Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. I welcome the opportunity to meet them today to review recent discussions at the Foreign Affairs Council in the latter half of 2013. It has been a busy few months with the Council focusing on a number of important issues, including efforts to reinvigorate the Middle East peace process, the search for a resolution to the ongoing crisis in Syria, instability in the wider southern neighbourhood region and intensive debate about our future engagement with our partners to the east.

The eastern partnership summit took place in Vilnius on Thursday and Friday of last week. I will begin by providing an overview and assessment of developments in the run-up to and following the summit. The Foreign Affairs Council has had regular discussions on the eastern partnership in recent months in preparation for last week's summit. A key issue related to whether Ukraine had fulfilled the criteria set out by the Council for signature of an association agreement with the EU. As members will be aware, in the event, Ukraine opted to suspend its preparations for signature, citing national security considerations and the wish to renew trade with Russia and other members of the Eurasian customs union. Ukraine's decision is a disappointment to us all as we believe that the prospective association agreement has the potential to support much needed reforms in Ukraine and to help build a better future for its people.

Disappointment is also evident in the large public demonstrations taking place in Kiev. I urge the Ukrainian authorities to respect the right to freedom of expression and assembly and to respond in a restrained manner. The EU's fair offer stands, and it will be for Ukraine to decide on its future path.

On a more positive note, the summit also saw the initialling of the EU association agreements with Georgia and Moldova. In reviewing the summit at the forthcoming December Council, Ministers will wish to discuss how best the EU can support both countries in following their chosen path in the face of likely external pressure from Russia. The broader question of the future course of the eastern partnership and its relations with the Eurasian customs union will need to be addressed by Ministers in the coming months and will also have to be factored into our discussions with Russia en marge of the Council meeting and at the January 2014 EU-Russia summit.

The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, has been invited to join us for discussion over lunch at the December Council. There are clearly areas where we can co-operate constructively with Russia, including on non-proliferation, the fight against terrorism and in our engagement with Iran and Afghanistan. It is also equally clear that our perspectives and values continue to diverge to a significant degree on other issues, including in the human rights sphere. Most immediately, and in the wake of last week's summit in Vilnius, it will be interesting to hear what our Russian colleague has to say about the eastern partnership and specifically Moscow's view on Ukraine's future orientation and aspirations for greater European integration.

Turning to the southern neighbourhood, a key issue on the Council's agenda remains the appalling conflict in Syria which is now approaching its third anniversary. The Council discussed the latest developments in Syria at its meetings in October and November and will do so again when it meets on 16 December.

The major recent development was the announcement by UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, on 25 November that the long-planned Geneva II peace conference is scheduled to begin on 22 January.

I welcome this announcement and commend Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Joint Special Representative Brahimi, and also Secretary of State Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov for their efforts to persuade both the Assad Government and the Syrian opposition to attend these crucial talks.

It is imperative that all sides involved in the Syrian conflict now embrace this vital opportunity to achieve a political resolution and promote an agreed transition within Syria. The challenges of reaching agreement remain immense, not least since both sides continue to believe that they can achieve victory on the battle-field, and at the cost of immense suffering for the Syrian population. I urge all those invited to Geneva, which should include all significant regional players involved with or able to influence the conflict, to expend every effort in seeking an agreed and just outcome.

The other vital aspect of the Syrian conflict is the humanitarian situation. A particularly heavy price is being paid by Syria’s neighbours, notably Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, which have had to bear the brunt of coping with the more than 2 million refugees from the conflict. The Council addressed the regional impact of the crisis in its conclusions last month and recognised the importance of support and financial assistance, developmental as well as humanitarian, to enable the host countries to respond to the growing needs of both refugees and those communities hosting them. I am pleased that Ireland has been able to respond generously to the major humanitarian crisis confronting Syria and the wider region. Our total contribution to date stands at €13.8 million, of which €11.15 million has been provided in 2013.

In my remarks to the November Council, I emphasised the vital issue of access for humanitarian aid. The UN now estimates there are some 2.5 million people inside Syria in need who have not been reached with any assistance for up to a year. The UN Security Council on 2 October adopted a Presidential statement urging all sides in Syria to respect their international legal obligations and facilitate access by humanitarian actors to those in need. Regrettably, this statement appears to have had little impact on the ground. I will continue to emphasise the urgent need for the UN Security Council to adopt a binding Resolution which might compel all sides, but particularly the Syrian government, to remove obstacles to the delivery of aid.

The process of destruction of Syria’s stock of chemical weapons, which is being overseen by the UN and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, OPCW, is underway and remains on course to meet the mid-2014 end-date. Ireland has joined with other EU and international partners in offering financial support to this process. However, major challenges remain, not least the actual destruction of chemical weapons stocks which is due to commence early in the new year.

I attended an extraordinary meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council on 21 August which considered the widespread disturbances in Egypt following the forced dispersal of supporters of the ousted President, Mohammed Morsi, which resulted in the deaths of many hundreds of people. The Council has continued to closely monitor developments in the interim and the EU, including through its Special Representative, Bernardino Leon, has remained actively engaged in efforts to try to promote reconciliation and political dialogue, and to fully restore Egypt to a path of democracy and constitutional order. The Council will discuss the current situation in Egypt at its December meeting. There have been some recent positive developments, notably the lifting last month of the State of Emergency imposed in August. However, there are also worrying developments, such as the adoption in recent weeks of a draconian new anti-protest law which fails to safeguard such basic rights as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.

