Vol. 1032 No. 4
68. Deputy Chris Andrews asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the new Israeli Government’s policy of expanding settlements in the occupied West Bank, using the means of ethnic cleansing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2133/23]
I congratulate the Tánaiste on his new position and wish him well in his new role. The new extreme right-wing Israeli Government has made the expansion of illegal settlements on Palestinian land a priority. This, in effect, amounts to ethnic cleansing of Palestinian communities. How does the Minister view the new Israeli Government's policy of expanding settlements in the occupied West Bank using the means of ethnic cleansing?
I thank the Deputy for the question and his kind comments. Ireland’s position on Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory is clear. The continued establishment and expansion of settlements is a violation of international law and is unacceptable. This position was reiterated at the UN Security Council on 19 December, which focused on the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2334. On that occasion, Ireland also led a joint press statement by a number of states demanding that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in that regard. Ireland’s embassy in Tel Aviv also raises the issue directly in its regular contacts with the Israeli Government, and Ireland's representative office in Ramallah has made a number of visits along with European Union colleagues to sensitive sites of concern in the West Bank, including Masafer Yatta.
It is deeply concerning that the stated intentions of the Israeli Government continue to show disregard for the clear international consensus on this issue. It is important that the international community supports the Palestinian Authority in its recourse to legal and political responses to the occupation. I had the opportunity to discuss this issue in a phone call with the Palestinian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Riad Malki, on 18 January, during which he shared his deep concern at the deteriorating situation. I also welcome that on 23 January, the Foreign Affairs Council provided an opportunity for both Prime Minister Shtayyeh and Foreign Minister Malki to raise these troubling developments with the European Union collectively. Ireland remains committed to supporting all efforts aimed at achieving a just and lasting two-state solution, with Jerusalem as the capital of both states, on the basis of international law and agreed international parameters.
The Minister acknowledged the violation of international law and said that Israel disregards international law and the views of the UN and the EU. However, there are still no consequences for Israel stealing Palestinian land, for apartheid in Israel or for increasing rates of murder by the Israeli Defense Forces. The new fanatical, fascist, homophobic Minister of Finance in the Israel Government and the new racist Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, are not interested in peace or justice. They are interested in hate and in getting rid of the Palestinian communities from the land which they view as theirs. It is all very well to talk about condemnation and violation, but where is the action and determination to right the wrong that Israel commits in Palestine?
I am not quite certain what the Deputy is getting at. Ireland has been very active politically, diplomatically and at all multilateral fora, whether the UN Security Council, where we have raised the issue consistently, or within the European Union, which remains the biggest donor to the Palestinian Authority and a significant donor to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA. Ireland is a strong donor to UNRWA and we give strong support internationally because we believe in fairness and in the two-state solution. The European Union is not united. There are 27 member states. We work with like-minded states in respect of the issue, particularly on trying to develop a roadmap to a two-state solution. We are one country. We have worked extremely hard as a country to do the right thing at all times, as we did recently at the UN General Assembly at the vote to seek international accountability for Israeli policies.
The point I am getting at is that the EU, for example, took clear and decisive action against Iran over human rights abuses. I heard the Minister say earlier that he disagreed with the introduction of the death penalty in Iran. The Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, is looking for the reintroduction of the death penalty in Israel.
When Ireland and the EU take action against Iran over human rights abuses, why do the same standards not apply to Israeli breaches and its violations of international law? Had Mahsa Amini been Palestinian and murdered by Israeli forces, would the EU have cared? The evidence suggests it would not because hundreds of Palestinians are killed every year and there is no action. The Minister should do the right thing and introduce the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 and recognise the state of Palestine.
I think it is accepted across the board what Israel is doing and what it has done to the Palestinians. Things are getting worse with a very right-wing and racist Government.
Brostaigh ort.
We are talking about breaches of international law, annexation, apartheid, execution and murder. The Minister has said he works with like-minded states across Europe. What action will these like-minded states take? I accept the European Union will not do anything to hold Israel accountable, but on that basis there is an onus on us to stand by the Palestinian people. There must be consequences for the apartheid regime. Maybe that will be the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 and, beyond that, recognising the state of Palestine.
