Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Apologies have been received from the Cathaoirleach, Deputy Flanagan, and from Deputy Cronin.

Today we meet with An Tánaiste, Deputy Micheál Martin, to discuss matters that have arisen at the Foreign Affairs Council along with the individually tailored partnership programme with NATO. I understand the Tánaiste will be required to be in the Dáil to deliver a statement on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and will therefore need to depart from the joint committee at 5.15 p.m. The Tánaiste is very welcome and we look forward to hearing from him on the issues outlined. I also welcome his officials and thank them for the briefing material they have supplied to us.

The format of the meeting will be that we will hear the Tánaiste's opening statement followed by a question-and-answer session with the members of the committee. As we have a lot to get through at this meeting, I ask colleagues to be concise in their questions to allow all members the opportunity to participate.

I will read the usual note on privilege. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction. For those colleagues who are joining us online, I remind them that they are only allowed to participate in this meeting if they are physically located on the Leinster House complex. I again welcome the Tánaiste and ask him to make his opening statement.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chair and committee members for the invitation to brief them on developments at the European Union Foreign Affairs Council and at the United Nations since I last briefed them on those issues in October, as well as our relationship with NATO. As might be expected, discussions and decisions in all of these formats have been heavily focused on the crises in Ukraine and the Middle East. I will address those today, but I also wish to take the opportunity to highlight a select number of other issues that would be of interest to the committee.

I wish at the outset to address the situation in Ukraine, which I think is of grave concern to us all. Russia continues to expend enormous resources, political will and human life in pursuit of its imperial war in Ukraine. Its tactics are devastatingly cynical. This is a challenge to the security of our Continent, the likes of which none of us has witnessed in our lifetimes. As might be expected in these extraordinarily grave circumstances, the European Foreign Affairs Council has been heavily focused on mobilising substantive and multifaceted support for our Ukrainian neighbours and friends who continue to fight for their lives and their freedom. It is critical that they are successful. Next month, Switzerland will host a summit on peace in Ukraine.

We are focused and determined to support Ukraine in delivering a successful first summit. This will be an important moment in the path towards restoring peace on our Continent. It will be critical that peace, when it arrives, occurs on the terms we aspire to for the future of our Continent, that is, respect for international law, for human rights, and for the sovereignty of nations.

We cannot have a peace borne of conquest and war. Such a thing would be inherently unjust and could never last. We need to ensure that as many voices as possible from across the globe, deliver a riposte to Russia by clearly and unambiguously endorsing the principles of the Ukrainian peace plan at the summit next month. This would set us on the road to achieving a peace in Ukraine that is both just and sustainable. I, together with my Department of Foreign Affairs team, will be engaging with other states on this and I encourage the committee, which I know has a wide range of international contacts, to do the same. The Taoiseach will also be reaching out to key contacts at Head of Government level. This is about the future world we wish to inhabit. Our response to Russian aggression will have profound implications for the future of global peace and security.

Of course, the European Union has not just been focused on lobbying others. We have been working intensively on delivering several complex and important decisions on the nature and scale of the European Union's support for Ukraine in recent months. We have successfully restructured the mechanisms through which we deliver macrofinancial and military support to Ukraine to put it on a more stable and predictable footing.

We have also taken important steps forward in advancing Ukraine’s European Union membership; in further sanctioning the Russian military industrial complex and the businesses that finance it; and in utilising the profits from frozen Russian assets for the support of Ukraine. The decisions to open the €50 billion Ukraine Facility and the €5 billion Ukraine Assistance Fund, to open accession talks with Ukraine, to agree a 13th and soon 14th package of sanctions and to seize profits from frozen Russian assets have all been preceded by lengthy and at times difficult discussions. These instruments and mechanisms are, by necessity, complex, not least because they are designed to ensure that all member states, including ones such as ours, where we have specified that our contributions to the military effort should be in respect of non-lethal means only, are facilitated. However, vitally, and each and every time, the EU has emerged with agreement. We cannot underestimate the value of this as a clear signal to Russia that it cannot simply wait it out and that it cannot assume that a war of attrition will diminish support in the European Union for Ukraine, and thereby deliver it victory. That will not happen and we will not allow it to happen. While Russia thinks of new ways to cause more destruction, we think of new ways to support our neighbours.

Earlier this month, we celebrated a number of important milestones in European history, in commemorating both Europe Day on 9 May and the origin of what today is the European Union, and on 1 May, the 20th anniversary of the Union’s biggest single enlargement, in 2004. Those decisions all precipitated periods of unprecedented levels of co-operation and peaceful co-existence in Europe. The recent decisions to open accession negotiations with Ukraine, Moldova and Bosnia-Herzegovina and to grant conditional candidate status to Georgia are of immense, generational significance. I expect intergovernmental conferences to be held with Ukraine and Moldova before the end of the current Belgian European Union Presidency, marking the official commencement of accession negotiations with both countries.

The European Union is doing its part to make European Union membership a reality for candidate countries, using new tools such as the new growth plan for the western Balkans, which provides €6 billion of investment to bring the region closer to the European Union, accelerate accession reforms, and boost the regional economy. We are also increasing our own direct engagement with future EU member states. In March, the Government announced the opening of new embassies in Belgrade, Sarajevo and Chisinu. Under budget 2024, we have established a new fund to support candidate countries with their reform agendas.

It is important that I also address the situation in Georgia. The scenes we are witnessing on the streets of Tbilisi are shocking. Let us be crystal clear – these are not consistent with the behaviour of an EU member state. To the Government of Georgia, with which we have enjoyed frank and open engagement in recent years, I want to say that this is a very important moment in its journey towards accession to the European Union. Together with 11 of my European Union counterparts, I have written to the European Commission, asking it to urgently publicly report on what the implications might be on Georgia’s EU accession, should its government proceed with the current foreign agents legislation it is proposing. I know that its parliament is considering that Bill this week and I want to urge all parliamentarians who are genuinely committed to Georgia’s European Union vocation to vote against it. I would also urge this committee to use its links with Georgia’s parliamentarians to have the same discussions. Most importantly, I just want to say to the people of Georgia that we are listening to them and we hear their demands. We support them. We support a future for them that is characterised by democracy, freedom and dignity.

I also want to address the situation in Israel and Palestine. I have had regular exchanges with many members on the situation in the Dáil, and I want to pay tribute to all the members of this committee, from all parties, for their commitment over the last seven months to bring an end to this appalling war and to demand accountability for the terrible violations of international humanitarian law we are seeing on a daily basis. When I last updated the committee in October, it was in the immediate aftermath of the horrific terrorist attacks on 7 October by Hamas. We have since seen an utterly disproportionate response by Israel to these attacks, resulting in unimaginable levels of death, trauma and devastation across the Gaza Strip. I have been clear in my view that this amounts to collective punishment. This must end.

All of the members here already know what Ireland has done over the last 7 months – pushing at European Union level to call for an immediate ceasefire, as well as the unconditional release of hostages and full, safe and unhindered humanitarian access; asking the Commission to carry out an urgent review of the European Union-Israel Association Council; supporting the International Criminal Court, ICC, with additional voluntary contributions for its investigations into the situation in Palestine, as well as for other situations before the court; confirming our intention to intervene in the South Africa v. Israel case at the International Court of Justice under the Genocide Convention; intervening in the written and in oral proceedings in the case before the ICJ on Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory; led discussions with European Union like-minded on the collective recognition of Palestine by a group of European states; doubled our funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, in the face of Israeli disinformation aimed at collapsing it as an institution, and at a time when others were racing for the exit; and hosted Philippe Lazzarini, the UNRWA Commissioner General, in Dublin.

