Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 12 June 2013

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade

EU Scrutiny Reports 2012: Discussion with Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

2:30 pm

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members, witnesses, in particular those in the Visitors Gallery, to ensure their mobile telephones are switched off completely for the duration of the meeting as they cause interference even in silent mode with the recording equipment in the committee rooms.

I welcome the Secretary General, Mr. David Cooney, from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade who is present to discuss two reports relating to European Union matters as provided for by the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002. These reports contain a historical review of the main legislative actions and developments for 2012 and also contain a forward-looking element giving an overview of the next six months of the EU Presidency. The Secretary General is accompanied by Mr. David Donoghue, political director, Ms Anne Barrington, director general, Europe division, Mr. Pat Kelly, director, Middle East unit and North Africa unit and Mr. John O’Grady, development co-operation division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

This is not the first time the Secretary General, Mr. Cooney, has come before us to discuss matters with the committee but it is the first time he has come to discuss the reports. The discussion with the Secretary General is an important part of the committee’s scrutiny of EU matters, which come within the remit of the committee. Among the many areas covered by the remit are such policy areas as the European neighbourhood policy which fosters EU relations with its nearest geographical neighbours both east and south and EU relations with the wider world, which include areas of particular concern to the committee such as developments in Syria, the Middle East and Africa. It also includes the current proposals for the financing of the EU external action programme and the European development fund which were considered in detail by the committee at a meeting of Department officials in 2012. The witnesses are all very welcome this afternoon.

The Secretary General’s statement was circulated to committee members earlier today and I am sure some of them have downloaded it. Much ground is covered in it so I do not think he should read it. Instead, I suggest Mr. Cooney would make a few brief introductory remarks and then we will take questions from members. I will advise him on privilege.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. However, if directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a person or an entity, by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Mr. David Cooney:

I thank you Chairman, and the members of the committee for asking me along today with my colleagues to discuss these two important reports. As the Chairman said, we have prepared a substantial statement and like him I did not see any point in taking up the time of the committee by reading it into the record or seeking to run down the clock. The point is to allow members to question me and my colleagues. We will do our best to assist them and answer the questions. I invite members to address the report and issues flowing from it.

Photo of Brendan SmithBrendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like you, Chairman I welcome Mr. Cooney and his colleagues from the Department. I appreciate that he forwarded his statement to us in advance of the meeting. He mentioned the success of the chairmanship of the OSCE. I compliment all involved in the success - the Tánaiste and the Secretary General and his colleagues in the Department. The decision was made in 2009 that Ireland would hold the chairmanship in the second half of 2012 and it shows the long lead-in process and preparatory work that must be undertaken to ensure a successful chairmanship.

With regard to the European external action force, some time ago I recall the European Parliament was critical of the ineffectiveness of the service. Mr. Cooney used the phrase in his script "continued to establish itself during 2012". Could he elaborate on that?

Is it gaining more recognition or appreciation? Does it deserve more appreciation from European parliamentarians with regard to its effectiveness?

As was noted in the opening statement provided, Syria is the humanitarian issue of our generation. At successive meetings of this joint committee, members have raised this issue and their former Dáil colleague, Mr. Barry Andrews, has appeared here in his capacity as chief executive of GOAL. Oxfam and other NGOs also have been in contact with the joint committee regarding the frightening humanitarian crisis, both in Syria and in the entire region. Some national coverage on Irish airwaves in recent days again has highlighted the particular difficulties and pressures in Lebanon and other adjoining countries. It is disappointing that the European Union has not been able to agree on the arms embargo issue and that this has changed in respect of France and Britain. Can the witnesses elaborate on whether there are ongoing efforts at European Union level, with the forthcoming Council of Ministers meeting, to again highlight this humanitarian issue? Members all have had the opportunity to meet a representative of the opposition groups, who outlined in graphic detail the huge abuse of individuals and are aware of the many millions who need humanitarian assistance and that more than 100,000 people have been killed. The position is frightening, as is the lack of international response. This joint committee has reiterated constantly its appreciation that the Government, through its overseas development programme, has continued to give more assistance to that particular region. I understand the European Union has been the main contributor. Is pressure being put on the other international players to play a much-needed and improved role in providing badly needed humanitarian assistance to that region? Some time ago, when the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, met his Russian counterpart, they indicated they would try to get talks under way in Geneva. Are there indications of momentum or impetus being given to this initiative? The failure of the United Nations to achieve a resolution obviously is extremely disappointing. However, all members must be deeply concerned with regard to what they read and see in the national media and through correspondence they receive from individuals. As the Secretary General noted in the opening remarks he forwarded to the joint committee, it is vital that the humanitarian disaster and catastrophe in that region is addressed in a much more thorough way by the international community.

Photo of Seán CroweSeán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I again welcome the witnesses. I will begin with an issue that was not really addressed in the statement provided, that is, the situation in Turkey, which is on members' minds after watching on television the scenes that unfolded last night. Amnesty International held a protest outside the Turkish Embassy today in respect of the attacks on peaceful protesters in which one can see the gas and so on. Aside from the impact on everyone concerned - this certainly is having an impact on business, investment and so on - what impact does the Secretary General believe this will have on the application to join the European Union? Many concerns and issues were raised with regards to human rights and so on but having seen it so graphically on screen last night, the witnesses might comment on this issue.

As for the situation in Syria, like everyone else I am horrified with what is going on and in particular with the humanitarian crisis in the camps. It is not helpful that some states appear to be pushing ahead with regard to more guns, greater supplies and so on. I do not think that will help in a civil war. I acknowledge Ireland has taken a strong position in this regard and note that Austria is taking a very strong position regarding the lifting of the ban. It is talking about pulling out its troops, who are serving with United Nations on the Golan Heights. Do the witnesses believe this issue is showing cracks within the European Union's Common Foreign and Security Policy? On the humanitarian crisis itself, how many countries - particularly European countries - have pledged to help? Do the witnesses have details of what European Union countries have reneged or thus far have not fulfilled their obligations in this regard?