Deputy Andrews made the point of the comparison between Iran and Palestine. Deputy Ó Murchú said Europe does not seem to care or act. Ireland does, though. When Shireen Abu Akleh was killed, Ireland raised the issue during our tenure on the UN Security Council. We did not stay silent on it. We called for an impartial, independent and effective investigation and, on 24 May, we organised a meeting of the Security Council on the protection of journalists. A Dáil debate on journalists and armed conflict took place on the same day. Ireland endeavours to be fair and down the middle in respect of condemnations of killings of this kind, whether it is in Iran, in the occupied territories or indeed in Israel itself, where many innocent Israelis have also been killed by militants, which is also unacceptable. We want a two-state solution. We condemn the approach that has been taken. We object in the strongest possible way to the statements made by some of the new ministers in the Israeli Government in respect of the occupied territories.
69. Deputy Fergus O'Dowd asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will provide an update on the latest information regarding the Northern Ireland protocol and related negotiations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4400/23]
I congratulate the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs on his new appointment. I welcome the outcome of the negotiations by successive Ministers and our Government in ensuring that there is no hard border on this island, that we protect the all-island economy, that there is unfettered access in Northern Ireland to European Union markets, that we protected the Single Market and that we continue peace and stability and the good things about the Good Friday Agreement. The problem is that unionists need to be convinced. We need to go to the furthest step. The negotiations between the EU and Britain need to ensure unionism can sign up and get back into government in the North.
I appreciate the Deputy's comments and thank him for his kind personal comments. The recent political and technical engagements between the EU and the UK around the implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol are welcome. While technical work is ongoing, I believe it is best to give the EU and UK teams space to find joint solutions that will address the concerns of people and business in Northern Ireland.
The Government continues to engage with all key stakeholders in this process. I had a meeting with the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, at the British-Irish Council in November and spoke to the Foreign Secretary, James Cleverly, in December. I have also met the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Chris Heaton-Harris, twice in recent weeks. The Taoiseach spoke to the Prime Minister by telephone last week. I remain in close contact with the Northern Irish political parties and other key stakeholders in the North, including businesspeople. I have made clear the Government’s commitment to resolving the difficulties around the protocol and helping to ensure that the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement can operate effectively. That involves concerns raised by unionists in respect of the operation of the protocol.
We also continue to engage extensively with our EU counterparts. The Taoiseach spoke to Commission President von der Leyen on 11 January. I met Commission Vice President, Maroš Šefčovič, in Brussels earlier this month and we maintain regular contact. I can reassure the House that EU member states continue to demonstrate the same strong solidarity we have seen throughout the Brexit process.
We are grateful also for continued bipartisan US support for peace and stability in Northern Ireland. The recent appointment of a US special envoy to Northern Ireland for economic affairs is a welcome development. In all our contacts, I have been clear that shared solutions are the only sustainable way forward. Resolving the protocol issues would also enhance the EU-UK relationship, the British-Irish relationship and, above all, relationships on the island of Ireland.
I agree with everything the Minister said. Again, I compliment the way we are all working together in the South and in the EU. Like the Minister, however, I have met unionists and listened to them. They are exceptionally clear on the issue that there is a serious power vacuum in the North and it remains unfilled by people who support democratic politics at the moment because the DUP is not going into the Executive. I urge that we in the South go the extra mile as best we can, accepting that it is up to the European Union and the British Government to negotiate the nuts and bolts and the technical part of the agreements. After 25 years, we need to ensure the Good Friday Agreement continues to have the huge influence and the huge importance it has in the lives of people, our economies, our relationship with the United Kingdom and, as the Minister rightly pointed out, with America.
I have no doubt the answer will be "Yes", but notwithstanding the fact that Ireland is not the key driver in the EU in the actual negotiations, will no stone be left unturned to ensure unionism will buy in and that we will have a restored Executive?