Ireland also ensured the full disbursement of European Commission funding to UNRWA; successfully pushed for political agreement on sanctions on violent settlers in the West Bank, as well as additional sanctions on Hamas; championed the Arab peace plan and worked intensively in particular with Egypt and Jordan to encourage its development and dissemination internationally; encouraged reform within the Palestinian Authority and continued to support its provision of services to the Palestinian population, including in the education sector; ensured the safe passage of more than 100 Irish citizens and their families and dependants out of Gaza to Ireland; worked relentlessly for the release of nine year old Emily Hand, who was held hostage in Gaza for more than 50 days; and co-sponsored and voted in favour of the resolution at the UN General Assembly last Friday on Palestinian membership of the UN, which was approved by a very large majority. I am proud of that work but we need to keep at it.

First and foremost, we need to move on the formal recognition of the Palestinian state. After intensive discussions with European and Arab partners, we will do so before the end of this month. We need to garner more support for the Arab peace plan, which envisages clear, concrete time-bound actions to make the two-state solution a reality.

We will continue to push at European Union level for a much more robust response, focused now on preventing an even more disastrous situation in Rafah and on the need for a massive surge of humanitarian aid. We will continue to support and advocate for the very small number of Irish citizens still in Gaza, along with a larger number of their dependants and family members. We will also continue to work at European Union level and bilaterally on the wider regional implications of the Gaza war.

I remain deeply concerned about the continued hostilities along the Lebanon-Israel border, where any further escalation would have devastating effects on both Israel and Lebanon. This will be a central focus for me when I travel to Lebanon later this week to visit our troops in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL. Last month, the Government agreed to increase the number of Defence Forces troops deployed with UNIFIL, underlining our continuing support to the UNIFIL mission and the important de-escalatory role that it plays in the south of Lebanon.

This is just a snapshot of the wider foreign and security policy context that the Government of this State finds itself in, characterised by a contested, dynamic and volatile international security environment. This global security context obliges us to take both our own security and our responsibility towards our like-minded partners more seriously than ever. This is the context in which the Government on 30 April approved the drafting of legislation which will govern how we deploy our Defence Forces as part of international peacekeeping or crisis management operations.

The modification to what is known as the triple lock will reinforce our ability to pursue an independent foreign policy by removing the power of UN Security Council permanent members to veto our national sovereign decisions. In addition to the proposed changes to the triple lock, it is also intended to amend provisions relating to the deployment of Defence Forces personnel overseas in other roles such as supporting an urgent crisis management evacuation of Irish citizens. I assure the committee that the proposed amendments to this legislation remain fully consistent with the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law and in no way affect Ireland's policy of military neutrality.

In addition, the Government is committed to broadening and maximising Ireland’s international security engagement with the United Nations and other key bilateral as well as multilateral partners, including the European Union and NATO. Ireland's relationship with NATO is conducted through Partnership for Peace, PfP, of which Ireland has been a member since 1999. PfP retains its own separate identity and was founded based on an individual bilateral relationship between NATO and each of the PfP countries. It is a voluntary and co-operative framework between NATO and individual partner countries. Previously, the framework for co-operation between partners and NATO was the Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme, IPCP, and the Planning and Review Process, PARP. In an effort to streamline the different partnership tools and processes, the Individually Tailored Partnership Programme, ITPP, was developed, to essentially combine the IPCP and PARP. Ireland agreed this with NATO late last year.

The new ITPP presents an opportunity to enhance any partner's co-operation in relevant areas of choice, including cyber, enhancing resilience, improved maritime situational awareness and climate change, as well as in work to address the impact of conflict on women and girls through the women, peace, and security agenda. This arrangement will build on Ireland’s existing engagement with NATO through the Partnership for Peace.

Access to NATO training and standards, through participation in Partnership for Peace, has proved invaluable in the development of the Defence Forces' capabilities for the increasingly complex and challenging crisis management operations we face today. It has improved the quality of our contribution to UN missions and UN-mandated missions, including those led by regional organisations such as the EU and NATO, including in our current engagement in the Irish-Polish battalion in UNIFIL.

The new ITPP will continue to focus on enhancing the interoperability of our Defence Forces, improving our Defence Force capabilities and ensuring that our Defence Forces are interoperable with the forces of other states engaged in UN mandated peace support and crisis management operations. It will also allow us to enhance co-operation in a number of new areas which will benefit Ireland.

The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces will lead on new forms of engagement with NATO in the areas of resilience and civil preparedness and human climate change security, all areas of important national interest to Ireland. Other new commitments include regular political and military dialogue and consultations, which will see engagement in a number of key areas, including on cyber and hybrid threats, maritime security and resilience, including the resilience of critical undersea infrastructure.

The Department of Foreign Affairs will lead on this new area as well as on a new goal on women, peace and security, reflecting Ireland’s national action plan on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and the Defence Forces' action plan on this agenda. The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications will lead on a goal relating to cyber defence, with a view to enhancing our co-operation with NATO in this area to raise awareness and address malicious cyber activity. This work is particularly important in the context of the serious risk which cyber threats pose, as we discovered in the cyberattack on the HSE in 2021.

This approach reflects the potential benefits to Ireland from engaging in the networks that NATO provides. It does not affect our military neutrality. We have no plans to join NATO or any other military alliance but it does improve, in a very positive way, our ability to defend our country and our people from threats and to ensure that our Defence Forces meet the highest international capability standards and are fully interoperable with the states they work with day in, day out in peacekeeping and crisis management operations.

The security and defence risks in Europe are very real at this time. Addressing the complex nature of the current security challenges facing Ireland is not something we can do alone. The nature of today’s threats, including in cyber, hybrid and maritime domains, requires us not only to invest in our own defence, but also to work more closely with our international partners. Co-operation with partners, based on mutual respect and benefit, contributes to global security, enhances resilience and upholds the rules based international order, which also contributes to Ireland’s security. This engagement with NATO via PfP will complement the additional investment the Government is making in our national security and defence capabilities. To be clear, as I said earlier, participation in the ITPP does not signal an intent to join NATO, or an erosion of our neutrality. It is a framework for co-operation. It is partner-led and completely voluntary in nature. A number of other PfP partners, including Austria, Malta and Switzerland, are also in the process of agreeing or have already agreed their respective ITPPs with NATO. Finally, the ITPP is an opportunity to enhance engagement in areas of clear strategic interest to Ireland, in a way which helps us face the current nature of the security context facing Europe at this time.

Before I conclude, I will briefly update the committee on a number of issues at the United Nations which may be of interest. We have frequently lamented here - and in the Oireachtas more widely - the shortcomings in the international multilateral system. Therefore, I am pleased that at the UN General Assembly in September this year, the Secretary-General is assembling world leaders for the Summit of the Future. This will be an opportunity to reinvigorate the multilateral system and for us to make our voice heard on the changes we would like to see in the system. We hope that the Pact for the Future that will be adopted and can build on the consensus Ireland brokered in the Sustainable Development Goals Summit Political Declaration last year and contribute to accelerating progress in achieving the SDGs.

