I propose to take Questions Nos. 18 and 57 together.
The St. Malo meeting has been presented, notably by the participants, as evidence of further convergence between France and Britain on the issue of European defence, but we should not overlook that those two countries which have permanent seats on the UN Security Council, which are the only two possessors of nuclear weapons within the European Union and which are prominent members of both NATO and Western European Union, have much in common and have long been close collaborators on defence issues. My views on the issues raised in the questions are in the perspective of our membership of the EU, the effective functioning of the Treaty of Amsterdam, which it is intended will come into effect in May or June next year, and our non membership of any military alliances. The agreements at St. Malo do not bind Ireland or anybody else in any sense.
Deputies will be aware that in recent months there has been renewed interest in the future of EU security and defence policy. At the informal EU summit in Portschach in October there was discussion on enhancing the effectiveness of the Common Foreign and Security Policy in the face of crises such as at Kosovo, particularly if and when the United States does not wish to be fully engaged. At the Vienna European Council last weekend, it was agreed to continue to reflect on these issues and challenges. The essential backdrop to these reflections is the imminent entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, under which the EU can use the Western European Union to undertake the Petersberg Tasks. The Western European Union would, for its part, be dependent upon NATO for the infrastructural and resource support to undertake large scale Petersberg Tasks in accordance with arrangements between those two organisations which are expected to be developed and finalised in Spring 1999.
In recent discussions at EU Foreign Minister level, and at the recent meeting in Vienna, I underlined the importance and priority of effective implementation of the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam concerning the Petersberg Tasks, which were the result of an initiative by Sweden and Finland and fully supported by Ireland. I emphasised that the emerging debate should proceed with respect for the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam and that the specific positions of the neutral member states, including Ireland, should be taken into account. These points are reflected in the presidency's conclusions from the Vienna European Council. In particular, specific references to the position of neutral EU member states were set out at my request in the conclusions.
Clearly we must be ready, willing and able to act constructively when faced with crises such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo which are European in origin and nature. I accept the Franco-British view that the Treaty of Amsterdam will provide the essential basis for action by the Union. I dispute any view to the contrary.
Continuing reflections within the EU should include a rigorous analysis of what the EU collectively wishes to achieve under the Common Foreign and Security Policy and an analysis of how we can best use the Western European Union's crisis management mechanisms that are available to the EU in the Treaty of Amsterdam.
In giving my views on the St. Malo meeting it is relevant to recall that Ireland remains committed to progress in the field of disarmament and to the utmost restraint on arms exports. I will continue to attach priority to disarmament as a foreign policy objective.