I accept the Deputy's sentiments. I am acutely aware of concerns unionism has on the operation of the protocol. I believe the EU is aware of that too and that, through meetings over the past year, Vice President Maroš Šefčovič has made himself aware of those issues and concerns and is anxious to respond to those concerns. We have also been very anxious to allow space to the EU negotiating team and the UK Government negotiating team. There are issues. We have acknowledged and accepted there are issues, through our meetings with unionist parties and all parties, including on the nationalist side and businesspeople who have raised issues around practicalities in the protocol's operation. I have always believed these issues are resolvable. We should just allow the teams to continue their discussions. There are challenges and there are difficulties, and while we should not underestimate the difficulties, we should wish them well.
IBEC's recent report was very clear about the huge success of the economies North and South since the Good Friday Agreement and the substantial benefit peace has brought to this island and the great growth. The report compared 18 different areas in Ireland, North and South, and in the UK. It made a surprising point that the greatest benefit outside London has been to people living on this island North and South. The Minister rightly points out that there has been substantial economic benefit. We need to impress more in the public domain on the benefit to the northern economy in the arguments that are being made because I do not think I hear the unionists iterating or responding to that point. They have a great opportunity. The British and European markets are wide open to them. There are substantial benefits in moving forward. I accept and acknowledge what the Minister says. We must go the extra mile for unionism if we can because the great prize is an Executive up and running, peace continuing and the vacuum no longer being there.
It is important to reiterate and reassert the constitutional position of the Good Friday Agreement, that is, that the principle of consent remains intact. That is the bona fide position of the Irish Government and of all parties to the agreement. Second, in all my meetings with all parties in Northern Ireland, no one has suggested that access to the European Union or the Single Market should cease because it is of huge benefit to exporters in Northern Ireland. Having access to both the UK market and the EU market creates opportunities. If a resolution of these issues could be reached, I think the European Union, along with the US through its new economic envoy Joe Kennedy, would be interested to see what we could do for the future economic prosperity of Northern Ireland if we can get a resolution of these issues. That opportunity should be grasped.
I am sorry; I did not see Deputy Ó Murchú indicating earlier. I thought he was joking with me. For Question No. 70 tá an Teachta as láthair so we will move on to Question No. 71.
71. Deputy Cathal Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he believes the Russian Federation should be designated as a terrorist state; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4332/23]
Does the Tánaiste believe the Russian Federation should be designated as a terrorist state? The European Parliament has passed a resolution along these lines. I would be interested to hear the Tánaiste's views on that matter.
Since Russia commenced its unjustified and unprovoked further invasion of Ukraine, we have consistently expressed Ireland's unwavering solidarity with Ukraine and support for its sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders. We have used our voice at the UN Security Council, the UN Human Rights Council and other multilateral fora to call for accountability for international crimes committed in Ukraine. Ireland has pushed for the Security Council to hold Russia accountable, to urge it to end its war in Ukraine immediately, and to call out Russia’s cynical attempts to use the Council and other UN bodies to spread disinformation.
As I said earlier, I was shocked last week that in the European Parliament, two Members from Ireland went against the resolution to establish a tribunal to hold Russia to account for the crime of aggression. It is incredible that two Irish MEPs, Mick Wallace and Clare Daly, would oppose such a resolution.
The Tánaiste should not mention people in their absence. I have given him some latitude but even though they are MEPs-----
I am sorry; I thought political representatives could be mentioned.
You have mentioned them twice.
Okay. The point is taken.
Accountability is extremely important because we have to call out Russia's cynical attempts to use the Council and other United Nations bodies to spread disinformation. Ireland voted to exclude Russia from the UN Human Rights Council and has co-sponsored three resolutions at the UN General Assembly condemning Russia’s aggression and calling for humanitarian access.