In respect of the Palestinian issue, Ireland has a positive position on what is happening in that part of the world. The Tánaiste has stated there is no consensus within the European Union regarding the ban on settlement goods. There is talk of introducing a labelling of Israeli settlement goods and while I do not believe that goes far enough, will the Government work to put this proposal on the agenda at the next European Union Foreign Affairs Council meeting? The witnesses might provide an update on the labelling issue and might provide an overview on the ban.

The issue of Mali was mentioned in the statement provided. I have serious reservations regarding Ireland's involvement in what is clearly a civil war taking place there. Recently, the Malian Government attacked Tuareg areas in northern Mali. While serious social and economic grievances obtain in respect of that entire region, Ireland appears to be taking the Government side in this regard. While one is told it is about al-Qaeda and other things, the Tuareg in this area clearly have legitimate grievances. There have been criticisms in respect of the Malian Government and serious human rights abuses have been raised by the United Nations itself. The European Union clearly appears to be adopting a one-sided approach to this conflict. Broadly, is the European Union doing anything to address the legitimate grievances of the Tuareg people in that region?

Finally, although it is not mentioned in the opening statement, I refer to the position in Bahrain. While uprisings in different parts of the world are being discussed, what is the European Union's position, in particular with regard to the arrest of human rights workers, lawyers and so on? It is one of those areas of conflict that always are being pushed to one side. Is the European Union adopting a formal position on events there and on the concerns all members have in that regard? It is a small country that clearly has a sectarian regime with regard to the treatment of a large proportion of its population. Almost on a weekly basis, one hears of people with a human rights background being arrested and imprisoned.

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like other members, I welcome our guests and thank them for their attendance. On the European Union external action force and the general influence of the European Union with regard to its neighbours to the east and the south, to what extent has the European Union developed a recognition of its authority, strength or influence in the area? To what extent are the European Union institutions working on that? Similarly, in respect of the ongoing situation in Syria, has Ireland unilaterally or together with the European Union and the United Nations, tried to establish safe havens or safety corridors of some kind in Syria with a view to addressing the serious human rights issues that continue to be brought to the attention of members on a daily basis?

For example, have the EU and UN institutions learned anything from the experiences of the war in Bosnia all those years ago when it became apparent that as long as perpetrators were secure in the knowledge that there could be no retribution, they would continue indefinitely to pursue their objectives? Have the various institutions of the European Union and United Nations at all levels examined the possibilities to the fullest extent possible in this area? If not, the belief will remain that in the absence of any intervention of an influential nature, the atrocities continue.

What is the general attitude to Iran within the European Union on both trade and the development of nuclear weapons? To what extent has Ireland, unilaterally or through the European Union and the United Nations, established common ground with a view to a common approach to the position in so far as the development of weapons of mass destruction in Iran is concerned, and to what extent is a serious effort being made to monitor such development?

To what extent has European scrutiny within the national parliament been co-ordinated to complement the European concept of cohesiveness and progress in the same direction at the same time and to the same extent, and to what extent has it been noted the degree of dissension within some European Union member states in respect of the focus on the original ideals of European integration and the European project? I do not want to mention individual countries, but there are a number of countries in which there is considerable growing Euroscepticism from which, if allowed to continue indefinitely without addressing the issues that appear to be causing the problem, disillusionment will develop and there will be a situation down the road in five or ten years, or perhaps even less than that, that would lead to a break-up or weakening of the European project in a way that would make it impossible to operate.

2:40 pm

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, can I disappoint Mr. Cooney by stating that my PA did not get an opportunity to get to the computer to download his contribution? In a sense, I will be speaking on the basis of the little bit of research I did on this huge tome.

As a public representative, I welcome this opportunity to engage with Mr. Cooney's eight officials around these important issues of concern to Europe and to the world in general. To touch on the last point raised by the previous speaker on oversight, there is a debate ongoing about the Seanad and we have had a debate here. We also have had a debate at the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. To follow through on Deputy Durkan's position, is the Department happy, given the existing political structures of multi-seat constituencies and the demands on the time of backbenchers, that we have an opportunity to seriously and assiduously study our obligation under section 2(5) of the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002 to look at the draft EU legislative proposals on foreign policy? These impose considerable responsibilities on any elected public representative to study the EU proposals. We as a nation are not managing and, equally, other member states are not managing to do this. I seek Mr. Cooney's opinion on that observation, which has been made previously by witnesses here.

Having studied some of the aspects of the report on which I congratulate Mr. Cooney for its comprehensive nature, he might explain how matters are developing around the common European asylum system. Mr. Cooney will be aware that we are being criticised increasingly about the direct provision allowance system. I am dealing with asylum seekers or persons looking for residency here who have been in direct provision for over eight years. Not only are they in direct provision for over eight years but they are rearing new families within these-----

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It might be an issue for the Department of Justice and Equality rather than Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is most certainly an issue for this committee because the report refers to the common European asylum system. I would argue that there cannot be anything more relevant to the committee than that.

Syria has been touched upon. One's heart bleeds for the citizens of Syria. It is a terrible humanitarian crisis. I congratulate the European Union, which provided €400 million. We, ourselves, provided €9 million in humanitarian aid. However, I would like to think that we take a balanced approach to those who constitute the Syrian opposition. The report is rightly riddled with condemnation of the Assad regime but I have been reading reports that would make one vomit of atrocities being carried out, not only by President Assad's forces but by those who claim to be the liberators. I refer to arbitrary executions, beheadings, throat-slittings and unbelievable barbarity. Can Mr. Cooney tell us whether Ireland's position at the European Union is to push at the International Court of Justice to ensure that with all of these criminals - be they President Assad's criminals or the opposition criminals - we must take a balanced approach to the activities of those acting in a war zone?