In February, Ireland had its fourth periodic review by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which assesses Ireland's implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Minister of State, Joe O'Brien, led the delegation, which included officials from nearly all Departments, a strong signal of our commitment and engagement. The committee acknowledged the positive progress that has made since the previous review in 2015 and made recommendations on how we can advance economic, social and cultural rights in Ireland. These recommendations are non-binding but Departments will take them forward and report back to the UN committee at the next review. I encourage this committee to review the UN committee's concluding observations in full. They are publicly available and my officials are happy to provide copies.

I look forward to engaging on any questions the committee might have.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste. I record apologies from Deputy Barry Cowen. I welcome to the Public Gallery Jeremy Wilmshurst and Colonel Sean Grant from the British Embassy. We have with us three new third secretaries from the Department of Foreign Affairs observing, and they are also very welcome. I call Deputy Matt Carthy to be followed by Deputy James Lawless.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Tánaiste. I have a number of questions and I will go through them individually as quickly as possible.

In respect of Ukraine and the Tánaiste's reference to the summit on peace that is due to be held in June in Switzerland, if I understand correctly, will he outline what role he envisages Ireland playing in the summit and what he expects the outworkings of it to be? We have had a prolonged period of Russian aggression in Ukraine, we have had the introduction of sanctions against Russia, billions of euro in EU moneys have been spent, and I think there has been broadly cross-party support in these Houses for those measures. The Tánaiste might give a sense as to whether he sees Russia showing any indication that it has an interest in pursuing a peace from whatever source the negotiations or otherwise might emerge. Does he have any view as to what the likely trajectory of the conflict in Ukraine will be over the coming months or how that might impact the rest of Europe? We are having a big debate in these Houses and in society broadly about the pressures on our accommodation systems. Does the Tánaiste see events in Ukraine over the coming months creating more pressures? Will more people be forced to leave Ukraine to come to other parts of Europe?

Might the Tánaiste take those questions first? I have a few others.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As regards the European position on the summit in Switzerland, which has been some time in the making, President Zelenskyy over a year ago, I would say, published or produced his ten-point peace plan, and it is on that framework that European member states, particularly Ireland, will be focused. The Taoiseach discussed the summit with President Zelenskyy during their recent phone call, on 9 May. We support the Ukrainian peace plan under Article 2 of the UN Charter in terms of self-determination and the right to territorial integrity. In essence, it is the first step to bring all the world regions together to discuss a future peace process. We are doing significant work with our partners in the global south on trying to develop support for this initiative. We are also focusing on food security aspects of the peace plan and on accountability. We have done some work on nuclear safety as well, I think. The IAEA has been very helpful in briefing FAC members repeatedly on the challenges around Zaporizhzhia. The last presentation was a bit more positive than the previous one, but since then I have noticed there has been further activity around Zaporizhzhia, which is not encouraging. It is fairly risky behaviour in terms of kinetic activity in and around the plant, so that is what we are focused on.

We have no sense that Russia is interested in peace at the moment. Russia is indicating no interest in any engagement on a peace process or a peace dialogue at all. I always say to members that I always recall that prior to the war beginning, and this has got lost in a number of commentaries in the Houses of the Oireachtas, Chancellor Scholz did everything he possibly could to prevent a Russian invasion, meeting with President Putin and urging him not to go in. The French President, Emmanuel Macron, went to Moscow to prevent an invasion. I note that some Members of the European Parliament and others have somehow come to the conclusion of labelling this a kind of EU-NATO proxy war, which to me is bizarre and I just want to nail that here. It is nothing of the sort because the two principal European leaders, among others, including Chancellor Merkel before Chancellor Scholz, strived with might and main to stop this war and went to meet President Putin. I spoke to Chancellor Scholz. He told me personally about the meeting, what transpired and the discussion. President Macron did likewise. That is the true story. Sometimes we need to put all the ideological rhetoric to one side. This was a landgrab. It was a desire to take out what is perceived to be an unfriendly government in Ukraine and a model of democracy that sits uncomfortably with the very repressive Russian regime. Those are my observations on the matter.

I am not going to pretend that I am a military expert. The pendulum has swung in terms of the military activity. I am appalled by the loss of human life. I am appalled by the decision of the Russian President to send so many young people to their deaths. The war has been of the nature of the First World War, the Second World War and 21st-century warfare in terms of drones and technology. Some of the battles have been described as - I hate using the phrase - waves and waves of humankind, with people just thrown onto the front, then the next group thrown onto the front. In some of the towns, people were literally trying to get by corpses, the corpses had fallen so thickly on the streets. Dmytro Kuleba said that to us on one occasion. Thousands of young Ukrainians are losing their lives. This is a horrible war, and there is no justification for the aggression, in my view. Whether the security reinforcements Ukraine has now received or will be in the process of receiving from the United States in particular will enable it to defend more resiliently its lines is what we have to wait and see now. Members have seen in recent days that Russia has broken through some villages on the east. Russia is really pushing hard now to see how much ground it can attain. In my view, its aim probably still is to go as far as it possibly can, so the omens are not good at this time.

There has been a massive assault on the energy infrastructure. About 80% of energy installations, we are now told, have been attacked in recent months.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste for that. He mentioned the increased deployment to the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in Lebanon. How many additional troops will that involve in total?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thirty-three. It is a platoon size. That was on the advice of military leadership in the context of force protection.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Considering that I think 133 have been withdrawn from the UNDOF mission in the Golan Heights, does the Tánaiste accept that our contribution to UN peacekeeping missions has diminished during the lifetime of this Government?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would not use that language. Our contribution to UN peacekeeping changes. We do not stay in the same places all the time, bar maybe in Lebanon. There was a time, if I am not mistaken, when we took time out, but we have been in many parts of the world. We do not stay in certain locations forever. We are participating in an EU battlegroup. We have been engaged in EU battlegroups since 2000, I think.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will come to that. I was referencing it in terms of UN peacekeeping missions.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

But I would not use that language.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Tánaiste accept that we have fewer troops deployed to UN peacekeeping missions now than when he came to office?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Right now, yes, but that can change in the next six or 12 months.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What UN peacekeeping missions is the Tánaiste contemplating or considering?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy will be aware, the Security Council has not sanctioned one since 2014, hence the amendment to the triple lock.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are quite a number of ongoing UN peacekeeping missions to which Ireland does not have deployments to. Does the Tánaiste understand that?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry?

