Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 3 May 1989

Vol. 122 No. 14

Nobel Peace Prize for UN Peace-keeping Forces: Motion.

I move:

That Seanad Éireann offers its congratulations to the UNIFIL forces on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize and particularly notes the contribution of the Irish Defence Forces towards maintaining that peace in many parts of the world for the last 13 years.

The motion is in error in two places. It should read "congratulations to the United Nations Peace-keeping Forces" because they, in fact, and not the UNIFIL forces, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Secondly, the contribution of the Irish forces has been going on for 30 years.

The reason for putting down this motion is basically to offer congratulations to our soldiers who, over a period of 30 years have been involved in many parts of the world in a peace-keeping role. One must immediately ask why Irish soldiers are involved so much? It stems from our neutral position and from the fact that we are a relatively young country, obtaining our independence in 1921. We, therefore, know the problems that similar countries have and are continuing to have. If one looks at where these services have been given, one will see that it is to emerging countries, who are gaining their independence with all the resultant problems.

Since the Irish peace-keeping forces began service in June 1958, with the United Nations Observer Group in Lebanon, known as UNOGIL, members of the Permanent Defence Forces have contributed almost 32,000 tours of duty to 12 different missions worldwide. In that 30-year period Irish personnel with the United Nations have lost their lives on four missions: in the Congo where 26 people lost their lives, 16 in action; in Cyprus, where nine people lost their lives; in Palestine two were killed in action; in Lebanon 30 people have been killed, eight killed in action, and one is missing, presumed dead. Of those killed in Lebanon, five were from the 28th Infantry Battalion which is located in my own county. They were Private Philip Grogan who died on 10 July 1979, Private Hugh Doherty who died on 27 April 1981, Corporal Dermot McLoughlin who died on 10 January 1987, and most recently on 21 April 1989 Private Arm-strong and Private Walsh. Also dead from another battalion is Corporal Heneghan from Galway.

The general perception of our soldiers perhaps is that in a country like Ireland they do not have much to do as soldiers, but they have a vital role to play. In our country, if necessary, they can be called on to maintain peace. They are working, particularly those stationed in my own area along the Border, on an ongoing basis. Only recently, I realised that where we might have one garda at a checkpoint, we require four soldiers, not because it takes four soldiers to protect one garda but because one armed soldier could be easily accosted and perhaps lose the weapon, so it takes one to watch the other. They are playing a vital role along the Border, a role that all of us would wish would go away, but which is not going away, as yet.

There have been various ways of acknowledging the contribution made by our soldiers. This motion is just another one of those ways, that this House would recognise the contribution of those soldiers. The United Nations has issued various medals from time to time in recognition of service with the United Nations. The medal which Irish personnel have received for United Nations service has been of one design, that is a medal round in form bearing on the obverse the UN emblem and the letters "UN" and on the reverse the inscription "In the Service of Peace". The distinguishing feature in United Nations medals from mission to mission has been not the medal itself, which is uniform, but the suspension ribbon. These specifications are setermined by the Secretary General. The description of medal ribbons for United Nations peace-keeping missions in which Irish personnel have served is set out in the magazine An Cosantóir of 8 October 1988 and is as follows:

United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation in Palestine (UNTSO) — blue background, two narrow white stripes — UN colours.

United Nations Military Observation Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) — varying shades of green to indicate the Himalayan Range and Kashmir Valley with a white stripe to represent the snow-capped mountains. The UN is represented by a UN blue stripe on either side.

United Nations Observer Group in Lebanon (UNOGIL) — as for the UNTSO ribbon. The United Nations medal awarded for serving in the Congo was issued with a blue and white ribbon and Congo bar. However, in 1963, it was decided that a distinctive ribbon for service with ONUC be issued and a blue and green ribbon with a narrow white stripe was decided on.

