Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 6 Oct 2015

Vol. 891 No. 3

Memorandum of Understanding on Establishment of Battle Groups: Motion

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves Ireland's accession to the Memorandum of Understanding concerning the principles for the establishment and operation of a Battlegroup to be made available to the European Union in the second half of the year 2016.

The memorandum has already been signed by the other participants in the battle group, namely, Germany, Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

I agree with the point made by many that the term "battle group" is unfortunate and misleading. It describes the force size rather than its role and is a standard technical military term for a battalion-sized force with support elements comprising 1,500 personnel. Their role is to provide an initial entry force in a crisis management or humanitarian situation or to reinforce an existing mission. They would be better described as a rapid response group or a peace management force. EU battle groups have a readiness to deploy within five to ten days on a range of possible missions, sustainable for 30 days and extendable to 120 days.

I will briefly outline the background to Ireland's participation in the German battle group. The ambition of the EU is to be able to respond rapidly to emerging crises. This is a key objective in the continued development of the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy, CDSP. The purpose of the battle groups is to undertake operations known as the Petersberg Tasks. These include, inter alia, humanitarian and rescue tasks, peacekeeping tasks, joint disarmament operations, military advice, conflict prevention and post-conflict stabilisation.

A central tenet of Irish foreign policy is support for the multilateral system of collective security represented by the United Nations. In this regard, Ireland has worked to uphold the primary role of the Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security. Our commitment has found expression in Ireland's long-standing tradition of participating in UN peacekeeping operations. Participation in EU battle groups represents another means for Ireland to express our commitment to the UN and the maintenance of international peace and security.

Concerns are sometimes expressed that our participation in battle groups may pose a threat to our military neutrality. This, of course, is not the case. Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality is unaffected by our participation. The guarantees under the Lisbon treaty and Ireland's declaration make this clear. We are not and will not become part of any military alliance or permanent military formation. We will not enter into any mutual defence arrangement. That position remains unchanged. In the case of battle groups, each participant retains the right to deploy or not to deploy its forces irrespective of an EU decision to launch a battle group operation. Equally, each battle group participant retains the sovereign right to withdraw its contingent at any time. As such, any deployment of the Irish contribution as part of the German battle group will be subject to the triple lock, which Deputies understand. It is also worth recalling the strong support of the UN for the EU's efforts in this regard. During his visit to Ireland in May, the UN Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, commented positively on the EU-UN relationship and the importance of having a rapid reaction capacity.

While no battle group has deployed to date, which is much to the frustration of some nations, the EU battle group concept has yielded many benefits to developing improved interoperability between the Defence Forces and the forces of other EU member states. Ireland's active engagement in battle groups and across the range of activity under the Union's CDSP enhances our capacity to influence the ongoing development and evolution of the rapid response capacity of the EU and helps to shape policy in a manner that is consistent with our values and our support of multilateralism and for the UN.

The Defence Forces' contribution to this battle group will only arise should the battle group be deployed to undertake an operation and should Ireland agree to participate. The Defence Forces' commitment will involve a reconnaissance and intelligence company, together with staff posts at the operational and force headquarters. The total number of Defence Forces personnel involved will be approximately 175. Their role will be to generate and deliver specific information and intelligence to decision makers in support of the planning and conduct of operations. Eight officers and two NCOs are deployed to the battle group headquarters in Strasbourg and engage in training and planning activities.

In summary, Ireland's participation in the battle group will continue to support the development of rapid deployment skills and capabilities within the Defence Forces, together with improved interoperability. It will enhance Ireland's credibility as a provider of professional and effective military forces for crisis management operations and reinforce our standing and ability to influence the ongoing development of the CDSP in support of international peace and security and the EU's relationship with the UN. I commend the motion to the House.

I apologise for being late to the House and missing the Minister's contribution.