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it not correct that there are a number of ongoing UN peacekeeping missions that Ireland does not have deployments to?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, and there are others where we have some and we have lower numbers. We will consider all of those.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am asking the Tánaiste if he is actively considering deploying personnel to those any of missions?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not immediately. We have been in Chad. That is the point I am making. Situations arise. There are situations in the Middle East. I do not know whether there will be requests made to us in respect of fairly urgent situations right now. Chad was a very heroic mission where our personnel were involved in peacekeeping and in ensuring that vital humanitarian aid got through. Given the troubled world that we live in, there are all sorts of scenarios whereby we could be called upon. That is all I am saying.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Tánaiste, even now, have any regrets that we withdrew from the UNDOF mission?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did that on military advice.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste did it on the basis of the strength of our Army.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The military advice was to consolidate. They wanted to participate.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Because of the reduced strength.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was also our participation in the EU battle group. I made that clear at the time, particularly because Ireland is a member of the European Union and because I support participation.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are also a member of the UN-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know but-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and it is a matter of choices. I am asking the Tánaiste does he regret the choice to withdraw from UNDOF.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not regret choices.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a straight answer. That is fair enough.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is endeavouring to introduce a politically partisan dimension to the debate which is unwarranted with regard to making decisions in respect of consolidation of our presence in various places around the world and trying to put a political construct on it. That is unfortunate. Anyway, we are entitled to our respective views.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste made a decision. I disagreed at the time. I still disagree with that decision. It may be political, but it is a fair political position to have.

I will ask one question. I will not go into the detail of PESCO, EDA missions and the different projects that Ireland has been involved in - and that it may be involved in in the future - other than to say we had a number of very limited Dáil debates in advance of the approval of those projects. The most recent debate was last year, when we had four projects agreed after a 50-minute debate in the Dáil. In future, would it be useful if missions and projects such as those came before this committee for substantive debate and analysis in order that Oireachtas approval would, when given, be on the basis of those substantive deliberations?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have no issue with coming before the committee at any time in respect of anything. The Deputy knows that.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Last year, the Tánaiste rejected my party's proposal that he come before the committee to discuss the proposals in question.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste did.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I never rejected that.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste voted against an amendment to that effect in the Dáil.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is playing politics. Our participation in PESCO has been minimalist. The Deputy needs to be honest with the public.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am talking about the principle involved.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is not talking about principles. He is creating a narrative that does not-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste really does not like being asked questions.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The public deserve honesty and there has been a whole noise-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What did I say-----

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Colleagues.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----that was dishonest?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is creating a scenario whereby he is intimating that momentous decisions are being taken in respect of participation in PESCO when, in reality, our participation has, on the basis of any objective assessment, been rather limited during our involvement in PESCO.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All I was asking was-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said to the Deputy, I have no issue-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----would the Tánaiste agree with the principle of coming before this committee on the future-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would not make it a precondition-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----but I have no issue with coming before the committee.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let me move on because I am sure the Leas-Chathaoirleach is eager to get me out of this position.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely not.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste mentioned-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will be bringing forward-----

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Deputy wants me to.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. I am conscious of that. That is why my questions are so-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will be bringing four more projects forward. We have no issue with discussing them here if people want to go through the detail of them. It is all quite transparent.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a long-standing precedent in committees, particularly this one, that if you ask a question, you wait for the answer before continuing.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For sure. I am, however, nervous that I might not get to ask the next question, which is equally important.

In terms of neutrality, because the Tánaiste mentioned at least twice that particular aspects of his remarks do not impinge on Irish neutrality. He stated that there is no suggestion of Ireland joining NATO as reinforcement that there is no threat to or question over our neutrality. Outside of joining NATO or a common defence pact, what would the Tánaiste consider to be in breach of Irish neutrality?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Irish neutrality is fundamentally whether you are a member of a military alliance or not. That is how it has always been defined.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that the only tenet?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is how it has been defined. Other people can have variations of that if they wish but that is how it has always been officially defined in terms of Irish military neutrality.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the Tánaiste states that this does not breach Irish neutrality, he means the limits of that are we will not join NATO and we will not join a common defence pact. Outside of that, anything is possible within the confines of neutrality. There is scope for a much wider debate but I want to talk about the situation in the Middle East.

I thank the Tánaiste and Government for many of the positive leadership roles that they have played, and particularly our team in the United Nations, for vocalising the position of the Irish people. The critique that I and others have had is the need to move beyond vocalising to action. The first question is obviously one of the clearest. I would consider it to be the basic action. It is official recognition of the state of Palestine. Wednesday next, 21 May, has been widely cited as the day that Ireland and other states will formally recognise the state of Palestine. Is that going to happen?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said to the Deputy, I am not getting into specific dates. I stated that it will be done before the end of the month. It is fluid in terms of the countries we are talking to, and we have been anxious to see can we get as many countries as possible on board which would be good for the cause of Palestinian self-determination. That work is continuing. I have had calls last week and I will have some calls this week as well.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Tánaiste intend to inform the House or the media first?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government will make a decision first and then we will obviously-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let me rephrase that. Does the Government intend to inform the House or the media first?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We intend to bring it to the Dáil and have statements.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will that be on the day?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not necessarily on the day. That is a matter on which we have work to with the House, etc. It does not necessarily have to be on the day.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It will be an historically important moment.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That moment belongs to a number of current and past Members on all sides of the House who have worked for far too long to bring it to this point. As I have said, time and again, I fear that the moment of our recognition of the state of Palestine will occur at a time when the prospect of a viable sovereign state is at its weakest ebb in many years.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I said in my speech it will be before the end of the month.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Presuming it will not happen before the Wednesday next, we have a ten-day window. It would be helpful if there was engagement across all sides of the House.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Please accept my bona fides when I say it is still fluid. I am trying to get as many members as possible on board.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is growing speculation and fear. We are talking about a ground invasion of Rafah with trepidation as to what that could mean. However, it is important to contextualise that Rafah is currently under attack. The situation and the scenes there are beyond imagining. I looked back at the transcript from October when the Tánaiste was last before the committee, and I suggest that he read it. Those in this room with the worst fears then could not have envisaged the destruction of Gaza that we have seen subsequently. If Israel moves to a ground invasion of Rafah, that will mean an attack on the last place of refuge of people who in some instances have been moved six times. These are people who are already starving and being denied water humanitarian aid.

If Israel were to make such a move of depravity, what action would the Tánaiste contemplate to be appropriate on the part of Ireland, in the first instance, and of the EU more widely?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, I think there is a military operation under way in Rafah. There is a degree of semantics as to scale and so on. It is horrific that there is such a military operation under way. Gaza has been levelled. The destruction is absolutely shocking in terms of the destruction of schools, houses, universities and hospitals so the very essence of any society to live in any humane way. All those essentials have been destroyed by Israel and its continued bombardment.

Many of the UN agencies went to Rafah in anticipation that the city would be a safe zone from which to conduct their operations in terms of humanitarian aid to be deployed to Palestinians in Gaza. It is absolutely unconscionable that the Israeli military and the Israeli Government have decided on a military operation into Rafah, and are conducting one right now, which is resulting in the destruction of the city but also in the killing of innocent men and women and, above all, children. I have outlined the list of what Ireland already has done. There has to be accountability. Unfortunately, accountability does not happen immediately but there are international instruments for accountability. I mentioned earlier the International Criminal Court, ICC, which is investigating. We have provided a further €1 million on top of the substantial resources that we gave last year. I understand that it was €3 million and we have put a further €1 million on top of that to make sure that the chief prosecutor has the resources. We have also called for protection for the ICC personnel against intimidation or attempts to undermine them in their work, which I believe is very important work in holding Israel to account.