There is the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority in West New Guinea (UNTEA) — the United Nations Force in Cyprus, United Nations India-Pakistan Observer Mission and the United Nations Emergency Force Middle East medals. There is also the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, the United Nations Headquarters in New York, the United Nations Good Offices Mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group. These are uniform medals given by the United Nations but thieir distinguishing mark is the various suspension ribbons that are designed in some way to reflect the areas in which the service was given and for which the medals were awarded.

The Government have awarded medals to 85 personnel of the Defence Forces in recognition of acts of gallantry and distinguished service associated with the United Nations service. I quote further from An Cosantóir dated 8 October 1988:

An Bonn Míleata Calmachte (BMC), the Military Medal for Gallantry, was instituted in 1948 and can be awarded in three classes.

The medal "may be awarded in recognition of the performance of any act of exceptional bravery or gallantry (other than one performed on war service) arising out of, or associated with, military service and involving risk to life or limb". To date, seven awards of this medal have been made, six 2nd Class and one 3rd Class. All but one were as a result of incidents associated with United Nations service.

The Distinguished Service Medal, was instituted in 1964 and can also be awarded in three classes. This medal "may be awarded in recognition of individual or associated acts of bravery, courage, leadership, resource or devotion to duty (other than any such acts or duty performed on war service) arising out of, or associated with, service in the Defence Forces and not meriting the award of An Bonn Míleata Calmachta". One hundred and two awards of this medal have been made. Eighty of these awards were as a result of United Nations service. As the time limit for this medal to be awarded is four years from the time of the incident to recommendation, it is possible for the entire Congo mission to be reviewed in the making of the awards.

Service with five separate United Nations Missions resulted in awards of medals for gallantry and distinguished service as follows:

ONUC — One 2nd Class Military Medal for Gallantry; Four 1st Class Distinguished Service Medals (DSM); Thirty 2nd Class DSMs; Thirty-one 3rd Class DSMs.

UNFICYP — One 1st Class DSM; One 2nd Class DSM.

UNTSO — One 2nd Class Military Medal fo Gallantry; One 2nd Class DSM.

UNEF — One 2nd Class DSM — this medal was awarded for services with UNTSO also.

UNIFIL — Four 2nd Class Military Medals for Gallantry; Two 1st Class DSMs; Six 2nd Class DSMs; Three 3rd Class DSMs.

The award of the Military Medal for Gallantry to Tropper Anthony Browne is perhaps the most "famous" of all these awards. It was awarded in recognition of his exceptional bravery which resulted in his death at Niemba, Republic of the Congo on 8 November, 1960. The citation to the award was:

“he endeavoured to create an opportunity to allow an injured comrade to escape by firing his Gustaf thereby drawing attention to his own position which he must have been aware would endanger his life; he had a reasonable opportunity of escaping because he was NOT wounded but chose to remain with an injured comrade.”

The medal was presented to Trooper Brown's father, Mr. John Browne, by the then Taoiseach Mr. Sean Lemass, TD at a ceremony in Collins Barracks on the first anniversary of the Niemba Ambush, 8 November, 1961.

My reason for saying all of these things is that these are various ways that recognition has been given to soldiers for their work, by the United Nations and by the Government.

On Wednesday, 12 October 1988 at the Ministerial review of the 64th Infantry Battalion, 57th Unit of the Defence Forces to serve overseas with the United Nations peace-keeping force, the Minister for Defence announced the Government's decision to award a medal for peace-keeping service with the United Nations. All personnel who have qualified for the United Nations medal will become eligible for this new medal which will be entitled the Service Medal for peace-keeping with the United Nations. The timing of this announcement, following closely on the award for the Nobel Peace Prize for 1988, has enhanced official recognition of members of the Permanent Defence Force in their contribution to peace-keeping duties with the United Nations worldwide.

