John Gormley
Ceist:13 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on holding a referendum on the question of Ireland's participation in the NATO led Partnership for Peace; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28291/98]
Written Answers. - Partnership for Peace.
John Gormley
Ceist:48 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has discussed Ireland's possible participation in the NATO led Partnership for Peace with any of his EU counterparts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28289/98]
Proinsias De Rossa
Ceist:69 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the steps, if any, the Government has taken to date to promote debate on the issue of whether Ireland should join the Partnership for Peace; his views on whether membership would be in conflict with traditional Irish neutrality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4366/99]
Gay Mitchell
Ceist:79 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the discussions, if any, commenced with NATO on Ireland's intention to join Partnership for Peace. [4544/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13, 48, 69 and 79 together.
I have gone to some lengths as Minister for Foreign Affairs to promote debate and understanding of the realities of what is involved in Partnership for Peace in this House and elsewhere.
The question of Ireland's participation in Partnership for Peace was the subject of a Private Member's motion and debate recently in this House. This proved to be very useful in the context of the ongoing debate which the Government has encouraged. During the debate, the Taoiseach told the House that the Government would envisage that, all going well, Ireland will participate in Partnership for Peace in the second half of this year. I also referred to this timeframe on Sunday last in an interview on RTE radio. I have previously undertaken in this House, and I do so again now, that a decision by the Government in favour of Ireland's participation in PfP would make clear the nature and scope of Irish participation in PfP, and would be submitted to this House for its approval. I would recall also that the Government Resolution passed by Dáil Éireann on 28 January 1999, at the end of the Private Members debate, makes clear the Government's commitment favourably to examine further Ireland's participation in PfP, taking into account the ongoing public debate and subject to the approval of the Dáil.
Participation in Partnership for Peace would not be in conflict with our neutrality. Irish participation in PfP would be on our terms. PfP imposes no treaty obligations. I do not believe, therefore, that a referendum on this matter is either required or appropriate. I have made clear that the opportunity of referring to the people would arise in the course of the European Parliament election campaign next June, in which no doubt parties will take the opportunity to set out their approaches.
The recent Government resolution in the Dáil reaffirmed our commitment to a referendum should the issue of a collective or mutual defence obligation ever arise in the future. No such obligations would be involved in participating in Partnership for Peace.
As regards consultations with NATO regarding the question of Ireland's participation in Partnership for Peace, we would take the appropriate practical steps at the appropriate time.
Partnership for Peace is an important and positive element in co-operation for peacekeeping and crisis management. PfP is also a significant element in Europe's security architecture, and it is natural that PfP should arise from time to time in discussions with my colleagues from the EU. Interest has been expressed in our position outside PfP, particularly by the other neutral states. I have not encountered any pressure from any of my EU counterparts on this matter.