Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the Government's priorities for the Seville European Council meeting on 21 and 22 June 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11525/02]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Official Engagements.
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the other EU leaders he plans to meet in advance of the Seville European Council meeting on 21 and 22 June 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11526/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:3 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the document, Ireland and the European Union: Identifying Priorities and Pursuing Goals, published by his Department on 2 April 2002. [11529/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:4 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed in his recent telephone call with Yasser Arafat; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12385/02]
Michael Noonan
Ceist:5 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he has received an agenda for the forthcoming European Council meeting in Seville; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12428/02]
Michael Noonan
Ceist:6 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach the preparatory meetings he intends holding in advance of the European Council meeting in Seville; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12429/02]
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:7 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the costs to date, including all expenses paid or due, of the National Forum on Europe. [12526/02]
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:8 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the details of recent telephone discussions he has had with Palestinian and Israeli leaders on the Middle East crisis. [12527/02]
Michael Noonan
Ceist:9 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the President of the European Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12611/02]
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:57 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the details of the budget for the National Forum on Europe; the payments made to date; and the estimated further costs during 2002. [12523/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 9, inclusive, and No. 57 together.
As is the usual practice, the agenda for the European Council meeting in Seville will not be confirmed by the Presidency in office until shortly before the meeting takes place. While the agenda for the Council meeting has not been confirmed, it is expected the issues addressed will include enlargement, an initial discussion on the Convention on the Future of Europe and consideration of measures to improve the efficiency and transparency of the European Council and the Council of Ministers. In addition, a range of current foreign and security policy issues can be expected to be on the agenda.
As Deputies will be aware, at the Barcelona European Council in March, I informed my EU colleagues that the Government would seek a declaration at the upcoming Seville European Council in June that Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality is not affected by the treaties. The European Council agreed to come back to the issue in Seville. Subject to a suitable declaration being agreed by the European Council, a second referendum on the Treaty of Nice will be held here in the autumn. I have no plans at this stage to meet any EU leaders, or the President of the European Commission, in advance of the Seville meeting.
The document, Ireland and the European Union: Identifying Priorities and Pursuing Goals, which has been laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas, sets out in clear terms the depth and breadth of Ireland's current engagement in the European Union. Following the outcome of the referendum on the Nice treaty last year, it was clear there was a need to effectively engage the public on European Union issues generally. This publication is offered as one step in the Government's efforts to better inform and engage the public on the European Union and Ireland's role in it.
Membership of the European Union has been, and continues to be of enormous importance and benefit to Ireland. As this publication sets out, Ireland's overall objective in the EU, in a nutshell, is to help achieve Ireland's and the EU's aims of: Protecting the rights and interests of our citizens; maintaining freedom, security and justice; promoting prosperity, jobs and sustainable development, and acting more effectively internationally to promote peace, security and development. These are aims to which every right thinking person in Ireland can subscribe.
The forthcoming referendum on the Treaty of Nice will pose a critical question to the Irish people. It is essential, before people make up their minds, that they are aware of the depth of our current engagement in the EU and are aware of what the European Union is, and what it is not. It is also essential that we are all aware that the answer to the question posed next autumn will have significant implications for our ability to best protect and promote the rights and interests of all the people of Ireland in the future.
The publication, Ireland and the European Union: Identifying Priorities and Pursuing Goals has been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. A copy has been made available to every member of the Oireachtas. It will be distributed widely in Ireland and is available on my Department's web site.
A total of €2 million has been allocated in my Department's Vote for the running costs of the National Forum on Europe in 2002. To date this year, the total cost of the forum has been €663,140. The future expenditure of the forum will be dependent to a very considerable degree on its activities for the remainder of the year and the continuation of its mandate. A breakdown of the expenditure to date is available in a table, which I will circulate with the official report.