We supported the decision by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe that the Russian Federation should cease to be a member of the Council of Europe as of 16 March 2022. Ireland also submitted a request for leave to intervene as a third party in the proceedings brought by Ukraine against Russia before the European Court of Human Rights. We, along with EU partners, were one of over 40 states to refer the situation in Ukraine to the Office of the ICC prosecutor to pursue accountability for alleged atrocity crimes committed in Ukraine. Ireland has also filed a declaration of intervention at the International Court of Justice in Ukraine’s case against Russia.
The term "terrorist state" is not a legally defined term in either Irish law or international law. There is no statutory power to designate a country as a terrorist state. There is no doubt, however, that Russia's targeted and indiscriminate attacks on residential neighbourhoods and civilian infrastructure are designed to terrorise the people of Ukraine. I condemn these attacks in the strongest terms.
I have a question coming up later regarding Russian accountability. Hopefully it will be reached. I asked this question following the recent passing of a resolution by the European Parliament declaring Russia to be a state sponsor of terrorism. The catalyst for this resolution was, of course, the brutal invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There are particular concerns about the targeting and killing of Ukrainian civilians. There is also the destruction of civilian infrastructure and general breaches of international and humanitarian law. These must surely be acts of terror and classified as war crimes. What is the Tánaiste's view of the European Parliament resolution? Is this something that could be advanced at the EU Foreign Affairs Council? An appropriate legal framework would have to be put in place to do it. The European Parliament goes into detail as to how that might be done.
In my previous role as Taoiseach, we had been pursuing the entire issue of accountability for Russia. It is complex legally but it is one area where Ireland feels it can make a contribution. I outlined earlier the different decisions we have taken, for example, that the Russian Federation should cease to be a member at the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe; that we submitted a request for leave to intervene as a third party in the proceedings brought by Ukraine against Russia before the European Court of Human Rights; and that we were one of over 40 states to refer the situation in Ukraine to the office of the ICC prosecutor to pursue accountability for alleged atrocity crimes committed in Ukraine. We have also filed a declaration of intervention at the International Court of Justice in Ukraine's case against Russia. There is no doubt that the entire approach of Russia has been to target and indiscriminately attack residential neighbourhoods and civilian infrastructure, designed to terrorise the people of Ukraine. It is a war of terror that has created the migration crisis, the energy crisis and the humanitarian crisis.
The actions of the Russian Federation in recent years are quite shocking. There is the case of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Democracies are being subjected to hybrid threats. Critics of Putin are poisoned as they go about their business on city streets. Of course, there is the ongoing matter of espionage capabilities in the Russian Embassy in Dublin. On a related point, where stands the implementation of the ninth round of sanctions? Are further sanctions being considered at an EU level on Russian individuals and entities?
I agree with the Deputy's general comment about how Russia has behaved in recent years. There were many warning signs but I thought the poisoning of people in the United Kingdom, in Salisbury and London, provoked too lame a response from the West. This was an appalling public health attack, as well as the murder of individuals. It was a public health attack that put many people in the United Kingdom at risk due to the radioactive material and nerve agents and so on. It seems to me that over time, with the invasion of Crimea, President Putin felt he could get away with these things and thought the same would happen with the invasion of Ukraine, that people would not take a stance against it.
The European Union has implemented extensive restrictive measures against Russia, including through its ninth package of restrictive measures and the international oil products price cap. Europe stands ready to continue this. Compliance with existing sanctions is a stronger focus. David O'Sullivan, a former Secretary General and Director General within the EU, has been appointed as sanctions envoy to make sure sanctions are not circumvented.
72. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will provide a report on his recent call with the United States Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4367/23]
119. Deputy Paul McAuliffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his reaction to the appointment by the United States of a new special envoy to Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4213/23]
Like other speakers, I congratulate the Tánaiste and the Minister of State on their appointments. Our party has a strong record of independent foreign policy, working within the European family and working within the multilateral rules-based order. Both Deputies will bring all those values to us and we wish them the best of luck.
I ask the Tánaiste to outline his recent call with the US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, and to comment on the recent appointment by the United States of the new special envoy to Northern Ireland on economic affairs.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 72 and 119 together.