We have indicated that we are preparing a legal intervention in the ICJ case that South Africa has initiated. As the Deputy will know, I did say in the Dáil that South Africa has been given a timetable for the submission of their memorial, which is their substantive case, in October and we are preparing a submission. As I said earlier, we are already working an idea ourselves, under Article 63, whereby we would attempt to broaden the criteria by which the court would judge genocide to have taken place. We believe that is a potentially important avenue to press legally to try to broaden the thresholds basically, because the thresholds were set very high in the context of finding a conclusion of genocide. That is around the prevention of humanitarian aid, starvation as a weapon, the siege and the prevention of the essentials of life getting into Gaza. We have more work to do. Obviously we must see the South African memorial and we are liaising with South Africa in respect of that. That is important because Ireland must be credible when we make a submission.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fair enough. I am conscious of the time so I want to ask the following. The difficulty with everything that the Tánaiste has said is that-----

Catherine Ardagh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has been greatly indulged and there are a lot of other people who want to ask questions.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the context of the question I have asked the Tánaiste about Rafah and the intensification of activities, can we not outline a single consequence for Israel for proceeding along that basis? That is my final question.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We outlined the consequence of accountability is the first one, which is an important point we cannot lose sight of.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have waited patiently for my slot. I presume that Deputy Carthy has used up his first, second and third round-robin slots in his long engagement.

I congratulate the Tánaiste on the international work that he has done on the world stage. That is something on which I get feedback locally. The Tánaiste is leading from the front, which is welcomed and recognised by the vast majority of Irish people. Well done on that.

I apologise to the committee as I must leave shortly as I am Chair of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, which is due to meet next door in a few minutes. I thank the Leas-Cathaoirleach for facilitating me to ask my questions early in this meeting.

In terms of the planned divisions that were raised in the contribution made by Tánaiste, I want to touch on a number of them. In the context of working with others and forming alliances, that is beyond doubt. There must be a degree of realism on all sides of the House about the hostile actors that are present in the debate, both nationally and internationally, and those malign influences that want to play a part, and are already active here, in Irish politics, EU politics and international politics. It is very hard for any nation state to stand alone now. The idea that a nation State can stand entirely in isolation from others yet hope to robustly defend its own democracy and sovereignty is an antiquated concept. Recently we saw our near neighbours, the UK, suffer an attack on its defence systems. The UK Government did not name the protagonist but it was well documented at whom the finger was pointed. Recently, there was a French report that identified interference in our own electoral system in terms of online activity. It was quite an amateurish attempt but it was the one that was found. There are probably multiple other attempts that have not been detected but are beavering away. An interesting statistic has emerged from the Newtownmountkennedy protests in recent weeks, which showed that 60% or more of the online activity that co-ordinated, supported and cheered on the protest emanated from the United States or other jurisdictions but certainly not at home. I have no doubt some locals were involved, and certainly on the ground, but in terms of the online presence there were some really nefarious, hostile actors whipping things up there.

The Tánaiste mentioned Georgia in his opening remarks. Albeit Georgia is at a more advanced stage, and geographically is a lot closer to Russia and within Russia's sphere of influence, Georgia is an example of how a relatively stable and progressive State that is moving towards EU accession and membership, and embracing democratic values, can be turned around and have internal conflict generated by actors from outside who do not want a democratic liberal State to emerge. We hope that the environment there settles down in due course. The situation in Georgia should serve as a warning to all of us that we cannot take democracy for granted anywhere in this country or in the EU.

We are seeing a pattern whereby some of the hostile actors, including hostile states, are weaponising our own systems against us in terms of our human rights protections, judicial systems and systems of litigation. We have put many instruments in place to defend human rights to protect vulnerable citizens but they are being weaponised against us by others who would seek to flood our courts and systems. We see that with immigration at the moment. There are many other examples where the west is eating itself and there are many people who are celebrating, enjoying and playing a part in that.

I note the areas of collaborations that have suggested in the NATO's PfP-type of alliance. They seem to accord exactly with the ones that I think we do need to focus on and they are very similar to the ones identified by Dame Richardson in her report on the forum. I refer to things like maritime security, cybersecurity and data security. These are all items that Dame Richardson has highlighted as needing attention and I completely agree.

Last year, this committee held discussions on the Russian activity on our subsea cable intersections. The committee debates the issue at that time. We know that the cable is a weak spot but it is the critical cable that links North America to western Europe. From an economic perspective, we can have all the discussions we want about neutrality, alliances and non-alliances around these tables and in other venues but if we want to be serious about sovereignty then we must control our own destiny, which means our economic destiny. Ireland is home to 40% of the EU's data and many more multinational and successful indigenous and international technology companies. Therefore, we need to be able to secure and protect those datasets as part of our economic package. If we cannot do that then we are on a hiding to nothing and we might as well surrender our sovereignty because we need to be able to defend ourselves. Defending our borders is not just about having paratroopers stationed on the mountains or a ship in the harbour. It is actually about data cybersecurity intelligence and of course all the different channels that operate that, which are far more important than the conventional means.

As I said, it is naive that some people seem to suggest that we can do these things on our own. I think collaboration is always a good thing. Ní neart go cur le chéile, which means strength in unity and the more of that then the better we will do in any event such as sharing facilities, knowledge and strategic alliances.

As I touched on at the start, the democratic values I and probably most of us in this Chamber hold dear are under threat internationally and around the globe. Democracy is in crisis. The new world order that we thought we had - the end of history and so forth as outlined by Dr. Francis Fukuyama - is not taken for granted anymore and democracy is crumbling in very many jurisdictions. We are seeing that happen around the world and we need to stand firm in our opposition to that. Certainly when it comes to these debates I stand with western liberal democracy. I do not stand with Putin, Al-Qaeda or Hamas, which I hope is fairly clearcut and we should not in any way be confused about that.

I noticed that the Tánaiste touched upon what is sometimes labelled a NATO proxy war, or something of that nature. The term is a bit of nonsense and the Tánaiste shared my view on it. The idea is thrown about that because the Iraq war was a complex, unpopular one, all of NATO and, by extension perhaps, the EU were somehow intermingled. It was a war in which a couple of NATO member states happened to be involved; it was not a NATO war. A couple of EU states were also involved but it was not an EU war either. The last NATO wars were after the events of 11 September 2001, when there was an international response supported by a UN motion to set up an international solidarity force, which ended up playing a part in Afghanistan in the early 2000s, and before that in Kosovo, when NATO intervened to prevent the bloodshed and genocide happening in the Balkans at the time. That is action I would fully support. President Clinton was the leader in the US at the time and was supported by European allies. The decision was the right one at the time, and I would not have any hesitation in endorsing such a decision or being afraid if it had to be made again in a similar situation. We have to be realistic about these situations.

We have to realise there is connection between events at home and those abroad. If we are going to complain about the cost of living and shipping and why materials are so expensive, we must note one reason is that shipping lanes are disrupted, blocked and hijacked in many places, such as the Gulf and the Horn of Africa. We have had events such as the container ship getting stuck, but we have also had Houthi rebels shooting at passing traffic. There is a direct effect. Prices are high at home because shipping containers are being blocked in making the passage through the Gulf from producer countries in the Far East. That region is not isolated or remote. The world is an extremely connected entity now, and that is how we operate.