I phoned Mr. Arafat on 29 March, during the holiday weekend, as a consequence of the sudden escalation of the problems in Israel and the Palestinian autonomous area. The deteriorating situation in the region had been a cause of concern for some weeks, but the events in progress on the day, including the latest suicide bombing, seemed to have brought the parties to the brink of open warfare. Naturally, I was also concerned for the personal well-being of Mr. Arafat and for the continuance of the Palestinian Authority. Both seemed at that time to be very much in jeopardy.
In my conversation with Mr. Arafat, we discussed the events unfolding in the West Bank and specifically in his own compound. I emphasised the need for the utmost restraint on both sides and for the parties to respect the resolutions of the Security Council. I assured him of the commitment of Ireland to a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian issue and of our ongoing efforts to achieve progress both in the context of our membership of the Security Council and of the EU.
The loss of life on both sides continues to mount and cannot be accepted. There is an ongoing and developing humanitarian crisis. The devastation of infrastructure in the Palestinian areas is enormous and will take years to reconstruct. The cost of the ongoing struggle in human life and general damage, largely borne by the civilian population on each side, can neither be justified nor tolerated. A reasonable and just settlement negotiated between the parties remains the only way to a secure and peaceful future for the region.
Breakdown of expenditure to date this year
– National Forum on Europe
Subhead Breakdown of Allocation for 2002
and Expenditure at mid April 2002
|
Subhead |
Provision for2002 |
Expenditureto mid April2002 |
|
€ |
€ |
|
|
Pay |
571,000 |
98,906 |
|
Attendance Allowance |
100,000 |
66,142 |
|
Travel and Subsistence |
100,000 |
80,667 |
|
Secretarial-Research Allowance (Delegations) |
150,000 |
19,000 |
|
Consultancy |
127,000 |
344 |
|
Catering |
127,000 |
42,308 |
|
Transcription-Interpretation Services |
100,000 |
36,529 |
|
Advertising-Media-PR Services |
200,000 |
133,555 |
|
IT and C Services |
75,000 |
69,112 |
|
Office Expenses |
50,000 |
25,817 |
|
Printing and Publications |
150,000 |
18,287 |
|
Broadcasting |
250,000 |
72,473 |
|
Totals |
2,000,000 |
663,140 |
There is a number of questions I wish to put to the Taoiseach but I will confine my first round of questions to the issue of the Seville meeting, which will take place immediately after the formation of the next Government, assuming the Taoiseach finally decides to go to the park on Thursday morning. We trust the Taoiseach will have a good guide and will know his way there.
Does the Taoiseach consider it useful to put into the public domain a draft of the declaration that is being contemplated, or invite people to provide suggestions for a draft so that dialogue can take place between now and 21 and 22 June among the various parties interested in, and concerned about, this issue? This could prove to be of help in light of the transitionary period in which we will find ourselves and among other matters, with a view to having a successful outcome to the second referendum on the Nice treaty some time in the autumn. That would allow the Taoiseach, or whoever goes to Seville, to tell the heads of state that there has been a debate in Ireland and that the declaration he presents is a declaration which addresses some, not all, of the concerns people have. We cannot address some of the concerns of those who are implacably opposed to the European Union.
Does the Taoiseach agree that in the context of the statements being put forward by various national interests and in light of the outcome of the first round of the French presidential elections, it is critically important that the Government indicates what constitutional settlement it would like to see emerge from the convention? Although the document presented is a useful one, the Government's goals should be outlined in a more substantial form. That should be done, before or after the general election, in the run-up to Seville, otherwise there will be a sense, as there was in the run-up to the debate on the Nice treaty, that people outside this country are deciding things on our behalf.
Does the Taoiseach anticipate that Seville will recommend that meetings of the Council of Ministers, in its legislative capacity, are open to the media in the interests of transparency? Is that what the Taoiseach means by transparency? Will Seville address this issue with any degree of finality?
