I am pleased to participate again this year in the discussions on the Votes for Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation. When we met for the Estimates last year, the Select Committee was still in its early days. Its deliberations over the past 12 months have established a key role for it and have helped to ensure that important foreign policy issues receive the attention and informed debate they deserve. My Department has warmly welcomed the opportunity to participate in many of the committee's discussions and we look forward to the continued interchange of information and ideas.
There have been some significant milestones over the past year and I will identify a few. The Maastricht Treaty, with all its economic and political implications, has come into force. Agreement has been reached with the applicant countries on the terms of their accession to the EU. On Northern Ireland, the Downing Street Declaration has given new impetus to the search for peace and highlighted as never before the overriding importance of bringing an end to violence and terrorism. On development co-operation, we have honoured the commitment in the Programme for a Partnership Government to increase substantially our development aid budget.
It has been a year of vivid and contrasting images. The scenes of unrestrained joy in South Africa this week were moving and unforgettable. New hope for the Middle East emerged with the historic handshake on the White House lawn last September. Important, if less spectacular progress was made in a number of other conflicts around the world.
Regrettably, the darker images are there also. The ongoing tragedy of the former Yugoslavia is etched on the conscience of the international community. In the past few weeks, the terrible scale of the carnage in Rwanda has been sickening to contemplate. The litany of places of suffering and human rights violations is a long and grim one.
In the attempt to build a new world order, the international community is grappling with the most fundamental dilemmas in areas such as peace-keeping, human rights observance and how to tackle hunger and deprivation on the vast scale necessary. There is no monopoly of wisdom in any of these areas and that is why I believe so strongly in the need for wide consultation in charting a way forward for our foreign policy. As the committee knows, I intend to produce a White Paper on Foreign Policy early next year. I would particularly value the input of the committee and have written to the chairman, Deputy Lenihan, on this matter. So as to ensure the widest possible contributions, I have contacted about 70 organisations around the country inviting their views and my Department is working on the organisation of a number of seminars in the latter part of this year.
On the 1994 Estimates, the committee will appreciate that the Foreign Affairs Vote, accounting this year for about half of 1 per cent of the Government's annual non-capital expenditure, represents a relatively small slice of Government spending. Given the limited size of the allocation, we have had to intensify our efforts and resolve to keep the Department's operations and activities under constant financial review to ensure that whatever is spent is spent effectively, to best advantage and with maximum efficiency in resource allocation.
Most of the allocation — over 96 per cent — is required for the Department's administrative budget. This covers salaries of staff at headquarters and at missions abroad as well as travel, accommodation, communications, equipment and supplies. The demands on our limited resources are increasing, both because of an expanded international workload and because the cost increases we must bear in running our missions and conducting our operations abroad are in many cases well in excess of the prevailing levels at home. We are nevertheless complying with the obligation to achieve real savings annually on our core administrative budget.
The basic requirement that any additional activity — including, for example, the opening of a new mission abroad — must be achieved within existing resources is increasingly confronting us with very hard choices in the ordering of our priorities. As part of the selective and necessarily modest expansion of our small diplomatic network, I am delighted that South Africa has now been added to the countries in which Ireland has a resident mission. The committee is also aware that last year we opened a resident mission in Helsinki, in view of that country's application for membership of the European Union.
In relation to the very small proportion of the Vote accounted for by programme expenditure, I am happy that despite our overall budgetary difficulties it has proved possible this year to provide increases in a number of the subheads concerned. I am sure that members will particularly welcome the increased resources being allocated for North-South and Anglo-Irish co-operation in view of the very valuable work being done by the organisations assisted.
The conflict in Northern Ireland continues to cast a dark cloud over the life and development of this nation and to sap the energy and spirit of all our people. I am absolutely convinced that a resolution of that conflict would release a powerful force for growth in every part of this island and I am determined to do everything I can to secure such a resolution. No matter how long it takes, no matter how many times we have to restart our efforts, we will never give up the attempt to build a peaceful and secure future for all the people of this island. The Joint Declaration signed last December has finally dismantled all arguments based on the use or support of violence. For paramilitaries on all sides it sets out a simple choice—murder or democracy. For the vast majority of the Irish people there is only one possible choice and only one possible course for the paramilitaries to take.
They say they need clarification. So be it. Both Governments have made strenuous efforts, consistent with principle, to clear up any possible misunderstanding and to clarify and explain any aspect of the declaration that might cause difficulty. Both Governments have said that they are prepared to address any further realistic request. We must lay to rest any notion that progress towards peace is stalled because the Government somehow failed to meet any genuine request for an explanation of their policy or position.
