Item No. 2 on the agenda is a discussion with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, on the forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting. On behalf of the committee, I welcome the Minister and his officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs.
General Affairs and External Relations Council: Ministerial Presentation.
I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to say a few words about the forthcoming meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council, GAERC.
It has been a fairly busy summer break. There are major issues ahead of us on the agenda, even in the next couple of months. Between now and the German Presidency there will be some major issues including increased focus on the constitutional treaty, the question of enlargement as well as some of the issues that address us, particularly from a European-wide point of view, and also the energy issue. We look forward to working with the Finnish and German Presidencies in taking forward the debate on the future of Europe and in delivering to the people of Europe the benefits of concerted action at EU level.
Friday's meeting in Brussels will be the second regular meeting of the Finnish Presidency. As the committee will be aware, it was necessary to meet in extraordinary session twice during August to take account of the events in the Middle East. We also had an opportunity to meet at Lappeenranta in Finland in formal session at the beginning of September and I pay tribute to the Finnish Presidency in that respect.
The comprehensive external relations agenda begins with the western Balkans which will focus on Bosnia-Herzegovina, in view of the elections which will take place on 1 October, and on Montenegro where the elections took place on 10 September.
Bosnia-Herzegovina has come a long way since the signature of the Dayton Agreement in 1995. The progress it has made was recognised by the EU last November when the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations on the stabilisation and association agreement. Further progress will depend on how quickly it can adopt the necessary reforms to enable it to become a fully functioning and viable state. We are increasingly concerned within the Union that many of the key reforms in this regard have been delayed in 2006 and I expect that the Council will take the opportunity to urge the new parliament that they should take forward the reform process once it assembles following the October elections.
On Montenegro, we await the report of the international election monitoring mission, which I hope will be in a position to pronounce the elections as free and fair. On that basis, I welcome the intention of the Commission to open a stabilisation and association agreement with Montenegro.
The Council will also discuss recent developments in Sudan and Darfur. Our conclusions are expected to express strong concern about the recent severe deterioration of the security and humanitarian situation in Darfur, condemn reported attacks by the Sudanese Government and rebel groups, and stress that any attempt to take renewed military action will have a devastating humanitarian consequence and remove any prospect of achieving peace through implementation of the Darfur peace agreement.
The Council is also expected to welcome the adoption on 31 August 2006 of the UN Security Council resolution, which authorised a UN peacekeeping operation in Darfur in principle and urged the Sudanese Government to consent to its deployment. The Government remains gravely concerned about the continuing humanitarian and political crisis in Darfur and welcomes the Security Council's decision to send a UN peacekeeping force to Darfur with a strong mandate to protect civilians and provision of security of the delivery of humanitarian assistance, but the consent of the government of Sudan remains vital if deployment is to proceed as planned. So far, despite some encouraging signs that I received on my visit to the region in July, it remains opposed. We will do all that we can in co-operation with our partners in the international community to exert pressure on the Sudanese Government.
There is obviously a particular onus on Sudan's neighbours, on the African Union and on the permanent members of the Security Council. We fully support the rapid and full implementation of the Darfur peace agreement of May 2006, which provides a constructive basis for peace and reconciliation and urges non-signatories to adhere to it and to commit to its implementation. Blame for the situation rests with all of those who are reluctant to take the path of peace.
At the Council I will again lay particular emphasis on the need for NGOs to be properly protected and facilitated in their vital work, something I did at the last meeting when we discussed the Darfur situation immediately after my return from the region. It is appalling and unacceptable and I saw for myself that the situation has become even more dangerous for them in recent times.
The DRC will review the position following the presidential and parliamentary election of 30 July, which passed off relatively peacefully in an open and fair manner. That represents an important step in its democratic development, but it is regrettable that the progress has been marred by violent incidents. The EU and the international community need to maintain pressure on all parties in the DRC to avoid further recourse to violence. The EUFOR mission deployed in the DRC played an important role in stabilising the situation following the incidents in August. The Government also supports an extension of the UN MONUC peacekeeping mission when its mandate expires at the end of November.