As the Deputy knows from previous replies, the terms of the declaration are being worked on within the Department of Foreign Affairs with the object of making it absolutely clear that the Nice treaty, among others, in no way affects, damages or undermines our traditional position of military neutrality. The Department will also consult with the legal office of the Commission to gain assistance on that issue. I will be open to suggestion and debate about that at the appropriate time. From what I have heard, I am somewhat concerned about putting out publicly the draft convention because it is absolutely clear what will happen. If people wish to put forward views and to build them into it, I will allow that. There will have to be consultation prior to Seville anyway on the other side of the general election.
I thank the Deputy for his comments regarding the paper we put forward. Some positions have also been put forward by Government representatives at the convention. At this stage, all countries are putting forward initial positions and some are putting forward several. There has been an agreement within the convention that in the months between now and September or October, when elections will take place in many countries, we will not get into any drafting. Views will certainly be expressed, people will think aloud and put forward their positions and I will not have any difficulty putting before Seville the views emanating from the Department of Foreign Affairs. In fairness, they should be considered drafts because everybody is involved in kite flying. I hear different countries putting forward views which I know are a long way from what their final positions will be and everybody is doing that to a certain extent. In so far as things of substance are being said, I do not have a difficulty with providing those papers on the substantive issues.
There was discussion at Barcelona and there will be more discussion at Seville about how transparency and the arrangements for the Council and the administration will work. Based on Barcelona, I do not think it will be finalised in Seville. It will go on for at least another six months before a conclusion on these issues is reached. There is a strong view on the part of most countries, with which I agree, that the European Council leaves a lot to be desired in regard to its size, scale and how matters are handled. The document which is being drawn up by Mr. Solana indicates reforms and how matters can be improved. This is an interim document and I do not think the Spanish Presidency will resolve these issues before the Seville meeting.
Has the Department of Foreign Affairs prepared a draft of the declaration on neutrality and has the draft been circulated to other European capitals? Will the Taoiseach indicate what measure of agreement to the text exists and will the text be published in advance of Seville?
There is a draft but it has not been circulated to other countries. However, discussions are being held with the Council's legal secretariat, which is being helpful and constructive in regard to the draft. Before Seville I would welcome discussions with the legal secretariat on the political system in this country so that most of us can agree on the text.
Why did the Taoiseach lump in questions on the Middle East with questions on Europe? Is the Middle East not a serious enough issue to merit separate attention? I note from his reply that he rang Chairman Arafat. Why was there no call to Prime Minister Sharon urging him to call off his troops and tanks in the West Bank and Gaza? Why is no lead being given at EU level by Ireland where representatives of the European Union have been treated with utter contempt by the Israeli Government? Will the Taoiseach accept that what has been coming from the Irish Government in the face of death and destruction as a result of the Israeli invasion has been a "softly softly" approach and that the Minister for Foreign Affairs has been a total wimp on the issue? Will he agree that tough action is needed on the part of Ireland bilaterally and within the European Union, if necessary focusing on trade sanctions, until such time as there is some indication from the Israeli Government and Prime Minister Sharon of an intention to accept UN resolutions in regard to, first, its aggression, and, second, its settlement policy?
On the first question, international questions and questions on Europe are taken together during Taoiseach's Question Time. They are treated differently when they are questions to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. That has always been the practice.
On the question of Chairman Arafat, their own contacts and officials in Dublin asked me on the day after the hotel bombing, which led to the Israeli assault, to ring him on the line that was available for a few hours that day. With some effort and difficulty we finally got through on that line. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has continued to talk to Foreign Minister Peres. We have spoken on numerous occasions with both Palestinian and Israeli officials here. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has been engaged in all meetings at EU level. There have been a number of special meetings, including ordinary General Affairs Council meetings.
In regard to the EU position, the General Affairs Council, on 15 April, considered the situation in the Middle East. There was no consensus on possible measures against Israel and it was felt that a meeting of the association council might not be productive. That is the answer to the Deputy's question. It would have been nice were it otherwise but it is not.