I will further ask Mr. Cooney about Iran which has been touched upon. We hope the Iranian people have a successful election, which is imminent. I seek his advice. He may or may not be conscious that we are lobbied continuously by a group which claims to be the Iranian liberation movement, the Iranian government in exile. We get correspondence continuously from them and they are lobbying within and outside the Parliament. Given that Ireland was fairly well represented at the group's last Paris meeting, where a former Taoiseach led a delegation comprising Labour Party members, Fianna Fáil members and Independents, what is the position of the European Union? This group claims to have a foreign affairs committee and a government in exile of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Perhaps Mr. Cooney's position on this organisation might help Members of the House who are signing petitions being proffered by this organisation as to whether we should now align ourselves as a country with its demands.

I have mentioned Bosnia-Herzegovina previously at the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. It is a tragedy. I know the region well. I knew programme refugees from Tuzla who had been bombed by the Serbs. Or was it the Croats? I forget who bombed them, but they were taken as programme refugees. They all did very well educationally and in business. Those Irish Bosnians are very concerned and are lobbying hard for a complete review of the policy of Europe towards Bosnia-Herzegovina. I ask Mr. Cooney because there is correspondence from the group. It seems it is pointing at us as a nation and Europe as a collective, stating that we should be doing more. Would Mr. Cooney support that argument or would he see that perhaps some of the main players are the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina, who seem not to be moving forward at the same pace and who are being left behind by Serbia, and Croatia which is now practically a full member of the European Union? Would he give his analysis of what is happening in Bosnia-Herzegovina and what is the solution?

On Macedonia, it seems that the simple issue of the Greek response to the name Macedonia is holding up progress and creating such difficulties. I understand the Greeks have a veto on the name but with the collective wisdom of an institution as large as the European Union, there must be some way around this in order to progress matters so that the name is not the issue that holds them up.

I will conclude by touching on-----

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I hope so.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are looking at a report of 12 months of work. I do not know how many members have read this report. It is extensive. It brings me back to the argument of whether we have the time and facilities to do this serious scrutiny of legislation.

On the last three areas, Albania holds elections this month. So does Mongolia. I wish both of them a happy outcome. My feedback from Albania is that matters are progressing. Mr. Cooney might give us an opinion. Perhaps he must wait until after the election for the OSCE to decide whether or not they were fair but I understand matters are progressing there.

This report covers something that has been the bane of my past two and a half years, that is, to understand the international players acting on behalf of Europe and humanity in general.

There are the United Nations and the European Union. Other bodies include the OSCE and the Council of Europe. Interestingly, both have "parliaments" of elected representatives. There are 56 countries affiliated to the OSCE. The document states there has been a study of the relationships between the organisations. The officials will be aware of the conflicting reports of the OSCE and the United States on election monitoring. The parliamentary assembly produced a report that was different from that of the OSCE. This ridiculousness on the part of an international body with such high status must not be allowed to continue.

Zimbabwe is the forgotten country. Ireland has a policy on Africa. Although Ireland is a small country, it has considerable influence in that continent. Do the officials believe we could use the professional skills of the Department in conjunction with those of individuals in Zimbabwe who have been educated by Irish missionaries - they include Mr. Mugabe - to work bilaterally, thereby achieving more than we would if we waited for the European Union to move? There is a highly educated workforce and Zimbabwe is a country of immense importance. Could we achieve greater understanding between the political forces there if we proceeded bilaterally?

Mr. David Donoghue will be familiar with the Khodorkovsky case because he was at a presentation I attended at which reference was made to it. I refer to the relationship with Russia. We dealt with the Magnitsky case and received rather undiplomatic correspondence from the Russian ambassador. Will the delegates advise us on how best we should approach the Russians? Russia is a very important country. When one bears in mind the oligarchs, individuals such as Khodorkovsky, the Magnitsky case and Boris Berezovsky, the man who died, how does one square the horror of the events surrounding the oil and gas barons and the oligarchs with our development of a relationship with Russia? We want to develop warm and cordial relationships with it. However, we are disappointed that the very pleasant Russian ambassador should have written such a negative comment to us when we were dealing with the Magnitsky case. He threatened that Ireland would not benefit from the adoption process that we had been negotiating for the past ten years.

I hope the officials have noted my questions because it could be another year before I will have the chance to ask them again.

2:50 pm

Photo of Jim WalshJim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the officials.

Reference was made to aid, including humanitarian aid. There was a report in the past week or so alleging Irish taxpayers' money was being used in Ethiopia for abortion providers. Will the officials comment on this? Is it true? If so, is the practice being continued? Is there anywhere to which we are sending taxpayers' money to provide for what is an inhumane abuse of human rights, namely, abortion?

With regard to the situation in Syria, I have noted the officials' comment that the United States and Russia are endeavouring to convene a conference. Some of us saw some of the refugee camps in Lebanon in January. The message we received from both the refugees and political interests in Lebanon, including the President, was that there was a real need for engagement to achieve a negotiated solution to the problems faced. I was pleased with the line the Tánaiste and Ireland took with regard to not providing arms for either side in the conflict. What is occurring is inhumane. Obviously, the provision of arms is fuelling the conflict and not resulting in a solution.

