Vol. 430 No. 4
1 Mr. Hogan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will confirm that further EC pledges have been made to provide humanitarian aid to the stricken people of Bosnia and other regions of the former Yugoslavia as current pledges only lasted until the end of March 1993; and the role he envisages that the Irish Army personnel will have in bringing about peace and an end to this devastating war.
3 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will give details of the steps, if any, which are now being taken by Ireland in relation to the war in Bosnia; and the stance Ireland is taking on the use of military force, if necessary, to end the genocide there.
5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the recent meeting of EC Foreign Ministers on 25 April 1993 to discuss the position in Bosnia; if any new initiatives are now planned to end the violence in the former Yugoslavia; if, in view of the speech made by the Irish deputy permanent representative to the UN on 20 April 1993, he will give details of the circumstances in which he believes military action by the United Nations would be justified; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
6 Mr. Flanagan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
8 Mr. McGahon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
10 Mrs. Owen asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
13 Mr. Finucane asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
14 Mr. Deenihan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
19 Mr. Molloy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs whether Ireland supports the establishment of safe havens in Bosnia for the protection of civilians; and his views on whether that can be done with existing UN ground forces.
37 Ms. O'Donnell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the Irish Government is supporting the international efforts to persuade the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro to end the acts of aggression and genocide in Bosnia; and whether Ireland will support the use of force for that end.
39 Mr. McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
43 Mr. Connaughton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the EC food pledges, if any, which have been made for the people of former Yugoslavia where more than 3.8 million people depend on the UN food distribution programme.
52 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the prospects of reversing the forcible acquisition of 70 per cent of Bosnian territory by the Serb population which is 24 per cent of the Bosnian population; and his views on whether this could be accomplished by peaceful means.
53 Miss Harney asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs whether Ireland supports the establishment of safe havens in Bosnia for the protection of civilians; and his views on whether this can be done with existing UN ground forces.
59 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if it is intended to raise the conflict in the former Yugoslavia at the next Heads of Government meeting in June 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
65 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in the light of the response of the EC to the continuing atrocities in Bosnia, the Taoiseach will seek to have a special summit of EC leaders convened to take action even at this late stage.
73 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on whether United Nations peace-keeping and humanitarian efforts on Bosnia have been a failure; whether a substantially different approach on the part of the UN is necessary if it is to be effective; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
77 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the extent, if any, to which he can mobilise the international community with a view to achieving peace in Eastern Europe; and if he will make a statement on the matter with particular reference to the atrocities occurring in Bosnia.
81 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the utter revulsion expressed by the Irish people and the civilised world at the ongoing atrocities in Bosnia; the steps, if any, he has taken at UN or EC level with a view to bringing the conflict to an end; if he envisages a role whereby Ireland can assist or influence others who may assist in bringing the violence to an end; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14, 19, 37, 39, 43, 52, 53, 59, 65, 73, 77 and 81 together.
The acceptance of the Vance-Owen plan by Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic in Athens on 2 May offered the hope of a resolution to the dreadful conflict which has brought so much suffering to the people of Bosnia. Its rejection earlier this morning by the Bosnian Serb Assembly is a major setback. Nevertheless, the fact that the authorities in Belgrade are now actively supporting implementation of the plan is an important and encouraging development.
The vote by the Bosnian Serb Assembly is an arrogant and dangerous development. It is a further challenge to the international community and to the United Nations. The Security Council will meet later today to consider what action needs to be taken, including the pressure to be exerted on the Bosnian Serbs. I hope that it will be possible for the Security Council to build upon the more co-operative approach demonstrated by President Milosevic.
We must not be deflected by the decision of the Bosnian Serb Assembly. The Security Council must continue, actively and urgently, its consideration of the preparations for the implementation of the plan. This is an enormous challenge and would require the deployment of a very large peace-keeping force under UN auspices. Ireland has not to date been requested to supply personnel to this force. Any approach from the Secretary-General on this matter will be considered carefully by the Government.
I share the view of the UN Secretary-General that the peace package provides the only mechanism available for the re-establishment of peace, with justice and respect for human rights, in Bosnia-Hercegovina and that the rapid implementation of the plan offers the best prospects for improving the situation there. The Vance-Owen plan requires the Bosnian Serbs to withdraw from large areas of Bosnia which they acquired by brutal and indiscriminate force.
The Government has been actively pursuing a policy involving a combination of increased pressure on Serbia through sanctions, while underlining the determination of the international community to ensure that continued defiance, by the Bosnian Serbs and by Serbia and Montenegro, of the decisions of the UN Security Council would not be tolerated. This view was expressed very clearly by the Irish representative in the debate in the Security Council on 20 April.
