Vol. 455 No. 1
5 Mr. R. Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will respond to the recent call by the German Foreign Affairs Minister, Mr. Klaus Kinkel, for a gradual merging of the Western European Union military alliance into the EU to give Europe an independent military capability; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11714/95]
6 Dr. O'Hanlon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the recent statement by the German Defence Minister who called for a common armaments market to be mandated by the Intergovernmental Conference. [11706/95]
32 Mr. R. Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on recent comments by the Secretary General of the Western European Union, Mr. Cutileiro, to the effect that he envisaged a nuclear strategy as part of a European defence. [11709/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5, 6 and 32 together.
The recent statements by German Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel, the German Defence Minister Mr. Ruhe, and the Secretary-General of the Western European Union, Mr. Cutileiro — to which the Deputies' questions refer — reflect the developing debate on security and defence issues in advance of the European Union Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) next year. The ideas they raise are amongst those that are being put forward as the debate develops and it is not at all clear which concrete proposals will be formulated and tabled at the Intergovernmental Conference.
The Intergovernmental Conference review of the Common Foreign and Security Policy provisions of the Maastricht Treaty is expected to include consideration of a common defence policy for the European Union. A key issue in this context is the question of the future relationship between the EU and the Western European Union. The German Foreign Minister's views concerning the possibility of a gradual merger of the EU and the Western European Union indicate the approach that Germany is likely to develop at the Intergovernmental Conference negotiations. A similar approach has recently been advocated by the Netherlands and it is probable that others among our EU partners will also take this view. On the other hand, the British Government has made clear its preference for the maintenance of the EU and Western European Union as separate organisations, although supporting the deepening of co-operation between the two organisations. The Government's views were set out in a speech which the Tánaiste made on 16 February and these will be developed in a forthcoming White Paper on Foreign Policy. Ireland's preference is for an approach in this area that takes account of the level of political and economic integration by the European Union, that is responsive to broader developments in European security and reflects the varying capacities and experience of the member states.
On the question of a common armaments market I have seen reports that this idea was mentioned recently by the German Defence Minister. It is not clear what the German Minister has in mind. If proposals are put on the table at the Intergovernmental Conference the Government will follow its existing policy which emphasises disarmament and arms control as well as the maximum restraint in the export of conventional arms.
In so far as the remarks of the Secretary-General of the Western European Union are concerned, the question of a common defence policy for the European Union is a matter for the member states of the Union at next year's Intergovernmental Conference. Any such policy will require the unanimous agreement of all the member states, including Ireland. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs has made it clear that a common defence policy for the Union would have to be compatible with Ireland's continued pursuit of its objectives in the areas of disarmament and arms control, and that the Government will continue to work for a reduction in armaments, for the strengthening of non-proliferation regimes and for an end to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. These will remain priority objectives of our foreign policy.
The Government's approach to the Intergovernmental Conference negotiations will be based on the commitments set out the programme for A Government of Renewal, namely, that we will continue to play our full part in the European Union and that our foreign policy will continue to be underpinned by our commitment to peace, security and co-operation.
The Government's Programme for Renewal also gives a clear commitment that the outcome of any future negotiations that would involve Ireland's participation in a common defence policy will be put to the people in a referendum. This will ensure that Ireland's policy of military neutrality remains unchanged unless the people themselves decide otherwise.
What is the Government's view in relation to full membership of the Western European Union? Will she assure the House that the Government will only retain observer status and will not agree to join the Western European Union as full members?
The Government has made its position clear. We are committed to a policy of neutrality. As part of the Intergovernmental Conference if the outcome of any negotiations would involve Ireland's participation in a common defence policy this will be put to the people in a referendum. This means that Ireland's policy of military neutrality remains unchanged unless the people of Ireland decide otherwise.
In the Intergovernmental Conference negotiations it is essential that the Government has a point of view. It is not sufficient to say that whatever the outcome may be, we will put it to the people. The Government must protect the traditional military neutrality to which the people of Ireland are deeply committed. Surely it is essential for the Government to outline its strategy when going in, not to say that whatever emerges will be presented to the Irish people? Will the Government say in these negotiations in the Intergovernmental Conference that we will not enter military alliances?