My third point is on the Middle East. I welcome the commitment in the report on tackling the threats to the viability of the two-state solution and trying to increase the size of the narrowing window. Some of us will be in the region next week and hope we will have an opportunity to see what is occurring at first hand. Did the issue of banning of imports from the settlement areas arise at EU level? Israel will need to be induced or driven, probably in equal proportions, if we are to resolve this issue.

My colleague has covered EU-Russia relations. Russia is a very significant player and the European Union is its biggest trading partner. Obviously, we are very dependent on Russia's energy supplies. With regard to visas and human rights, was the case of Sergei Magnitsky raised by the EU side? If so, what was the outcome?

I agree with everything said by Deputy Eric Byrne on Bosnia-Herzegovina. EU enlargement will lead to circumstances where Bosnia will become more isolated than it has been. While I can see the political difficulties that arise, the citizens of Bosnia really deserve better than for us to allow that to happen. The Tánaiste has recognised that there is a threat of renewed conflict in the area. Therefore, the country merits focus and much assistance. The European Union has a part to play in that regard.

I compliment Ambassador Anderson and her staff at the United Nations on their tremendous support and participation with regard to the arms trade treaty. The latest figure I saw suggested over 68 countries had signed up. This means that the treaty is now in effect, as 50 signatories were required. The more countries that sign, the more the terms of the treaty will be adhered to. This is essential to so many of the conflict areas we have encountered.

My last question is on one of the smallest states. When is it planned to reopen the embassy to the Vatican?

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not believe any other member desires to contribute. The Secretary General can now understand the reason I asked every member to ask questions first in order that he would not have to reply to each individually. I am not saying he can duck or choose questions, but that he should do his best to answer as many as he can. Many of the themes were similar.

Mr. David Cooney:

I will try to answer as thoroughly as possible. Since a number of issues were raised, I will take one at a time. I might make a point and then refer it to my colleagues because they might have something to add.

The first point, raised by Deputy Brendan Smith, was on the European External Action Service, of which there was some criticism but not by us. The creation from scratch of a foreign service in the European Union was a significant undertaking. The whole point of the service was that its staff would be drawn in equal proportions from the Commission, the Council secretariat and the member states. There are different administrative cultures in the various bodies. The whole system had to be set up physically. It is headed by two very able civil servants, Mr. Pierre Vimont from France, the head of the service, and Mr. David O'Sullivan, the chief operations officer. Mr. O'Sullivan may be known to some of the members since he started out as a third secretary in my Department. Subsequently, he became Secretary General of the European Commission and then a representative in Geneva and elsewhere. The European External Action Service has extremely able staff.

We meet secretaries general of the foreign ministries of the 27 EU member states every six months.

While two or three years ago there was a great deal of criticism of the service from many of the larger member states, at the last meeting in Vilnius about three weeks ago - the meeting is always held in the country taking up the Presidency rather than in the country holding it - there was mooted, if any, criticism. There is a real sense now that the EEAS is working, although it is still a work in progress. I was recently in Indonesia, where I received a superb briefing from the EEAS in Jakarta. I was extremely impressed by the whole team, as I was when I met them in Zimbabwe last year. For example, it is possible for accredited diplomats from Singapore to go into the EU mission in Jakarta and work there on a hot desk basis. It is an effective arrangement.

The EU is establishing a presence for itself internationally. That the EU High Representative now represents the Union abroad is a big factor in this regard. It has changed the way the EU Presidency works. Although I would not say the EEAS is by any means perfect it has made significant strides. I am confident it will become more efficient and effective as the various ingredients of the service coalesce around its operating systems. From what I have seen in terms of the reports from the services, it has a high quality and dedicated staff although there are issues to be resolved.

3:00 pm

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are plans in place for the European External Action Service to facilitate small countries like Ireland in, say, setting up permanent missions in particular capital cities?

Mr. David Cooney:

That is an issue discussed at all meetings of secretaries general. One of the reasons for my going to Jakarta was to examine the possibility of setting up a small mission there. While doing so might be possible, there are downsides in that a country cannot operate its own consular activities out of an EU mission. For a country like Ireland, it can be expensive to collocate. We have low overheads in terms of operation. While an EU mission would have high security risk, we have a low security risk. Therefore, if we bought into its operation we would end up having to pay high security overheads. Such issues need to be considered.

Irish embassies and missions travel extremely light, in terms of staff, resources and overheads. While on the surface it might seem a no-brainer to join with the EEAS it will not always work out because it can be quite expensive to do so. The EEAS has rather high overheads in terms of security and other operating costs. We are looking at it and are certainly open to it but much depends on what one wants to do. My own assessment is that if one wants to be taken seriously in Asia one has to take oneself seriously. In the EU we can operate one person-one diplomat missions because everybody knows who we are. We are all members of the EU and are not trying to put on a show. Anyone who wants to do business in Asia and wants to make contacts must have its own identity and a reasonably decent residence to which to bring people. Different assets are required in different places.

We are very much open to the idea but it does not automatically follow that because there is an EEAS mission it is the natural host for everybody else. I believe the EEAS is doing a good job. It proposes to review its operating regulation in the next year with a view to doing things better. I would give it a good mark for its efforts to date. A lot of the criticism was borne out of over-expectation. People thought it was possible to just wave a wand and create an EU foreign service over night. It takes a little longer than that. The EEAS is not perfect but it has done well.

On Syria, the situation there is hideous. On the political situation and where we are, it is complicated. Often the presentation is simplistic. It is not quite as simple as there are good guys and bad guys. Almost the entire international community, including President Putin, recognises the Assad regime was the cause of what happened. The protests against the regime were the result of a failure to reform and respond to the demands of the people. The attack on the people by the Assad regime was unacceptable and appalling by any criteria and it continues.