The interim government of President Mansour continues to follow the 20 August road map aimed at implementing a new constitution before proceeding to hold fresh parliamentary and presidential elections. The revised constitution is likely to be finalised shortly and submitted to a referendum possibly as early as January, with both elections then due to be held before the summer. I welcome the invitation extended to the EU to monitor the constitutional referendum.

Little progress is evident however, as regards reconciliation and launching a genuinely inclusive political dialogue within the country. Egypt appears more politically polarised than ever between those who supported the ousting of President Morsi’s government last July and those who opposed it. I believe we should continue to pass clear messages to the interim authorities on the need for dialogue, inclusivity and restoring Egypt to a fully constitutional path. Ultimately, the problems which Egypt has encountered in recent months are political and can only be fully resolved through dialogue.

Following the tragic sinking of a boat carrying illegal migrants off the coast of Lampedusa in early October, in which several hundred people lost their lives, discussions have intensified at EU level on how to prevent similar tragedies from recurring. These issues have been recently discussed at the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council and the European Council. Foreign Ministers also discussed the issue at our November meeting, in light of instability in the Southern Neighbourhood and the wider security threat that this poses. The JHA Council this week will examine a report from the Commission Taskforce established to identify priority actions to address these problems, and the Presidency will report back on this matter to the December European Council.

Although not formally on its agenda in recent months, the Council has been kept fully appraised by High Representative Ashton of progress in the vital negotiations being conducted by the E3+3, that is, France, Germany, the UK, the US, Russia and China with Iran in regard to its nuclear programme. As I said in my statement at the time, I warmly welcome the agreement reached in Geneva early on the 24 November by the E3+3 and Iran. High Representative Ashton and all those involved, including Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif, are to be commended for having fashioned an agreement which was never going to be easy and involved difficult concessions on all sides.

The Geneva accord, due to run for six months but renewable, represents a first step towards a comprehensive agreement with Iran aimed at resolving the many concerns and questions to which Iran’s nuclear programme has given rise over the past decade. It should be welcomed as setting out a road map for resolving diplomatically this vital international issue and helping to prevent the further proliferation of nuclear weapons. I have no doubt that, if faithfully implemented by all sides over the next six months, it can greatly contribute to promoting increased regional and global security. I look forward to hearing High Representative Ashton’s own personal assessment when she briefs the Council on the Geneva agreement on 16 December.

The December Council is expected to take stock of developments in regard to the Middle East peace process. The US-sponsored peace talks began in late July and are now at almost the half-way point of their allotted nine-month time-span. Both parties are continuing to engage and wisely saying nothing publicly about the discussions to date. I have on numerous occasions expressed both Ireland’s and the EU’s full support for this process which possibly represents the last chance to achieve a negotiated two-state solution. It is incumbent upon us to give the parties every opportunity to engage meaningfully in the talks and hopefully make progress in addressing the core issues which are well known.

No-one under-estimates the scale of the challenge facing the two negotiating teams. Nor would it be honest to pretend that all has run smoothly during the past four months. President Abbas is continuing his efforts to persuade his negotiating team, led by Saed Erekat, to rescind the resignations which they submitted some weeks ago in protest at announcements of further Israeli settlement expansion.

I and many others in the international community have criticised these announcements as not being consistent with a genuine effort to achieve a peace deal. None the less, my strong advice to both sides would be to stay the course. These talks are benefitting from the strong personal commitment and involvement of both Secretary of State Kerry and President Obama. If all sides genuinely engage in good faith in the remaining months and desist from actions counter-productive to the talks process, then I believe that long-sought prize of a just, agreed two-state solution can still be achieved, to the immense benefit of not just the Middle East region but the world.

EU foreign affairs and defence Ministers met in a joint session at the November meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council for a wide ranging discussion on the Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP. Their discussions were informed by a report from the High Representative and a Commission Communication. We discussed draft conclusions on CSDP which were subsequently formally adopted on 25 November. The conclusions cover the effectiveness and visibility of the CSDP, the capabilities required for CSDP missions and the defence industry from where these capabilities are sourced. The conclusions have been conveyed to President Van Rompuy and together with input from the Competitiveness Council and the EDA Steering Board will form the basis for the December European Council Conclusions on defence issues.

The December Council is expected to review developments in the Western Balkans region, in advance of the adoption by the General Affairs Council the following day of conclusions on the EU’s annual enlargement package. At our November meeting, we had a good discussion on the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I joined with my colleagues in voicing my concern at the lack of progress in the country. We expressed support for the EU’s on-going efforts to facilitate agreement among the country’s leaders on constitutional reform, in particular on the implementation of the European Court of Human Right’s "Sejdić-Finci" ruling. I very much hope that agreement can be reached soon on this sensitive issue, which is a key requirement in order for Bosnia to continue to pursue its EU integration path.

I expect we will again address the situation in Bosnia at our December meeting, as well as discussing relations with Serbia, Kosovo, Albania and Macedonia.

Myanmar-Burma has also featured on the Council agenda in recent months. We were joined for lunch by Aung San Suu Kyi at the October meeting. Her main request to the EU related to the need to reinforce strong political messages to the Myanmar Government to push ahead with the reform agenda. At the November Council, High Representative Ashton reported on the first meeting of the EU-Myanmar task force, which took place in Rangoon on 14 and 15 November last. The task force reiterated the EU's political messages to the Myanmar Government in terms of inclusive and deep democracy, also in view of the elections in 2015. Bilateral contacts have also intensified in recent months.