What lead was taken by Ireland?
There was not a joint position; there was agreement on the need to maintain support for the Powell mission and US engagement generally. It was also considered important that the role of the quartet be maintained. There was general support for the idea of an international conference as outlined by Mr. Powell and we strongly supported that. The importance of expressing support for the Saudi initiative, which we have supported all the way at European level, was also accepted.
EU foreign ministers are, today in Valencia, meeting their counterparts in the Mediterranean partner countries to discuss a wide range of issues, including, security issues which in practice will focus on the Middle East. The Spanish Presidency is holding bilateral meetings with the Israeli and Palestinian representatives today. Syria and Lebanon have decided to boycott the meetings in protest at Israel's presence. This means the signatory association agreements with Lebanon will not now take place for some months. The EU special envoy to the Middle East, Miguel Maritanos will continue, through his contacts in the region, to liaise with the US, Russia, the UN and the quartet group and that will continue into the future.
Deputy O'Keeffe will be aware that the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, at a meeting on 12 April, passed a resolution calling on the EU to impose sanctions on the Middle East.
In response to my proposal.
Yes. We are pursuing that idea but the UK is opposed to the imposition of any sanctions, a position supported by Germany and the Netherlands. France and Italy are hesitant about imposing sanctions. The Presidency also has major reservations. A paper, setting out options for action under the Association Agreement, has been prepared by Commissioner Patten's office. Mr. Solana, the UN representative for Common Affairs and Security Policies opposed reference to sanctions on the grounds that it would undermine EU-quartet co-operation with the Americans, a reason widely cited. The case against the imposition of sanctions is that the unity of quartet, as expressed at Madrid meetings, would be preserved; the emphasis should be on the follow-up to the Powell mission and there would be a complete breach of Israel with negative consequences for the EU in any resumed peace process.
The United Nations Commission on Human Rights currently holding its annual session in Geneva passed a resolution on 5 April requesting the High Commissioner, Mary Robinson, to undertake a mission to the territories. The High Commissioner subsequently asked the former Spanish Prime Minister, Felipe Gonzalez and the South African politician Sir Ramaphosa to accompany her on that mission. The Israeli Government and Palestinian Authority were asked by the High Commissioner's office, to facilitate her visit. The Palestinians welcomed the idea but the Israeli Government said it would require time to consider the request. Last Friday, the High Commissioner announced she was cancelling her visit due to refusal by the Israeli Government to co-operate with her request. The High Commissioner will now prepare a report on the situation in the occupied territories based on other available data from people in the region. That report is to be presented to the Commission by the end of this week.
The Israeli Government denies that it failed to co-operate and says it required more time to consider the High Commissioner's request. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has objected formally and in statements which he made last week, he called for direct contact to be made with the officials involved. Other difficulties have also arisen of which I am sure the Deputy is aware. The Israeli leadership has accused other international individuals for their efforts in this regard.
The new UN investigation team announced in recent days is to be led by the former President of Austria, Martti Ahtisaari. Assistant Deputy Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Mr. Peter Fitzgerald, has been asked by the United Nations to serve on that committee which means we will have an Irish presence in the group. Mr. Fitzgerald hopes to be in a position to take up his new role in a short period.
The Deputy asked about the UN position. We have been involved in continuing United Nations discussions on the Middle East problem as one of the 15 members of the Security Council. On the day I spoke to President Arafat and that the Minister, Deputy Cowen, spoke to Shimon Peres, Resolution 1402 was drafted and passed that night. This and Resolution 1403 call for the implementation of the ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian cities. We remain actively engaged in the continuing discussions in the United Nations, which are going on every day on the Middle East issue. That engagement is not only through a number of significant statements by our ambassador to the United Nations, but through the less conspicuous work of Irish representatives in building links, facilitating contacts and developing positions which are generally appreciated both by the parties in the conflict and by other states.