Deputy Byrne's comment that it is not all one-way traffic is true in that atrocities are being committed by both sides. The EU recognised this at its main meeting. It also condemned the atrocities committed by opposition groups, while pointing out that it still believed the balance of unacceptable human rights violations rested with the regime. There is no doubt but that all parties are involved. There is now also, unfortunately, an increasing ethnic-religious element to the conflict. It is no longer a matter of people protesting against the regime. Deep divisions are now emerging between the different communities, which will make it even harder to put the country back together if and when some type of peace is restored.

It is correct that the international community has put its weight behind the convening of a conference embracing all parties on the basis of the Geneva declaration of last year. It is rowing in behind the American and Russian Governments. The west has not gotten involved militarily - at least overtly. This is different from what happened in Libya. Russia is clearly involved in arming the Assad regime. It believes it has a significant strategic stake in Syria. Unfortunately, the situation is not without parallels to the type of cold war conflicts which occurred prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, in which there were seemingly interminable conflicts with one side backed by the then Soviet Union and the other backed by the west.

On the EU position, we very much regret that the EU was unable to continue the arms embargo on Syria. The Government believes that sending more arms into Syria is adding fuel to the fire. To be fair to those who took a different approach, I do not believe their analysis is that sending in arms will make matters worse. Their approach appears to be based on the fact that Assad will not deal until he feels under military threat. There are people on the opposition side who say that because it appears that the Assad regime is in the ascendency in the military conflict there is no point in having a conference because Assad will not deal. However, we are of the view that sending in more arms to what is already a violent region will not assist the situation. On humanitarian zones, our analysis is that any military external intervention of that nature will only heighten the conflict at this stage and could broaden it.

The humanitarian situation on the ground is appalling. There are huge numbers of Syrians living outside Syria in Turkey and Jordan. The Tánaiste has visited Turkey and the Minister of State, Deputy Costello, has visited Jordan. Ireland has been to the fore in its humanitarian effort and has contributed €8.5 million. We have just committed a further €1 million. We are doing our part. It is true to say that some states that have committed money have not followed through as assiduously. I am not sure that is the case among EU member states, but I do not have the figures with me. My expectation would be that member states have followed through. If I can establish the position on contributions from EU member states, I will forward the information to the joint committee. As can be seen in the answers the Tánaiste has provided in reply to parliamentary questions on Syria, Ireland has been very vocal about its expectation that countries will follow through on their commitments.

This is an extraordinarily complicated situation. Clearly, we have been to the forefront in terms of the ICC and supported the Swiss initiative calling for those guilty of crimes against humanity to be referred there. Crimes against humanity have been committed. That should apply to people involved on both sides of the conflict. We would be happy to see that being pursued by the Security Council of the United Nations. Even when the conflict is over, as it will be one day, those responsible should be pursued. If I have omitted anything on Syria, I would be glad if members let me know.

The next country on my list is Turkey, where a very disquieting situation has emerged. Turkey is a candidate for membership of the European Union and we are in negotiations on its accession. Ireland has traditionally been a supporter of Turkish membership. We must recognise that Turkey is a country experiencing change. It is change that is necessary if it is ever to become a member state of the EU. One of the most striking aspects of the change we have seen is that we now see the emergence of a real civil society in Turkey. Many of the demonstrators are members of civil society who are making a statement about the kind of society they want to see. Not everything we are seeing about Turkey at the moment is negative. Clearly, there are a number of aspects of any functioning democracy. One aspect is the rule of law, another is the right to peaceful assembly, and a further right is the right to demonstrate peacefully. As the Tánaiste has recently said in replies to parliamentary questions, we regret that the Turkish authorities appear to have ignored the appeals of the European Union to act with restraint. Some of the things we have seen on television and the heavy-handed response of the police in some cases - which has been admitted by the Turkish authorities, who have promised to investigate - are matters of regret. We have also seen scenes of violent demonstrators attacking police and property. Some believe that these are not demonstrators but are in fact agents provocateurs, which remains to be determined. It is a worrying situation. It is clear that the overwhelming majority of the protestors are totally peaceful in their intentions but have been met with what one would have to call heavy-handed and violent treatment from the security forces.

What is the impact of this on Turkish accession? Turkey is a country in transition and the Government continues to see it as a future member of the European Union. We support Turkish membership and, during our Presidency of the Council of the European Union, have been doing our best to reinvigorate the accession process and open Chapter 22 of the enlargement process on regional policy. We should not reject Turkey because of what is happening but need to make our views clear that we find the police reaction disturbing and inconsistent with EU membership. That does not alter the impact of where we would like Turkey to be. I am quite convinced that the vast majority of the demonstrators who are on the streets and being manhandled by the police would like to see Turkey's progress to EU membership continue. The EU represents the kind of society many of those protestors would like to see. It is a difficult moment but the interests of those who want to see Turkey continue to move forward would not be best served by bringing down the shutters on the enlargement process. Hopefully, this situation is simply a step backwards in what is otherwise a forward progress.

I have not talked about the Austrian decision to pull out of UNDOF, the UN observer mission on the Golan Heights. The Austrian decision was provoked by a serious deterioration in the security situation. It is an unfortunate development. Obviously, the Austrian Government must take the decisions it feels are necessary, but the international community, through the United Nations, will have to do something to plug the hole. UNDOF is a significant and important peacekeeping presence. The UN is working very hard to identify a troop contributor to fill the gap.