I thank the Deputy for his kind comments. Since assuming my new role, I have had the opportunity for constructive exchanges with both the US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, and the newly appointed US special envoy to Northern Ireland for economic affairs, Joe Kennedy III. During my recent call with the Secretary of State, we discussed the conflict in Ukraine as well as a number of other foreign policy issues of mutual interest.
In particular, our discussion focused on Northern Ireland. Secretary of State Blinken emphasised the Biden Administration's support for the restoration of the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement and the significance of the upcoming 25th anniversary.
The contribution which US special envoys to Northern Ireland have made has been greatly valued by successive Governments. I have welcomed the appointment of Joe Kennedy as special envoy to Northern Ireland with a mandate for economic affairs. This appointment also comes as we prepare to mark the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, an agreement which owes much to American support. I look forward to working closely with the special envoy. His role, focused on economic opportunity, will complement some of the economic work being undertaken by the shared island initiative, helping to consolidate the Good Friday Agreement through enhancing the prosperity of, and opportunities available to, all the people of Northern Ireland and the Border counties. As part of that process, Ireland's ambassador in Washington DC hosted an informal event with the special envoy last week, which included members of the Ad Hoc Committee to Protect the Good Friday Agreement. I will travel to Washington DC next week for meetings with senior members of the US Administration and other key opinion formers.
In his continued conversations with Secretary of State Blinken, I hope the Tánaiste will continue to underscore the important role the US has played over those 25 years. In many ways, the US in the past played a role as a counterbalance to the British taking a more selfish, strategic and economic interest in the North. One of the most powerful things in the Downing Street Declaration was the British Government's admission that it no longer has a selfish, strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland. It allowed many people to take a leap of faith. Unfortunately, Brexit forced Britain to have a more selfish, strategic and economic interest in the North and that has led to many of the issues we face. The US has a continuing role to play.
I also ask the Minister to impress on the Secretary of State the issue of Ukraine. The US could do far more in respect of admitting to the country people fleeing the war in Ukraine. The US often looks back and regrets the numbers it took in during the Second World War. The support the US is giving in terms of military aid and other aid, which is a matter the Tánaiste spoke to the Secretary of State about, is important but it is also important that the US also admits people fleeing the war.
I thank the Deputy for his comments. The response of the US and the White House to the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine has, fortunately, been balanced. That was the case when the US wanted to avoid the war. It has also done everything possible to support Ukraine in its pursuit of its entitlement under the UN Charter to self-defence. The US has done that in a way that avoids, if at all possible, escalation to a worse conflagration. I think the US has found the fine line in that regard. It has navigated a balanced approach that can lead to a better outcome, peace and the guarantee of the territorial integrity of Ukraine. As a global voice, President Biden has led as well as he could. He has led well in the face of this appalling war. Given the geography, Europe's proximity means it was always going to be the main support in terms of migration from Ukraine and people fleeing the war.
I take the Tánaiste's point. However, I think more can be done to manage the flow of migration. I have no doubt that the Biden Administration is ready to provide support.
I welcome the Tánaiste's comments with regard to the appointment of Joe Kennedy as special envoy. Senator Malcolm Byrne and I, as conveners of the US friendship group, have already spoken to the US ambassador. We look forward to engaging with Mr. Kennedy. The North of Ireland has an important opportunity to exploit the potential of both the EU and UK markets. That is a tool Mr. Kennedy will have in his bag to try to attract investment and to support businesses. It might be to the detriment of my constituents if investment is going up north but we know there are benefits to investing in communities over time. Like the Tánaiste, I welcome the appointment of Mr. Kennedy and look forward to the benefits it will bring.
I thank the Deputy for his comment and agree with him. I hope that if outstanding issues are resolved, we could create a platform for further investment in the economy of Northern Ireland. Historically, it has not done as well as other regions on the island. The cessation of violence and the Downing Street Declaration helped economic development in the North and it has improved significantly. There is, however, no doubt that maintaining access to the European Single Market and the UK market is of huge importance to the Northern Ireland economy. There can be a win-win situation if these issues can be resolved.