Officials from my Department visited Myanmar-Burma in early July on a scoping mission. Their objectives were to explore possible economic and trade opportunities and to identify options for a focussed programme of development assistance to help underpin the political transition that is under way in the country. Having considered the report of that mission, and the reports of recent visits by our ambassador in Hanoi, who is accredited to Myanmar, I have decided to approve funding of €500,000 for a bilateral development assistance programme in Myanmar-Burma in 2013. This is in addition to the €1.3 million provided to Trócaire and the €250,000 provided to GOAL already this year. In implementing the development programme, we will take on board the comments made by Aung San Suu Kyi at the October Council. We will focus on support for improved livelihoods for poor rural people, the development of the agriculture sector, support for the peace process and the development of responsible business practice and transparency. As we embark on this bilateral programme of support, it will be important to continue to monitor and address humanitarian needs and responses in light of the difficult situations in Rakhine and Kachin states.

High Representative Ashton briefed Ministers at the November Council meeting in advance of the 16th EU-China summit. The summit, which took place in Beijing on 21 November last and was presided over by President Xi Jinping and Presidents Van Rompuy and Barroso, delivered a number of positive outcomes, including the launching of negotiations on an investment agreement. There have been developments at bilateral level, including a political and trade mission to Beijing and Shanghai, which I led from 30 July to 2 August 2013. I held a bilateral meeting with Chinese Vice Premier Ma Kai during his visit to Ireland in October. Our discussions covered a wide range of topics, including Ireland’s economic recovery, ways to advance bilateral co-operation across a range of areas and human rights issues. On 23 November last, China announced that it had established an East China sea air defence identification zone over an area of the East China Sea that covers the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, which are also claimed by Japan. In a declaration on 28 November last, the High Representative expressed the EU's concern at China’s decision to establish this zone and called on all sides to exercise caution and restraint. Ireland would wish to see this dispute resolved peacefully through dialogue and in accordance with international law.

The December Foreign Affairs Council is expected to endorse the strategic framework for the EU and member states' non-military engagement in Afghanistan from mid-2014 to 2016. EU engagement will focus on existing frameworks and areas critical to achieving progress in Afghanistan over the next three years. An EU priority is to promote Afghan ownership and mutual accountability of the Government of Afghanistan and the international community on the basis of the Tokyo mutual accountability framework. The EU will also focus on further development of Afghanistan's civil institutions to provide the resilience needed to safeguard progress achieved to date.

It is expected at this stage that the December Council will discuss developments in the Central African Republic, which has seen an escalation of political instability and violence in recent weeks. This is a cause of grave concern to Ireland and our EU partners. Our discussions will consider what support the EU might provide and will be informed by developments at the UN Security Council.

At our December meeting, Foreign Ministers will consider a report and recommendations by the High Representative on the European External Action Service, which was established in 2010 and has been in operation for nearly three years. The review process has provided a useful opportunity to take stock of the progress achieved to date and to consider what areas might be further improved in the period ahead. The General Affairs Council is expected to adopt formal conclusions with regard to the European External Action Service review at its meeting the following day.

I thank the committee for its valuable contribution and support over the last 12 months. I look forward to continuing engagement with members in 2014. I will happy to take any questions they might have.

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

I thank the Tánaiste for his comprehensive report on various meetings that have taken place recently and the meeting that will take place next week. As we have another session with the Tánaiste later today, I ask members to keep their questions and comments brief. Many people want to contribute to this meeting. I would appreciate it if members would focus on asking questions rather than making comments.

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

I welcome the Tánaiste's detailed statement on the issues discussed at recent meetings and to be discussed at the forthcoming Council meeting. The eastern partnership is very important in the interests of stability and prosperity in the countries to the east of the EU. At one stage, the Kremlin regarded the eastern partnership as just another EU initiative. It seems to have amended its view to one of outright opposition. Can the Tánaiste tell us whether there has been any dialogue with the Russian authorities since last week at Commissioner level or at the level of the President of the Council? I welcome the fact that the Russian Foreign Minister will join the Ministers for lunch at the Council meeting.

We appreciate the submission of the detailed briefing note that was prepared by the Department. According to the briefing note, an EU-Russia summit is "currently scheduled" for the end of January. That suggests to me that there may be a doubt about whether the summit meeting will go ahead. It is very important that it does from the perspective of developing relations between the EU and Russia.

I would like to comment on the figures quoted by the Tánaiste with regard to Syria. It is frightening to think that 2.5 million people have not been reached with assistance over the past year, that 6 million people have been displaced and that terrible loss of life and acts of inhumanity have occurred. We hope some progress will be made at the Geneva II conference at the end of January. I have seen correspondence from a person who is advocating on behalf of the opposition in Syria. Obviously, I do not know the accuracy of this suggestion. The person in question quoted from some noted international commentators on foreign relations who believe there is widespread concern about the "lack of western support for the moderates" and their "effective abandonment" by the west. They argue that Assad is regaining momentum and suggest that air bombardments and barrel bombings are continuing. Obviously, I hope this correspondence is wrong in its suggestion that the talks will be "pointless". It is important that we air this viewpoint, which has been put to us. I do not know how well based it is. The humanitarian crisis in Syria has departed the public mind following the desperate typhoon disaster and subsequent humanitarian crisis in the Philippines. We hope the Tánaiste will continue to encourage the EU and the international community to provide more assistance to the people of Syria. We should recognise the good assistance that Syria has received from neighbouring countries and the pressures that have been placed on those countries.

Having been critical of the European External Action Service in the past, I acknowledge that High Representative Ashton has been praised for her role in achieving an interim agreement on Iran's nuclear programme. It is important for me to record that at a time when the work of the action service is being reviewed.

