My understanding is that with the exception of perhaps Botswana and, strangely, Kenya, the African Union has exerted no influence and by its silence has construed consent to what is happening in Zimbabwe. Is the Minister puzzled by the stance of South Africa, particularly its failure to back the proposals at the UN Security Council to toughen sanctions against Zimbabwe?
I welcome the fact that some European companies, particularly those in Germany, have intimated that they will not carry out work in Zimbabwe. Has the Minister called in the South African ambassador and articulated the view that this country and its people are deeply outraged by what is happening in Zimbabwe, particularly the role assumed, or rather not assumed, by the President of South Africa in respect of trying to find a solution? Can the Minister offer any opinion as to why the South African President, Thabo Mbeki, seems to be paralysed in this situation and does not seem to have the will to address the difficulty that is there?
In respect of the Middle East, I welcome the fact that the Minister outlined his concern that the illegal settlements under construction were causing difficulty. While everyone, regardless of where the Minister goes, seems to be committed to the peace process, the activity on the ground reflects something different. With regard to the Minister's visit to the Middle East, what is the status of the Irish consul in Lebanon and will he remain in his position?
On the Lisbon treaty, Fine Gael will welcome President Sarkozy's visit to Ireland next Monday. I hope that he will address the National Forum on Europe, as it would give the public an opportunity to learn of his opinions. We in Ireland do not like being lectured by external politicians, but there is an onus to tolerate the opinions of others. As president of the country that holds the EU Presidency, I hope that Mr. Sarkozy will give his unfettered opinion instead of worrying about being diplomatic. He should tell us what he believes, as I am sure he will. We should not try to rein him in and ask him to go easy.
Will the Deputy communicate his wish to Gay Mitchell, MEP?
Like the Minister's, we are a broad-based party. I hope that Gay Mitchell, MEP, is not watching the meeting on the monitor. If he is, he will attend. He is the Mr. Sarkozy of Fine Gael.
Previously, I asked the Minister about his opinion on the Government's options. He is engaging in delaying tactics via Millward Brown. Will the research be made available to everyone? Surely the Government has a concept of the direction it wants to go and how it intends to move forward. Only a limited number of options are available to it. I would welcome the Minister's opinion in this regard. He is courageous and will not hide behind the Millward Brown research. He has an opinion of his own. Will he confirm that further enlargement can occur under the Nice treaty and that we do not need the Lisbon treaty to do so?
For the information of the meeting, the committee has expressed its willingness to meet Mr. Sarkozy if he so wishes. In that event, Deputy Timmins might have a closer meeting than anticipated.
I am delighted to meet the Minister again so soon and wish him well in his deliberations. I congratulate him on his successful trip to the Middle East. I welcome the invitation to President Sarkozy to meet the committee, but has he indicated whether he will accept it? Such a meeting and a meeting with the National Forum on Europe would be useful. Unless he tries to meet as many of the relevant bodies, institutions and people as possible, I do not know how his fact-finding mission will operate. Recently, the French ambassador told us that the visit's purpose was to listen to, analyse and debate the issues. We would be delighted to do all of the above.
Can the committee be supplied with the terms of reference of the Millward Brown survey? It seems to be an attempt to clarify the underlying reasons for the referendum result. These have been discussed ad nauseam in the media and elsewhere. Unless in-depth research has been undertaken or previously unasked questions have been raised, the likelihood is that there will be more of the same. I am interested in the survey’s terms of reference and how it will differ from the questions put by the Eurobarometer survey and other surveys conducted since The Sunday Business Post survey and so on.
Previously, I asked whether the committee could be granted access to the Attorney General's advice on the items in the Lisbon treaty that required a constitutional amendment so that we could focus our attention on the areas that need to be addressed. Failing this, the committee should seek legal advice on the matter, but I hope that I will not be required to formally propose such a course of action. It is important that the committee determine the precise issues that offend the Constitution so that we can best plot the way forward. As the Minister prepares for the October summit, it is essential that he have a clear idea of the legal issues involved.