The award of the first service medal for peace-keeping duties with the United Nations is still some six to nine months away. The necessary regulations and procedures had to be drawn up and the medal design will shortly be going out to tender for manufacture. At present there are some 8,000 serving personnel who are eligible for the medal and it is likely that approximately an additional 300 personnel will become eligible each year on having completed their first tour of duty with the United Nations. The medal should be awarded only once to an individual as it is deemed to be the national recognition of those on peace keeping service with the United Nations regardless of the number of tours of duty and the number of different missions he might serve with. As of now, it is not known how many ex-members of the Defence forces qualify for the medal as there is sizeable duplication in the tours of duty. There is the added difficulty of a change of home address. In the case of deceased personnel, it is intended to give the medal to the next of kin. The Minister has now decided to award medals to people who are serving with the United Nations. Therefore, all in all, the services of our peace keeping forces abroad are being officially recognised. The Taoiseach, in a letter dated 5 October 1988, to Lieutenant General T. O'Neill, the Chief of Staff, said:

I wish to convey to you and, through you, to all personnel of our Defence Forces my warmest congratulations on the announcement of the award of the 1988 Nobel Peace Prize to the United Nations Peace-Keeping Forces.

The members of the Defence Forces who participated in UN missions down the years have shown bravery, integrity and dedication. Some have laid down their lives in the cause of peace. They share in the honour of this Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the UN forces in which they have served with distinction for almost 30 years. The country is justly proud of them.

The Government are deeply appreciative of all the Defence Forces have done to advance the cause of peace and the standing of Ireland throughout the world. Please convey our best wishes to all members of the Defence Forces at present on UN service and to their comrades at home who have served with the UN in the past.

Will the Senator identify what he is quoting from?

An Cosantóir dated October 1988. Our motion seeks to offer congratulations to all of these people, past and present. The United Nations have their own medals as a method of honouring the forces. The Government have distinguished gallantry medals, the present Minister has instituted new medals and the Taoiseach has offered letters of congratulations. All of these honours are very poor recognition, if we cannot honour our soldiers here and now by offering them decent terms of employment.

Acting Chairman

We will have to keep to the motion. That is a separate item and we cannot discuss it now.

You anticipated that quickly.

Acting Chairman

The first sentence indicated it.

These congratulations are no good to people if we cannot, and I think you will agree with me, recognise them at home by giving them that standard of living. For example, I wonder do many people know that when a soldier completes his service, unlike other groups he does not receive one and a half times his salary as gratuity, and that he can get as little as £7,000 or £8,000.

Acting Chairman

If you want to discuss conditions and pay, that would come under a different motion. This is a motion to congratulate them.

It is relevant to the contribution. What we are saying is that they have made a commendable contribution, despite the fact that their pay and working conditions are not good. You have allowed me, a Leas-Chathaoirleach, to quote directly from the Taoiseach's letter, you have allowed me to quote——

Acting Chairman

We are talking about the UNIFIL forces now and not about the Army at home.

The force must be at home before they can go abroad. You will be aware that personnel from Finance, Defence, Labour and the Office of the Taoiseach met and produced——

Acting Chairman

We cannot allow that. We have to keep to the motion. You should have worded your motion differently if you wanted to debate Army conditions at home. The motion is about the UNIFIL forces.

May I ask whether you consider that their present pay structures are adequate for——

Acting Chairman

That is not my function. I am here to see that every speaker keeps to the motion. If you had included that in your motion then we could allow you to speak on it. You know the rules of this House better than I do.

Is there a method whereby I could add an addendum to the motion?

Acting Chairman

No, not at this stage. We have to keep to the motion:

That Seanad Éireann offers its congratulations to the UNIFIL Forces on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize and particularly notes the contribution of the Irish Defence Forces towards maintaining that peace in many parts of the world for the last 13 years.

There is nothing in the motion about the Army at home, so you must talk about the Army service away from home because that is what your motion says.