Deputy Crowe asked if the Syrian arms embargo issue revealed cracks in EU policy. While it does, we must be realistic about it. We do not have a common EU policy on every issue. We strive very hard to have one but all of us retain the right on occasion to say "No, we cannot go along with this." We must recognise that, as there have been many occasions, particularly regarding the Israel-Palestine issue, on which Ireland has been the member state saying it cannot agree to a position. We are still at the stage of best endeavours and it will be a long time before we are in a situation in which we agree on everything. Ireland, including the members of the committee, will want the State to take a very firm position on some issues which would require us to say to our partners that we cannot agree to a common position. The Israel-Palestine issue is one on which we have a clear national position which we are not prepared to abandon at this time in favour of a common EU position. While it may be inconvenient in the case of the Syrian arms embargo, we must recognise that we are sometimes the member state that is holding out.

We have been very much to the fore on the issue of Palestine and settlement goods. Members of the Dáil and Seanad have been very active in demanding that we take that position. The Tánaiste has taken that forward in the EU and we have made progress. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy commissioned a study of this and we have brought it to the EU table. The Tánaiste has been very clear that he does not expect any unanimous endorsement of this. If we are realistic, we must expect that to be the case. What may emerge are guidelines that those countries who so wish can follow. That will be a positive development. We clearly wish to see a common EU-wide policy on that but, for the reasons I set out, that may not happen. We will continue to be active. We think citizens have the right to know whether what they are buying is a good produced in Israel or an illegally occupied Palestinian territory. That is where we want to go. The Tánaiste is determined to continue to take a lead on that.

The situation in Mali is very complex. We must look back to where this conflict came from. The origins of the recent conflict effectively arose from a Tuareg uprising against the Malian government. Many people feel the government in Bamako did not take sufficient account of the particular identity and regional diversity of the Tuareg minority. There have been previous Tuareg uprisings that were fairly heavily put down by the Malian forces. The Tuareg forces got the upper hand and the coup d'étatthat took place in Bamako arose from the fact that the Malian government forces were effectively collapsing in the face of the Tuareg military campaign. Some people ask why we are supporting a government that is the result of a coup d'état. The situation in Mali did not arise because of the coup d'état. Although we do not support it or agree with it, the coup d'étatwas, in effect, a response to the disintegration of government writ in Mali. With our EU partners, we are involved in trying to support a process, which is now governed by a UN Security Council resolution, to put in place a new dispensation in Mali that will have support across the country and recognise ethnic diversity. The reason Ireland is assisting with the EU training mission is precisely to develop armed forces in Mali that are capable not only of keeping peace and order but of doing so in a way that respects the ethnic diversity and human rights of people in all parts of Mali.

In respect of the humanitarian situation, we have been putting money in there. Ireland announced at the donor conference on 15 May that we would not only give more money but support human rights monitoring. We are in dialogue with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to identify specific ways in which we can support that work most suitably. The UN is putting together an integrated, strategic peacekeeping mission in Mali that will cover not just military but police and rule-of-law aspects and will replace the current African mission. It will be a major undertaking but, again, Ireland will be very supportive of that. We certainly feel there can be no long-term solution to the situation in Mali without addressing the situation of the Tuareg and recognising their human rights and particularly regional diversity. Does anybody else wish to speak about Mali?

Again, the situation in Bahrain is very complicated and difficult. Bahrain is a particularly sad case because it was to the fore in the Arab world on many fronts, particularly in terms of the openness of its society and its recognition of women. I remember when I was ambassador to the UN, the ambassador of Bahrain was elected as president of the General Assembly, one of only three woman to be so elected. It fell to me by coincidence, as head of the Western European and Others Group at the time, to welcome and recognise this. This was a time when Bahrain was being lauded as a model for other Arab states to follow. Sadly, we see that it is a country riven by religious division. The Government has made very clear its unhappiness with and condemnation of the events that took place there and the ongoing crackdown on and abuse of civil and human rights activists. We support the effort that is under way to enter into a national dialogue. Dialogue is the only way this will be resolved peacefully. I cannot see it being resolved in any other way at the moment.

The EU has also expressed its criticism and condemnation of what is happening. It is probably true to say that not all member states are as outspoken as we are on the issue but we do not miss any opportunity to raise our concerns with Bahrain. We see that it is a situation that can be turned around with the right policies. It is not a lost cause and we urge the government there to take the right path. Does Mr. Kelly wish to say a bit more on the EU approach? Is there anything he would like to add?

3:20 pm

Mr. Pat Kelly:

I would just like to confirm that there is as much concern at EU level about the overall human rights situation in Bahrain. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy has commented on it and it has attracted quite an amount of attention in the European Parliament. The EU is trying to be supportive of Bahrain as it goes through a difficult transition and has offered assistance to the process of national dialogue to try to further that. Progress has been slow because it is seen as the best hope for Bahrain and for introducing reforms, particularly the recommendations of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry, which made strong recommendations about the need to safeguard human rights. We are satisfied that our EU partners share our concerns about the human rights situation.

Photo of Seán CroweSeán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The key is meaningful dialogue rather than the optics of dialogue. If meaningful dialogue is engaged in, the situation in that country could be transformed.

Mr. David Cooney:

I thank Mr. Kelly and Deputy Crowe. Deputy Durkan raised a point about the relationship with our neighbours to the south and east. I might ask Ms Barrington if she would like to talk about the Eastern Partnership, because there is quite a lot going on there.

Ms Anne Barrington:

Clearly, the European Neighbourhood Policy, the Eastern Partnership and the partnership and relationship with the southern Mediterranean states are priorities for the EU.