With regard to the WTO talks, there is a special meeting on 21 July in Geneva. There is a proposal to complete the process by the end of the year. That is optimistic. How does the new draft, which I presume has been presented to the Minister by now, differ from the old draft, which was roundly criticised by France and Ireland? The French President stated that if it was the same document, he had every intention of vetoing it. Are there new measures and issues before the meeting on 21 July that will allow the breakthrough to take place? Are we facing a veto from the French, if not from the Irish? This applies particularly to proposals on food security and agriculture.
Deputy Timmins has raised the matter of Zimbabwe and I agree with him on it. The UN resolution was not successful and I presume there is no going back on that. Are there specific proposals for the EU to take action in respect of sanctions? The thrust of the UN proposal was sanctions. Zimbabwe is still a member of the Commonwealth and Britain is the host and parent country. Surely the EU can take specific initiatives on its own. European countries are those that are associated with Zimbabwe, in the past and the present.
It is hard to know if it is Lieutenant General Pat Nash or the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O'Dea, who is in charge in Chad. Perhaps they have shared responsibility. The Minister made statements regarding the UN, with suggestions that Irish troops had not fully protected UN personnel. In the Sunday Independent, the Minister seems to be of the impression that the Government forces fired on the Irish troops. Is that true, is it a rumour or was it disclosed to the Sunday Independent by the Minister, a paper for which he has written?
What is happening in Chad? There are rumours about various incidents but do we have any truth regarding these. It is not much good to say that some people believe it was Government troops. Others believe it was rebel troops. There are only two types of troops, either it was Government troops or it was rebel troops. The Minister for Foreign Affairs does not need to go to Europe to get clarification on this but it would be useful to have it.
We seem to be getting mixed signals on the Middle East. The Minister referred to a growing sense of concern that events on the ground are undermining the prospect of a final status agreement by the end of 2008 and, to an extent, the credibility of the political process. If one listened to media reports on the Mediterranean union and the Barcelona process, President Sarkozy has been doing everything possible to bring both sides together, with everyone shaking hands and smiling. What is the reality? Is there a separated operation between the French President, Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas? Is it as bleak as it seems with continuing illegal settlements, the wall and restrictions on movement? Is it a false dawn that will fizzle out when President Bush disappears off the scene at the end of 2008? Is it a fig leaf to pretend something was being done in the last months of his presidency when he could not do much at home?
Deputy Timmins has already highlighted the nuclear threat posed by Iran. This is the largest single nuclear threat remaining in the world, given that the nuclear threat from North Korea has been pretty much resolved. In that context, it would be good to see some progress on that issue.
I join my colleagues in welcoming the Minister and his officials to the meeting and thank him for his comprehensive statement. I found his comments on the situation in the Middle East particularly gratifying and informative, especially with regard to the events and realities on the ground. It is extremely important that he has made reference to that. We read in the newspapers about these types of events all of the time and about how the humanitarian situation in the region can, at any time, undermine any peace process that may get under way. I am very glad the Minister raised that issue with the Israeli foreign minister. As the Minister said, given what happened in Paris in recent days, there is an added impetus to the Middle East peace process between Syria and Israel, with Turkey also involved, which is very positive.
That is also linked to the Iranian situation. It was frightening in the past few weeks to hear of military exercises going on among both sides. I hope that at all stages the point is made to Israel that its own nuclear weapons have been developed completely outside of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The fact that Israel has nuclear weapons outside of the international framework is a destabilising influence in terms of the security and nuclear situation in the region. That point must be made or our position will be misinterpreted by countries such as Iran. I am sure the Minister will bear that in mind.
Relations between the EU and the US are very important. Events in recent years have shown that there is a gulf between the approaches of Europe and the US on some of the most important issues of the day, certainly in the Middle East and, indeed, elsewhere. I would be very happy if the Minister could revert to this committee at a future date with some ideas on this issue. We do not, for example, appear to have a lot of parliamentary contact with our colleagues in the Houses of Congress in the US, certainly not through this committee. Members of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs visited the United States once or twice in the past five years. There is a case to be made for deeper parliamentary contact between parliamentarians of the European Union and the United States of America.
