Middle East

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 30 November 2023

Thursday, 30 November 2023

Questions (155)

Darren O'Rourke

Question:

155. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the memorandum of understanding between the European Commission and Egypt at the Mediterranean Gas Forum; if he is further aware that this does not include a clause to exclude occupied Palestinian land which contravenes Irish and EU policy that all agreements with Israel should be explicitly inapplicable to territories occupied by Israel; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52803/23]

Oral answers (8 contributions)

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Is the Tánaiste aware of the memorandum of understanding between the European Commission and Egypt at the Mediterranean Gas Forum and is he further aware that this does not include a clause to exclude occupied Palestinian lands which contravenes both Irish and EU policy that all agreements with Israel should be explicitly inapplicable to territories occupied by Israel, and could he please make a statement on the matter?

Deputy Micheál Martin

First, a trilateral memorandum of understanding with Israel and Egypt on co-operation relating to trade, transport and the export of natural gas to the European Union was signed by the European Commission on 15 June 2022. Ireland supports the agreement, which is a timely initiative that will strengthen energy security across the European Union. The legal framework for the EU-Israel partnership is provided by the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which has been in force since 2000. Similarly, the foundation of the EU-Egypt relationship is the association agreement signed in 2004.

The bilateral relationships between the EU and both Israel and Egypt do not prevent either the European Union or the member states from voicing their opinions on issues of concern, including on human rights and international law, which we do regularly both bilaterally and in multilateral fora.

With respect to the territorial applicability of this trilateral agreement, it is established EU policy, reflecting UN Security Council Resolution 2334, that all agreements with Israel unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967. This is an important expression of the European Union's support for international law and for a negotiated two state solution. The territorial clause is included in an annex to this trilateral agreement.

Ireland and the European Union remain firmly committed to a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The region is part of the EU's neighbourhood. I attended the Union for the Mediterranean Regional Forum in Barcelona on Monday this week. This was an important opportunity to discuss the current conflict in Gaza with my European Union and regional foreign minister counterparts. I had bilateral meetings with the Lebanese, Saudi, Turkish, Belgian, Slovenian and Luxembourg Foreign Ministers. The focus of all the meetings was on developing a credible pathway to peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Is the Tánaiste saying that the clause is included?

Deputy Micheál Martin

Yes.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

It is included in the annex. Obviously that is very welcome. There has been much discussion, and, whatever about this particular agreement, other Members have brought up the Israel-EU Association Agreement, which is the basis of the European Union's relationship with Israel. It includes particular conditions. I would like to see what moves we have made with regard to those conditions from a point of view of getting them reviewed. As the Tánaiste said, that does not involve some of the issues that there may be where we would require unanimity. I do not in any way accept the reasons why certain European states have particular views. I will put it on the record. We know the historic crimes that were carried out against the Jewish people. The fact is that when Israel asked for help in 1973 from the likes of West Germany and others, Israel was absolutely refused, because at that time, those states' guilt was not more than their interest in Arab oil. I am not sure I altogether buy that particular reason.

Deputy Micheál Martin

For clarity, UN Security Council Resolution 2334, adopted on 23 December 2016, calls on all states to distinguish in their relevant dealings between the territory of the state of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967. This resolution reflects the position already held by Ireland, the European Union and the UN for many years. Ireland regrets that the main text of the agreement does not include a territorial clause despite the fact that the negotiating mandate from the Council clearly stated that a territorial clause would be required. Our position was made clear at EU level. In June 2022, Ireland, along with Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Slovenia and the Netherlands, submitted national statements to a meeting of the committee of EU ambassadors, emphasising that the absence of a territorial clause in the body of the agreement must not set a precedent for future agreements of this kind. However, the statement in annex to the agreement clearly underlines the inapplicability of the memorandum of understanding to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967. That differentiation is de facto there in the annex. On the latter point, I have spoken to German leaders on this. I would not be as dismissive of it as the Deputy appeared to be.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

There is an obvious reason for German guilt and guilt across eastern Europe about what happened. I do not think that is enough to countenance what Israel is doing to Palestinian people at this point. I am also saying that there may be other considerations. We know there are business and security interests. I have also accepted the difficulty in trying to get some sort of agreement at European level. I think it might need a subgroup of states and we may possibly have to go it alone about certain things.

I thank the Tánaiste for the answer about annexation. I also welcome that it was pointed out that, from here on, we would need these sorts of clauses to be absolutely explicit, because I do not think it is in any way acceptable that there would be a rowing back from that position. Could the Tánaiste give me an indication of any movements we have made to look at the human rights conditions which relate to the Israel-EU Association Agreement and any other moves that we could make with regard to what he talked about, which is a structured relationship with the Palestinians?

Deputy Micheál Martin

I take the Deputy's point. There is a genuine view in Germany in respect of its relationship with Israel that I would say transcends economic issues and is rooted in the historic position of the Holocaust and Germany's role in the Holocaust. Many current leaders, and, indeed, those before, including Chancellors Merkel and Scholz, from different ends of the political spectrum, would be clear about protecting what they perceive, correctly in my view, the exceptionality of the Holocaust. It influences their thinking and responses to even contemporary issues. Equally, I take the Deputy's point that that cannot justify what is happening in the West Bank and in Gaza, the need for a two-state solution and a cessation of all violence and war in the region.

Questions Nos. 156 and 157 answered with Question No. 153.

Questions Nos. 158 to 177, inclusive, taken with Written Answers.

Question No. 178 answered with Question No. 153.