Suffice to say, Fianna Fáil supports Ireland's participation in the German battle group. In 2010, the most recent Fianna Fáil defence Minister, Mr. Tony Killeen, stated: "Ireland's participation in EU Battlegroups is a tangible means of showing our support for the EU as a provider of high quality peacekeepers to United Nations mandated operations." We as a party reject any assertion that taking part in battle groups undermines our neutrality. Rather, it is a way of bolstering our commitment to the United Nations. The UN is the third strand of the triple lock, to which we remain committed. We are strong and committed supporters of collective security through the UN. In 1945, when we first applied to join it, Éamon de Valera observed:

It is the small nations particularly that should welcome an organisation which is intended to give collective security. But the small nations, just like the big ones, will, if they become members of such an organisation, have to be really loyal members of it. They will have to make up their minds that the obligations which are necessary, if the organisation is to be successful, will be fulfilled and carried out.

The EU battle group is a way of fulfilling that commitment.

Our Defence Forces are keen to participate in battle groups. Ireland has a long tradition of overseas service in support of UN or UN-mandated deployments in pursuit of international peace and security since the first Defence Forces deployment abroad in 1958. We are all aware of the high level of pride in and public recognition of the work that our Defences Forces do. It is no harm to mention the work that our naval forces are currently engaged in the Mediterranean. The Defence Forces also provide personnel to the EU stand-by battle group rapid response brigades, even though no EU battle group has to date deployed into a mandated mission.

Overseas service deployments by the Defence Forces are a pivotal element of Irish foreign policy and for the attainment of Defence Forces operational capability across a wide spectrum of challenging military, geopolitical and geostrategic environments. Defence Forces personnel of all ranks have and continue to excel in overseas deployments, be they at strategic, operational or tactical level. The continued participation of Defence Forces units, contingents and individual members is essential for individual and unit professional development, unit operational viability and cohesion.

When contingents deploy, they must be in formations of sufficient strength and composition that the leadership functions of all ranks and military specialisations are fully maximised. Deploying numbers of small units in different missions concurrently is not consistent with optimum operational capacity advancement or outputs once deployed. A mix over time of "ground holding" and "mission rapid reaction" unit operational postures is the most beneficial strategically to the Defence Forces and the missions on which they operate. The deployment of personnel from the Air Corps and the Naval Service in cohesive unit strength, along with their aircraft and ships as required, must be progressively and positively pursued as a means of contributing specialist unit capability to UN, UN-mandated or Chapter VIII missions.

Ongoing Defence Forces deployments in the Middle East, the Balkans and recently in Africa have increased linkages to Ireland's international wish to reinforce its political and diplomatic platforms and visibility, together with its concurrent economic and business connectivity and trade ambitions. This ambition and action is consistent with Ireland's place in the world as a valued and trusted United Nations and European Union member.

I wish to formally oppose this motion and this deployment, which undermine Irish neutrality. Sinn Féin is committed to an independent and progressive Irish international relations policy with Irish neutrality at its core. Sinn Féin's support for neutrality is the product of a well-developed and coherent republican position stretching over 200 years of Irish history. Our interpretation of sovereignty of the people and national self-determination includes the freedom to determine one's relationships with other nations. This motion pertains to Ireland's participation in a EU battle group from July to December 2016 with Germany, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg and Croatia. Each of the 18 battle groups consists of a battalion-sized force of 1,500 troops reinforced with combat support elements. The formation of battle groups allows the European Union to deploy troops and military equipment quickly to regions as far as 6,000 km from Brussels for a minimum of 30 days, which can be extended to 120 days if they are resupplied. They are designed as a rapid reaction force that can deploy anywhere within that range, supposedly within six days. While some people try to portray these battle groups as humanitarian soldiers, their ultimate purpose is right there in the name - that is, they are primarily established to go into battle. Sinn Féin considers these battle groups to be more about military powers in Europe wishing to push Europe in a certain direction militarily than about a sense of responsibility to peacekeeping.

Just as with the euro, it is possible to be a member of the European Union and not support or participate in its militarisation via the battle groups. While some neutral countries such as Austria are taking part, Malta does not, and Denmark, which is a NATO member, has an opt-out for this and all other areas of the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy.

Were Ireland's position truly neutral, it also would exit these battle groups.