I agree with the Minister's comments on Chad. We are doing a very good job there. As I understand it, the initial commitment was for one year but what is the plan after that? Is it envisaged that the mission will go on for longer than a year? If so, will there be a review and a decision announced on it? I sense that the public is very supportive of our involvement in Chad but would not like it to be open-ended. The public would like some clarity on the exact timescale for our involvement.
I very much welcome the proposed visit of President Sarkozy because he is an individual who is very keen to listen and engage. That was obvious at the Mediterranean summit in Paris last weekend. It would be good if he appeared before this committee or before the National Forum on Europe, of which I am also privileged to be a member. However, if he does appear before this committee or the forum, the agenda should not just be confined to issues surrounding the Lisbon treaty. There are some other issues that are of equal national importance. In particular, it is no secret that the French had been pressing very hard for a consolidated tax base in the EU. They should be asked openly and forthrightly if they are going to finally give up on that issue.
The Irish people are entitled to honest answers from the President of France. He stated publicly that he wants to see greater co-ordination between military forces of member states. I am aware that the Taoiseach has made it clear we will only co-operate subject to our principles of neutrality but it would be interesting to hear the President's views on how far military co-operation should go. I would encourage the Minister to ask the President to attend the National Forum on Europe and, if possible, to attend this committee so these issues can be debated.
I welcome the Minister and wish him continued success in his post. In regard to Chad, our troops are doing excellent work under Lieutenant General Pat Nash. Will the Minister have an opportunity to visit the troops given that the visit by the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, was so encouraging? I am sure they would be delighted to meet the Minister for Foreign Affairs. It is a highly dangerous mission and I wish them a safe return. They are courageous men and women. The Government and the Dáil made the correct decision to send them to Chad because further lives might have been lost without their presence.
I am delighted that the Minister has already had an opportunity to travel to the Middle East. I am sure he saw the disturbing effects of the 30 metre high wall during his visit to Bethlehem. It is disconcerting, to say the least, that the area is being divided. In his discussions with Israeli officials the Minister clearly explained that the expansion of settler villages is breaking all the rules of the Middle East peace process. It looks as if these villages will take the best lands from Palestinians. It is a difficult situation but the wall has not prevented the recent atrocity whereby a bulldozer killed three Israelis. It does not work and it is causing terrible divisions in the region.
I hope that irrespective of the discussions that take place regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities, we will maintain our exports to and trade links with that country. When I visited Iran as Minister with responsibility for trade and marketing, I received a great reception. Even while the British Government had concerns about the Rushdie affair, it engaged in trade. As someone with experience of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, I know it is important that the Minister maintains this relationship. I acknowledge that the Department of Foreign Affairs has been helpful in trade missions and I hope that work can continue.
I am concerned about the questions that have been raised in regard to the honorary consul in Beirut. I am not sure of the accuracy of the newspaper reports published last weekend on this issue and I do not know anything about the individual concerned but he appears to have provided significant assistance to Irish people during a difficult period.
I welcome the Minister and his officials. I agree wholeheartedly with Deputy Timmins regarding the Iranian question. This is one of the most important and worrying issues that have arisen internationally and the heightening of tension puts a responsibility on actors such as the EU to exert a calming influence. Deputy Timmins referred to the importance of the EU positioning itself as an honest broker.
I wish to express my concerns about the missile defence shield which is being negotiated at present between the US Administration and the Czech Republic and Poland. It appears that an agreement for a radar system has been made with the Czech Government and that Poland is negotiating a deal to locate part of the missile defence shield on its territory. The purpose is, supposedly, to provide protection against a possible nuclear strike from Iran. This has major implications for the future of EU policy on Iran. Has the matter been discussed at the General Affairs and External Relations Council? What are the Minister's views on the influence the European Union can bring to bear on the issue? Defence is an area in which there is almost exclusive competence for member states but the plans have major implications for other members of the European Union.