Will the Taoiseach confirm – if I understood him correctly – that the Government's position within the General Affairs Council is to support sanctions against Israel? Presumably those sanctions would take the form of trade sanctions, denying or restricting or in some way reducing Israel's access to the internal market of the European Union. Is it correct that the major nation state within the European Union that was opposed to such a form of sanctions was the United Kingdom? If so, will he outline the arguments advanced by the UK authorities as to why it was opposed to sanctions?
Does the Taoiseach agree that the attitude in this country towards the Middle East conflict is changing? Previously there was considerable support for the isolated position of Israel as a state and the fact that it was surrounded by Arab states which denied it its right to exist. Recently that attitude has shifted considerably and there is now a perception, however misconceived, that a state power with all the apparatus of military hardware and equipment, under the "generalship" as distinct from the "prime ministership" of Ariel Sharon, is mercilessly crushing a neighbouring people who do not have a parallel state infrastructure. It is not a contest of equals and great injustices are being done.
War crimes may have taken place in Jenin. This will become clear if and when the international media get a chance to examine that and see it. If one accepts that and if the Irish Government's position is to the effect that it supports sanctions of some measure against Israel, has the Department of Foreign Affairs sought to call in the Israeli ambassador, Ambassador Sofer, and convey in clear terms the concerns of the Irish people, as expressed both popularly and by the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the General Affairs Council?
The Deputy raised two issues. On the issue of sanctions, there has been an amount of discussion about this but, frankly, there is not much support. Our position, as always on these issues, is that we would go with an EU position but we thought some action should have been taken. In reply to Deputy O'Keeffe, I stated the scale of that opposition. The interesting question is why so many countries from the UK to Germany, the Netherlands, France, Italy and the Presidency held divergent positions. It is not as if anybody was pushing. They were trying to get to a position that would have led to a joint position but, obviously, there was no hope of achieving it. It was not a case that we or others were against it. We thought there should have been some action. The reason given was threefold. The unity of the quartet that had been working on this, as expressed at the Madrid meeting, should be preserved. That quartet involved an unusual group of internationals, including Russians.
The second point is that the emphasis should be on the follow-up to the Powell mission and the imposition of sanctions would be a major distraction. The argument I read through in the full UN and EU brief on this issue the other day for my own information appeared to be that having got Secretary of State Powell involved, having the Americans and their permanent representative back on the ground and the new Administration having been fully engaged in it for the first time, the view of people was that the most important thing was to keep that in place.
From reading all the relevant documents, presentations and cases put, it is clear that European member states, while acknowledging they have their own role and position, do not feel they can exert the necessary pressure to achieve progress and deal with the humanitarian issues, in the absence of American pressure on the Israelis. I suppose we can all understand that. We all realise this not as easy to achieve as it seemed in the past. Colin Powell, who I believe, and I am sure most people would agree with me, is a formidable diplomatic person, has not yet been able to achieve that type of progress, but there is talk that he will go back to the region and that would be welcome.
The third reason is that a complete breach with Israel would have negative consequences for the EU in any resumed peace process. A major position of the Presidency and others is that somewhere along the way – the sooner the better as this crisis has drifted on and has been really bad for four weeks – we would get to a stage where the peace process and talking would be resumed and that the EU would be able to play a major role in that. I am not sure if Deputy Quinn would accept that those are great reasons, but they were the ones put.
With regard to the Deputy's second question, I have no doubt he is right. People's views have changed. I am old enough to remember the 1967 war and I took an interest in it even though I was at school at the time. I also remember the 1973 war and Irish views about it and people's views are a long way from those. There is no doubt about that.