The outlook for the Middle East peace process is not very positive at the moment. Perhaps the Tánaiste could indicate to us whether there have been any developments regarding the ban on products from illegal settlements.

The Tánaiste referred to the unfortunate increase in violence in the Central African Republic. I think there was an Irish Aid programme there in the past. The Tánaiste might let us know whether we are in a position to assist the people of that country at this time.

I hope the humanitarian problems facing the people of the Philippines following the terrible disaster there will be considered at the Council meeting. When Mr. Peter Power of UNICEF, who is a former Dáil colleague of ours, gave this committee a detailed, effective and powerful presentation on the crisis a fortnight ago, he outlined very clearly the difficulties that will arise when the pictures go from our television screens and there is very little international coverage of the difficulties in the Philippines. We must be very conscious that they will need assistance in the long term.

It was brought to our attention that in one area where 90% of the community depends on fishing for an income, practically every boat and vessel had been shattered and broken. Sadly, the possibility of deriving a livelihood from the sea has been taken from this community. I hope humanitarian issues in Syria and the Philippines will be at the forefront of considerations when the Tánaiste meets his colleagues at the forthcoming Council. I thank him again for his detailed presentation.

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

The Tánaiste referred to events in Ukraine, about which we are all concerned. The European Union appears to have adopted a zero sum position where the Ukraine must agree to the complete package if progress is to be made. Could anything else have been done in this process? For example, should the European Union have engaged in simultaneous negotiations with the Russian Federation?

Ukrainians face the possibility of facing freezing winter conditions without gas and power supplies because they may be cut. There is also a concern that a state of emergency will be called, which would give the authorities repressive powers. Ukraine has been unstable since the jailing of Ms Yulia Tymoshenko on politically motivated charges. There are tensions in the country between pro-EU and pro-Russian sides. Is it possible to bridge this gap? Many people believe the wider region has the potential to become a bridge between the European Union and Russia but the countries of the region are in a difficult position. Could the European Union do more in this regard? Buildings are being occupied and the police are being attacked in Ukraine, which is in a state of unrest. At the same time, the EU is taking a strong line requiring the country to agree to everything before anything is agreed. That is how the position appears to an outsider in any case.

The Tánaiste confirmed that the Geneva II talks on Syria will take place. The situation in Syria is deteriorating. One issue that is being overlooked is the role of the Kurdish people who make up 15% of Syria and is primarily concentrated in the north east and north west of the country. The Kurds have largely stayed neutral in the conflict, which is a positive development. Will the Tánaiste support giving a seat to a Kurdish delegation at the Geneva II talks, rather than having the Kurds lumped in with the wider opposition? The Kurdish aspect of the Syrian issue has not been adequately discussed.

The Tánaiste referred to the positive news on Iran. Is he concerned by the Israeli Prime Minister's extremely critical reaction to the agreement and his statement that the world is being fooled by Iran? Could his position have a destabilising effect?

On the talks on Israel and Palestine, there is some disagreement among Palestinian representatives. Just yesterday, a Palestinian parliamentarian visited the House to discuss the ongoing difficulties in the region. To what extent does the continuation of settlement building during the negotiations undermine the credibility of those taking part in the talks and the entire negotiation process? We hear stories from the Occupied Territories about refuse trucks in Gaza running out of oil, power shortages in hospitals affecting people on dialysis, etc. Problems of this nature are bubbling up outside the talks and we have no idea whether the negotiations are essentially for show or will lead anywhere. The United States Administration has expressed confidence that progress is being made. I am worried about the impact of the expansion of settlements on the process.

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

Deputy Brendan Smith stated that other events will push Syria down the agenda. The issue that has been pushed furthest down the agenda is the Middle East peace process. It is very much on my mind because I visited Palestine a couple of weeks ago. There is no doubt that settlements are oppressive and threatening. Apart from the moral and ethical aspects of the issue, the settlements also give rise to significant environmental and ecological issues. Large-scale building in such a small area is placing pressure on water supplies and is not doing the environment any good, not to speak of the other effects of settlement construction.

It was interesting to meet Israelis and Palestinians during our visit because I did not get a sense that the two state solution is making as much progress as the Tánaiste suggests. Ordinary people, including left-wing Israelis and Palestinians who are not involved in politics, do not consider a two state solution to be achievable in their lifetime.

While it is welcome to note the chemical weapons issue is being addressed, it has distracted attention from the serious suffering that is being caused by other types of weapons. We spoke previously about Ireland supporting proposals for humanitarian corridors, where a ceasefire would be called to allow assistance into Syria. The recent request by Valerie Amos of the United Nations that access be provided for food and medicine does not appear to have been heeded. After three years of appalling suffering, there is no end to civilian suffering. While talks have been arranged to discuss political solutions, no one is pressing for humanitarian issues to be addressed in the same way.

For the information of members, the EU special representative for the southern Mediterranean region, Mr. Bernardino León, will visit Ireland at the beginning of February to attend an AWEPA sponsored event on reconstituting constitutions. Some members of parliament from Arab spring countries who will also attend have been invited to a meeting of the Constitutional Convention.

I tabled questions to the Tánaiste about the Rohingya people, one of the ethnic groups in Burma which has suffered serious human rights abuses. Has this issue arisen in discussions on Burma? I will raise some points on Africa when the Tánaiste next speaks.

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

Syria's information Minister stated today that the Geneva II talks will not lead anywhere unless President Assad leads an interim government. Against that background, are the talks doomed before they start?