I will ask a question on the visit of President Sarkozy next week. President Sarkozy is a Head of State and France currently holds the Presidency of the European Union. In light of the recent rejection of the Lisbon treaty by the Irish electorate, it is important the visit be a listening exercise because we learned from the Lisbon treaty campaign that comments from outside could have a powerful impact on the attitude of the Irish electorate. President Sarkozy is free to conduct his visit as he sees fit but, rather than try to influence the Irish people, he should be in listening mode. He should listen to the concerns people have. We have a responsibility, as parliamentarians, to take every opportunity to put the views of the Irish electorate to the President.
I warmly welcome the Minister and his officials. We are delighted that President Sarkozy will visit the country next week. This is very important for Ireland in the wake of the Lisbon treaty referendum result. It shows the respect Mr. Sarkozy, as President of France and the European Union, has for the country and emphasises the importance of the links we have with the European Union. I endorse the Chairman's statement to the effect that the committee would be delighted to engage in dialogue with the President, if he has time. It might be appropriate to extend the debate to the broader political spectrum in the interests of moving forward together.
I congratulate the Minister on his visit to the Middle East and note that he visited different areas, including Ramallah. Did he observe the situation at the Jerusalem-Ramallah crossing? Are the resources which are being provided by the European Union reaching the unfortunate people who need them? Is there the necessary mobility to ensure sustainability for the people living there? Is there any possibility that Israel might freeze further illegal construction to create a period of opportunity for more positive dialogue to take place between both sides? This could assist in bringing about a permanent peace by creating the structures that could ultimately lead to a two-state solution.
I endorse what colleagues said about Zimbabwe. It is very important the European Union make a strong statement at its next meeting, given the fact that the African Union and some of its leaders have not asserted their position in the region. It is also important the European Union have a clear position on Iran to ensure we make progress in eliminating the continuing serious threat to the world.
Like everyone else, I welcome the Minister and look forward to President Sarkozy of France coming to Ireland next week. The idea that the president of one of our largest neighbours and President of the European Council should not visit the country is ludicrous. Any senior politician who said this should have his or her head examined because it is important that we stay in touch with the leadership of Europe. France is a practical leader in Europe as it is one of the largest countries and a founder member of the EU. I hope his wife will come because she had a huge impact in Britain on her visit at Easter; this can help in solidifying good relations between countries which is important, especially in the aftermath of the Lisbon treaty. A French Minister, and how his comments were reported by certain newspapers, had an influence in the last week of that campaign and caused some people to vote "No". I look forward to President Sarkozy's visit and hope he comes before the National Forum on Europe. I would like to see the President here, though I know his schedule will be busy.
The WTO is an important issue, though it is not on the Minister's agenda. It is crucial for this country and for our future relationship with Europe. We must influence Europe as much as possible. There is a list of issues with which the Council will deal and when one considers Ireland's position as a small island nation we would have little influence in them but for our membership of the European Union and our positive role therein. It is important to note the positive influence we can have in the world.
Deputy Mulcahy raised transatlantic relations and I also have an interest in the area because we are often told we have a choice between Boston and Berlin. However, many of us would like to combine both approaches. President Kennedy gave an example in this regard as did his wife who has similar characteristics to the wife of the French President.
I wish the Minister luck with this meeting and thank him for coming before us to address these issues.
There is a list of hot issues at the moment. On behalf of the committee, last week I attended a preliminary meeting, consisting only of chairpersons of COSAC, the Conference of European Affairs Committees of the national parliaments. The other EU member states were anxious for more information on the position in Ireland and sought to accommodate our review process. They did not indicate that they would wait forever and there was a clear indication that Europe intended to proceed and would take on board the reservations of various member states. The intention is not to reverse.
The Minister referred to the WTO and this will be important. I am concerned that there may be a hurry to reach an agreement to tidy up matters. There could be a trade-off between agricultural and non-agricultural goods and services. If this does not work out it could be a tendentious issue in this country, particularly with regard to future discussions on the ratification of a treaty to replace the Lisbon treaty.
Another matter that came up in the course of discussions was the north-western Balkans. The question of the current relationship between Russia and the European Union was raised, particularly with regard to Serbia and the north-western Balkans. Russia is a near neighbour of this region and the current US deployment of defence forces in eastern Europe is a contentious matter. It has been noted that Russia has huge reserves of gas and oil and seems to have done deals with countries and groups much further afield. This could have a serious impact on EU-Russian relations.