Neither Government will compromise in any way any of the principles set out in the declaration. However, I know that every Member of the House will wish to be absolutely sure that no stone was left unturned in the effort to explain and to clarify so that the principles of self determination and consent underpinning the declaration are fully understood. For that reason I feel sure that every Member of the House would welcome one final effort to provide any genuine clarification sought or needed.
Side by side with the effort to remove violence from the conflict, we are also working with the British Government to try to build a framework within which a deep and lasting accommodation of the conflict itself can be developed. That framework would aim to translate the principles of the declaration into agreed political structures.
Building such a framework is no easy task. The best efforts of the two Governments will be required, with openness and imagination and a firm sense of purpose and vision, if we are to put something together that can both challenge and attract the political parties in Northern Ireland. We want to attract them into using the democratic process to build something that will make the future secure for everyone. We want to challenge them into using rights and identities, heritage and aspirations, as building bricks rather than as barriers.
Officials of both Governments are at present engaged in an intensive process aimed at building that framework. They are working, tragically, against the background of the recent sickening upsurge in terror, murder and suffering. Not only does this recent spate of violence make both Governments more determined than ever to ensure that violence will never prevail, it also reminds us ever more forcibly of the obligation on us to put aside preconceived ideas of how progress can be built and to bend all our efforts to try to arrive at a deep and well balanced settlement.
While the prospects for peace and political agreement are at the top of my agenda, I am continuing to make full use of the Anglo-Irish Conference and its mechanisms to work for progress on a wide range of issues to which the Government attaches profound importance. These include public confidence in the security forces and the administration of justice in Northern Ireland, parity of esteem between the two traditions in Northern Ireland and North-South co-operation in the economic and social sphere. I am deeply committed to making progress under the Anglo-Irish Agreement in relation to these matters for the benefit of all the people of Ireland.
In relation to the European Union, the immediate focus is on completing the current enlargement process. Ireland for its part worked hard towards achieving a successful conclusion of the negotiations. As the committee knows, there is a long history of mutually friendly relations with the accession countries and we share a similarity of views on a whole range of issues on the European and international agenda. I have no doubt that their accession on 1 January next will help strengthen the Union as we face the challenges of the coming century.
It is also incumbent on us to begin now the necessary process of deliberation and reflection in preparation for the Intergovernmental Conference in 1996, when important policy areas will be reviewed. We have to address the question of the kind of Europe we want, post-Maastricht, and how this might best be achieved. Institutional change, for instance, will clearly be necessary to cope with changing needs, including those arising from future enlargements; but it will be essential to get the balance right and to preserve the principle of partnership that has been the real success of the Union to date.
The question of the further enlargement of the Union must also be addressed. The European Council — indeed the Maastricht Treaty itself— has recognised that enlargement cannot stop with our EFTA neighbours but must in time be open, as of right, to other Europeans who are ready and able to take part in building a viable Union.
The year 1996 will also bring a review of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. I know that this is a matter of deep interest to the committee and it will be one of the central themes of the White Paper. The fluidity of the present "security architecture" in Europe was emphasised this week when Sweden and Finland joined NATO's "Partnership of Peace Initiative" and a number of former Warsaw Pact countries became "associate partners" in the Western European Union.
Ireland will of course be deeply involved in the 1996 negotiations and ultimately the Irish people will decide whether or not Ireland should take part in any arrangements agreed. Although it would be premature at this stage to predict the precise shape of the Union's future defence arrangements, it might be useful to sketch out some of the considerations which will be taken into account.
First, the policy will need to be based on a broad definition of security interests, including non-proliferation, conflict prevention, peacekeeping, as well as human rights and economic and environmental security. Security in the new Europe is indivisible. It must be based on an up-to-date and relevant assessment of Europe's security needs. This will entail looking beyond the threats of the Cold War era to the new risks arising from our contemporary situation. Such as minorities issues, ethnic unrest and border difficulties. It will need to be responsive to the need for inclusiveness, partnership and co-operation. As I have said before, we must, above all, not reconstruct old divisions or rebuild old walls on our continent.