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The questions covered considerable ground. On the eastern partnership, we had hoped to be able to sign the association agreement with Ukraine at the Vilnius summit and work was progressing to that end. There have been ongoing discussions about the requirement to meet the conditions necessary for signature. One of the key issues was the issue of what is known as selective justice, at the centre of which were the circumstances surrounding Ms Yulia Tymoshenko. A process initiated by the European Parliament was under way in which former Irish MEP, Pat Cox, and former Polish Prime Minister, Aleksander Kwaśniewski, were leading discussions which it was hoped would lead to a resolution of that problem. In the event, it was taken out of the hands of the European Union states because Ukraine decided it would not, at this stage, proceed with the signature of the association agreement.

I hope that position will change. In terms of Russia's relationship with the European Union, the association agreement with all six Eastern Partnership countries, is not only of mutual benefit to the six countries concerned and the European Union but in Russia's interest. It would strengthen the relationship between the European Union and Russia at a number of levels. This is one of the issues we will discuss with Foreign Minister Lavrov at the next Foreign Affairs Council. It is intended that the EU-Russia summit, scheduled for the end of January, will go ahead. All the preparatory work is being done.

I am addressing the issues sequentially. Deputies Brendan Smith, Seán Crowe, Maureen O'Sullivan and the Chairman raised issues pertaining to Syria. We have put great emphasis in our discussions at the Foreign Affairs Council and elsewhere on the humanitarian side of the Syrian crisis. The chemical weapons issue is in the process of being resolved. We need to reflect that the chemical weapons issue had the potential to generate further conflict in Syrian. There was much talk of military intervention in the middle of August. A date has been set for the Geneva II talks. I understand there is a degree of pessimism about the Geneva II talks but it is the only show in town in relation to the participation of Kurdish people. Both Special Representative Brahimi and UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, have urged the coalition to work together and to form a united delegation at the Geneva II talks. It is ultimately for each element of the opposition to decide on their approach to Geneva II but a divided opposition is likely to make reaching agreement more difficult. I think the urgent issue is that of the humanitarian access. The UN President's statement in October is not being complied with on the ground. That is why we support and have called for a UN Security Council resolution which would be binding and would allow for humanitarian access. We got a briefing on the situation from Commissioner Georgieva who has responsibility from an EU point of view for the humanitarian contribution that the European Union is making. The European Union's contribution and that of the member states is by some distance the largest contribution to the humanitarian effort in Syria but, of course, the big burden is being borne by the neighbouring countries of Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. At the December Council I expect we will be back discussing the humanitarian issue as well.

As I said in my opening statement, the discussion under way on the Middle East peace process is probably the last opportunity to conclude a settlement based on the two-state solution. The continuing announcement of settlements is undermining the process. It is physically undermining it on the ground because the more settlements that are built the harder it will be from a geographic point of view to have two states and, of course, is undermining the talks process. However, internationally we have to encourage both the Israeli and the Palestinian side to remain committed to the talks and to try to get a resolution.

I answered a question recently in which I confirmed that we are funders of the UN administered common humanitarian fund for the Central African Republic. For a number of years Ireland and Sweden are the two member states that have supported this fund. We contributed more than €2 million since 2009.

A number of issues arise in regard to Iran. It is important to recognise that progress is being made. The E3+3 talks had been stalled for a long period. I pay tribute, in particular, to the persistence of Catherine Ashton who has done a fabulous job in taking on the Iran issue when nobody else would touch it and has stayed with it. I pay tribute to the progress she has made on the issue. I can understand Israeli concerns in relation to Iran's stated intentions with regard to the nuclear issue but there is no alternative to negotiations. With respect, I regard Prime Minister Netanyahu's assessment as hard to reconcile with the realities of the deal. What we have to do now is build on it.

On the question of the Philippines, we have been contributing to the humanitarian effort. It was not a major item for discussion at the last Foreign Affairs Council. Clearly there were references to it because, obviously, it was very much in the news at the time. Other European Union states are mobilising to support it.

In regard to Myanmar-Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi attended the October meeting where a good discussion took place with her on the position. On the occasion of her visit to Dublin to receive the freedom of the city of Dublin I had a very good meeting with her when we discussed the development of bilateral relations. Following that meeting we reactivated our diplomatic relations with Myanmar-Burma and assigned the ambassador in Vietnam to be ambassador to Myanmar-Burma. A scoping visit by officials from my Department has taken place and we are building on that. I think that covers all the points.

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

If there is anything left out we can return to them. Deputies Bernard Durkan, Eric Byrne and Olivia Mitchell are offering.

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

I thank the Tánaiste for appearing before the committee and giving a comprehensive review of activities. As the Chairman will be aware I attended, on the Chairman's behalf, the December meeting in Vilnius of chairmen which was taking place last week. Considerable concern was expressed at the unsatisfactory conclusion of the Eastern Partnership so far as the Ukraine was concerned. A long and animated discussion took place on the treatment meted out to Ms Yulia Tymoshenko in particular. It was also pointed out that those on the east of the Ukraine appear to come under greater influence of Russia while those to the west are more oriented towards the European Union, which I suppose is natural. To what extent can the European Union continue to engage with the Ukraine and, perhaps, the Russian authorities with a view to ensuring that the obvious will of a majority of the Ukrainian people in terms of orientation towards the European Union is acknowledged, provided and catered for?

That would be important, considering Georgia and Moldova have accepted and concluded their association agreements. Had the Ukraine completed its requirements in regard to the partnership and the acquis and to what extent is it influenced by the Russian authorities in this regard?

I wish to make two or three other points. The humanitarian issue has been covered, but there is a danger that areas like the Philippines could be ignored because of a series of competing crises all over the globe at the same time. In such situations, can we be assured an adequate international focus will continue to apply to countries in positions such as that of the Phillipines?