With that I will hand over to the Minister. We wish him well in the negotiations ahead.
I agree with most Deputies and Senators who articulated concern about Iran. Deputy Billy Timmins raised this initially. It was clear even from my own visit to the Middle East that the Iranian nuclear programme and related difficulties and challenges overshadow the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Many countries are very concerned about the potential implications. The EU has pursued a strong diplomatic approach. The High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Mr. Solana, has been in discussions with the EU 3+3 with regard to engaging with Iran, and the EU has offered a very positive vision in terms of political, technical and social engagement with Iran. The response so far has been, to put it diplomatically, understated and cautious. There is no sense of a real response to the fundamental issue.
It is clear that a diplomatic solution must be pursued and that we must avoid compounding the tense situation in the region. We will continue to pursue this. There has been a response to the Solana letter and package from the Iranian side and further meetings are to take place. The committee may rest assured we are pursuing the diplomatic route and we will continue to engage on that basis. However, I do not want to create a view that it is as simple as that. I will not understate the seriousness of the situation from that perspective and the difficulties in arriving at a resolution.
The issue of Zimbabwe was raised by several members. When I met with the South African ambassador two weeks ago I articulated my own perspective and that of the Oireachtas as expressed in the earlier Dáil debate and the debate that took place in this committee some time ago in which members expressed their views on the need for the partners in the region, particularly South Africa, to engage in a positive way and leverage a desirable resolution to the situation. We also had a good debate in the Seanad on this two weeks ago. Senator Quinn, a member of this committee who was here earlier, made the reasonable point that we must be careful in our approach in terms of endeavouring to achieve an outside solution because we must ensure that the partners in the region are involved. If we discard that principle we run the risk of compounding the situation even more.
We are very disappointed with the stance taken at the UN. A unanimous UN position would have put significant pressure on Mr. Mugabe and the Zimbabwean Government. We must, as part of the EU effort, attempt to keep pressure on the regime rather than the people. That is where our focus is and we believe it could yield results. In parallel with this, we hope that the discussions currently under way will yield a transitional government which could ultimately lead to free and fair elections. We are all clear that the continuing situation is detrimental to stability in the region. It is in South Africa's interest and that of the region that a fair and viable regime which has the confidence of the people is put in place so that the economy and society can be restored. That would be of benefit to the entire region and it is the way to go.
A number of people mentioned the Middle East. From one point of view there is much positive engagement across the region. However, from our meetings in the West Bank it was clear there was much frustration, particularly among the representatives of the Palestinian Authority, many of whom feel the rug is being pulled from under them. The settlements are having a negative impact on confidence on the ground in the Annapolis process.
Both the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli Government are committed to the Annapolis process. However, on the ground, the daily impact of what is a very tight regime, the wall, and various other developments such as the settlements are undermining confidence in the process. My observations were that there is a clear disconnect between the actual negotiating process and the views of ordinary Palestinians and their representatives. We articulated that view and put it across clearly. Given our own experience on this island we know the necessity of building confidence on the ground. Ultimately, any agreement that arrives from a negotiating process must deliver on that basis.
It is not just a matter of the wall. To be fair, the Israeli Government representatives say that the wall has dramatically reduced the number of suicide bombers and they see it as a security imperative. On the other side of the coin, the representatives of UNHRA, for example, who do fantastic work there in education provision and so on, pointed out to us that even some of their own people were hindered in getting vital supplies to discharge their functions and engage in their activities. There is no need for that outcome and such was the clear sense we got from what we observed.
Progress continues, however, particularly in the discussions brokered by Egypt. We had good talks with the authorities in Egypt and I commend the approach they have taken with the Israeli Government in terms of brokering the ceasefire in Gaza and now moving on to the next phase which is more difficult. This morning we had evidence of further engagement with the release and exchange of Hizbollah and other prisoners. There are movements at a certain level but on the other hand, there is a very clear sense that confidence-building measures are needed on the ground within the Palestinian community. If that does not happen the danger still exists that the vast majority of moderate opinion will be undermined and lost.
