Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Yes, what work is being done on the detention centres and on ensuring the Libyan coastguard does not return people to official or unofficial detention centres that are not fit for purpose, that are in industrial units and that house up to 2,000 people with no proper sanitation or food? It has been pointed out that some of those being returned then end up on another boat within a week, which suggests there is some skulduggery behind those running the detention centres or public sales of these migrants are happening. There is an element of this that is worth looking at in terms of foreign affairs rather than defence. I know the Minister of State specifically deals with defence matters, but if the Naval Service is in any way complicit through lack of knowledge then we need to have the knowledge to inform it that it cannot be part of an operation which ends up enhancing or increasing the suffering of migrants.

I have raised my concerns about PESCO and Ireland's association with it being a drift against our neutrality. The Minister of State has discussed this recently. What additional commitments does the Minister of State expect to be placed on Ireland with regard to increasing our capacity and interoperability in the action plan outlined by the President of the Commission, Mr. Juncker, which the Minister of State mentioned in his introduction, on military mobility in particular? This is a man who has committed to a fully fledged European defence union by 2025. He has outlined this and has been honest enough to state this is where he wants to go. His roadmap on military mobility is part of this, and Ireland's association in any way with it is an association with the drift towards an EU army, defence union or whatever title we wish to call it. There is still a full debate required around all of the changes and moves that the Government has signed up to, but today is probably not the day. I might come back to this, but there are a number of other issues I want to ask the Minister of State to address.

Ireland has had a very proud tradition in UNIFIL, and it has managed to keep the peace relatively secure in Lebanon. It has managed to be involved in the area without taking sides. Major General Michael Beary is in charge at present and he came under severe attack by the US ambassador to the UN, who accused him of being partial to Hezbollah. The information I have is that recently the opposite has been happening, in that the Lebanese and Palestinians have huge concerns about his association with particular events. He tweeted photographs of himself celebrating a great event on the 70th anniversary of Israel being founded. Included in the photographs is one of him with what looks like members of the Israeli Defense Forces. This is the wrong message. It undermines him in particular and it looks like he is taking sides. It could endanger Irish troops out there if they are seen in any way to be partial. The advantage we have had over the years is that we have remained aloof. The day he tweeted this was the anniversary of an attack by Israel on UN forces in the area in Qana. I have been told it has not gone down well locally and internationally among a community that would have had respect for Irish troops in the past. I do not know whether the Minister of State can say anything about it, but at the very least we should state that the military should not be associated with such events, especially not when they are involved in peacekeeping in the area. It suggests taking sides. I know the record and I know this is probably not the intention but it is the way it is being perceived.

With regard to other overseas operations, there have been operations in Afghanistan over the years, and only last week the Minister of State replied to Deputy Clare Daly to suggest the Army Ranger Wing was in Afghanistan for various periods over the years. In the past I have asked, first and foremost, what Irish troops were doing on a NATO operation. I also asked what was their role. I was told by a previous Minister with responsibility for defence that their role was administrative. A Ranger Wing being sent to Afghanistan does not suggest administrative duties. We have also been led to believe in the past they were there to work on ordnance and deal with unexploded mines. A different section of the Army deals with this and not the Ranger Wing. I hope the Minister of State will be able to answer why we were not told or tell us that the Dáil was misled in terms of the operations in which Irish troops were involved in Afghanistan.

In this meeting I will stick to dealing with international affairs in the main because, as I have said, we can have many debates about the Army itself. Its established strength is supposed to be 9,500. We have specific UN commitments and this Government and the previous Government signed up to commitments in terms of EU battle groups. The German battle group now has the Army Ranger Wing involved. If numbers continue to deplete and we do not manage to retain people, and my information is that by the end of this year even with new recruits we will have fewer people in the Defence Forces than we did at the start of the year due to an increase in retirements and the number of those who leave, what is the commitment we have at present with regard to the UN and the battle groups and can we live up to it? My understanding is a maximum number of members of the Irish Defence Forces can be overseas at a given time. This was set in the past based on the established strength but we do not have this. Could it be undermined? A key aspect of depletion and retention, outside of the lack of numbers, is the loss of experience and corporate knowledge if we lose people from the top levels of the Defence Forces. We have discussed this previously and I do not know how it can be addressed quickly. It is similar to the Garda and nursing. We can increase numbers, but if we lose experience it will take quite a number of years to regain the corporate knowledge required.