When our Army personnel are abroad I wonder how their levels of pay compare with the levels of pay before they leave? I will not obstruct the Chair's ruling. All I am going to say is that it is sad that soldiers who have given up to 40 years service to the Army, at home and on peace-keeping duty in many parts of the world — 32,000 tours of duty in 12 different missions — find that their retirement pension can be as low as £70 a week and that the gratuity can be as low as £6,000.

Acting Chairman

If the Senator had wanted to make those points he should have ordered his motion differently and then we could allow it to be debated. The rules of the House do not permit wandering from the agenda.

The terms of the motion are congratulatory. We on this side of the House warmly congratulate them, and I am sure there will be total agreement from the other side of the House, but all of the warmth of our congratulations, the warmth of the Taoiseach's letter and the award of the medals cannot possibly compensate for the conditions and pay at present.

At this stage I wish formally to second the motion and reserve my right to speak at a later stage.

I support the motion before us. When I saw the motion I was a little suspicious of the motives of those who brought it before this House. I was not going to mention what happened in this House on 4 October, but I am afraid that Senator Loughrey has whetted my appetite for a debate on this particular matter. I now quote from what I said on the Order of Business of 4 October 1988:

Before we go into the business for today, I think it would be appropriate that we should pass to the Minister for Defence and to the Chief of Staff of the Army our sincere congratulations to the United Nations peacekeeping troops on gaining the signal honour of having presented to them the Nobel Prize for peace. I think it was an inspired choice.

I went on from there. That motion of congratulations was seconded by Senator Hogan from Fine Gael and he joined with me in passing the vote of congratulations to the UNIFIL troops. Senator Loughrey has attempted to bring into this congratulatory motion something which I think is not appropriate to this House. I do not think it is appropriate that on a motion of congratulations with which this House has already agreed that a note of contention should be brought in which is not relevant to the debate before the House. If Senator Loughrey had wanted to have a debate on Army pay and conditions we would have accommodated him here and we would have had to answer some of the questions and queries raised. It would appear from the final comments of Senator Loughrey that the motion was not brought in to congratulate but as a means of going into other areas of the status and the conditions of the Army.

The UNIFIL force is not an Irish Army force; it is a United Nations force. The Irish personnel are seconded from the Army. They are paid for by the United Nations. They are paid by the Army and, in addition, get United Nations service pay. They remain members of the Irish Army. Having criticised to a degree some of the things that have been said by Senator Loughrey, I would have to join with him in congratulating the Irish troops who are serving with UNIFIL, and indeed all the other troops who have served in Lebanon.

As I have said, the use of UNIFIL troops was an inspired choice. I have seen the UNIFIL troops at work. I have been in southern Lebanon on a number of occasions and have seen that in the area where UNIFIL troops are based there is normality in life that is not present in any other part of that desperately war-torn country. You see new houses being built, children playing in the streets, people walking on the lanes and streets at night. It does not happen anymore in other parts of Lebanon.

It did not come about by anything other than the dedication of troops from many nations who are willing to be a buffer between the state of Israel and Lebanon. Of course, one of the problems is that they are in a no-win situation. Their mandate from the United Nations suggested that they were to be on the border between Israel and Lebanon and, unfortunately, because of the intransigence of the Israeli State they are not allowed to fulfil their mandate. There is what the Israelis would like to call a buffer zone between the United Nations legal borders of the State of Israel and Lebanon — the buffer zone extends about 17 to 20 kilometres into Lebanon and it is at the end of this 17 or 20 kilometres range that the UNIFIL force is basically serving. It is a peace-keeping and peace enforcing force. These are difficult concepts.

What is the difference between peace enforcement and peace-keeping? The UNIFIL troops have attempted at all times to be a peace enforcement and peace-keeping body. They have been under extreme pressure for many years, in particular, from the Israeli Defence Forces and the LAUI, Lebanese armed and uniformed by Israel. They have also been under severe pressure from Lahad, the SLA and every type of gangster who was allowed to be brought in and paid for by the Israelis.