Regarding the coming visit of President Sarkozy, I note that Deputies Noel Treacy and Thomas Byrne have offered an unequivocal and unambiguous welcome. It is normal that the President of the European Union should visit a country within Europe. We might be inclined to think he should come but should say this and not that. We are open democratic countries, 27 in all, and we cannot cottonwool people. It is very good Mr. Sarkozy has decided to come so early in his Presidency. We took a decision on the Lisbon treaty which placed us in a high-profile situation in Europe. In other words, we are the focus of attention. It is natural that President Sarkozy would wish to come to Ireland and we welcome that. His schedule will be tight so I cannot open up the prospect that he will be in a position to meet the committee. I regret that.
We are willing and able.
I have no doubt that you are. The officials in the Taoiseach's office are in discussions with the French officials, fine-tuning the President's schedule. He is anxious to listen and is coming in a listening mode, with reference to the point made by Senator de Búrca. It is part of an ongoing process.
Deputies Timmons and Costello mentioned the upcoming research on the outcome of the Lisbon referendum. The terms of reference of the research include issues of concern raised during the referendum campaign and which of those influenced voters' decisions; an analysis by socio-demographic groups of the underlying reasons for the voting decisions; Irish attitudes to EU institutions and decision-making processes, including the changes that were to be included in the Lisbon treaty; how these results compare to existing research findings and to findings in other countries; and recommendations for the Government's ongoing communications strategy in Ireland about European issues in general. That will add to research already done. It is important that the Government formally and officially undertakes such research and is not reliant on the research conducted by non-governmental organisations or agencies. We can collectively use all the information and it will, to some extent, inform our approach.
It will take some more time to find the answers or chosen options with regard to the Lisbon treaty. There has been a series of discussions in this committee and elsewhere on the treaty and perhaps in September we can use these committees to flesh out the issues related to the treaty and the route map. The issue of whether enlargement could take place under the Nice treaty was raised and the answer is "Yes".
The Irish Honorary Consul in Lebanon, Mr Khaled Daouk, was appointed in 1988 following the closure of the Irish Embassy in Beirut in 1987 as a result of the worsening security situation. He was then appointed Honorary Consul General in 1995. He has given considerable assistance to Ireland throughout a very difficult period. I wish to put on record that his efforts were especially important during the period of the deployment of Irish troops with UNIFIL and when Irish citizens were evacuated during the 2006 emergency in Lebanon. He was very helpful to Irish citizens and the Government on that occasion. It is with regret that I confirm that his appointment as Honorary Consul General will come to an end on 10 October 2008. His involvement in the political arena in Lebanon is not compatible with the role of an Irish diplomatic representative abroad. The Lebanese foreign ministry have been informed accordingly. Deputy Timmins raised this matter in the Dáil. We appreciate the long-standing and valued service of Mr. Daouk and we wish him well for the future.
I have dealt with the questions from Senator de Búrca on Iran and President Sarkozy.
I also asked about missile tests.
The missile protection shield has not been discussed at the General Affairs and External Relations Council, GAERC. This is a bilateral issue between the countries involved and the USA. The recent EU-Russia summit went well. As a country we jealously protect our core competencies in these areas. The recent debate shows we have always looked for opt-outs and the protection of an independent foreign policy in our approach to defence matters. Therefore, we have not been involved in dictating or communicating to others our views on their bilateral arrangements with other countries which relate to defence requirements.
I have dealt with the issues raised concerning the Middle East, and elaborated on the views expressed. Deputy Thomas Byrne raised the issue regarding the transatlantic situation, which needs to be fleshed out more, both at the GAERC and EU level. It is something to which we can return at this committee. This matter was not considered at length at the last GAERC, but it will feature more significantly in the months ahead.
Deputies Durkan and Costello raised the matter of the WTO negotiations. It is clear that Mr. Pascal Lamy and Commissioner Mandelson are anxious to secure a ministerial meeting in Geneva, which is perceived to be make or break. At the GAERC which specifically dealt with the WTO talks some two months ago, we made it clear that substance was more important than timing. We have concerns and indeed Commissioner Mandelson has articulated concerns about certain aspects of the deal, especially regarding non-agricultural market access and services. Many countries have reserved their position on these matters. It is difficult to say whether there will be a breakthrough. Some commentators are saying there is a 50-50 chance.
