Skip to main content
Normal View

Overseas Missions

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 12 December 2012

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

Questions (9, 15, 32, 176)

Michael McGrath

Question:

9. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Defence the new United Nations missions he expects the Defence Forces to undertake in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54765/12]

View answer

Bernard Durkan

Question:

15. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the extent to which further deployment of Irish troops at various locations overseas is anticipated or has been requested; when he expects current deployments to end and or new assignments to commence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54796/12]

View answer

Robert Troy

Question:

32. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Defence if the Defence Forces will participate in any new United Nations missions over the next year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54790/12]

View answer

Bernard Durkan

Question:

176. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the total number of members of the Defence Forces that have served overseas over the years; the extent to which such service is planned for the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55034/12]

View answer

Oral answers (15 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 15, 32 and 176 together. I am frightened to ask how much time that gives us as a consequence.

The Minister's initial reply should be six minutes.

I will try to be briefer than that.

Through the United Nations stand-by arrangements system Ireland has offered to provide up to 850 military personnel for overseas service at any one time, which demonstrates our commitment to the cause of international peace. This continues to be the maximum sustainable commitment that Ireland can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. Ireland is currently contributing 438 Defence Forces personnel to 11 different missions throughout the world. Full details of all personnel currently serving overseas are listed in the tabular statement provided.

Ireland's main deployment is in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, with 361 personnel, with smaller contributions in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan and the European Union training mission, EUTM, in Somalia. Ireland is also currently participating in the Austro-German-led battlegroup, which is on stand-by until 31 December 2012.

The question referred to the future deployment of the Defence Forces overseas. Ireland receives requests from time to time relating to participation in various missions and these are considered on a case-by-case basis. When considering any particular request, the existence of realistic objectives and a clear mandate which has the potential to contribute to a political solution, consideration of how the mission relates to the priorities of Irish foreign policy and the degree of risk involved are among the factors considered. Ireland received an invitation from the operational commander of Operation Atalanta of the European Union Naval Force Somalia, EU NAVFOR, to contribute an autonomous vessel protection detachment, AVPD, to the operation. Currently, EU NAVFOR has received offers from five member states to provide such a detachment. As a result, the requirement for additional AVPDs does not arise in the immediate future and no vacancies will exist within the mission for such detachments until August 2013. Consideration may be given closer to the time with regard to whether Ireland will contribute after August 2013. We have also received an invitation from the UN requesting the deployment of a specialist training team on conventional munitions disposal, CMD, and mine and specialist search awareness to support the work of the United Nations mine action service in South Sudan. The request is currently under consideration. The Department of Defence constantly reviews the deployment of Defence Forces personnel overseas. At this time, it is not anticipated that there will be any major additional deployment of troops to further missions in 2013.

Members of the Permanent Defence Force Serving Overseas as at 1st December 2012

1

UN missions

(i)

UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) HQ

UNIFIL 107 th Infantry Battalion

UNIFIL Sector West HQ

16

337

8

(ii)

UNTSO (United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation) – Israel, Syria and Lebanon

11

(iii)

MINURSO (United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara)

3

(iv)

MONUSCO (United Nations Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo)

3

(v)

UNOCI (United Nations Mission in Ivory Coast)

2

TOTAL

380

UN-mandated missions

(vi)

EUFOR (EU-led Operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina)

7

(vii)

EUTM Somalia (EU-led Training Mission in Uganda)

10

(viii)

KFOR (International Security Presence in Kosovo) – HQ

12

(ix)

ISAF (International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan)

7

TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING WITH UN MISSIONS

416

2

Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

(i)

OSCE Mission to Bosnia & Herzegovina

2

(ii)

OSCE Mission in Belgrade - Serbia

1

(iii)

Head of High Level Planning Group, Vienna

1

(iv)

Staff Officer, High Level Planning Group, Vienna

1

TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING WITH OSCE

5

3

EU Military Staff

Brussels

4

4

Austro-German Battlegroup

Ulm, Germany

1

5

Military Representatives/Advisers/Staff

(i)