Coming up in the next short while is a major summit of the Eastern Partnership, which will take place in Vilnius next November, when we hope we will be in a position to sign a number of association agreements with some of the Eastern Partnership countries. Clearly, they are at different stages of development and of the relationship. The most advanced is Ukraine, although there are still some issues before we can get to the point of signing an association agreement. The Ukrainian authorities have undertaken to do a range of things such as rectify selective justice, deal with the issues that were identified in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ODIHR, election report, and a range of matters including addressing the issue of Mrs. Yulia Tymoshenko. They have to do a number of things. An EU parliamentary delegation is in Ukraine working to see if a bridge can be built between Ukraine and the EU so that by next November we, as EU members, will be in a position to sign the association agreement, which would be a very significant step in Ukraine's prospective looking towards the EU.

The other members of the Eastern Partnership are at different stages of the relationship but are more or less progressing. There are issues with Belarus which will need to be addressed. The human rights situation there is obviously of significant concern. The EU has been very active in focusing on building up democratic institutions with the southern neighbours and supporting the efforts towards democratisation, and that effort will continue in the coming period.

3:30 pm

Mr. David Cooney:

Iran was mentioned. Again, this was an unfortunate situation. Nobody wants it to be that way, certainly in the West. The concerns about Iran's nuclear programme are not confined to the US and Israel. They are very real and they are shared; we share them. The work of the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, has given rise to serious and justified concerns. The international community, which is grouped in this three-plus-three formation, has tried extremely hard to engage genuinely with the Iranian authorities to seek to make some progress on this, and it has not been forthcoming. The sanctions have been applied very much as a last resort and we, the international community, have made every effort to try to apply them in a way that will not harm the Iranian community. It is very difficult to apply sanctions that have no impact on people on the ground, particularly when one has to keep winding them up to a higher level because one is getting no response.

There are elections in the next few days. We sincerely hope they will lead to a more enlightened approach on the part of the Iranian Administration, because the long-term situation is extremely worrying. The last thing one wants in the Middle East is another state with nuclear weapons. The international community is very much trying to avoid that, not just because we do not want another such state but because there are some in the region who have made it very clear they will not tolerate that and nobody knows what the repercussions would be. At all costs we want to avoid military action and see Iran fully re-integrated into the international community as a country that is co-operating on nuclear policies and is free from sanctions.

Photo of Maureen O'SullivanMaureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are concerns that the sanctions are affecting the poorer people in Iran because of the lack of medical facilities and medicines getting through. I asked a parliamentary question about this. While the sanctions are intended for one purpose, the repercussions are that the ordinary, poorer Iranian people are suffering because of them. One wonders about their impact on the political world.

Mr. David Cooney:

Every effort is made to avoid harming the poorer people. As I said, as the sanctions are intensified it is very difficult to have sanctions that will not harm anyone on the ground. We answered a parliamentary question on that in the last couple of days.

Photo of Maureen O'SullivanMaureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is right. I just got it last night.

Mr. David Cooney:

I do not have it in front of me. Mr. Kelly might be able to come back to the Deputy on that. If Iran is ever on the agenda of the EU Foreign Affairs Council, the People's Mujahidin of Iran always has a big demonstration in Brussels. It is able to mobilise people in the expatriate community. We have expressed concerns about it in the past. It has been guilty of a number of very violent outrages and deaths. It does not command any real support within Iran. That said, there is a particular situation with regard to Camp Ashraf in Iraq, where we and other members of the international community have been active in trying to deal with Iranian refugees based in Iraq who are opposed to the Iranian regime but no longer have the support of the Iraqi authorities. We are active on that front but, as an organisation, while it represents a strand of opinion in the expatriate community, we do not regard it as providing the future course for Iran. One cannot get away from the fact that the regime government in Tehran still enjoys a substantial degree of support from within the country and we feel the solution to Iran's difficulty rests within the country through reconciliation and a more open and democratic system.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could I interpret what Mr. Cooney has just said? The People's Mujahidin of Iran has no support base of any substance in Iran but the diaspora supports it to some degree. Could the Department of Foreign Affairs officials explain their views on such important people as Mr. John Bruton speaking in Paris, ostensibly on behalf of Ireland and other parliamentarians, and the interesting presence of very senior military generals, among others, from the US military, and their involvement with this group?

Photo of Jim WalshJim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Am I right in thinking the Iranian authorities rejected Rajavi's nomination for the presidential elections? That would have been a litmus test of what support it had in Iran. Why did they reject it if there would be no support there for it?

3:40 pm

Mr. David Cooney:

Unfortunately, they rejected many candidates, including some senior figures within the governing elite. I believe they were rejected because they did not like opposition, even from within their own cadre. If the Mujahidin had been able to put up its own candidate, it would have been a test of the support. I could comment on why US generals were there. I do not believe it is a secret that the United States is not supportive of the regime in Tehran and would be only too happy if it were to fall one way or another. On the issue of Mr. John Bruton addressing it, he is probably still a politician at heart. I know he acted as EU ambassador in Washington, but I suspect he is more of a politician than a diplomat at heart. The Deputy will need to ask him why he was there.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am being slightly provocative. People are signing petitions and are not quite sure what the group is. I was hoping that perhaps today we would have a greater understanding of what it was.

Mr. David Cooney:

They have support. There is a considerable expatriate community outside Iran, which is very active and well funded. As often happens with expatriate communities, they would be very happy to see regime change in their home country. There are differing views as to how that should be achieved. As of now, the People's Mujahidin of Iran has foresworn military activities. Therefore, it would now present itself as a political movement rather than a military movement, which begs the question as to why US generals are there.

Have I covered everything?

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Mr. Cooney to speak about Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Mr. David Cooney:

I see we are up against time. We have answered a number of parliamentary questions on Bosnia-Herzegovina. Progress has been very disappointing. Progress appeared likely and there seemed to be a coming together before the elections at the end of last year. However, it has dissipated. Nobody wants to see progress in Bosnia-Herzegovina more than we do, but as we have pointed out in answers to the more recent parliamentary questions, at the end of the day only the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina can resolve this matter. We cannot circumvent arrangements on the ground. Unless and until the people can come together and implement meaningful political structures and introduce the necessary reforms, we are not able to move forward. That country needs to get itself ready for EU membership; that is effectively what I am saying.