Most of the Council's time will be taken up by the Middle East situation, building on the meetings to which I referred earlier. The attempted attack on the American Embassy in Damascus earlier provides further evidence of the precarious situation across the region and of the determination of certain elements to destroy any prospect of a revival of the peace process. Over recent months, the Government has been very clear that there can be no military solutions to the crises in Lebanon and in the Occupied Palestinian Territories or to their underlying causes. The only way to provide for lasting peace and security for all the people of the region is through a comprehensive settlement, with a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at its core.
The tragic and unnecessary violence and destruction visited on the Lebanese, Palestinian and Israeli people provides clear evidence of the emptiness of unilateralism. At our detailed policy discussions during the informal Foreign Ministers meeting, it was clear that there is a strong consensus on this point among member states. I expect the Council to issue conclusions on the determination of the EU to play a leading role, with its international partners, in working to revive the Middle East peace process.
The Union played a vital role in the achievement of a ceasefire in Lebanon. The nature of the conflict — the cynical initial attack on Israel by Hezbollah and the largely disproportionate Israeli military response — underlines the challenges facing the democratically elected government of Lebanon. The EU will be visible and consistent in its support for Prime Minister Siniora and his government as they work to rebuild their country after yet another war, to assert their authority and to protect Lebanon's territorial integrity.
The Council will emphasise our commitment to the full implementation of Security Council Resolution 1701 and its strong support for the ongoing efforts of Secretary General Kofi Annan. We welcome the progress made in the deployment of the Lebanese army in southern Lebanon and the leading role being played by European troops in the new UNIFIL mission. A total of 3,500 UN troops are on the ground while it is expected that 5,000 international peacekeepers will be on the ground in the coming weeks and that the Israeli withdrawal should be complete at that point.
The Government had an initial consideration of the situation in Lebanon at its meeting on 30 August. We are continuing to review the question of possible participation in the new UNIFIL mission. After initial uncertainty, greater clarity was achieved in regard to UNIFIL's rules of engagement and the objectives of the force, with Secretary General Annan making it clear a proactive role in disarmament is not envisaged. The commitment of significant numbers of troops by France, Italy and Spain, in particular, has created a framework within which an Irish contribution could be made. Against this background, the Defence Forces are consulting potential partners to see how Ireland might contribute in a meaningful way to UNIFIL II. The Defence Forces remain engaged in the detailed technical assessment and planning required for the Government to make a decision in due course. Key criteria will be the situation on the ground as it continues to develop and our capacity to play a useful role within the overall structure of the force. Under the triple lock, Dáil approval will be required for a deployment.
Ireland has responded effectively and swiftly in response to the humanitarian crises in both Lebanon and Gaza and has committed a total of €4 million in additional funding. I welcome the lifting by Israel in recent days of the air and sea blockade on Lebanon. This is an important first step in facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid and starting the process of economic recovery, but all sides must meet their obligations in the period ahead.
One issue which has caused particular concern is the extensive use of cluster bombs in southern Lebanon, about which I spoke strongly previously. These pose a serious threat to the civilian population returning to their homes. It is essential that all parties co-operate fully with the UN to ensure that southern Lebanon is cleared of this danger. There is a serious moral responsibility on Israel now to do everything possible to ensure this happens without delay.
Ireland has been to the fore internationally in expressing concern at the potentially indiscriminate nature of these weapons. Apart from the danger posed by unexploded cluster bombs after conflicts have ended, we believe that the international community also needs to address their use during conflicts, and in particular the dangers posed to civilians. Last week at discussions in Geneva under the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, on my instruction Ireland joined with five other delegations in calling for a specific mandate for negotiations to lead to "a legally binding instrument that addresses the humanitarian concerns posed by cluster munitions". We will pursue this initiative in the months ahead in co-operation with the other sponsors and with international civil society organisations.
I expect that our discussions on the region on Friday will focus on the unresolved crisis in the Palestinian Territories and on developments in the formation of a Palestinian government of national unity. The situation in Gaza is now unsustainable. More than 200 people have been killed since the end of June, the humanitarian and economic crisis continues to deepen and there is virtually no freedom of movement in and out of the area for people or for goods. The first priority must be to end all violence from whatever source, achieve the release of the Israeli soldier captured over two months ago and ensure the reopening of border crossings.