I welcome the fact that the EU has authorised a defensive mission, ASPIDES, to patrol the area in question. No more than subsea cables, global shipping comprises one of the arteries of the world economy, in which we are a very important participant and exposed as a state with an open economy. I know NATO patrols the Gulf and other regions and has had similar operations. If we are to prevent crises abroad, at our own borders and in our State, we need to play a positive, constructive role abroad, and that involves working with others. I would welcome any views the Tánaiste may wish to share. I thank the Chair for letting me contribute early because I will shortly have to go next door for a debate.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the contribution Deputy Lawless has made. One of the most important points he made was a fundamental one, namely, that we cannot do all this on our own. In other words, enhancing our own military capability and interoperability cannot be done alone. We are in UNIFIL with the Polish military as part of the Irish-Polish battalion. There has to be interoperability. In other missions, we worked with different nations. There is a Hungarian element to the UNIFIL deployment. Interoperability is very important, as are capability and understanding the advances.

If one wanted to learn from other alliances, one might look to North Korea, Russia and Iran. Are we seriously suggesting that? No, we are not. We are members of the European Union and we must work with European member states in respect of the capability question and procurement. We are considering radar now, for example, and may very well do so using a government-to-government perspective to ensure we have sufficient expertise to achieve value for money and the optimal means of procuring radar for the country. These are all issues that we consider.

There has been an excessive tendency in Ireland to regard any such co-operation and collaboration as undermining our neutrality or whatever. We are simply not in a position to act alone. By definition, we all learn from each other in politics. We travel abroad and meet other politicians from different Parliaments and examine their systems. Militaries do the same. In fact, the European Union defence industry is the most fragmented, and its militaries are the most fragmented. In the United States, there might be two or three types of helicopters or certain weapons, but in Europe there are 15, 16 or 17. Despite everything, there is relatively poor interoperability in Europe compared with the US, China and others.

As I mentioned to Deputy Carthy, we have not been overly active in PESCO. It is an open forum to improve capability, knowledge and experience in areas such as maritime security and cybersecurity. Deputy Lawless's point on western liberal democracies is important. There are big differences in how countries of the world are governed. The reasons for the current amount of migration into Europe include economic dislocation, war, conflict and the climate, but there is also a sense that there is a better quality of life here for people rearing families. Also, people may be fleeing authoritarianism, military autocracies, dictatorships and so on. That is an important point.

On the Deputy's point on connectivity, the war in Ukraine created a genuine energy crisis. The only silver lining of a dark cloud was the acceleration of our move to renewables, but essentially the war was a very significant contributor to energy inflation. Wars have impacts, and the Middle East is having an impact in terms of shipping lanes, which the Deputy said are the arteries of the world economy. The Houthis are disrupting trade and increasing insurance costs, etc.

Very often, it is the furthest behind and least well-off who suffer first in respect of any disruption to shipping lanes or the economy. For example, when the grain production was undermined in Ukraine, it was the Middle East and Africa that were to suffer the most.

On disinformation, it is a fact of life that foreign actors all across Europe are manipulating information, disseminating false information and targeting European societies in this regard. A malicious online presence is designed to generate confusion, sow division, fear and hatred, and undermine trust in government and democratic institutions. At the highest levels of the European Union, efforts are being made to combat what is happening, including the Strategic Compass of 2022. Within that, there are new EU toolboxes concerning hybrid threats and foreign information manipulation and interference. There is a suite of measures to deter, mitigate and identify threats in the first place and also respond to disinformation interference campaigns and impose restrictive measures where necessary.

As part of a broader European response, we have the Digital Services Act, with which the committee is familiar, and the code of practice on disinformation. Coimisiún na Meán is Ireland's digital services co-ordinator to counteract disinformation, and we have a new national strategy to counter disinformation. The Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media will be developing it and publishing it shortly, subject to Government approval. That involves an all-of-government, all-of-society approach to countering disinformation. The role of An Coimisiún Toghcháin is to examine online electoral information and protect the fairness and integrity of elections. It recently published a voluntary framework.

On maritime security and critical undersea infrastructure, we are taking part in international initiatives. It is a huge issue for us given our exclusive economic zone. We saw what happened with the Nord Stream pipeline and saw the Baltic connector incident, highlighting the sensitivity of such resources. Again, international co-operation is vital. We cannot deal with cyber threats on our own. We have enhanced our engagement on many EU initiatives, including a new critical seabed infrastructure project, CSIP, within PESCO. I do not know what the problem is with that, but I believe it is vital that we participate in it. We have observer status. I reacted a bit to Deputy Carthy but we need to get real about this. We have observer capacity on a project concerning critical seabed infrastructure and we should be welcoming such participation.

The Department of Defence is responsible for the implementation of the European Union's critical entities resilience and network information and security directives, which will enhance the resilience of critical entities that provide vital information for societal functions.

On maritime security, there is the critical undersea infrastructure. That is a key priority in the new individually tailored partnership programme agreed with NATO in 2023. We are pursuing further engagement with NATO's critical undersea infrastructure co-ordination cell. We have a response to the Portal Kombat pro-Russian disinformation campaign, which again seeks to promote confusion, and so forth.

What is noticeable - I will finish on this - is that since the war on Ukraine, there has been a significant increase in such activity, in both disinformation and cyberactivity. Portal Kombat is one such pro-Russian disinformation campaign identified by the French authorities in February. It is not particularly sophisticated, as I believe the Deputy has said, but there is an associated network of websites including 19 across the European Union, one of which had a specific focus on Ireland. I will leave it at that for the Deputy.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will make one quick follow-up remark. I thank the Tánaiste for his detailed answer. I note with interest the different initiatives we are proposing to join. They all make perfect sense. I completely endorse and support us in standing up to those and more of them. I think we should go further than being just an observer - we should be an active participant at the table in most of those.

I understand that for very historical and political reasons, there is in some instances perhaps a hesitancy or apprehension about some of these initiatives. As much as some members may ask why we are joining, I would be asking why are we not joining and working with them. It is important to have that plan and the sort of detail the Tánaiste has mentioned. There has to be a reality check around the entire system. These are the sorts of things we need to be doing to take our place in the 21st century. I call for more of it and say "well done" to the Tánaiste.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Craughwell will be followed by Deputy Stanton and Senator Ardagh.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste for a very comprehensive report. I found it very down to earth. It covered many areas that it is time we covered in the open.

I ask the Tánaiste to ask his Department to draft a briefing document for Members of the Oireachtas which explains exactly what neutrality is. Quite frankly, I am tired of being overseas and hearing people talk about Paddy neutrality, being militarily non-aligned and using two polar opposites in the same paragraph and sentence. There is clearly a lack of understanding of what neutrality means. There should be a briefing document for all of us so that we know exactly what we mean when we say that Ireland is a neutral country. I compliment the Tánaiste on what he has said today regarding NATO. Listening to my colleagues here, it is clear that we cannot survive on our own anymore. The world we live in is a changed one. We must have friendly alliances with those who are of similar thinking to ourselves.

In the past two years I have led a number of delegations to Estonia to visit various cybercentres. I have always found the Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, CCDCOE, the NATO research centre, extremely welcoming and willing to share its information and research. When I was leading one particular delegation, I mentioned to a chap in the group that we were visiting the CCDCOE the following morning. He asked me what it was and I said it was the NATO research centre. He told me "No" and said that he was not going anywhere near NATO. I told him that that was fine and he could stay in the hotel and we could pick him up later. The following morning, he said he would go up and see what they were about anyway. When he came out, he asked why we do not deal more with them because of the information they can provide. He said we need to be able to get that information and work with it. The CCDCOE offered the last delegation I had out there a number of internships to Irish universities. We have an Irish military officer there in an observing capacity and we need to build that alliance more. I ask that we be more open about that. That is my first issue on NATO.