Military Adviser, Permanent Mission to UN, New York

1

(ii)

Military Adviser, Irish Delegation to OSCE, Vienna

1

(iii)

Staff Appointments, Irish Delegation to OSCE, Vienna

2

(iv)

Military Representative to EU (Brussels)

5

(v)

Liaison Office of Ireland, NATO/PfP (Brussels)

2

(vi)

EU OHQ Operation Althea, Mons, Belgium

1

TOTAL NUMBER OF DEFENCE FORCES PERSONNEL SERVING OVERSEAS

438

I thank the Minister for his response on this matter. We should never fail to avail of the opportunity at such times to acknowledge the value of the service that our Defence Forces have provided in a variety of countries overseas. Time and again they have distinguished themselves in the service they have given in the cause of peace. Some of them have sacrificed their lives. In general, when we reflect on our Defence Forces, we think first and foremost of the distinguished overseas service that has been given over many years. We should never lose the opportunity of highlighting the importance of that. For young people who are considering a career in the Defence Forces, one of the attractive aspects is the type of service that they are in a position to give in parts of the world where our Defence Forces are deployed from time to time.

I am mindful of the fact that over the years people in the Minister's party have had various comments to make about the triple lock system. What is the Minister's current thinking on the triple lock, with particular reference to our participation in the EU battle groups? Let us speculate on a scenario whereby some fellow members of these battle groups express an interest in participating in a particular mission that might not have the approval of the United Nations. What strategic approach would the Minister for Defence adopt to that issue? Does the Minister envisage bringing proposals before the House on the triple lock? This issue has concerned some Fine Gael Members in the past.

I commend the Deputy on researching some of the views expressed by members of the Fine Gael party. At least they have views on issues of importance and we debate and consider them.

The debate on the Green Paper will give us a useful opportunity to discuss our position in dealing with peacekeeping and peace enforcement; to discuss the benefits of the triple lock and whether there are any detrimental problems or difficulties that arise around it; to discuss the relevance of all of these issues to the new security environment in which we find ourselves; and to discuss the relevance of what we perceive to be appropriate defence policy in a world where conventional armies do not pose any major threats at present to this country, but where terrorism does pose a threat to other EU member states and where we continue to have our domestic home-grown terrorists who pose a threat in the State. There is a range of interesting issues to be discussed and openly debated.

The triple lock has played an important role in ensuring that when we deploy our Defence Forces abroad we do so for peacekeeping and peace enforcement missions that have been given a UN mandate. We have played an important role in missions because our history and background is such that we have no colonial past. In the eyes of many countries in troubled regions of the world, although we were colonised, we do not have a past of colonising others. This gives our troops a particular perspective, whether they are located, as they were for some time, in Chad or in the Lebanon. Often the local communities in these areas have a different perspective towards Irish troops compared to others. We find that our troops can build up engagements and relationships on these missions that sometimes prove more problematic to others.

The UN mandate has an important role in all of this. The Green Paper will afford an opportunity for Members of all parties and none to consider and debate these issues. I do not believe we should take for granted that in the future we will do everything we have done in the past. We need to look at where the world is now, our place in the world, the role we play, what is relevant to Ireland in a defence context as a state and what role Ireland should play as a member state of the European Union. These are all interesting issues and I have no doubt we will have all sorts of interesting debates and exchanges on them during 2013.

I have two brief questions for the Minister. There is a request in at the moment for a trip to South Sudan, which is currently being evaluated. Will the Minister provide some more information about the number of personnel who may be involved? This allows me to come back in on a question I have raised in the past - that is, the use of Lariam. We tabled a question which was disallowed today because of the suspension of a Member. Will the Minister give his position on that request?

I noted the Minister's comments on the triple lock. I have raised this issue in the past as spokesperson on this portfolio. I am somewhat concerned about the Minister's answer. Up to six months ago the Minister said that the triple lock was a valuable aspect of how we did our business and that he could not foresee any changes to it. I note he did not say that today. He is now saying that as part of the Green Paper we should consider our role within global affairs and whether there are unintended consequences of having the triple lock in place. This does not instill me with great confidence that there are no plans to get rid of that mechanism. Will the Minister clarify the position? If it is the case that the Minister's position is the same as it was six months ago and he cannot foresee any circumstances in which we would not have a triple lock mechanism in place, then it should probably be clarified here today. Anyone listening to the debate would have picked up the impression that it is possibly up for review as part of the Green Paper.