We are not happy with the agricultural paper as it stands. The NAMA paper needs significant improvement and we need further clarity on services. That is the current position. We will put forward a robust case at the meetings in Geneva. The Tánaiste will be leading the delegation with the relevant Ministers pertaining to the different areas under discussion.
Deputy Costello raised the issue of Chad. I dealt with this before at this committee. People such as High Representative Solana have warmly praised the role of Irish troops in Chad. They came to meet me to convey their gratitude and admiration for the professionalism, impartiality and objectivity of the Irish troops in their handling of difficult situations in a challenging environment. That is the overwhelming sense I get from the participation of the Irish troops in Chad. Their mission to protect up to 400,000 refugees and displaced persons has been effective. That is the fundamental point, notwithstanding difficulties about particular operations or incidents.
I do not have responsibility for operations on the ground but there was an incident on 14 June. In the midst of an engagement between unidentified armed groups and the Chadian national army, EUFOR Irish troops, who were deployed on observation post duties in the vicinity of Goz Beida, received incoming fire and returned warning fire. They immediately reinforced the area between the ongoing engagement and the IDP refugee camps. Ground and air reconnaissance were sent to monitor the situation to ensure protection of the troops. That is the information I have and I will ask Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea to communicate further on the issue. It is important to point out the UN confirmed, thanked and withdrew some of the statements on that matter.
President Sarkozy's initiative at the weekend encompassed more than the Middle East; I believe he has a broader vision for the Barcelona Process. To bring so many together was a significant achievement in the early stages of his Presidency, and if he can develop stronger rapport with Euromed that is ultimately for the good and would have a ripple impact on issues within the region. We were glad to participate in that.
Deputy Mulcahy dealt with the Middle East and Iran. We are in favour of a nuclear free Middle East and have articulated that position consistently. The Deputy also made an interesting point on the gulf between the US and EU on many global issues and the question of deeper parliamentary contact. I have no difficulty with increasing the levels of parliamentary contact between the two areas to try to bridge that gulf.
Deputy Mulcahy also mentioned Chad. The timeframe for EUFOR is 15 March 2009. There are discussions on its success or a transition, but I believe there must be further discussion to give effect to that. The Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, and the Government will review that, keep it under observation, and make decisions closer to the date.
The issue of the consolidated tax base was raised and the European Commission has been pursuing that. It is clear that the four or five top priorities of the French Presidency do not feature this matter. I believe I have covered most of the issues raised by Deputies and Senators.
Deputy Martin's continuity, from being Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to Foreign Affairs is very worthwhile.
The embassies of the Department of Foreign Affairs are a strong economic resource for the country, for many Irish companies and inward investment. We work with IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland to facilitate inward investment and Irish companies making contacts abroad, developing relationships with government agencies and departments overseas. It is an important resource. I have made it clear since I became Minister for Foreign Affairs that I see an important economic dimension to the role of the Department of Foreign Affairs in supporting and assisting our other agencies whose core focus is on this area to do their work effectively and successfully.
The activities of the Iranian Government in terms of its nuclear programme have created a degree of uncertainty in the region such that there is not the right atmosphere for investment or for companies to take risks. Because there is such regional political uncertainty and instability, not alone Irish indigenous companies but also some very significant global companies, particularly in the oil industry, have taken key decisions to pull back from Iran. That is the bottom line in terms of trade. It is not conducive to the conduct of trade.
I thank the Minister and his officials for their attendance. We can note that the holiday season will not be without its frenzied activity. Regarding the ongoing review of the Lisbon treaty referendum result, the committee undertook six regional meetings, the minutes of which are available. They are interesting from the Minister's point of view and should be drawn upon because they give an indication as to where the people who addressed the committee in the course of those meetings were coming from. There is an historical significance to most of the issues that arose and the context in which they arose, as the Minister will see when studying the minutes. I wish him the best of luck with the negotiations and look forward to hearing good news from him in the not too distant future.