Where I was staying in Tibnin, one evening I asked somebody to give me a call at 5 a.m. the next morning and I was told their would be no need to give me a call because the IDF would come through with their water carriers for the LAUI and the IDF and would start spraying the wadi. I thought that when they were coming through with water trucks they would be spraying the wadi with water but they were spraying it with machineguns and anything they had on their water carriers and tanks. They considered that by spraying the sides of the hills, it gave them a certain protection, which protection they did not need. They were doing this very early in the morning in an area where the planting of tobacco is extremely important. Tobacco has to be planted in these areas early in the morning when there is a dew on the ground. It is the only time the tobacco plantations can be worked and spraying them meant spraying with bullets. Unfortunately many people were killed in this operation.

The troops who have gone from Ireland to serve in UNIFIL are a credit to this country. They are a credit to the training they have got in the Army. They are a credit to themselves and their families. The Israelis do not like the Irish troops and the reason is that the Irish troops do their job very professionally. They are doing their job as far as is possible according to what was set up by the United Nations.

The motion also congratulates the Forces for maintaining peace in many parts of the world. In recent times — within the last six weeks — I have had talks with Irish troops serving the peace-keeping mission between Iran and Iraq. On the borders between Iran and Iraq there is a peace but it could evaporate overnight. They are working extremely hard. I was in the Kurdish area of Iraq — in Sulamineya — six weeks ago and there is absolutely no doubt but that they are maintaining observation of the very delicate peace that has come about between Iran and Iraq. The Irish force is extremely well thought of in that area, as they have been in other areas.

The United Nations troops on border duty on the Iranian side of the border are not getting the degree of co-operation from the Iranian Government that they should. It is in the interest of Iran just as much as of Iraq that peace be maintained. The United Nations Forces are in the area to observe, to report on incidents and whether these incidents are caused by one side or the other. Friends of mine have served in Afghanistan. The Irish Army troops in Afghanistan have been well received. They are well trained and are a credit to the United Nations efforts in support of peace. Unfortunately, over the past 30 years a large number of our Irish troops were killed in an attempt to maintain peace. Whether they served in the Congo, Cyprus, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq or Iran, they have acquitted themselves extremely well.

Unfortunately, a large number of families in this country have lost dear ones often in causes they cannot understand. Recently when Mr. Jack Heneghan from County Mayo expressed his regret and sorrow at the death of his son, he queried the reason that our troops were in Lebanon. He had a right to query it and it was natural for him to do so. I would say to him and to the other families who have been so tragically bereaved that the Irish troops serving with the United Nations forces for peace have been exemplary and have protected many thousands, and it may run into millions, of people who might otherwise have found themselves in a conflagration or in worse war conditions than they have had to put up with.

We still have an Irishman serving as an observer in what is probably one of the worst cities for violence in the world at present, Beirut. We wish him and the other Irish soldiers serving the cause of peace continued success. I sincerely hope the Irish nation remains proud of the service that has been given by members of the Defence Forces in the cause of peace. I think at this stage we should also congratulate the members of the Garda Síochána who have gone out to Namibia and wish them every success in their difficult mission.

Service with UNIFIL is the main reason the United Nations troops got the Nobel Peace Prize, and I think we should ask countries that have an influence with Lebanon to cease to supply war materials to warring factions within the borders of Lebanon. It is a magnificent country made up of Sunni, Muslim, Maronite, Catholic, whether they be Roman, Greek, Orthodox, or people of no religion. Lebanon is a founder member country of the United Nations and in this very difficult situation, I think it should get every support possible from the community of nations, so that it will survive as a member of the community of nations, the United Nations. We appeal here this evening to the countries who are supplying arms and materials for war to cease doing so, to let the Lebanese decide their own future. If that happens the efforts of UNIFIL over the past number of years will have been a success.

We, of course, support the motion before the House this evening.