The EU is continuing to take the lead in the provision of assistance to the Palestinians. The temporary international mechanism to channel aid directly to the people is now in operation and the Council will extend its remit for a further three months to December. The level of Community assistance is now higher than in any of the past five years. Ireland's bilateral assistance will be higher in 2006 than it was last year but the humanitarian and financial crisis in the occupied territories will not be effectively addressed until Israel restores its transfers of tax and customs duties, which have been withheld since April, and until there is again a credible political process between the parties. The EU has a vital role to play in this regard.
It is of course clear to all that the Quartet roadmap is now in abeyance but it is important to emphasise that the principles which it sets out are those on which a settlement must be based. In the weeks and months ahead the EU will work with the Israeli Government, with the Palestinians and with its regional and international partners to inject new momentum into the stalled political process. We will continue to emphasise very clearly the obligations on both sides under the roadmap and under international law. We want to see an early and substantive meeting between Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas, as a first step towards the resumption of a credible process based on the essentials of the roadmap.
The EU has strongly supported President Abbas in his negotiations with Hamas and the other parties for the formation of a national unity government. I warmly welcome his announcement yesterday that agreement has been reached, and that a new government will be formed in the coming days. This is potentially a hugely significant development. The EU and the Quartet have set out very clearly the principles on which we can work with any Palestinian government. However, we need to be pragmatic and imaginative in encouraging progress as it happens. I have already stated that if it is clear that the violence has stopped and if the government is committed to the negotiation of a two state solution I will argue very strongly for an appropriately positive EU response.
The situation with Iran has entered a very delicate phase following its failure to abide by the Security Council's demand, that it suspend enrichment-related activities by 31 August. The five Permanent Members of the Security Council together with Germany are currently discussing next steps in light of Iran's failure to comply with the terms of Resolution 1696. High Representative Solana is engaged in discussions with Iranian officials regarding the reply from Iran on 22 August to the wide-ranging package of incentives presented last June. These discussions have reportedly been constructive and are expected to continue later this week. We will have an opportunity for a detailed briefing at the Council. I would continue to urge Iran to suspend enrichment-related activities as a confidence building measure so that detailed negotiations can begin. We all want to see a successful diplomatic solution to the current impasse, a solution which will respect the rights and interests of Iran while countering the threat of further nuclear proliferation. We believe that the package of incentives, which Europe took the lead in developing, has the potential to offer just such a solution but Iran has to be prepared to move also.
The Council will also review developments in Iraq where the daily toll of death and destruction has reached horrific proportions. The European Union remains determined to give its full support to the national unity government which was approved by the Iraqi Parliament in May. Nobody underestimates the severity of the challenge it faces in securing the unity and prosperity of the country. For the EU the focus in the period ahead will be on working with the government to develop urgently its initial proposals for an international compact for Iraq. The idea of a compact, which the EU strongly supports, would involve greater international co-ordination in the provision of assistance for the reconstruction of the country in accordance with the government's own policy priorities.
Under the heading "Any Other Business" Greece is expected to speak on the European Union's relationship with the Black Sea Economic Council, BSEC. It believes the EU should adopt a regional approach to the Black Sea states and favours closer EU co-operation with the BSEC to this end. Ireland would welcome such enhanced co-operation if it adds value to the activity already under way in the region.
On the possible involvement of the Defence Forces in UNIFIL II in Lebanon, I assume from the Minister's comments that the chances of participation in the mission have improved. When does the Minister expect a decision to be announced? Potentially how many troops would be involved? On what criteria will a decision on participation in the mission be made?
As I indicated, the detailed assessment is being carried out by the Defence Forces. The position is now much clearer than it was when the United Nations made its initial call for a force for Lebanon. France, Italy and Spain have the core of a force in place and this will be built up over a short period. I indicated that, having considered the matter in conjunction with the advice it received from the Defence Forces, the Government believes an Irish force, if it fits in anywhere, would be relatively small. While I cannot indicate what numbers are being considered, in the context of our size and the fact that Ireland is already close to the limit of Defence Forces participation in overseas missions, with substantial forces already in place in the Balkans and Liberia, we would only consider participation in the second or third wave. The second wave will, it is hoped, be concluded by the end of October with the final phase completed at the end of November.
What determines our consideration? Ultimately, the key issue is the safety of our troops. One of the reasons we are somewhat hopeful is that all our contacts on the ground indicate a desire on both sides to maintain the ceasefire. Obviously the fact that the ceasefire has held for so long will be another element in our decision on whether to participate in the mission.