Our participation in the Intergovernmental Conference will draw on our stance in our calls for disarmament, arms control and restraint and reduction of conventional weapons. As a neutral country we have put forward this viewpoint not only in the EU but in the UN and many international fora. That continues to be the position.
However, the question on the Order Paper relates to comments made by politicians in another member state. The Intergovernmental Conference is being preceded by a reflection group on which our representative is my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Mitchell. We have put forward our traditional view. As it is a process of discussion, first at the reflection group and subsequently in negotiation at the intergovernmental stage, we expect and anticipate other Governments will put forward their points of view, as is happening.
I assure the Deputy the Government's position will be strongly stated and has already been made known, both before and after the commencement of the work of the reflection group. The Tánaiste and I are on record as to our commitment to neutrality. If changes are proposed which would in any way reflect on that policy, that position would go to the people for decision in a referendum.
It is the view of all sides of the House that the issue should go to the public if there is a proposed change. I am asking about the Government's position and let it be noted the Minister is refusing to answer. Not only does Fine Gael want us to join the Western European Union, some of its members are on record at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and elsewhere as wanting us to join NATO. There should be an unequivocal statement of the Government position on behalf of the three parties, not the position of the Tánaiste or the Minister of State. The Government position should be clearly stated in advance of the discussions that we are a militarily neutral State and will not be involved in military alliances. We should not hide behind having a referendum at a later stage but should clearly state that to our European partners because if we continue——
A question please, Deputy.
Does the Minister of State agree that the line she is stating is already selling the pass to our colleagues in Europe, if she is agreeing at this stage to have a referendum on the outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference? There should be a clear negotiating stance by the Minister of State on behalf of the Government, including Fine Gael and DL, that we will not vary out position or join military alliances, no matter what our partners want. If we take that line, the other three neutral countries in the EU will join us.
The position of the Government in relation to both the reflection group and the Intergovernmental Conference is well known. I reiterate that we have made clear our broad position on military alliances, armaments, disarmament and non-proliferation.
Is the Minister speaking on behalf of Fine Gael on that matter?
I think that position is generally supported by the Irish people. Nonetheless the process of the reflection group and the Intergovernmental Conference will inevitably give rise to proposals from other countries. We have a duty to listen to what they have to say, just as we hope they will listen to Ireland's position.
In relation to setting out our foreign policy, the Deputy will be aware that the Tánaiste will publish the While Paper on foreign policy shortly. This followed an historic and unique process of consultation at various venues and seminars around the country. Having attended a number of those. I agree with the Deputy that there is a strong commitment in Ireland to the concept of neutrality. We welcomed the arrival into the EU of a number of other states with a strong tradition of neutrality, which I think will strengthen Ireland's traditional position on military matters and reduction of armaments in the Union.
The Minister should talk to her partners in Government.
For the information of Deputy Burke, I was the only representative from here to attend the last Western European Union conference in Romania. I clearly stated not only the Government's policy on neutrality and the Western European Union but also, as chairman of the Labour Parliamentary Party, the policy of the Labour Party. That policy will not change in or out of Government, irrespective of the combination of parties with whom we work. Is the position I stated at that conference Government policy and will it continue to be so?
Including Fine Gael?
The Deputy is aware of the Tánaiste's statements on this matter; he has repeatedly reiterated his commitment to neutrality, as have I on a number of occasions. I am not specifically aware of the conference to which the Deputy referred but if, as chairman of the parliamentary party, he put forward the position of the Irish Labour Party on neutrality I congratulate him.
With the advent of the other neutral countries into the EU, I believe there is a greater possibility than when Ireland was the only neutral country to express a neutralist view, which I hope will progressively lead to a reduction in the use of conventional armaments and to the reduction and elimination of nuclear armaments. I hope the structure and balance of the Union on military matters has fundamentally changed and that the outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference will reflect this change in the Union's position. Ireland will argue strongly for this and that we should pursue options on peace building, preventative diplomacy and reductions in both conventional and nuclear armaments.
The Minister of State has gone to great lengths to speak about the Tánaiste and the Labour Party. Can she confirm that in replying on behalf of the Government, she is also speaking for her Fine Gael partners?
The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs in articulating and formulating Government policy speaks for the Government. I am representing the Tánaiste today and I assure the Deputy that in speaking for the Tánaiste I am also speaking for the Government.
The Minister of State is speaking for Fine Gael.