I mentioned earlier the ongoing crisis in former Yugoslavia. Last month's violent events in Gorazde represented an unwelcome setback to the peace process. We must not, however, allow this to deflect our attention from what has been achieved since the beginning of the year. The major conflict in Bosnia over the last nine months — that between the Croats and Muslims in central Bosnia — has been brought to an end. While still besieged, Sarajevo is at least no longer being shelled; a ceasefire in Croatia is holding and forces are withdrawing from the confrontation lines there. It is on these successes that we must now build. The European Union, Russia, the US and the UN must now press for a general ceasefire and for an urgent return to negotiation of an overall settlement.
Ireland is actively engaged in the European Union's efforts to bring peace to the region. The International conference on former Yugoslavia continues to provide the framework for a negotiated settlement for the problems of the Yugoslav region. European Union member states are contributing some 15,000 personnel to UNPROFOR. Approximately 65 per cent of the total cost of the humanitarian aid operation has been provided by the European Union and its member states. At the request of the Bosnian Muslims and Croats, the European Union has agreed in principle to administer the town of Mostar.
The committee is fully familiar with Ireland's contribution on the ground; 38 members of the Defence Forces are serving with UNPROFOR, the European Union monitor mission and the European Union task force on humanitarian aid. Irish personnel are also serving with the CSCE sanctions assistance missions which are deployed in the area to bolster the implementation of the sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro. In addition, we are providing assistance to the victims of the conflict — some £1.7 million to date by way of humanitarian aid. We have given shelter to refugees and medical care for the wounded and we are supporting the work of the international tribunal to prosecute the perpetrators of war crimes.
Unfortunately, Bosnia is not the only place where people are dying at the hands of their neighbours. There are many such places — far too many — but one stands out by virtue of the savagery of the conflict which has occurred there. I refer to the carnage and anarchy in Rwanda. I am aware that the committee has been actively considering what action the international community might take in the face of the tragedy and the contribution that Ireland itself might make and I have noted the terms of the resolution finalised by the committee at its meeting yesterday afternoon.
I strongly support the efforts of President Mwinyi of Tanzania and of the Secretary General of the Organisation of African Unity, Mr. Salim Ahmed Salim, to mediate in the Rwandan crisis. As I said on the adjournment debate on 5 May, the United Nations and the OAU and the countries in the region must make every effort to help the two warring parties in Rwanda agree to a ceasefire. The Security Council should review the mandate of UNAMIR and should also consider the application of an arms embargo to Rwanda. This action should be taken in addition to the increase in humanitarian aid in the area. I would also support a visit to the area by the UN Commissioner for Human Rights and an early meeting of the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. Ireland has given over £500,000 from the emergency humanitarian assistance fund to help the victims of the conflict.
I referred earlier to the situation in the Middle East and South Africa as providing some points of light in a rather sombre international landscape. The signing of the declaration of principles on interim self-government arrangements by Israel and the PLO in Washington last September and last week's agreement in Cairo on interim Palestinian autonomy have been the most important positive developments in the region for decades.
Ireland fully supports the Middle East peace process — politically and economically. Our UNIFIL troop contingent — this country's largest contribution to UN peacekeeping — has been maintained since 1978. We have more than doubled our aid contribution to the West Bank and Gaza in 1994 to US$1.2 million or £830,000. We have also offered to train members of the new Palestinian police force at the Garda Training College in Templemore. Ireland is also participating in the five working groups established in the multilateral track of the Middle East peace process, which deal broadly with regional economic, security and environmental concerns and with refugees.
The inauguration of Mr. Nelson Mandela as President of South Africa on Tuesday was one of the great and uplifting events of this century. Ireland demonstrated support for last month's elections by sending over 100 observers to the country — of which 22 were Members of the Oireachtas, including some from this committee — to participate in various monitoring missions, including the European Union Observer Mission. I was happy to visit South Africa earlier this year in support of the peace process and for talks with the parties involved. Over the period ahead Ireland will continue to develop its relations with the new South Africa and will join with its partners in the EU in helping with the reintegration of South Africa into the international community.
Subheads A and B of the International Co-operation Vote deal with our contributions to international organisations. The principal component here remains our contribution to the UN; whether the estimated provision of £5.73 million will prove sufficient will not be clear until later this year. The dramatic growth in peacekeeping expenditure by the UN in recent years has made it almost impossible to forecast accurately the extent of our assessed contribution to the peacekeeping budget.