There have been reports of the Jenin refugee camp on the West Bank which has been the scene of the most intense Israeli military activity over the past number of weeks. The situation there remains unclear. It is widely believed there were significant civilian casualties during Israeli operations at the camp. UN reports of the number dead range from 50 to several hundred. The position is still not clear. According to Israeli sources, their troops entered Jenin to track down Palestinian fighters and potential suicide bombers. As many of the narrow roads in the camp were mined by the Palestinian and Israeli forces, they progressed by literally moving through houses using bulldozers and tanks. As independent observers had no access to the camp while operations were in progress, it has not been possible to confirm allegations of serious human rights violations. On the day I spoke to President Arafat and since then when I met Palestinian leaders in Ireland, they gave me reports of what they had heard from their people.
Ireland made a confidential démarche to the Israeli authorities requesting that humanitarian assistance should be given to the camp as far back as 11 April. On 19 April, the UN Security Council endorsed the idea of an investigation into the events in Jenin by the Secretary General – Resolution 1405. The UN requested the participation of Commissioner Peter Fitzgerald in that group.
The UN fact-finding mission was named yesterday and is expected in the region later this week. That team will be made up of Martti Ahtisaari, the former Finnish President, and includes a former UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the former president of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Prime Minister Sharon indicated that Mary Robinson would not be acceptable in this role. On 21 April he reported that he was considering declaring the UN special envoy for the Middle East process, Mr. Larson, persona non grata due to his remarks after leaving Jenin. Mr. Larson described the scene in the camp as horrific beyond belief and was strongly critical of Israel's refusal to admit humanitarian agencies and assistance. Prime Minister Sharon has also barred Israeli officials from having any contacts with Mr. Larson. This just happened in the past 24 hours. Any move against the envoy would be badly received by the international community, especially given Mr. Larson's central role in the Oslo accord.
I should mention for the record that the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy O'Donnell, announced a few days ago that there would be a strengthening of the programme of assistance to the Palestinians which covers immediate emergency humanitarian needs and recovery aid. The new assistance will bring the amount allocated to Palestine to more than €5 million this year. The Minister of State also announced an immediate addition of €1 million to be channelled through those agencies which are capable of delivering resources rapidly and effectively.
The House will remember that it is only a few years since I represented the Irish people in meeting President Arafat and stayed in the area where he is now. At that time I was the first foreign leader to land at the airport and to see the educational facilities which had just opened. I participated in the opening of some of the local government offices there. President Arafat told me that every one of those facilities, including the runways, have been absolutely destroyed. He gave me the entire list, which I cannot now recall. The entire infrastructure—
Virtually all paid for by Europe.
Yes. He gave me the list of all the facilities. People will recall seeing on television some years ago the new waterworks and sanitary arrangements. All of those facilities have been destroyed so at this stage the entire infra structure of the Palestinian people has been completely ruined.
The Taoiseach, as is his wont, has meandered along for the last ten or 15 minutes reading from his files. I ask him to focus on one issue: what role has Ireland taken since the invasion of the occupied territories by Israel? What lead has Ireland given in the EU by way of protesting at what has occurred and by trying to bring home to the Israeli Government that what it is doing is utterly inhumane and unacceptable? What have we seen at European level, helped by the Irish contribution, but a wringing of hands which was ignored by the Israelis? Requests for discussions have been brushed off contemptuously. What lead has Ireland taken in relation to the hundreds that have been killed and the thousands who have been maimed? Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of damage has been done by the Israeli aggression. What have we done when an Irish citizen and former President has had her request as UN High Commissioner for Refugees to visit the region contemptuously rejected? The same has happened to any independent person who wants to see the place – they have been kept out because Israel does not want an independent view.
Does the Taoiseach not accept that Ireland, as a small country, should have been prepared to stand up in some way for the Palestinians and not just hang around in the pack, wringing our hands and effectively doing nothing?
It is perhaps another issue but I take offence at what Deputy O'Keeffe said. Perhaps he did not hear anything I said. This country has continued to take a lead role within the United Nations which is much appreciated by Palestinians both here and in the front line. They are well aware of our close co-operation and resolution. It is not a question of participating in photo-calls or running around with resolutions for the sake of it; it is about getting things through. Ireland has played an enormous role in Resolutions Nos. 1397, 1402 and 1403. We played a lead part in those.