A report by the Transnational Institute and the Dutch Campaign against Arms Trade has found that high levels of European military spending played a key role in the unfolding EU debt crisis and continue to undermine efforts to resolve the debt crisis. It is clear these battle groups aim to promote increased military spending during times of austerity while the funding of essentials such as schools, hospitals and nursing homes is cut. It makes no sense that Europe is spending more on its militaries then was the case ten years ago-----

-----despite the backdrop of harsh and disastrous social spending cuts. One is told the Cold War has ended, but the stockpiling of nuclear and chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction by some countries continues to pose a major and serious threat to international security and human survival. To ensure we live in a safer and more equal world, increased military expenditure certainly is not a solution. It is necessary to challenge the structures that cause poverty and insecurity. Many have tried to make a false distinction between neutrality and non-neutrality. If a country is neutral, that does not mean it does nothing to help innocent civilians who are affected by war or does not try to tackle poverty, inequality and social injustice, which are the primary triggers for war. A policy of positive neutrality would ensure this State would not increase its military spending, take part in the arms trade or profit from conflicts or wars. Our focus should be on guaranteeing the economic, social, political and cultural rights of people worldwide while aiming to assist people to lift themselves out of poverty and hunger. It should be on working with countries to implement global targets on issues such as land rights, citizen participation, tax justice, government accountability and making the world a safer and more equal place.

A Red C poll commissioned by the Peace and Neutrality Alliance on 17 September 2013 showed that eight out of ten Irish people are in favour of neutrality, which is a massive and unprecedented number. In considering the record of this State, particularly with regard to Shannon Airport, it is hard to escape the conclusion that consecutive Governments have pursued policies to abandon incrementally the twin policies of neutrality and United Nations primacy in favour of a hybrid that abandons both.

I understand Deputy Paul Murphy is sharing time with Deputy Clare Daly. Is that correct?

Yes, two and a half minutes each.

It is interesting to watch the Minister squirm about the use of the term "battle group," because it is as though the EU forgot to pass this particular terminology through the regular EU doublespeak machine, with the result that it is honestly termed "battle group," which does what it says on the tin - that is, it does what people would expect. The issue is that in other European countries, the establishments need not pretend to be in favour of neutrality in the manner of Fine Gael, which occasionally doffs the hat towards neutrality while at the same time agitating against the policy of neutrality. Members should be aware that Ireland is committing 175 soldiers to be part of the battle group led and effectively organised by the German military command, which can put 3,000 soldiers on the ground. The kind of equipment being made available by the Irish Defence Forces includes an Orbiter unmanned aerial vehicle, UAV, as well as communications and sniper equipment. The first of these, the UAV, is a military drone, which, together with the sniper rifles, means this is not about helping people affected by natural disasters but is about going to war. This supposedly neutral country, which allows American weaponry to land in Shannon Airport on the way to Iraq and Afghanistan, where it will kill innocent people, proposes to be available for participation in a battle group. I am not asking Members to trust me about this; they should trust Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, a former Secretary General of NATO, who stated that EU battle groups could be used to go to war. He said:

Why is the EU creating battlegroups? It is not just to help rebuild a country. The battlegroups are not [there] for building schools ... we shouldn't think the EU is for soft power and Nato for tough power.

Alternatively, Members should listen to the words of the Minister under questioning at the committee, where he stated:

Essentially, what it means is that we do not want to be restricted to humanitarian assistance only. There are missions that may necessitate disarmament.

EU battle groups are a key drive in the way of militarisation-----

We have been involved in disarmament.

-----but disarmament clearly involves military engagement on the ground. It is a key means of driving European militarisation, but also integration with NATO, hence the increased spending in recent years on defence in Ireland to ensure military interoperability with NATO. I am with James Connolly in this regard when he stated:

We have held, and do hold, that war is a relic of barbarism only possible because we are governed by a ruling class with barbaric ideas; we have held, and do hold, that the working class of all countries cannot hope to escape the horrors of war until in all countries that barbaric ruling class is thrown from power.

The term "battle group" is in no way misleading but is pretty much spot on. The key objective is not a secret at all, in that EU battle groups were set up to provide a military force directly under the control of the EU political elite and the EU structures that are dominant there. It is part of an increased militarisation across Europe, and I must note that the Minister is in the camp of the hawks in this regard, very much accelerating the process. The Minister is correct that it is not just a case of having the battle groups present; there is currently an acute drive to have them deployed against the backdrop of the drive towards increased EU military expenditure. As Deputy Crowe noted, this is precisely at a time when austerity is raining on the heads of ordinary citizens. If one takes the recent example of the Russian war planes accused of incursions over Turkey and the Baltic states, such events could spark an incident in which the German battle groups would be deployed, and Irish soldiers would be participating.