As the Deputy is well aware, section 2 of the Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1960, as amended by the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, makes provision for the triple lock mechanism. That is the law and our position on this issue. It would be odd to produce a Green or White Paper that omitted all references to the triple lock mechanism. The Deputy would be more excited and upset if that were to happen. It is reasonable that we review all areas and positions taken and consider the benefits and downsides. I am not expressing a view about change. The last White Paper was produced in 2000 and no major debate preceded its introduction. We now have an opportunity, through a Green Paper, to debate and discuss issues. We need to review where the world is now as compared with where it was in 2000. It is good to review measures we believe are working satisfactorily to ensure they are. If there is something we can do to change or improve the way in which we approach or address issues, we should do so. We should consider whether stances taken in the past which made a lot of sense now make no sense. In a democracy, when one is considering the introduction of a policy paper that may be in place for a decade or more, as was the case in respect of the previous White Paper, it is important consideration is given to where we are. We are living in a different world. For example, there are some areas in which the triple lock mechanism is no longer relevant. An important issue is how we deal with international terrorism. If a group of terrorists based in Ireland is targeting, say, Britain, or persons here are committing criminal acts, should we do nothing until there is a UN mandate? There are concepts that do not cover every issue that arises in the area of defence. However, none of this should cause the Deputy sleepless nights.

It is important that we review where we are, where we were in the past and what we believe will be the position in the future and the roles we can play of a constructive nature. Irish Defence Force' roles outside the domestic environment are essentially in the area of peacekeeping, peace enforcement and humanitarian assistance and will continue to be such.

The south Sudan region has been riven by war, horror, death, destruction and problems with landmines. We are reviewing the role Ireland might play in this regard. We have particular expertise which is recognised globally in the neutralisation of explosive devices. If we can make a contribution to making things safer, we will do so, but we will have to be careful about the nature of the mission involved. Decisions will be carefully made and in appropriate circumstances in the context of the legalities of any engagement that may take place.

If the decision is to participate in that mission, I presume the Lariam issue which I have raised a number of times in the past will arise again. Is the Department considering discontinuing the use of Lariam in favour of another drug? As far as I am aware, there are four compensation cases - there may be more - before the Department relating to the use of Lariam. I would welcome hearing the Minister's view on that issue.

That is a completely different issue. I am aware of the Deputy's concern about this matter. As he will be aware, Lariam is the recommended drug of choice in dealing with malaria. Recommendations on the use of this drug include that a person be medically examined prior to it being administered; that there be no adverse impacts on an individual - the reason it is administered some time prior to a mission - and that the contraindications and circumstances in which Lariam should not be used are outlined. A departmental review in this regard is almost complete. The Deputy may not be aware that a particular medication which it was previously recommended should be only used for a short period may now be used for a longer period and that in some circumstances it may be an alternative to Lariam, despite that up until relatively recently it was not proposed as such. This issue is also being examined. I am sure the Deputy would not expect me to say anything about any existing or threatened court case.

We have, in the context of the Defence Forces, ensured procedures that should be in place are in place. I do not know, in the context of a mission to Sudan, what will be the recommended medications. That issue has not yet come for consideration.

There is growing concern among persons who have served overseas and taken Lariam. I took it many years ago with no ill effects, at least, of which I am aware. Have the Defence Forces provided counselling, guidance or information directly to serving or retired members of the Defence Forces who have concerns about this issue? If the Department was to be proactive in this matter, by way of maximising the amount of information available, concerns would be allayed.

The maximum information is provided for individuals on the use of Lariam, the contraindications in terms of when it should not be used and the necessity, should a person have an adverse reaction, to immediately bring the matter to the attention of medical personnel within the Defence Forces.

Top
Share