The Partnership for Peace programme has done wonders for the Defence Forces. The Tánaiste talked about the divergence among the military in Europe versus what one has in the United States. I believe that being involved in something like Permanent Structured Cooperation, PESCO, is a good thing because we can standardise what we have got and our training, and reach a level of expertise which is common across the European Union. That is a good thing.

The other issue which was mentioned recently was the possibility of a commissioner for defence in the European Union. Shock waves ran through Leinster House among people who thought this would involve - oh my God - a European army. What would be wrong with having a commissioner for defence at the very top of the European Union who would be able to co-ordinate what happens within the defence sector? I do not have a problem with that.

I want to ask the Tánaiste's opinion on another matter. I wrote, at a recent meeting in Bruges of foreign affairs and defence committees, about the establishment of an Atlantic fleet. The Tánaiste spoke about the undersea cables, the interconnectivity we have with the UK and the interconnectivity we will soon have with France. Is it not time, therefore, that the EU took control of the Atlantic? No single nation is capable of patrolling the Atlantic on its own. Our economic zone is so large that even if we had all nine ships at sea, I do not believe we could cover it. The establishment of an Atlantic fleet - the Tánaiste may give me an answer or opinion on it - is something that we should be discussing at European level with a view to securing the assets of Europe. That is what I am talking about. I am not talking about the establishment of any military initiative other than the possibility that a French, German or British ship could be patrolling in our economic zone. If they come across something which appears to be illegal, they could carry out an arrest and take the offending vessel to the nearest port. I am merely talking about co-operation to defend our assets and nothing else. I would be interested to hear the Tánaiste's view on that.

The other issue I have a difficulty with - I am still in the foreign affairs space here - is our overseas development aid. I want to put this as simply as I can: if I decide tomorrow morning that I will fund your car, pay your car insurance and look after everything to do with your car, the money you would ordinarily have to spend on your car can now be spent having flash dinners up in the Shelbourne Hotel. With our overseas development aid, over the period from 2013 to 2022, we funded ten countries to the tune of €2.236 billion. When I look at the military establishment of those countries, the fighter aircraft and the tanks they have in their hundreds, and at the size of their military, clearly if we are funding their education, health or welfare system with overseas development aid, they are able to divert funds into things we should actually be diverting funds into. I am not saying what we are doing is wrong here. I believe that overseas development aid is a crucial part of our foreign policy. I am asking if it is time we reviewed where we are putting our money and had a look to see if we are perhaps putting money into some countries that do not need it and could manage their own systems better without our money. Perhaps we should divert what overseas development aid we have into poorer countries which could use it.

That is where I am at. I ask if the Tánaiste might deal with those foreign affairs issues. I have some defence questions also. Does the Tánaiste wish me to hold those and to allow him to deal with the-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought the first three questions were on defence matters.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They border on defence but I think they fit more into the-----

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will deal with those questions first, Senator Craughwell. I can go then to Deputy Stanton and Senator Ardagh and come back to Senator Craughwell then.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine. I will accept that. I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, on the draft of the briefing document, that may not meet the definitions others have. Since the Second World War, neutrality has always been an avoidance of participation in a military alliance or of joining one. In the context of one of the referendums, we inserted that we would not be part of one and entered into our Constitution that we would not be part of an EU defence pact without a further referendum. That, in essence, is the position.

Allied with or complementing that is an independent foreign policy position within the framework of the European Union, with a strong focus on the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, international development aid, climate security, women, peace and conflict. We have fairly distinct positions and when referencing that, I might have gone on for too long for Deputy Carthy in respect of what we are doing in the Middle East. I was endeavouring to make the point that it takes a persistent and consistent focus and approach to build up credibility so that when Ireland files an intervention into the International Criminal Court on robust legal grounds, and does so in an analytical and informed way, people will take notice. On the other hand, if it is simply announced some fine day without any due diligence, people would just say the Government is politicising the court and is not taking the court seriously. How we develop our foreign policy and the areas we concentrate on are just as important, in terms of stating we are not joining any military alliance. Others might have a view that we should be politically neutral or should broaden the definition. Given our membership of the European Union and the Common Security and Defence Policy - which we never opted out of and opted into on day one - it seems to me that we are in a position that we can navigate and manage and that we can be proactive on the international stage. Our position is respected and the European Union accommodates the national characteristics of each member state's foreign policies. In this case now, it is Ireland, Austria and Malta and prior to that, we had Finland and Sweden. Because of the Ukrainian war, their governments have, with the support of their people, taken decisions in respect of joining NATO but the situation there changed overnight on foot of the Russian invasion.

In any event, we will try to get a briefing document together for the committee and I take the point the Senator made. The world has changed. I visited that centre in Estonia. Our National Cyber Security Centre has participated in what is called the NATO Centre of Excellence in Estonia. When I went there they were looking at how water utilities can be penetrated by cyberattacks. What is wrong with people learning about how to develop public water supplies that are resilient? We heard this morning on "Morning Ireland" and maybe the other stations as well, the commentary in respect of how it has been three years since the cyberattack on our health service and the enormous cost it created in human and financial terms.

On the EU Commissioner for defence, we have the EDM maritime surveillance project that includes Atlantic countries. There is a lot of proactive action between the member states and the UK in respect of activity in international waters or suspicious activity with certain ships and there is a lot of exchange of information. When it comes to dealing with drug traffickers and so on, there is a lot of co-ordination on an intelligence level and our new C295s now give us tremendous capacities from the air in terms of maritime surveillance and surveying our exclusive economic zone. We can do it much more quickly and effectively now with the technology on board those planes. They cost a couple of hundred million - €200 million a plane - which is a substantial investment. Both have arrived and that is giving us far greater capacity. Again, the Senator is correct, in that it is collaboration and co-operation in which we all share. It is a case of what have you seen over there or have you seen what is going on over there. That goes on every day between the different militaries and intelligence teams across all militaries. In terms of overseas development aid, my view is that the OECD praises Ireland, through peer reviews, in terms of the quality and impact of the Irish Aid programme. Most of our support is in sub-Saharan Africa, which is the furthest behind, and we tend to focus on education in some countries, such as Uganda for example, or in health. Ethiopia was traditionally very strong. I was in Mozambique last year and food security is a key focus of ours. None of our aid is going anywhere other than to the projects and areas we have identified. We are working with USAID in Malawi on food diversity and crop diversification for example. We are trying to get people off one crop and to develop climate-resilient seeds. There is a lot of good work being done on food security by Irish Aid. When I was in Mozambique for example, a simple thing like a solar powered pump or well-----

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Tánaiste mind if I just finish up on Mozambique-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Just hear me out for a second now. That was in the middle of the bush and that gave water on tap to 3,000 villagers. It was not on tap in their individual huts but in the square that serviced 3,000 people. A consequence of that was the girls did not have to lose time in school because it is the girls who traditionally go and collect the water. Now they can go to school as the water is on the doorstep, so to speak. This is an Irish foreign aid direct provision and idea as well, so there is a lot of innovation going on in our-----

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If you look at Mozambique, it has 60 battle tanks, 417 personnel carriers, 24 military aircraft and 30 ships at sea.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, it is a vast country, but what is happening in Mozambique?

