Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The chemical weapons issue has taken the focus and the media attention away from conventional weapons. Perhaps that is the way it should be, but, as we discuss this conflict, up to 1,400 people are being killed every day with conventional weapons. Given the impotence of the European Union and the United Nations, does the Tánaiste agree that essentially the solution will come from the United States and Russia?

Presumably Russia is conditioned or hardened by its own experience of fundamentalism in Chechnya and would seem to be determined not to facilitate the "rebels". Given the sophistication of Western intelligence with things in the air, spying and everything, nobody seems to be openly telling us the relative strengths of the free Syrian army vis-à-visthe strength of the "Al-Qaeda jihadists". Does the Tánaiste have any idea of the geopolitical, military combinations at play in the region?

With the focus now on chemical weapons, the regime is clearly rebuilding its army. We know of the involvement of the Iranians, which has been there since the beginning. We know that the Russians have publicly volunteered to tell the world that they will arm President Assad, whose side is possibly getting stronger and the opposition getting weaker - we do not know. The Tánaiste is a politician and not a military expert. Is anybody capable of giving us an outline of what is happening on the ground? Is the West slightly hypocritical in acknowledging the strength of the jihadists, Al-Qaeda and the fundamentalists, whom we do not want to win? As a Christian West we do not want to see the Palestinians or the Christians slaughtered by those who would proclaim a Muslim state and are happy, in a sense, to hope President Assad's secularist form of a Muslim state would survive. While I know the Tánaiste is not a military man, perhaps he could help us.