I want to congratulate all involved in the progress that has been made in regard to Iran. This is of huge benefit to global peace. While there is still a long way to go, the discussions were critical and will be reviewed over the trial period. It is incumbent on all concerned to maintain the focus. I compliment Catherine Nash on what has been achieved.

What is taking place in regard to the Middle East peace process may not be all that spectacular, but it is taking place. I urge that everything possible be done to ensure the focus remains on the process, flimsy as it may be, so that it continues, strengthens and is successful.

Members have covered the other issues. I believe the review of the European external action service is useful. It is critical that process is adequately geared up to quickly address issues as they arise. There is a grave danger that because of the multiplicity of issues confronting the European Union and the international community at any given time, it could be overwhelmed. I hope the external action process will be able to make provisions to deal with that.

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

I welcome the Minister and his staff. I want to speak about the Ukraine because that country is of key importance to the region and to Europe. Should we be surprised by what has happened? The western media built up the association agreement as being on the verge of being signed, but we suddenly discovered there are other forces at play which have prevented the Ukraine from signing it at this point. Was the Minister not aware of the power of Russian diplomacy, in whatever guise it takes, in that region? For example, did he not consider it after Armenia became the first of the six countries to break with Europe in favour of the customs union? At the time, Armenia's decision was loudly proclaimed to be because of the diplomacy of Russia, which, to call a spade a spade, is fairly forceful when it is dealing with weaker neighbours, particularly around the issue of energy supply. Does the Minister accept that when Yanukovych cites national security considerations, he may have real grounds for concern? For example, he may be concerned the Ukraine's energy supply will be cut, which is the formula I think the Russians use in international diplomacy. If that happened, Yanukovych would have a serious problem.

I would like to convey the lonely position I hold. My view of the West's dealings with the Ukraine is that the West looks at it as though it is two states rather than one. We have heard the name Tymoshenko mentioned many times. She is in jail and we all agree she may be a political prisoner. This country was bankrupted by politicians. Tymoshenko did a deal on energy that was unsustainable. She is an oligarch and was allegedly corrupt and tried and sentenced by the Ukrainian system. I would like to see some of our former leaders, who bankrupted this country, being tried and, perhaps, interned.

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

I ask Deputy Byrne to stick to the point.

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

The point I want to make is that this simplification of the Ukrainian issue as being a kind of Tymoshenko-Yanukovych, party of the regions conflict is wrong. What efforts is the European Union making to convey to the Eastern wing, the Russian speaking half, that we do not seek to dominate it and that we recognise a unitary state and that we will have to work overtime to woo it towards the West?

Some Minister, perhaps the Tánaiste himself, will travel to Russia in January. We got a commitment when we were debating the sensitive issue of the Magnitsky case that this would be raised under the issue of human rights the next time we were dealing with the Russians. Will the Minister give us a commitment that will be done? Subsequent to that case, we have concerns regarding the obscene treatment of gay and lesbian people.

I agree we should be concerned about what is happening and about the diplomacy of the Russians. The Minister mentioned Georgia and Moldova. The Georgians should thank their lucky stars - they should be on their hands and knees thanking the Russians for not going all the way to Tbilisi when it could well have done so on the basis Georgia provoked the Russian bear. Moldova is an incredibly weak and poor country that is sandwiched between Romania and the Ukraine. The Ukrainian issue is key, not just in regard to our influence in the region, but to give the stability required to the likes of Moldova. We have a good relationship with Romania.

Is Russian diplomacy winning the day? It seems to have outskilled the West on a number of issues recently. Was it in the Iranian talks it did so? I cannot quite remember whether it was Iran or some other country. In fact it was Syria. The Russians were diplomatically astute and took the West by surprise. We have a lot in common with Russia in the sense that it is strongly anti-terrorist and has worked closely with Europe on a number of issues. The Russian Foreign Minister, Lavrov, could be included in discussions. The art of negotiation is in arriving at a conclusion to these complex issues. However, I get the feeling that, in regard to Ukraine in particular, we see it as a West-East issue. We do not see it as a unitary state, but as a divided state.

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to thank the Minister for his presentation. No doubt he has been extremely busy in the past six months, just as busy as he was during our Presidency. There is no sign of a let up in the next six months.

Most of the points have been made, but I want to go back to the Palestinian issue. Others have mentioned it and I am sure the Minister is aware of the tightening of the blockade around Gaza and of the huge human misery this is causing because of the limited access to any form of power. As described by a UN commissioner, the situation has deteriorated to a state where Gaza is virtually uninhabitable.

It is approaching that situation now. The fact that there are talks going on does not mean the Israelis should be immune from criticism. There is a major humanitarian crisis emerging there yet again. As Deputy O'Sullivan said, at the least there should be humanitarian access to Gaza.

Meanwhile, in the West Bank and elsewhere the settlement programme is expanding with greater levels of violence, apparently. I appreciate what the Tánaiste has said about the talks and that they must go ahead. However, the Israelis should be left in no doubt that if they think this is upping the ante in their favour or that it will somehow improve their negotiating position, then they should be disabused of that opinion. Unfortunately, I do not believe they want that or that it is their aim. As the Tánaiste said, what they are doing is totally undermining the talks. It is altogether counter-productive for anyone who wants a two-state settlement. Perhaps that is exactly the outcome they want. Perhaps they want to undermine the talks.