As the population of the island of Ireland is growing, the more seamless economic development we create, the greater opportunities there will be, North and South. I recently met representatives of InterTradeIreland. I was impressed at the increased trade between North and South, which creates jobs in both Finglas and Northern Ireland.
73. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he supports calls for a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes in Ukraine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4334/23]
Does the Tánaiste support calls for a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes in Ukraine? We touched on this topic in an earlier question. How does the Minister think Ireland should proceed on this question?
I thank the Deputy. In Ukraine last July, I heard first-hand accounts from civilians of the brutality and violence visited upon men, women and children by occupying Russian forces. Where Russia's forces have been pushed back, we have seen wanton destruction and the uncovering of mass civilian graves in towns and villages.
Ireland supports initiatives to bring to account the individual perpetrators of atrocity crimes, including war crimes, committed in Ukraine since Russia's latest invasion of that country in February 2022. Ireland, along with its EU partners, was one of over 40 states to refer the situation in Ukraine to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, ICC, to pursue accountability for alleged atrocity crimes committed in Ukraine. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide that have been committed on Ukrainian territory since 2013. In March 2022, the prosecutor of the ICC commenced a formal investigation into the situation in Ukraine.
Ukraine is also advocating support for the establishment of a special tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression as it concerns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Due to the separate jurisdictional regime for the crime of aggression, which is a separate and distinct crime to war crimes under international law, the ICC does not have jurisdiction over the crime of aggression as it relates to events in Ukraine. The establishment of the proposed tribunal seeks to address this impunity gap. Ireland supports the idea of creating a special tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression. However, a number of significant legal and practical challenges must still be resolved before this can happen. In the meantime, we welcome proposals to establish an interim prosecution office to investigate the crime of aggression as an important first step to achieving accountability for this crime.
I believe there is general agreement that there must be full accountability for the individuals responsible for international war crimes in Ukraine. We have all observed Russia's deliberate targeting and killing of civilians, attacks on civilian infrastructure and threat to use nuclear weapons. The question is how we achieve this accountability. Some EU states favour the establishment of a special international tribunal. The European Parliament has passed another resolution along those lines. I do not think we should underestimate the complexity of this matter and the difficulties in gathering evidence and bringing about a prosecution. The Tánaiste said that Ireland favours the establishment of a special international tribunal. Does he also see a role for the ICC? I believe what he has said indicates he does. Is there also a role for the European Court of Human Rights or the International Court of Justice, under the Genocide Convention? There are different international bodies looking at this matter. We need to co-ordinate and decide how best to proceed as a State and within international organisations.
The principle of accountability is very important. At the commencement of and during all wars in the past, accountability has seemed a long way off and appeared an almost unachievable proposition.
We should know from history that accountability can and does happen in the aftermath of terrible wars. We saw that recently in the Balkans. We must pursue those who perpetrate war and engage in the crimes in question. They must know that there will be a day of reckoning or, at the very least, that there could be such a day in the form of international accountability. Along with our EU partners, we have referred the situation in Ukraine to the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC to pursue accountability in respect of alleged atrocities committed in Ukraine. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide that have been committed on Ukrainian territory since 2013. In March of last year, the Prosecutor of the ICC commenced a formal investigation into the situation in Ukraine.
I thank the Tánaiste. How will the Russian Federation be made to pay compensation for the damage it has done? Can Russian frozen assets be used for this purpose? This is a complex issue to resolve, but we should, at an EU level, look into it to see how the Russian Federation can be made to pay compensation for the tremendous damage it is doing and that it will no doubt continue to do in the coming months.