As members will be aware, Irish troops served in Lebanon for 23 years and it took a long time to get them out. We also suffered significant fatalities, among the highest of participating countries in proportion to size. The Government will have to weigh up all these issues and take into account whether a relatively small Irish force would validly fit within the requirement of the overall force. We must work with our partners and I understand from my colleague, the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, that discussions are taking place with some potential partners on how an Irish contribution, if required, could fit in. These discussions are ongoing. While I expect the Government will arrive at a clear view before November, I cannot give a precise date.
When will the international election observers in Montenegro pronounce on whether the elections held recently in that country were free and fair?
Before the Minister arrived, we were discussing the suspension of the Euro-Med association agreements, which is something I have raised in the past. This has been discussed because of Israel's violation of international law in Lebanon and in Palestine. Has that been considered? Would it be considered and will the Minister comment on it? There has been a huge amount of disruption in Lebanon and I welcome the aid announced recently, as well as the response of the EU. Israel is not being made to pay for the environmental damage caused due to its targeting of oil refineries. It is not being made to pay for the clean-up of unexploded ordnance. It is not being brought to account for the targeting of UN personnel or civilians. Even though the situation is calm at the moment, there is a major need to address the heightened tensions in the region. What does the Minister think the Council will do about the manoeuvrings of other states which have used this crisis to forward their own agenda, such as Israel, Syria or Iran?
Given the announcement of a unity government in Palestine, does the Minister think that Israel should release Palestinian MPs and Ministers who have been held since the most recent outbreak of conflict? What steps are necessary to ensure that a Palestinian state becomes viable? It cannot continue to survive on hand-outs from the EU. It needs to be made economically viable if it is to have any chance in the future. Will the EU repeat its calls for the ports and the airports to be opened in Gaza? The EU should ask that the electricity supply be provided again.
The report on the elections in Montenegro should be available in the next couple of days.
I saw the Deputy's proposed all-party motion, which is a regurgitation of a motion that was tabled during the conflict. The motion has been overtaken by recent events as we now have a ceasefire, albeit a very precarious ceasefire. As it is maintained, we will become more confident that it will be retained.
I have heard the call that we should isolate Israel and not enter into continued dialogue with its government. That would be counterproductive in my view. Given the history of the Deputy's party, he should know that isolation is not the way to sort out difficult issues. I urge that we treat motions such as that proposed by the Deputy with some caution. We must consider whether it has a chance of getting past the EU. I suggest it does not have a snowball's chance in hell. Moreover, it would have a negative practical effect for the people of Palestine, whom most of us would try to protect, in particular from a humanitarian perspective. As the Deputy noted, if Palestine is ever to become a fully recognised state it must be viable, and the way in which the goods that enter Palestine will be correlated and dealt with will be through the Israel-EU trade agreement. There would be a negative impact on ordinary people in Palestine if we were to pass a motion which seeks to cut off EU trade links with Israel. It would be an empty gesture.
I strongly agree with the Deputy's comment on the release of the imprisoned and captured Hamas leaders, members of parliament and members of government. As I have stated at EU meetings — this is the strong view of the broad brush of the EU — if we are to make any progress, this must happen. Equally, the captured Israeli prisoners should be released forthwith. We very much welcome the moves towards a national unity Government. I am on the record of this committee earlier this summer as stating that it was no coincidence the conflict in Lebanon began just as Hamas and President Abbas were coming to an understanding on a national unity government. That was derailed and put on the back-burner until very recently. I strongly welcome that it seems the national unity government will now be put in place.
We will have to tread warily with regard to whether this is the type of government the international community can deal with in the normal way, and whether it is a government that fully recognises international rules and laws on human rights issues, the recognition of Israel and so on. However, it is an important step, which we welcome and have encouraged.
There have been some misconceptions in this regard. I sometimes read newspaper reports which suggest it is terrible that the EU has turned off the tap to the Palestinian people. That is not the case. The EU has this year dramatically increased its aid, even given the difficulty of recognition and the difficult political situation in Palestine. The level of EU aid which was supposed to be dedicated to Palestine was in the region of €250 million but to date it is in the region of €330 million. It is not for want of assistance from the EU that the Palestinian people are suffering but because of the continued blockade by Israel and the withholding of tax and customs revenues by Israel, in regard to which the EU and I have called strongly on Israel to deliver what is due to the people of Palestine.
