Defence Forces

Tuesday, 23 January 2024

Questions (55)

Matt Carthy

Question:

55. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence the current number of Defence Forces members posted to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, UNDOF, peacekeeping mission in the Golan Heights; the current timeframe for the withdrawal of the Defence Forces' infantry group from this mission; the number of Defence Forces personnel who will remain posted to this mission thereafter; and if he will consider reviewing the decision to withdraw from this important mission. [2734/24]

View answer

Oral answers (22 contributions)

Deputy Matt Carthy

I want to return to what is one of the more disappointing developments in the history of the Defence Forces, particularly its contemporary history.

This is the decision to withdraw members from the UNDOF peacekeeping mission in the Golan Heights. I would appreciate it if the Tánaiste would outline the current timeframe for the withdrawal of the infantry group from this mission and the number of Defence Forces personnel who will remain posted to the mission thereafter. I again ask whether there will be a reconsideration of the decision to withdraw.

Deputy Micheál Martin

No, there will not be. As of 11 January 2024, there are 134 Defence Forces personnel serving with the UNDOF. I got advice at the time I came into office to pull back and consolidate. We may consider additionality in UNIFIL or elsewhere but that depends on current events. We have a commitment to the EU battle group 2024-25. We have been part of the battle groups since 1999-2000. That is something we have committed to under the Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP. It is important for interoperability. We are in UNIFIL with Poland at present. Interoperability is key so the battle groups are important.

Planning for the withdrawal of the current Defence Forces contingent, the 68th Infantry Group, and its replacement, is well advanced, involving the United Nations, the force headquarters, the current Irish contingent and the replacement troop contributing country to ensure a smooth handover that in no way compromises the mission. Notwithstanding the withdrawal of the infantry group, the Defence Forces intend to continue to occupy a small number of staff officer posts at the UNDOF mission headquarters. These numbers have not yet been determined and will depend on the take-up of these posts by those countries contributing troops to the mission.

As I said, there is no plan to review the decision to withdraw from the UNDOF this year. The replacement troop contributing country has been selected to take over the role of the force reserve company, following the scheduled Irish departure in April this year. That is the position. We must have the flexibility to contribute, pull back in certain areas if we wish, and then redeploy elsewhere. That is normal.

Deputy Matt Carthy

Whatever way the Tánaiste tries to justify this, he should not try to justify it as an example of flexibility. Far from it being a sign of flexibility, this goes to the core of the weakness of the Defence Forces as a result of the actions of successive Governments. I can see it is logical for a Minister to say that "circumstances must" and, in order to fulfil other commitments we have made, we have to withdraw from what is a crucially important UN peacekeeping mission. At the very minimum, however, I would expect an acknowledgement that we are in an incredibly regrettable position.

In response to an earlier question, the Tánaiste mentioned what would happen if there were a peacekeeping mission in the Middle East. There is a peacekeeping mission in the Middle East. There are actually two, but there is one-----

Deputy Micheál Martin

I am talking about Gaza. The Deputy knows that.

Deputy Matt Carthy

-----that has a UN mandate and we are withdrawing from that. Does the Tánaiste acknowledge it is a regrettable position that we have to withdraw and that it would be better if we had the capacity, if we are to take his other rationale at face value, to continue operating in this mission? Does he accept that?

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Deputy is a great man for distorting what gets said. He knew damn well I was talking about Gaza, yet he just switched it. What I mentioned earlier is there may be a call for an international security force. There may not be but there may be. In all the talks about bringing peace to Gaza and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict it has been actively considered that an international security force would be better in Gaza than an Israeli security presence. I am sure the Deputy agrees with that. He asked the question in the context of the triple lock. I made the point that if the triple lock continues, we would need UN Security Council agreement for that. That was the context in which I suggested to the Deputy that if we were asked to contribute to a peacekeeping mission in Gaza, I would not like to depend on the Security Council if there were not unanimity there. I would like to participate, if we could. That was the context, but the Deputy switched around to this question of us wanting to go into the Middle East and then pulling out. I received military advice at the time I came into office to reconsolidate. Yes, we are joining the peace group but we have been doing that. We have withdrawn from a number of areas, although they involve smaller numbers, for different reasons.

Deputy Matt Carthy

I asked the Tánaiste whether he had considered the position we are in. Accepting the Tánaiste's rationale that we have to do this, I contend it would have been much better had that decision not been made. It is crucially important if for no other reason than just imagining a hypothetical scenario where a peacekeeping mission is going to Gaza. I am sure whichever body was organising it, it would look at the Irish and asking whether they could trust these lads not to pull out. That is what we are doing as regards the peacekeeping mission in the Golan Heights. To do that, and the reason it has taken quite an amount of time from the original decision being made, others need to step up to plate, just as we stood up to the plate when a previous state withdrew.

The point I am making is that this goes to the heart of dichotomies in the Government's position. On the one hand, it is saying we need to get rid of the triple lock in order to be able to participate in missions that do not have a UN mandate. The Tánaiste has yet to cite what precisely that is. He cited a hypothetical mission in Gaza-----

Deputy Micheál Martin

No, I gave you four cases-----

Deputy Matt Carthy

-----but there is an important mission in the Golan Heights. Does the Tánaiste accept it is important? Does he accept it would be better if Ireland were able to continue participating in it? Those are the questions I have asked.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Again, I gave the Deputy four examples in a recent question. I spoke about the ship and Operation Sophia and so on-----

Deputy Matt Carthy

From 1999. I am talking about today.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Marian Harkin)

One voice, please.

Deputy Micheál Martin

No, it was 2015. I gave the Deputy examples in respect of that. He made a comment that was unacceptable when he said that these lads could not be trusted as they will pull out.

Deputy Matt Carthy

That is what we are doing in the Golan Heights.

Deputy Micheál Martin

The United Nations trusts Ireland. As a country, we are one of the most consistent, respected peacekeepers in the world.

Deputy Matt Carthy

And you are withdrawing from one of the more important missions.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Cheap comments of that kind should not be made by the Deputy. He is just in the job, but he should at least have some respect for the country and how we are perceived internationally.

Deputy Matt Carthy

That is why I am trying to protect our reputation while you are trying to do it down.

Deputy Micheál Martin

All peacekeeping participation is subject to review. We pulled out of MINUSMA, which concluded in September 2022. We withdrew three Defence Forces personnel from the MONUSCO stabilisation mission in the Congo. The original two-year commitment to that had ended. We withdrew from the UN training mission in Mali. We take decisions on an ongoing basis. We then decide to enter into other missions if we can, some of which were, in the past, EU led or otherwise led. I will not mix up the two jerseys of the triple lock question and this specific issue. There might be a role in the western Balkans.

Question No. 57 taken with Written Answers.