Early last year, the Estonian Prime Minister was the first to put forward the idea of utilising Russian assets that have been frozen to facilitate reconstruction in Ukraine. When this suggestion was put forward at the European Council, there was not a big take-up in respect of it. I gave support to Prime Minister Kallas of Estonia and stated that we needed to pursue the matter. Momentum since then has grown significantly, and the proposal put forward is being actively looked at by the European Commission and member states in the context that some frozen assets will be used for reconstruction in Ukraine. The damage there is enormous. Countries that conduct wars that give rise to such savagery and destruction must know that there will be penalties. The resolve of the international community has to be strong, particularly in the aftermath of conflict. It cannot be the same donors all the time that come in and rebuild countries after terrible wars.
74. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will provide an overview of the shared island civic society fund he announced on 12 January 2023; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4216/23]
Will the Tánaiste outline the details of the new shared island civic society fund? While I welcome the capital projects, I am anxious to see a project that would facilitate civic dialogue. I welcome this initiative and thank the Tánaiste for announcing it. Will the Tánaiste report on his recent meetings with Wavetron?
I was very pleased to launch the shared island civic society fund earlier this month. The fund forms part of the Government’s shared island initiative, which I established more than two years ago, and will build on all of the progress already made on infrastructure, research and community projects. Through the shared island dialogue series, we learned that civic society groups across the island would benefit from enhanced support to deepen their work with cross-Border partners on issues of common interest. The shared island civic society fund responds directly to this need. It is my intention that the shared island civic society fund will promote North-South co-operation across a range of sectors and themes consistent with the objectives and commitments of the Good Friday Agreement and support the emergence of new cross-Border civic projects. I anticipate that the fund will complement work that is already taking place on a North-South basis. It should also assist civic society organisations in establishing new strategic links.
In its first year, the fund will support organisations working on projects in a broad range of areas, including climate and environment; community development; heritage and conservation; social enterprise; the charity and voluntary sector; and sport. The fund will provide €3 million over its first three years of operation, with up to €500,000 being made available this year. The application process is now open with full details available on my Department’s website. Applications will be accepted until Monday, 27 February.
On the shared island civic society fund, I was 20 years of age in 1997 when the Good Friday Agreement was signed. The majority of people on this island have adult memories that do not involve the Troubles. That is a positive thing. However, it also means that we must make sure we do not forget the lessons that were learned from the Good Friday Agreement, namely, ideas around parity of esteem and a shared space. The civic society fund is an important way of getting people to engage with one another. I wish to talk about young people in particular in this regard. In the past, we had programmes, such as those operated by Boston College, Co-operation Ireland, etc., that did this regularly. I hope we can work with young people at the civic society forum to encourage them to understand one another and why their communities come from different places, but also to understand that they often come from similar circumstances. The political and religious context shapes their perception of one another rather than the circumstances in which they live from day to day.
I agree with the Deputy. Applications are invited from a range of civic society community organisations, business and trade union representative groups and regional or national representative bodies. Of course, we are also including the under-represented voices of women, young people, older people, ethnic minorities, the LGBTQI+ community. Applications will have a North-South dimension. The Deputy made a point about the younger generations and the many people born since the Good Friday Agreement came into being. In the context of the anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, it is vital that we try to communicate the message to a younger audience. We had a shared island dialogue with young people. Young people's perspectives are quite different from those that were prevalent during negotiations on the agreement. There is a pressing need to work with young people in the context of the future of the island.
It is funny the Tánaiste should mention applications. We are already working on one in Ballymun with some groups in east Belfast. We hope to be able to bring together young people from both perspectives and to avail of funding. I ask the Tánaiste to look favourably on that application. I am sure many other Deputies will ask him to do the same. The communities of east Belfast and Ballymun are similar in many ways. They face similar economic challenges, and the young people from both have many issues in common. The theme that is going to be proposed is the idea of how we might tackle climate change, which is a matter on which both groups can agree. I see potential in the context of so many areas. We could have sports clubs from both sides engaging with one another. When it comes to access to arts centres, we are going to take the lead on it. We hope that the idea of culture can be explored in the context of what it means. I refer to how traditional culture is defined in one way and the fact that young people might have more in common in the context of rap music or other forms of culture that are more relevant to their generation.
I thank the Tánaiste for launching the programme. I look forward to his favourable consideration of the application.