I have already stated our position regarding our former President, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. We have worked closely with her and with Martti Ahtisaari on that issue. We now have a very senior Irish person, Thomas Peter Fitzgerald, who is well known in the UN, taking the lead in this position. In all the UN meetings the Minister for Foreign Affairs has taken a strong position. Deputy O'Keeffe will understand that Ireland will not solve the Israeli aggression and we should not try to trivialise these matters. This requires pressure on one side in the United States, which I worked on before St. Patrick's Day, when I put our voice towards getting the President to engage again rather than standing back, which was the position he had held. We have continued to do so with the Americans and to work with our EU colleagues and the quartet so we can maintain pressure on the Israelis. Deputy Cowen spoke to the Israeli Foreign Minister, Mr. Peres, who has spoken to this Administration. All of these issues have been put forward and we will continue to put them forward. Every day our UN ambassador is playing an excellent public role, but Irish representatives are also working less conspicuously on building links, facilitating contact and developing positions and will continue to do so. This is a significant contribution which we can make. Deputy O'Keeffe is correct to state that, as a small country, we can do something and we are doing it well.
(Dublin West): The Taoiseach described the destruction of the Palestinian homeland. However, in all its public pronouncements, the Government insists on describing the Middle East holocaust as if both sides were equally to blame. It is clear that the most horrific atrocities have been carried out by the Israeli army in, among other places, the Jenin refugee camp. Helicopter gun ships are raining death on civilians from the sky and Palestinian homes are being bulldozed.
Anyone who has been in the camps knows how densely populated they are and this residential community has been pulverised by a pitiless attack with overwhelming military power on the side of the Israelis against fighters who only have small guns. A ring of steel has been placed around the camp for a week with the result that people bled to death in the streets and in their homes.
The Deputy must ask a question. This is Question Time.
(Dublin West): Why does the Government confine itself to mild rumblings of disapproval in the face of these criminal activities? If, following the Bloody Friday atrocities in Belfast in the 1970s, the British Army, suspecting that some IRA bombers came from a Catholic, working class ghetto in Belfast, did to it what the Israelis did to Jenin, would the Irish Government be satisfied with mild rumblings of discontent from the international community? Did the Taoiseach approach the American Government, for example, on its toleration of Israeli atrocities carried out with US weapons and US aid? If Saddam Hussein's dictatorship did to Kuwait what was done to Jenin, would the B-52 bombers not already be on their way?
Will the Taoiseach call the nauseating hypocrisy of the US Administration towards the Middle East situation by its real name? Will he agree that his arrival in Washington and his public declaration of support for Mr. Bush's war on terror was ill-judged, to say the least, when Prime Minister Sharon takes his lead from that same war to carry out criminal acts against a virtually defenceless people?
If the Deputy reads the statement issued by Deputy Cowen and the Government on 10 April he will see that it used strong language similar to that he has just used. However, that will not solve everything, as I am aware from my experience in dealing with Northern Ireland and conflict resolutions in other places.
My reply to these questions represents a fair idea of where I think the balance lies. However, I cannot ignore facts such as the attack on a hotel in the Israeli city of Netanya on 22 March in which 25 people who were out for lunch were blown apart. One cannot ignore such events.
(Dublin West): We do not ignore them, but do they justify attacking defenceless people?
It means that one has to maintain a balance when making a statement. One cannot ignore terrorism on one side.
(Dublin West): I gave the Taoiseach the example of Bloody Friday.
Order.
We do not sort out a wrong by ignoring things that are right.
When David fought Goliath he fought back.
