I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 28, 45, 49, 53 and 58 to 60, inclusive, together.
The continuation of the war in Bosnia-Hercegovina, and the killings and wanton destruction there, are matters of the greatest concern to the Government. Ireland is fully engaged with our European Union partners in promoting a settlement. We participate in the International Conference under the auspices of the European Union and the United Nations; we contribute to the UN Force, UNPROFOR, and to the European Union's Monitor Mission; we are implementing the UN sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro; and we support the victims of the conflict. At a national level we have recently made a further significant financial contribution of £500,000 to the international relief effort.
The Government continues to believe that the best hope for a peaceful settlement to the Bosnian conflict lies in the negotiations underway in the International Conference. The Co-Chairmen, David Owen and Thorvald Stoltenberg, enjoy the full support of the Irish Government, and of the other members of the European Union who have expressed the hope that they will continue to offer their valuable services to the conference.
Some progress has been made in the negotiations. Last summer under the auspices of the Co-Chairmen the Bosnian parties developed a peace package acceptable to all three sides. This included the concept of a Union of three constituent republics. However, the subsequent detailed negotiations reached an impasse last autumn, particularly over the amount of territory to be assigned to the Muslim majority republic.
Since then Ireland and the other members of the European Union have been working to unblock this impasse. To this end the Union has developed a plan of action with three key elements: first, a settlement in Bosnia, building on the package already accepted in large measure by the Bosnian parties; second, interim arrangements in Croatia which would serve as a basis for a peaceful settlement there; and third, the improvement of the delivery of aid as envisaged under the European Union's joint action.
In return for co-operation in the peace process, the EU indicated that it would be prepared to support a phased suspension of UN sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro. These sanctions, the most comprehensive set of measures ever imposed by the UN, include measures under which the assets of Serbia and Montengro have been frozen. The Union has made it clear that this phased suspension will not be supported by the EU until Serbian implementation of a peace plan in Bosnia has been verified. It has also been made clear to Croatia that lack of co-operation in the peace process would result in the imposition of sanctions on that State also.
To underline the seriousness of its concern the Foreign Ministers of the Union met the parties to the conflict as well as the leaders of Serbia and Croatia on 29 November last and again on 22 December. We explained the plan in detail to the parties and pressed them to negotiate, within the conference, on this basis. In particular, we pressed the Serbian side to make the necessary concessions to meet the demands of the Bosnian Government that one-third of the territory of Bosnia be assigned to the Muslim-majority republic. This is now agreed in principle but the precise location of the territory has still to be settled. The Union also demanded that the Bosnian Serbs should permit the immediate opening of Tuzla airport to enable relief supplies to get through.
However, the elements of agreement and the pressure exerted by the European Union have not been sufficient to persuade the parties to end the war. Fighting continues in central Bosnia and Sarajevo continues to be shelled by the Bosnian Serbs. The delivery of humanitarian aid continues to be blocked in certain areas and the Serbs refuse to allow Tuzla airport to be reopened.
Faced with this situation there have been calls for the UN to use force, in particular air power, in Bosnia. The relevant Resolutions of the Security Council authorise UNPROFOR to take all necessary measures, including the use of force, to achieve certain objectives in Bosnia. Clearly, however, the UN bears a particularly onerous responsibility in deciding on military action. It must address several difficult and complex questions. For what purpose should force be used? Should it be used to get humanitarian aid through for more limited objectives, such as opening Tuzla airport, or only in self-defence? What of the likely outcome? Would military action result in an escalation of the conflict? Would it provoke attacks on UNPROFOR forcing its withdrawal? Could it break the consensus which has operated in the Security Council up to now? I believe that these and other serious questions will need to be weighed carefully before any decision is taken on the use of military force in Bosnia.
In addition to the calls for military action, there have been suggestions that the UN should pull out of Bosnia. I could not advocate such a course. UNPROFOR has, through its determined work in difficult circumstances, performed a vital function in Bosnia. I hope that its mandate will be renewed in March when it is reviewed by the Security Council.
The negotiations between the Bosnian parties are to resume early in February. Given that the military option is being pursued on the ground, no one could be overly optimistic about the possibilities for an early settlement. I hope that this valuable opportunity for peace will not be lost and I believe that the European Union and the international community generally must continue to maintain political pressure on all the parties to arrive at an agreement. To do otherwise would consign the suffering people of Bosnia to further misery and destruction.