It was the view which the Tánaiste expressed at the meeting of EC Foreign Ministers in Denmark on 24-25 April. At this meeting, Ministers considered a range of options for additional measures to bring about peace in former Yugoslavia. They agreed that the policy of isolating Serbia and Montenegro, through the strict application of the provisions of Security Council Resolution 820, offered the best hope of obtaining implementation of the Vance-Owen plan.
On the basis of an Irish proposal, Ministers also considered the possibility of establishing additional safe areas in Bosnia so that protection could be afforded to the Muslim population. I very much hope that, if implementation of the Vance-Owen plan proceeds, it will not prove necessary to establish further safe havens or areas. However, it remains an option that may need to be considered, particularly in the light of the Bosnian Serb Assembly's decision earlier today. Additional UN peacekeeping troops would be required in Bosnia to establish such areas.
I sincerely hope that the Bosnian Serbs can, even at this late stage, be brought to co-operate with the peace process and implement the Vance-Owen plan, thus obviating the need for further enforcement measures. Should this not be the case, should the killing continue, it would be necessary, as we said in the Security Council for the council to consider all the options open to it under Chapter VII of the Charter.
I wish to pay tribute to the UN peace-keeping forces and the humanitarian aid personnel on the ground in Bosnia. Hundreds of thousands of Bosnians would have perished last winter had it not been for their efforts. The European Community and its member states have been the main contributors to the international relief operation in the former Yugoslavia, since the start of the conflict in 1991. The Community and its member states have, to date, covered 58 per cent of the expenditure by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, which is the lead agency in the operation, and 73 per cent of the cost of the food distribution operation being carried out by the world food programme.
Since 1991, the European Community has committed a total of 350 million ECU in emergency assistance to victims of conflict. In view of the seriousness of the humanitarian situation in Bosnia, a further allocation of 150 million ECU was agreed on 29 April, 1993. The precise breakdown of this extra expenditure is still under consideration. However, it will include further substantial contributions to the UNHCR, to the world food programme and to other agencies involved in the delivery of emergency food and medical assistance to over 3.8 million refugees and other victims of the conflict.
We will continue to stay in very close liaison with our EC partners. Bosnia will be discussed by EC Foreign Ministers at their next meeting in Brussels on 10 May and at the European Council in June. Proposals are also under consideration for a full meeting of the International Conference on Yugoslavia.
Is the Minister aware of the recent report of the world food programme which indicated that no additional pledges were made in respect of a food programme to the former Yugoslavia up to March 1993? In the light of what the Minister stated regarding a recent decision by the European Community that 200 million ECU will be allocated in respect of food donor countries to this fund, will he acknowledge that this is far short of what is required having regard to what is contained in the world food programme report and that £365 million is what would be required to compensate for the food shortages arising from the conflict? Will the Minister indicate what other steps he will be taking at EC level to improve the food supply at the earliest possible opportunity?
In regard to the second part of the question——
I asked that there would be brevity, having regard to the time limit involved.
I realise that, but there are two parts to the question.
I ask the Deputy to have regard to the time factor involved in dealing with Priority Questions.
In regard to the second part of the question which relates to the Bosnian/Serb Assembly's on the recent Vance-Owen agreement, I share the Minister's disappointment that the Bosnian/Serb Assembly rejected that plan. I am disappointed the Government has no policy decision in relation to the contribution that Irish Army personnel can make to the resolution of the conflict.
The Deputy is embarking on a statement.
Will the Minister indicate what action the Government proposes to take in view of the collapse of the Bosnian/Serb Assembly in relation to this agreement and their failure to agree the Vance-Owen plan? What contribution will the Government and Irish Army personnel make to a UN peace enforcement plan?
In regard to food distribution, the increase in emergency assistance agreed by the European Community and by individual member states has been designed to ensure that the UN relief operations can continue to provide essential humanitarian assistance to victims of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia in the coming months. I am aware of the points made by the Deputy but I pointed out the contribution that has been made by the European Community.
The Deputy's second question was about Irish troop involvement and the role that Irish troops might play in a possible UN peace-keeping force. The Government has not to date been approached by the Secretary General regarding a possible contribution to the force. Indeed, the mandate for the force has not yet been established by the Security Council and our policy is to examine all requests from the Secretary General on a case by case basis. We will do so should he seek our support in this instance. It is important that we take each country case by case and the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste have already been questioned on the situation with regard to Somalia. This would involve a Government decision, as the Deputy is aware, and it would also involve changing our Defence Act, 1960 which contains a specific peace-keeping dimension. The request has come in relation to Somalia, as the Deputy knows, and yesterday the Taoiseach in a reply to a question, said that the Government has yet to consider the request.