The committee can take it that while we adopt a strong position on the need for Israel to move on these issues, at the same time we must be conscious that we can only deal with a government in Palestine on the basis that it recognises the principles set down in the roadmap. That must be a prerequisite because there will not be peace in that part of the world unless and until there is an acceptance of the two-state solution between Palestine and Israel.
I thank the Minister for appearing before the committee and making a presentation to it. While any single area of conflict could dominate the Minister's time at the Council meeting, I wish to refer to Darfur in Sudan, which the Minister has mentioned. Since the conflict erupted in 2003, the United Nations has estimated that more than 200,000 people have lost their lives, 2 million people have been displaced and more than 3 million people are in need of humanitarian aid. At present, a total of 1.6 million people cannot be reached owing to the fighting and direct targeting of humanitarian workers. Moreover, there is an estimated shortfall of almost $300 million in the sum needed by the United Nations to meet the ongoing needs in Darfur. If this money is not forthcoming within the next two to three months, a new emergency will arise in northern Darfur.
I wish to refer to a number of reports that appeared during the weekend to the effect that the Sudanese Government is mobilising 25,000 troops to enter Darfur and to deal with the rebels. While that may be good, I note the camps will also be dealt with, which will be devastating for the people involved. Hence, I repeat my request to the Minister to keep Darfur to the fore at his meetings. Any topic from around the world could dominate and undoubtedly some of the other points raised earlier will do so. However, I make a strong appeal to the Minister. These people are helpless and it is terrible that humanitarian aid workers are not permitted to carry out their work, for which we have made provisions.
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue, which is one of the greatest disasters facing the world. Unless the international community does something fairly quickly, the situation will deteriorate even further. While that was my view before I visited the region, it was copperfastened during my visit. I welcome the passing by the UN of a resolution in principle to set up a substantial force in Darfur. I visited the troops of the African Union mission in Sudan, AMIS, and spoke to its leading military personnel. It was clear they had been given an impossible task. While they stated their troop numbers came to approximately 7,500, I understand the figure is closer to less than 7,000. Darfur is 1.5 times the size of France, which puts the ability of 7,000 troops to do anything into perspective.
I visited the largest camp in Darfur, which contains more than 50,000 people, and events there constitute a crime against humanity. Thankfully there is a substantial engagement by the UN and by non-governmental organisations. However, as I noted, the position of non-governmental organisations is becoming more precarious as time passes. While there, I met the Sudanese Foreign Minister, who is part of the more moderate wing of its government. He gave a fairly optimistic view as to whether the Sudanese Government would allow UN troops to enter.
When I visited Ethiopia, I also met the chairman of the African Union in Addis Ababa and raised this issue with him. He had just come from a meeting of the African Union at which, he stated, considerable pressure had been placed on the Sudanese Government to allow a United Nations force to enter. However, as I noted on my return home, it would take some time for a UN force to be deployed. As a result of the pledging conference at which Ireland dedicated more resources, substantial financial resources will be made available to AMIS to beef up its troop numbers. The difficulty lies in the short term. In a number of months time, a UN force might go in if allowed by the Sudanese Government, but the critical period for the people of Sudan, particularly those in the camps, is the next six months to one year.
I will raise this issue with the Sudanese Foreign Minister in New York when I attend the United Nations meeting. I will also raise it with the Chinese vice premier, whom I hope to meet in late September. The Deputy can rest assured that we are active in respect of this issue, given our history, the focus of our NGOs in this area and our visit to that area, which informed my thinking on the matter.
I welcome the Minister and thank him for keeping the committee up to date regarding ongoing issues in the Middle East. I am concerned by the remaining cluster bombs in southern Lebanon. The Minister stated that he is entering negotiations to seek a mandate to remove the danger, but the timescale must be considered, as the disruption suffered by the civilian population trying to return home is a serious issue. I hope Ireland will play a considerable role in pressing the Israelis to remove this danger. The Minister has taken this matter on board and I would like to hear his comments in that regard.
I welcome the Senator's comments and condemn the use by Israel of cluster bombs because their nature is to have an indiscriminate effect, particularly on civilians. Now that the ceasefire is in place and the Israelis have withdrawn, this is one of the sizable issues that must be dealt with by the Lebanese army, supported by UNIFIL and others. When we make our assessment of whether to send Irish troops, this issue will be to the fore.