The Israelis are given support in the sense that, apparently, they appear to be immune to any criticism or international opprobrium, much less international sanctions. Inevitably, this gives them the idea that they can continue to do what they like to the Palestinians. I was reading about the EU research grant. There was a gesture made that perhaps the Union might not give it to firms in settlement areas. The outcome was farcical. It was nothing more than a gesture against the idea of the settlement policy of the Israelis. The trouble is that we are constantly making gestures with no follow-through, with the result that the settlements continue to expand. As the Tánaiste said, time is running out for a two-state solution, if it has not already run out.

The Tánaiste should let no opportunity pass to let the Israelis know what we think of their policies, especially the position in Gaza where people have been living in misery for years. I am unsure what the Israelis hope to achieve by squeezing Gaza almost to death but we cannot stand by and simply watch it happen.

Noel Grealish (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I raised the issue about Ukraine and the Russians in the Dáil this morning. I realise previous speakers have raised the same issue. Will the Tánaiste outline the EU response to the bully-boy tactics of Vladimir Putin? Since he became re-elected as president he has tried to flex his muscle. I have been watching him in the international field with his interference in Syria or the way he has operated in Syria and in the Ukraine. We can see plainly that they are trying to set up the Soviet bloc again and to stall any other countries from joining the European Union. What does the EU propose to do about this, especially given what has happened in the Ukraine? I realise that other speakers have raised the same issue and therefore I will not dwell on it. I look forward to the response of the Tánaiste on the EU response on the same issue.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for leaving, I had to go to a vote. I wish to reciprocate the good wishes of the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, and his staff. I have been on this committee since it started and I cannot remember a foreign affairs Minister who came in so frequently and dealt so comprehensively with issues. We are grateful indeed to the Tánaiste for it. I have a number of questions but I will be as succinct as I can.

One question is about Sri Lanka, a matter, I gather, which did not come in to the review. There is a situation relating to Mr. Jeyasundaram, who is an Irish citizen married to an Irish woman, Deirdre. The situation seems to be getting more extreme there with the concentration of greater and greater powers in the hands of the President and his family. I wonder whether pressure is continuing to be applied.

I am pleased that the question of the Middle East, the so-called peace process and the less and less likely two-state solution was brought up. There is a great deal of smoke and mirrors in this. The Israelis released 52 political prisoners but at the same time they snatched a further 550, ten times the number they released. I am glad that Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan visited Israel. Two of my colleagues from the other House accompanied her. They travelled at their own expense and initiative. They are greatly to be commended on this. They became aware of a situation in which I am keen for the Tánaiste to take a particular interest, that is, the attempted ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian people. These are quite primitive farmers, with no real political axe to grind, around Hebron in villages such as Susya and Twaneh. I hope that we will take an interest in these because there is a real principle at stake. This is real ethnic cleansing going on at the instigation of the Israeli Government. Unless we keep a spotlight on it, that government will be successful and will win that principle. I believe that would be a disaster.

While I am on the matter, I will ask a question which, even with his diplomatic talents, the Tánaiste may find impossible to answer. However, I believe it is important and I have been keen to ask it for some time. Does the Tánaiste find the efforts of his colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, who appears to have taken a position of de facto Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, of assistance in this area? Are they co-ordinated with his Department?

One element that seems to have been left out of the Syria situation and which I am concerned about is the fate of children. There are at least 250,000 children there. They are in a desperate situation. They have been forced to work at a very early age, they have no real proper education and their medical needs are not looked after. I am keen for some concentration on that question.

We all welcome the release of the three women in Egypt. I imagine the Department played a role in this. I hope pressure will be kept up because I understand the brother is still in captivity, or at least he was when I last heard about it. With regard to China, I hope that Tibet will never be allowed to slip off the agenda because there are increasingly worrying signs coming from there.

I hope my final point is not outside the realm of the thing because I have a broken-down car that I have to attend to and, therefore, I may be unable to stay for the whole meeting. I understand that the Department is undergoing a review of embassies and staff.

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

That is for the next session. I am not going to take any questions on that. The Tánaiste will address that in the next session. We are dealing with the European Council meeting.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could you give me an idea of the timescale?

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

It will be straight afterwards. If you let the Tánaiste answer questions now, we will go straight on into that area. We are staying with in the European Council.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In that case, I will reserve my question.

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

We are staying with the European Council meeting for now.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine. I shall wait and leave the car abandoned.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste for appearing before the committee. Many of the issues have been raised already. There is an issue with the common security and defence policy. A statement by EU High Representative Ashton referred to a more comprehensive and effective defence and security sector. My question relates to how Irish neutrality sits in that particular area and I have major concerns. In a report we received there was a reference in the conclusion to the effectiveness and visibility of common security and defence policy capabilities and the defence industry. My main concern is the term "defence industry". Clearly the defence industry has a vested interest in expanding and broadening Europe's role in defence and the security sector because there are billions of dollars to be made by doing so. What is Ireland's response to that given our traditional stance of neutrality?

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Tánaiste and I thank him for his comprehensive report. My apologies for having to leave because of a vote in the Seanad. We are all reading on a daily basis about the appalling situation in Syria that the civilian population, children in particular, as Senator Norris said, are going through. Most concerning is a report published yesterday by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights which stated that the Assad regime has authorised war crimes against humanity in Syria. Will the Tánaiste comment on that?

It is very obvious that the Assad regime is not responding to appeals by Valerie Amos to allow humanitarian access to towns under siege in the countryside around Damascus. Does the Minister feel that we and the EU are not taking a tough enough line on this? Does the Minister feel that the Western community is demonstrating too much respect for the Assad regime as a result of which the civilian population feels abandoned by the West? Is the question on sanctions against Syria likely to be on the agenda of the December Council meeting? What do our Government and the EU think about sanctions?