Events over the past year in the former Yugoslavia and Somalia have influenced the continuing debate about the peacekeeping role of the United Nations. I am aware that this question is under active examination at the UN Sub-Committee of the Committee and I look forward to seeing its final report in due course. The optimism of just a year or two ago is now tempered by a more cautious and critical approach. The continuing financial problems faced by the UN have also contributed to the sense of uncertainty.
There are now 18 UN operations in the field with nearly 80,000 peacekeepers and associated personnel deployed worldwide, including about 900 Irish men and women who serve in ten of these operations. The cost of this global commitment is running at about $3 billion annually, of which Ireland's share this year is estimated at about £4.7 million. A number of lessons have already been drawn by member states as experiences of UNOSOM II in Somalia and UNPROFOR in the former Yugoslavia are absorbed. I particularly welcome the renewed emphasis on traditional peacekeeping which is a feature of the most recent extension of the UNOSOM II mandate. Ireland is now the only western country and member state of the EU still serving with UNOSOM.
Yet peacekeeping is not the only subject of debate in the UN as it prepares to celebrate its 50th anniversary next year and we in Ireland our 40th year as a member state. The question of institutional reform is also to the fore. Ireland has already submitted proposals designed to enhance the representative charcter of the Security Council and is working to secure greater accountability by the Council to the UN membership generally. We strongly believe, however, that any proposals in this regard must not result in any impairment of the Council's effectiveness.
The current debate on this issue involves a fundamental review of all aspects of the Security Council, with literally hundreds of proposals on the table. It will only be possible to make a commitment to detailed proposals when the picture of what is beneficial to the UN and to Ireland and feasible within the constraints of the Charter have become clearer. Moreover, to make a firm commitment now could hinder our capacity to play a mediating role in the debate, which countries like Ireland are well equipped to do. I intend to announce shortly the memberhip of a national committee to prepare our own programme of events to mark the 50th anniversary of the UN in 1995.
Subheads C to J of the International Co-operation Vote relate to development co-operation and there are large increases in most of the subheads. These increases are the tangible proof of the Government's solidarity with those who live in poverty and need throughout the developing world. They show that we have not reneged on our pledge to increase our official development assistance substantially. In 1993 ODA was increased by £13 million compared to the previous year; in the Estimates for 1994 we are providing a further increase of £17 million. This means that funding for development assistance has increased by some £30 million since this Government took office. That is a significant increase which will be welcomed by members of this committee.
Given the expansion of the aid programme and the calls for a policy statement on development co-operation, I felt it was appropriate to set out our plans in public. Last July I launched the strategy plan which detailed the ways in which it was proposed that the expanded aid programme could be implemented. I am happy to say that the strategy plan received support across a broad spectrum in the Dáil and from development experts. Work is now well under way to implement the provisions of the strategy plan. My colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, will provide details of the activities we are engaged in under the various subheads when he speaks about the International Co-operation Vote.
I would like to say something about the philosophy which underlines our approach to development co-operation. Increased funding for ODA will bring our performance to a level which is on a par with that of our European partners. The strategy plan spells out the sectors and the manner in which the money will be spent. I am aiming for transparency as to how the ODA money is spent and to return a sense of ownership of the aid programme to the public and, especially, to the practitioners of development co-operation. This I believe we are doing.
That is by no means all there is to development co-operation. It is time to take a hard look at our relationship with the developing world, to ask ourselves what we hope to achieve and to subject even our most cherished views to careful scrutiny. Development co-operation does not exist in isolation but is part of the fabric of international relations and must be considered in that context. A section of the forthcoming White Paper on Foreign Policy will be devoted to development co-operation and the nongovernmental organisations, which have built up so much experience in this field, will be among those I will consult before the White Paper is drawn up.
The successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round must constitute one of the most significant events in the world economy in recent years. The OECD has estimated that net world welfare will increase by $270 billion by 2002 through the implementation of the Uruguay Round. Such a level of growth should prove to be of importance to the European Union in its task of boosting employment and in consolidating and improving the situation of its citizens. On the bilateral front, the promotion of Ireland's trade and other economic interests abroad remains a key objective of my Department and its mission abroad. Working closely with other Government Departments and with the State promotional agencies, we are ensuring that our diplomatic network is fully exploited to promote trade, investment and tourism.
I am acutely conscious that we are entering a period in which a number of issues which are crucial to the future of this island and its place in Europe and the wider world require to be seriously and honestly debated and necessary decisions taken. The committee is already deeply engaged in examining many of these questions and I look forward to its continuing contribution. I will be happy to answer any questions which the committee may have with regard to the Votes here presented.