Last week in Geneva, we joined with five other delegations — Austria, the Holy See, Mexico, New Zealand and Sweden — in urging a specific mandate for negotiations under the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons to have a legally binding instrument to address the humanitarian concerns posed by cluster bombs. This matter will be reviewed at the next review conference in November and, in conjunction with our co-sponsors, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Cluster Munitions Coalition, the NGOs dealing with these matters, we hope to press the issue.
I thank the Minister for appearing before the committee and speaking so candidly. The situation seems to have improved somewhat since our last meeting.
I will refer to a number of questions asked in the context of the General Affairs and External Relations Council. The conflict in Lebanon was sparked by the abduction of two Israeli soldiers. Will the Minister ask about the reasons behind a conflict of that magnitude whereby a sovereign state was invaded, civilians were indiscriminately bombed and cluster bombs were left behind? Why this disproportionate response? Is there any acknowledgement by the Israeli Government of ways of doing things without all-out war as a response to something that should not have happened? I welcome the lifting of the blockade, that UN troops are on the way and that Ireland has donated €4 million to the international community, which raised €1 billion.
The Lebanese Prime Minister, Mr. Siniora, specifically stated that he would like to see an Irish element in the force. Owing to our other commitments, Ireland could send only a small number of troops, if it sends any. To some extent it would be symbolic but Ireland has expertise and experience because of our past decades of involvement. Does the Minister think it likely that an Irish force will be sent?
Funding from the EU and the international community has not been channelled through the Palestine Government since the election of Hamas. In recognition of the Palestinian government of national unity, will the Minister raise the matter of channelling EU and other international funds directly through the government rather than bypassing the government, thereby undermining it?
Does the Minister have an idea of the result of the elections that took place two days ago in Montenegro as distinct from the validity of the elections?
More information has emerged about Guantanamo Bay and there have been admissions by the US authorities regarding prisons in EU countries. Countries identified as having been used for the imprisonment of people from Iraq on the way to the US are Bulgaria and Romania, two accession countries that will join the EU in January 2007. Can the Minister throw any light on this?
The Government would not send troops for symbolic reasons. It would send troops if they were required by the UN. Having been there for so many years Ireland has expertise such as geographic knowledge. Previously Ireland had a relatively large cohort within a small force in the area but this force will be much larger. The key question is whether a small number of Irish troops could fit into such a force. We are considering a number of options in conjunction with partners. We wish to be helpful and to assist. People such as the Lebanese Prime Minister would want us to be there. There is and always has been much goodwill towards the Irish in Lebanon because of our involvement for 23 years. We will make our decision in a calm and measured way with the full facts available to both the Government and the Oireachtas. Therefore, if our troops are killed at least we will have sent them in with full knowledge of what might happen.
The channelling of money to the government of national unity will be one of the key issues to be discussed during the coming weeks. The temporary measure in place to channel money is not ideal. However, it is designed to provide EU money to assist the ordinary people of Palestine. No one in the Oireachtas or any other parliament in western Europe would be happy if European taxpayers' money was channelled into a government or state where strong suspicions existed that the money would be used for violence.
We must be careful to ensure the money goes to the ordinary people of Palestine. On my first visit to meet the former Israeli Foreign Minister, he handed me a copy of the charter of Hamas, which clearly shows that the duty of anyone involved in Hamas is the destruction of Israel. From that perspective, one must not only understand Israel's point of view but also understand that if we assist people in Palestine it must be for humanitarian reasons only.
I have no information on Guantanamo Bay other than press reports. These matters must be considered not only in the context of the countries mentioned but also the ongoing investigations into so-called "black sites". As we have stated on many occasions, we will not allow this country to be used in connection with either "black sites" or extraordinary rendition.
I thank the Minister for his articulate explanation of what is happening in the Middle East. He touched on the tasks facing the EU during the coming year, particularly under the Finnish and German Presidencies. Is the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe up for discussion during the next six months? Will the matter be raised at the upcoming meeting? Is it confirmed that Romania and Bulgaria will join the EU on 1 January 2007? What is the position regarding Croatia and Turkey?