Any dispatch of a contingent of troops would require a motion to be brought before the Dáil for approval. It involves a specific procedure. However, no request has yet been made but it is our policy to examine each request made to us by the Secretary General.
Would the Minister agree that Ireland's views on this matter must be devalued by the present state of our defence legislation? It is worthwhile putting on the record that this legislation prohibits the deployment of Irish troops under a UN mandate except for policing role in the context of peace-keeping operations. Therefore, peace enforcement or peace-making roles are excluded. Would the Minister agree it is not enough for the Government to say they are considering whether our Defence Act should be amended to permit such a role for Irish soldiers? Would the Minister agree that we cannot legitimately urge others to use force in circumstances where we legally proscribe ourselves from using such force? This House could not pass a resolution for intervention in Somalia or Bosnia in a peace-making role without a pre-condition that the Government would have to amend the Defence Act, 1960.
Would the Minister further agree that in the meantime it is not sufficient to simply express dissatisfaction with the decision of the Bosnian Serb Parliament in this matter? There is a clear chain of authority and responsibility which goes to the Belgrade Government in this matter. The tanks and artillery being used in the campaign of genocide in Bosnia is equipment which is the property of the Yugoslav national army and could be recovered by them from the people who are abusing them to kill others.
I appeal again for brevity, Deputy.
I will conclude now. Would the Minister agree that Mr. Milosevic and Dr. Karadzic, even though they have distanced themselves from this decision, are not doing enough to enforce it and that Dr. Karadzic's commitment to resign if he was defeated on this matter by the Serbian parliament has already been torn up in that he is retaining his office as Head of the Bosnia Serb Government. This is in complete contradition of his undertaking that he would resign from that position if he was defeated on this motion.
The Government has consistently supported a negotiated solution to the Yugoslav crisis. It holds the view which is shared also by our EC colleagues that the council will have to consider all the options open to it under the Charter should the peace process fail. The pressure of sanctions, and the knowledge that the international community will not tolerate the continued defiance of the Security Council decisions, has brought about a change of policy in Belgrade. The Deputy has referred to the role of President Milosevic and the Leader of the Bosnian Serbs, Dr. Karadzic. It is significant that there has been a change of policy in Belgrade, but we should concentrate on ensuring the full and prompt implementation of the Vance-Owen plan. That is the basis of our approach, but the position there is changing on an hourly basis. We are convinced that the promotion of the implementation of the Vance-Owen plan is the correct one. The Deputy referred to specific aspects of the Defence Act, 1960, and in an earlier reply I referred to the procedures involved. In relation to Somalia, there is a specific request to which the Government will respond. However, it is very premature to inquire about the Government's attitude to a potential peace-keeping role in Bosnia when we do not know what such a peace-keeping role would involve.
The House will be aware that less than five minutes remain of the time available for disposing of these priority questions and there are still questions remaining. I seek the Deputies' support; I can do no more.
That highlights the inadequacy of this form of discussion on such an important issue. Will the Minister give an undertaking that there will be an early debate, not only on the position in former Yugoslavia but in regard to the proposed changes to the Defence Act, 1960? I am aware there will be an Estimates debate tomorrow but that will not be the same as a general debate on the defence issue.
The Vance-Owen plan, which was rejected by the Bosnia-Serbs was reductantly signed by the Croats and others. The Serbs only agreed to it on the basis of threats of military action and increased sanctions. If that plan fails it does not automatically mean that military intervention will be the only option. Perhaps another approach by way of a political solution, might be considered. In some circles it has been proposed that an international civil authority should be put in place in Bosnia and that that would be a more productive long term development than seeking to enforce the Vance-Owen plan.
I appeal for brevity.
The Chair must appreciate our difficulty in dealing with this issue.
The Chair merely administers the rules of this House.
The Vance-Owen plan, which is based on carving up Bosnia into ethnic provinces, is a recipe for ongoing long term violence in that area.
The Vance-Owen plan is a response to a highly complex and tragic problem and its implementation would be extremely difficult following the brutal war and destruction. As the Secretary General stated, it represents the best hope for restoration of peace with justice and human rights in Bosnia. In addition to the constitutional provisions central to the plan is the requirement that there should be a complete cessation of hostilities, military disengagement, the return of ethnic military units to assigned provinces and the freedom for displaced persons and refugees to return to their homes in safety. The alternative is more fighting, destruction and the de facto partition of Bosnia. It is the Governments view that the Vance-Owen plan is feasible but it requires enormous international support at this stage.
I will call Deputy Owen's question if it is responded to now and if supplementaries are brief.
I have one question.
Let us observe the time.