The same applies to Macedonia. The name is an issue, but the progress for which we had hoped on the political front has not been as forthcoming as we had hoped. The political leadership needs to take matters in hand. There has been more constructive engagement on the name issue of late and one is hopeful progress can be achieved. If that were the only obstacle to progress, that would be one thing, but there are things that need to be done on the ground.

Again, there are positive signs on Albania, but we are not there yet. All of these countries need to join the European Union. The Union will be better when they join, but they need to introduce the reforms necessary to be able to be members of it.

I was in Zimbabwe last year to view the situation on the ground. On our return we actively tried to get the EU embargo lifted. Everyone we met there, including people who had been the victims of torture, said sanctions were not working. There was a partial lifting of sanctions. It is a country that still has problems, but Ireland is engaged bilaterally and we are more than ready to get engaged to a much greater extent once it has a stable political system. We are awaiting the new constitution. We have to see elections, on which there is much riding. However, we are more than ready to become engaged with Zimbabwe on a bilateral basis.

As Mr. Donoghue knows more about Russia than I will ever know, I ask him to answer the points on Russia and the Magnitsky issue

Mr. David Donoghue:

I believe Ms Barrington can deal with that issue.

Ms Anne Barrington:

Obviously, it is deplorable that the trial after Mr. Magnitsky's death is still ongoing. The issue of whether to impose sanctions on those involved in his death is one that has been discussed in many parliaments. Our view has been that it is an issue we should raise every time there is a summit. There are two summits a year between Russia and the European Union and we have been active in ensuring this is done. We will continue to be active in that regard. Our view is that this is the way to have a longer term effect on Russian authorities on the issue.

Photo of Jim WalshJim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What was the Russian response?

Ms Anne Barrington:

Russia has not accepted the views of the European Union on this subject.

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The matter has obviously been debated in many parliaments throughout the European Union. Is consensus expected or is it unlikely?

Ms Anne Barrington:

It would be very difficult to reach consensus in the European Union on the imposing of sanctions. As a result, we are focusing more on raising the issue at summit level.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind the delegates of one outstanding question on the study of relationships, which was mentioned in the report.

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not doubt that it was included in the report, but the Deputy has had considerable time already. What is his question?

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked the question but did not receive the answer. Is progress being made on the study of relations between the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the European Union?

Mr. David Cooney:

I am bound to say I do not know where that stands. The reason they operate differently is that they have different memberships and different areas of responsibility. I ask Mr. Donoghue to comment.

Mr. David Donoghue:

Obviously there are synergies between all three. The OSCE has a security-oriented remit, while the Council of Europe has more of a human rights one. There are areas in which they can definitely achieve economy of effort. I am not au fait with where the study stands, but we would be very happy to come back to the Deputy on that issue.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Mr. Donoghue to send me a copy when he gets hold of it.

Mr. David Donoghue:

Certainly. The Deputy also spoke about the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly having one view and the ODIHR having another. While we held the chair of the OSCE, we regretted that there were differences in assessment between the two on a regular basis and it is a shame that this continues to be the case. We are not apportioning blame, but clearly it would be better if there was a single OSCE perspective.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It might be covered in the study of relationships.

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did anybody cover the new democracy in Myanmar-Burma and the European Union's relationship with it?

Mr. David Cooney:

It is moving apace. As the Chairman knows, the European Union has lifted the restrictions on Myanmar, with the exception of the arms embargo. We are working very hard. There are some human rights issues. The Muslim minority community has been subject to a very heavy-handed crackdown and abuse.

The EU was very active in raising this issue. All I can say is the relationship at EU level has been transformed. From an Irish perspective we have been very active and our ambassador in Hanoi has been appointed on a non-resident basis. He has been there several times with companies, and a scoping mission is due to go out in several weeks to examine how we might develop or introduce assistance in Myanmar through the Irish Aid programme and how we might look to expand our trade connections. It will be a mixed delegation with people involved in trade and development. It is very positive but we recognise we still have problems and issues to address and we are very keen to help the authorities in Myanmar to do so.

3:50 pm

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Cooney. Obviously this is an issue we will keep under review.

Photo of Jim WalshJim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Cooney overlooked two questions on how aid money to Ethiopia was used, which is an important issue, and how long the ambassador to the Vatican will be non-resident and when will we have a resident ambassador there.

Mr. David Cooney:

Irish Aid money in Ethiopia was being channelled through an organisation dedicated to maternal health. Among its activities it facilitated abortion. Some years ago Irish Aid acted to make it very clear that money being given by it could not be channelled to abortion. I understand that at present we do not fund this programme. The question on the embassy to the Holy See is political and all I can say is that I do not see my posting as permanent.

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not expect Mr. Cooney to answer the question. I thank Mr. Cooney for his very informative discussion on foreign policy matters in the EU. It has been a very useful meeting for the members. It is good to have such meetings once or twice a year. As Mr. Donohoe will probably not come before the committee again before his new appointment at the UN in September, I wish him well in his new posting and we hope to work closely with him. I wish all of the witness well in their dealings as they wind up the Irish Presidency which has been quite successful and very cost efficient, which is extremely important.

Mr. David Cooney:

I thank the Chairman and committee members for their support and I wish them a successful trip to the Middle East.

Photo of Eric ByrneEric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before the officials leave is it appropriate to congratulate Ms Samantha Power on her appointment by Barack Obama?

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will discuss it with correspondence and any other business. It is on the agenda.