Mheas mé go rabhamar ar ais in áit éigin eile ar feadh tamaillín ansin. Tá an-áthas orm an deis a bheith agam cuidiú leis an rún atá os comhair an Tí, an rún comhghairdis le fórsaí agus trúpaí na Násiún Aontaithe as Duais Nobel a ghnóthú. Is iontach an rud é go bhfuair na trúpaí, an grúpa daoine sin atá ag iarraidh an tsíocháin a choinneáil ar fud an domhain, an Duais seo agus an pháirt ghníomhach a bhí ag ár muintir, inár bhfórsaí cosanta féin, leis na trúpaí sin. Sin, b'fhéidir, an chuid is tábhachtaí den rún, ar bhealach, an bhaint atá ag ár bhfórsaí cosanta féin leo, ní hé, ceapaim, le trí bliana déag anuas; it must have been a mistake, or perhaps I misheard Senator Loughrey say 13 years, because I think it must be nearer to 30 years since we first became involved with the United Nations troops. I remember the tragedy in the Congo. I remember coming up to Dublin to see the victims of the Niemba ambush the very day they were buried.

I welcome the motion of congratulations before the House even though, as Senator Lanigan has said, such a congratulatory message was sent previously. It is a good thing that we take cognisance of the importance of the UNIFIL troops, and more especially of the part played for nearly 30 years by our own troops in the forces. It is important that we take a certain pride in their achievements. We see the Army's role at times as standing at banks and guarding money being transferred from one place to the other. We should see them in a different image and light——

Acting Chairman

Please stay with the motion.

I know you are a very strict, a Leas-Chathaoirleach, and I will keep strictly to the motion. In UNIFIL, we see our Army at work, work at which they are proficient and professional. We take a pride in it. The whole nation takes pride in our forces abroad. It is perhaps the training, the discipline and the professionalism of our troops that has won the admiration of the other troops with whom they serve and the commanders by whom they are led. We should add that several commanders from Ireland have been in charge of UN troops abroad.

As I said previously on a motion on our neutrality, the fact that we are a neutral country gives us an image and a standing in world affairs far above what we could aspire to having regard to our size. The fact that we are a neutral country gives our Defence Forces and the people we send to UNIFIL a certain standing and they are appreciated much more on that account. We passed unanimously a motion on neutrality and I think that helps us and our forces abroad.

It is important that we realise the type of mission to which our forces are sent when they become part of the UNIFIL. They are there on a peace mission, keeping the peace in war areas, in circumstances which are probably unbelievably hard, maybe incapable of solution, something that would remind us of that other area in our own country that seems almost incapable of solution at present. It is important that they are recognised in these countries as a non-confrontational and a non-colonising force.

It is recognised that we are the only State in the European Community that was not a colonial force and that we suffered from colonialism. This is very important in our international role abroad, and particularly in our role outside the European Community. It is important as well that these forces are not seen as an occupying force but as helping the people in whatever area they are sent.

One of the most important things that our Defence Forces have done in UNIFIL is that they have established a liaison with the local people. This has come across very much, especially in Lebanon at present. When things get difficult, all the reports show that they have established a relationship with the local people who look to them for protection, and see them as their protectors. This is very important for our own forces and reflects credit on them and the nation in general.

When I see the work being done by our forces abroad as part of UNIFIL the thought sometimes strikes me, as I am sure it strikes many others also, as to what might have happened had we been successful in the late sixties and the early seventies, especially when the present President of our country, Dr. Hillery, was Minister for Foreign Affairs and appealed to the United Nations for a UN force in the North. The "might have beens" of history are things we can never bring to a conclusion. Would the situation today in the North be at least somewhat better had there been a force such as the forces we send out to other difficult spots in the world brought into the North 20 years ago? The question again arises, since we have been so efficient in sending our people out to these other troubled spots, is it perhaps time to ask the British not to use the old cliché that it is an internal problem? Our own army would not be involved, but should we again ask the United Nations to provide a force in the North which might help bring about peace and reconstruction there?

Debate adjourned.
Barr
Roinn