During the past two months, the European Parliament passed a resolution on fair trade. One of the objectives is to make Africa more wealthy in order to avoid conflict there. That will not happen by giving alms but through providing an opportunity to participate in the world market. The recent WTO talks failed. Will the Minister give an insight on what is happening on that matter? The European Parliament made an interesting proposal that fair trade products should get preferential treatment in terms of import duties or VAT in the European market. Is this matter likely to be discussed at the upcoming meeting? Will it be high on the agenda during the coming months?
Our position on the constitution is clear. A draft constitution was agreed which was a compromise. I have seen reports of the proposals made by various EU leaders but I do not think they are feasible. The constitution has to be treated as an agreement which was hammered out after very detailed negotiations and cherrypicking it will result in grave difficulties. However, the matter will be discussed over the coming months and a strong push will be made during the German Presidency.
No decision has been made on Romania and Bulgaria but we are assessing the situation in conjunction with our EU partners. To date, only Finland has indicated its willingness to permit citizens of the two states to immigrate without restrictions from day one. We have to consider the issue in terms of the dramatic figures on immigration to Ireland. There was surprise in the UK, where 500,000 people immigrated from the ten accession countries, yet at least 300,000 have come to Ireland. In Sweden, the only other country which allowed free access, the numbers of immigrants were in the region of 5,000. That indicates we have done more than any other member state for the new accession states. I have advised my colleagues at one of our informal meetings that it is up to other member states to break down their restrictions and they will have to do so anyway within a relatively short period of time.
With regard to Turkey, progress on negotiations is slow and it is envisaged that the country will not be ready to join the EU for a considerable time to come. Due to the difficulties arising in respect of General Gotovina, Croatia's timeframe for accession has slipped somewhat. However, the issue will be the subject of further negotiation between Croatia and the EU.
We are disappointed with the lack of movement by other blocs on the Doha Round of the WTO negotiations. I understand Senator Quinn's comments with regard to developing countries. We were insistent that the WTO negotiations had to be conducted in such a way that developing countries, and African countries in particular, should be given a fair deal on trade. At the same time, we must also look after the interests of Ireland and the developed world, in that some of the changes being pushed on us would have the effect of assisting large countries rather than the sub-Saharan countries we would like to target. Due to the impasse, we do not envisage much progress before the end of the year, which is unfortunate for the continent of Africa. However, we will continue to push as much we can for progress on the issue of fair trade for Africa.
I ask the Minister to enlarge upon the situation pertaining to Iran. It goes without saying that there are concerns with regard to the nuclear enrichment programme being pursued by the Iranians. As regards progress on the diplomatic front, obviously the UN Security Council is seriously concerned about it. At a European level, in terms of who is taking the lead role in this area, who has the best prospect of getting to the decision-makers in Iran? Perhaps the Minister will give us a brief outline of the position.
At the informal meeting in Lappeenranta last week, Javier Solana gave a full briefing to EU Foreign Ministers, including myself. There was some discussion. By and large, the member states were all in favour of the continuance of the EU three initiative in conjunction with other partners on the UN Security Council. The EU three comprise France, Germany and the UK.
As members will know, a very substantial package of measures across a broad spectrum — economic, nuclear, etc. — was put to the Iranians in exchange for understandings that while we respect their right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPT, to prosecute nuclear energy for civilian use, they would not use it for military purposes. As requested by the Iranians, that package of measures is secret. They gave an initial response on 22 August and have said there are still some issues to be dealt with.
Javier Solana was delegated on behalf of the EU to meet the Iranians and he did so last week. I understand both sides said those meetings were productive and further meetings will be held next week. There is a view among a number of EU member states and outside the EU that Iran has been given more than enough time, that all it is doing is, in effect, playing cat and mouse with the international community and that it is dragging out negotiations while at the same time continuing to develop its nuclear capability for military purposes.
We should continue with the diplomatic initiatives. I will meet Hans Blix when I leave this meeting in a couple of minutes and he is strongly of the view, which I share as somebody who represents a country with a very strong adherence to the NPT, that while we criticise some states for the proliferation of nuclear weapons, some of the countries which demand non-proliferation by other states do not disarm under the other side of the NPT. That is a point countries such as Ireland and others, including the country from which Hans Blix comes, Sweden, have articulated over the years and will continue to do so.
I thank the Minister.
The joint committee went into private session at 12.25 p.m. and adjourned at 12.35 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Wednesday, 27 September 2006.