They would not.

I will cite Romano Prodi when he spoke of these issues and stated:

When I was talking about [a] European Army [or a battle group], I was not joking. If you don’t want to call it a European army, don’t call it a European army. You can call it “Margaret”, you can call it “Mary-Ann”, you can find any name, but it is a joint effort ... the first time you have a joint, not bilateral, effort at European level.

That is what is under discussion in the Chamber at present. An Irish entanglement in military alliances makes us complicit. It is an absolute affront to the citizens of the State, who believe in our neutrality.

It is part of a process that sees us joining the NATO Partnership for Peace, which everyone knows is a training ground for full NATO membership, and it goes hand in hand with our complicity in the daily use of Shannon Airport and in the revelations produced by Shannon Watch last week of the hundreds of permissions granted last year for overflights and landings for war planes on the way to Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, where innocent civilians are being slaughtered. We are complicit in that process and this is part of that. It has no place in a country which proclaims its neutrality, and we will be opposing it.

That concludes the debate.

Do I not get a chance to respond?

It is not provided for, but if the House agrees, I have no problem.

It is not agreed.

No, it is not agreed. I have no problem with the Minister responding as long as we can respond also.

He should respond.

Question put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 72; Níl, 25.

  • Aylward, Bobby.
  • Breen, Pat.
  • Browne, John.
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Buttimer, Jerry.
  • Byrne, Catherine.
  • Calleary, Dara.
  • Carey, Joe.
  • Coffey, Paudie.
  • Conaghan, Michael.
  • Connaughton, Paul J.
  • Conway, Ciara.
  • Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coveney, Simon.
  • Cowen, Barry.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Daly, Jim.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Deering, Pat.
  • Dooley, Timmy.
  • Dowds, Robert.
  • Doyle, Andrew.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Farrell, Alan.
  • Feighan, Frank.
  • Fitzpatrick, Peter.
  • Fleming, Sean.
  • Griffin, Brendan.
  • Hannigan, Dominic.
  • Harrington, Noel.
  • Harris, Simon.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Humphreys, Kevin.
  • Keating, Derek.
  • Kehoe, Paul.
  • Kelleher, Billy.
  • Kelly, Alan.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • Kyne, Seán.
  • Lynch, Ciarán.
  • Lynch, Kathleen.
  • McCarthy, Michael.
  • McConalogue, Charlie.
  • McEntee, Helen.
  • McFadden, Gabrielle.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McLoughlin, Tony.
  • McNamara, Michael.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • Murphy, Eoghan.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Neville, Dan.
  • Nolan, Derek.
  • Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
  • O'Donovan, Patrick.
  • O'Dowd, Fergus.
  • O'Mahony, John.
  • O'Reilly, Joe.
  • O'Sullivan, Jan.
  • Penrose, Willie.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Reilly, James.
  • Ryan, Brendan.
  • Shatter, Alan.
  • Spring, Arthur.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Tuffy, Joanna.
  • Twomey, Liam.
  • Varadkar, Leo.

Níl

  • Boyd Barrett, Richard.
  • Broughan, Thomas P.
  • Collins, Joan.
  • Colreavy, Michael.
  • Crowe, Seán.
  • Daly, Clare.
  • Doherty, Pearse.
  • Ellis, Dessie.
  • Ferris, Martin.
  • Fitzmaurice, Michael.
  • Halligan, John.
  • Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
  • McDonald, Mary Lou.
  • McGrath, Finian.
  • McLellan, Sandra.
  • Murphy, Paul.
  • Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
  • Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
  • O'Brien, Jonathan.
  • O'Sullivan, Maureen.
  • Pringle, Thomas.
  • Ross, Shane.
  • Stanley, Brian.
  • Tóibín, Peadar.
  • Wallace, Mick.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Paul Kehoe; Níl, Deputies Paul Murphy and Seán Crowe.
Question declared carried.
Barr
Roinn