The deadline for applications for the current funding round is Monday, 27 February, so the Deputy had better get the application in. Officials in my Department are happy to engage with anyone who has a query regarding the eligibility of a specific organisation or project. Further funding rounds will be scheduled and will take account of any learnings gained from the first call for applications. Full details on the shared island civic society fund, including eligibility criteria and the application process information, are available on the Department of Foreign Affairs website.
The issue the Deputy mentioned is key. We need to share lessons relating to school completion and educational attainment in different communities, North and South. This is vital work that we have advanced through the Economic and Social Research Institute's research work on the shared island initiative. That research revealed a great deal regarding educational completion on the island of Ireland, the differences between the North and the South and how, by sharing knowledge, we can improve outcomes for young people on the island.
76. Deputy John Brady asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the actions he proposes to take or is willing to support against Israel following the destruction of aid supplied by the EU and Ireland to Palestine by Israeli forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4406/23]
What actions is the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs prepared to take in order to hold Israel to account for its continuous demolition and destruction of EU-funded structures in Palestine?
As I said earlier, I am very concerned by the demolitions and evictions in the occupied Palestinian territory. Demolitions and seizures of Palestinian property and humanitarian aid accelerated in 2022, which saw a record number of Palestinians affected by demolitions, evictions and confiscations. I have been consistently forthright in voicing my opposition to Israeli settlement activity, including demolitions and evictions, in the occupied West Bank. These actions are a clear violation of international law and stand in the way of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
Ireland has been proactive in ensuring that these issues are highlighted in international fora, including during our recent tenure on the United Nations Security Council. Ireland has repeatedly urged Israel not to proceed with planned demolitions and to cease all settlement activities. Ireland has raised these issues directly with the Israeli Government, including during visits to the region. Ireland’s embassy in Tel Aviv also raises these matters in its regular contacts with the Israeli authorities. Ireland's representative office in Ramallah has made a number of visits, along with EU colleagues, to sites of concern in the West Bank.
Ireland is part of a group of EU member states pursuing compensation for humanitarian structures, funded by donors such as Ireland, through the West Bank Protection Consortium. The consortium has sought compensation of over €1,170,000 in respect of confiscated or demolished assets since 2015. Ireland provided €300,000 in funding to the consortium in 2022, underlining our commitment to reducing the vulnerability of Palestinian communities living in Area C of the West Bank.
Ireland remains committed to supporting all efforts aimed at achieving a just and lasting two-state solution, with Jerusalem as the capital of both states, on the basis of international law and agreed international parameters.
On 24 November last year, Israel demolished Masafer Yatta school in south Hebron. That was one of more than 9,257 Palestinian structures that have been demolished illegally by Israel since 2009, displacing more than 13,345 Palestinians from their lands. This is a policy of destruction, demolition, displacement and dispersal of Palestinians to the smallest parcels of land, similar to the Bantustans in apartheid South Africa. The Minister referenced the application by the West Bank Protection Consortium. That has now been going on for the past four years and not one penny in compensation has been paid. Again, words of condemnation and compensation claims are not having an effect. What is the Tánaiste prepared to do to ensure that the illegal demolition of Palestinian structures stops, and stops immediately?
Ireland is doing everything it can within its diplomatic and political capacities, particularly, as I said earlier, in multilateral forums such as the United Nations Security Council, where we have consistently raised these issues. Our position was most recently reiterated on 19 December at the meeting of the UN Security Council which focused on the issue of Israeli settlements, and we were key to getting that on the agenda. Our position is very clear: fundamentally, we believe in the two-state solution, as this House does. These settlements militate against the creation of a two-state solution and jeopardise and imperil any prospect of a two-state solution, and I want to be very clear about that. There is not unanimity or anything near unanimity of views across the EU 27, unfortunately. However, we work with like-minded EU member states to consistently raise the issue and to do what we can, through our funding programmes and through our diplomatic and political channels, to work with the Palestinian Authority to keep these issues alive.