Given the delay in implementing the decision on the Sejdić-Finci case is it time for the EU to review its position on, and approach to, Bosnia?

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

To correct the record, I did not mean to speak about the Russian influence on Iran I was speaking about the Russian influence on the decommissioning of chemical weapons in Syria where Lavrov played a progressive leadership role.

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

I do not expect the Minister to answer a question about the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Deputy Shatter, because I believe that the Cabinet has collective responsibility for Government on that issue.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In respect of the Eastern Partnership, Ukraine and Russia, the Lithuanian Presidency did an excellent job preparing the Vilnius Summit. The signing of the association agreement with Georgia and Moldova was very significant. It is a pity that it was not possible to sign the association agreement with Ukraine, which is strategically important. It is very important that the EU-Ukraine relationship develop. There are conditions for the signing of association agreements. While the European Union understands the strategic importance of Ukraine, it is important that we do not dilute the standards and conditions which the European Union expects of prospective member states. The EU is based on certain very fundamental principles of rule of law, democracy and human rights, which must be respected. I believed that it was possible to reach a conclusion on the outstanding issues with Ukraine in advance of the Vilnius Summit and that we were heading in that direction when I left the last meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council. I expected that by the time of the meeting in Vilnius we would be in a position to sign the association agreement. I believed it was heading in that direction. They were all taken by surprise at the turn of events when Ukraine decided not to sign.

Deputies Byrne, Grealish and others raised the role of Russia in all of this. Deputy Byrne reminded us of the problem in Armenia, which had occurred sometime prior to that. We do not consider that the relationship between the European Union and the countries east of it is a zero sum game. This is not and should not be a question of Russia or the European Union because the countries concerned are important to Russia and the European Union, and the Russia-European Union relationship is important. Therefore, the meeting that we will have with Foreign Minister Lavrov at the next Foreign Affairs Council meeting will be very important because we need to have a frank discussion about where Russia sees this relationship going.

It is not a question of a competition between Russia and the European Union for the hearts and minds, love and affection of the Eastern Partnership countries. There is also a critical issue here about the relationship between the European Union and Russia and how that will be worked through in the long term. This is an issue of wide public debate in Ukraine. I hope that what we are seeing in Ukraine can be worked through and that we will get to a point where the association agreement can be signed.

In the Middle East the continuing blockade of Gaza and the continuing expansion of settlements, and the problem for the Bedouin communities - I visited some Bedouin communities when I was in the Middle East last year - undermine the peace discussions and threaten the prospects for a two-state solution. It is in the interest of the Palestinian people, Israel and the wider region to have this issue resolved. There is an opportunity to do this. There is engagement. The US Secretary of State, John Kerry, and President Obama have taken a very keen interest in this issue and committed themselves to it. For some time the European Union has sought a robust Middle East peace process through which peace negotiations would proceed. The European Union has a particularly strong role to play in the economic relationship that Europe has with Israel and Palestine, and the potential for that economic relationship. That will be an important dimension. The fact that discussions are under way does not mean that we do not continue to put pressure on Israel in respect of the blockade on Gaza and the continuing settlements. We must continue to do that.

Mention was made of what were described as competing crises. I did not have the opportunity to inform the committee about our work in the Philippines. I am very proud that despite the constraints on the country's budget, Ireland was among the first to respond to the typhoon Hayian disaster. Our contribution to date stands at over €3.6 million. This week there was a fourth airlift of vital supplies from Ireland which arrived in the Philippines on Monday morning bringing what we have delivered to a total of 166 tonnes, valued at almost €1 million. Last week, I authorised the deployment of a technical mission which landed in the Philippines last Thursday and has now reached the worst affected area.

We are continuing to work closely with the various UN agencies.

The humanitarian situation in Syria and the fate of the children in particular is our priority for our engagement on Syria. I will revert to Senator Norris separately on the Sri Lanka case because I do not have the information with me.

Senator Daly asked about the EU Common Security and Defence Policy. The European Union Common Security and Defence Policy set out in the Lisbon treaty is an integral part of the common foreign and security policy. It provides the Union with an operational capacity to undertake missions outside the EU for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations charter. Accordingly, the CSDP is entirely consistent with Ireland's values and interests, including the primacy of the United Nations in the maintenance of global peace and security. While the CSDP is an evolving process directed towards the achievement of ever greater effectiveness, successive treaties since the Maastrict treaty have stipulated that Union policy in this area shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain member states. Ireland's neutrality is not in any way affected by the discussions taking place on CSDP and in any event, Ireland's participation in European common defence is prohibited by Article 29.4.9o of the Constitution. Any change in that position may only take place with the approval of the people.

The question was raised about a review of the policy on Bosnia. The policy is being reviewed because of the lack of progress. I expect it to be the subject of discussion at the next meeting.

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

I thank the Tánaiste for dealing with these matters so comprehensively. I note the large attendance of members and of people in the Visitors Gallery. It shows that foreign affairs is top of the agenda in Ireland.

The second matter to be considered by today's meeting is the departmental review of foreign policy and external relations.

There is a vote in the Chamber. Does the Tánaiste wish to wait?

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am in the Chairman's hands.

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

We have four or five minutes if the Tánaiste's wishes to commence his presentation.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am concerned about the finishing time because there is a Labour Party parliamentary party meeting at 5 p.m.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is probably a very important meeting considering the recent defection, the enormous loss.

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

We will finish as quickly as possible.