The Deputy is objecting because there seems to be equal balance when the Irish Government makes statements on behalf of the Irish people. A person could not think there is equal balance on reading any of the statements but we cannot ignore the fact that in just one incident 25 people were blown away by suicide bombers. When I spoke to President Arafat I made that point to him and he accepts that. These actions by Hamas and others who, in the name of their people, are creating problems have made life difficult for him for several years now. That is why the Israelis can get away with going in and bulldozing people. However, nobody in his right mind would defend what happened in Jenin when they bulldozed through people and their houses.
(Dublin West): The US is tolerating it.
Many people are tolerating it. The Irish people and our officials have been stronger than most against it. I want to quote Resolution 1405 which is important. It came out of the day I spoke to President Arafat and our people had an enormous part to play in it. I want to put the full resolution and then we can see where the balance was. It was reaffirming its resolutions. It was
"CONCERNED by the dire humanitarian situation of the Palestinian civilian population, in particular reports from the Jenin refugee camp of an unknown number of deaths and destruction,
CALLING for the lifting of restrictions imposed, in particular in Jenin, on the operations of humanitarian organisations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross and United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East,
STRESSING the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians, and to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,
EMPHASISES the urgency of access of medical and humanitarian organisations to the Palestinian civilian population;
WELCOMES the initiative of the Secretary General to develop accurate information regarding recent events in the Jenin refugee camp through a fact-finding team and requests him to keep the Security Council informed; and
DECIDES to remain seized of the matter."
They are the kind of resolutions for which our people are working and getting support. As can be seen it would be easier for somebody to argue about balance on those but they are our views. We have taken a strong and courageous position and will continue to do that both in the European Union and in particular in the United Nations.
Would this Government move within the EU to suspend the preferential association trade agreement with Israel? Let us hit them in their pocket and not with meaningless resolutions. Will the Government take a lead with such a proposal which has been recommended by the European Parliament?
In the course of his conversation with President Arafat on 30 March did President Arafat indicate to the Taoiseach that he was unable to control the suicide bombers? Suggestions were made by Prime Minister Sharon and others, that the Palestinian Authority was facilitating, if not encouraging, the Hamas led and al-Fatah led attacks against Israel of the kind described which cannot be condoned. Did President Arafat indicate to the Taoiseach that he was not able to control these or that he would not control them?
In reply to Deputy O'Keeffe, the position is that this can only be done if there is agreement at the EU. There is not agreement and that is the difficulty.
Will Ireland propose it?
It has already been openly discussed at two meetings.
We did not support it.
We were on the side we are with and I have given the countries and their positions. There was no support for it.
In reply to Deputy Quinn, I had the pleasure and honour to meet President Arafat on a number of occasions. I have discussed Hamas and other groups with him. It is unfair to blame him. Right through the Camp David process and the Oslo accord, he has taken a courageous position to try to move the situation forward. I raised the issue of the suicide bombs and the difficulty countries like Ireland had, to help him in that situation. He is in a difficult position.
I have no doubt that he does not support any of those actions but his difficulty is that after speaking out against them he will probably be marginalised within his own community. When he was here in late October and early November he spoke in strong terms to the media about his abhorrence of tactics such as these. His view was that if he was allowed some room to manoeuvre he would be able to do much more and he has tried to do this on a number of occasions. He has been undermined by such things as the Iran arms issue, which has not been proven, and as a result the USA and other countries have lost confidence in him.
In my discussion with him he revealed that he is completely marginalised and has not been able to move or go to the Arab League conference. Contact with him has been minimal. His difficulty is that if he were to speak out strongly now, with so many of his people under threat, he would put himself in a weaker position. The Saudi resolution, Martti Ahtisaari's intervention and Mr. Arafat's meeting with Colin Powell may all be of use. Although many delegations have gone to see him he is not in a position to talk to them and this has undermined his position considerably. This is not helpful to anybody. I have heard from people representing the UN and the EU, from Mr. Arafat himself and from the discussions between the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and Mr. Peres, that there is no other person on the Palestinian side who could take over his role. He is being undermined and that is the kernel of the problem.