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe it should cut back on the number of aircraft it has and educate its own.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, but there is a war going on. I am not into militarisation of these countries but there has been a civil war there.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ireland played its role on the peace secretariat. We had two to three diplomats working on the peace secretariat. We had a member of our Defence Forces who oversaw the decommissioning of weaponry in Mozambique. One of the secrets of good Irish diplomacy and work is trying to bring peace to other parts of the world. We have real problems in Cabo Delgado, where there is violence from Islamic State-affiliated insurgents and that has got worse in the first half of this year. Again, it is of course because natural resources have been discovered in that province. What follows the discovery of natural resources? People's attempts to create conflict and so on. From a security perspective, there is a vulnerability in Mozambique, in addition to being vulnerable to climate shocks and so forth. We always have sought to have a strong civil society dimension to our aid programme, as well as a governance, women, peace and security dimension to our development aid. We are doing the right thing for the right reasons to enable human potential to develop but if we pulled it back in any of these countries or if we or other western developed countries did not maintain it - in fact other countries should increase their development aid - we would have higher levels of migration flowing to Europe. That is the other side of the coin, if you want to do it from a self-interested point of view. People are pulling their supports out of Syria now and what they are telling us in Jordan and nearby is that it is increasing the flow of migration.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do not impose sanctions unilaterally. Trade is an EU function and together with our EU partners, we have imposed sanctions on settlers in the West Bank. We got agreement but it was difficult to get an agreement with 27 member states as one member state was holding out for quite some time. It was on 19 March that we adopted that agreement. We also placed sanctions on Hamas focused on the sexual and gender-based violence that was committed on 7 October. We do not support the policy of taking a boycott, divestment, sanctions approach to this complex area.

That has been our position. We keep this under review all the time. However, a focus on trying to get a resolution and trying to get a two-state solution is parallel with everything. It is a much more complex situation than is sometimes presented.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would have to come back to the Deputy on the estimates in Israel. There are four or five citizens and about 30 dependants in Gaza at the moment. We have taken out about 100 between citizens and dependants. While I said we did take out the full 100, there has been a new channel opened up in terms of a private channel. However, we did facilitate those who came out of that channel with exit back to Ireland through Egypt.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will get figures for the Deputy on the others.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. For some time now, Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan, the UAE, Egypt and Qatar have been working on an Arab peace initiative framework that would endeavour to be as comprehensive as possible, embracing Palestinian self-determination, a ceasefire in Gaza, guarantees to Israel's security, normalisation in terms of the Israeli-Saudi relationship and so on. Our officials were also working with Jordanian and Egyptian officials around the question of making sure that recognition would be a part of that plan. Our understanding is that framework has been presented to the United States and we believe it will be presented to the European Union shortly. The issue we were partly holding out for on recognition was to see whether we could dovetail with the publication of that peace initiative to give strength and impetus to it at the time of its publication, in particular, that recognition might give hope to Palestinians and what I might term as modern Palestinian leadership, as well as citizens in respect of the world saying we are with them regarding their right to determination.

I have spoken to Minister Safadi and others, such as Minister Shoukry in Egypt, and I have suggested they make the presentation to Europe. That may happen soon, at least in terms of the like-minded states. It has been very important for a contact and relationship we have built up because I do believe it will ultimately need a peace initiative. It will depend on Israel's willingness to engage and be part of a sustained and sustainable peace process.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is difficult and challenging. Israel does not appreciate or like the Irish position, to put it mildly. We have always been consistent in saying we are not anti-Israel or the Israeli people. However, we make our judgments and observations and take positions on this situation through the prism of international humanitarian law, the UN charter, and the need for a two-state solution and peace. I say this in a humble way, but Israel lacks a strategic sense, in my view, of any policy and has a very simple view of life that if one is not totally on its side then one is off-side. I say that in the context of understanding the horrific nature of the 7 October attack on the people of Israel by Hamas, which was heinous and horrific and has left a lot of trauma on the Israeli people and that should not be underestimated. However, nothing can justify what has happened in Gaza and the nature of the destruction there.

EU Commissioner Janez Lenari said something to me when he came to Ireland recently, which I was glad to hear and which was interesting. He said people say to him that Ireland is pro-Palestinian. He replies that Ireland is not pro-Palestinian; Ireland is pro-humanitarian law. That is important to me. We are pro-Palestine's right to self-determination, however, we do not allow ourselves to be partisan for the sake of it. We believe in basic principles and they should be applied. There has been a long-standing support in Ireland for Palestinian self-determination. That was a view held in Israel at one stage, that there would be a two-state solution. However, in the last decade or so, all efforts have been to undermine the viability of such a state emerging.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. They are extremely anxious. We underestimate the degree to which these countries see this as existential. When one meets the foreign ministers of these countries, it is a completely different narrative and expression to what one would see from ourselves or others. They are very worried that were Ukraine to fall, they would be next. We can already see threatening behaviour. Politicians in Estonia have been told they face conviction for desecration of Russian monuments, for example. There is increased threatening behaviour and it tends to intimidate.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are not members of NATO, and-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are not, in terms of our military neutrality. However, there is a clause of mutual solidarity in the European Union, which means we would support - in any way we can - such as the way we are supporting Ukraine right now. However, that has never been tested.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That has been approved.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Deputy asking in terms of the military assistance?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Deputy referring to the training with EUMAM Ukraine?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That has been very effective, insofar as the number of Ukrainian military and soldiers that have been trained and so on. Ireland has participated in a number of programmes. We provided training to about 455 members of the Ukrainian armed forces. These modules have been in tactical combat, casualty care, drill instruction training, demining and the use of mine flails. There are eight Irish civilian experts deployed to the Civilian EU Advisory Mission focused on security sector reform and the prosecution of international crimes.

The EU member states have agreed to about €10.6 billion in military assistance to Ukraine under the EPF. Ireland's commitment stands at about €250 million in non-lethal military assistance. From an Irish perspective, the biggest area there will be in demining and we are part of the Lithuanian coalition on demining because unfortunately, in wars such as this, we could be demining for 30 years.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It does not bear thinking about.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The size of our contribution will be 182 participants. I can get the details for the Deputy, but it is in different phases. Its group headquarters consist of four personnel, a mechanised infantry company with a company HQ and two platoons, a weapons platoons consisting of 139 personnel together with a national support element consisting of 29 persons providing the necessary transport, medical, communications and information services, CIS, maintenance and ordinance support and staff posts of ten personnel to the force headquarters, FHQ. The operational headquarters is located in Ulm, Germany. The force headquarters is based in Strasbourg and Defence Forces personnel commenced their postings in January this year to FHQ. A lot of it will be here in Ireland first and in the second year there will be more of it in Germany.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I gave that answer to the Dáil last week. There are frozen Russian assets and we are talking about the windfall revenue generated as a result of the interest. I can get the precise figure for the Deputy.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Generally speaking, I do not use that juxtaposition. I do not know where the figure comes from but I presume it is our net contribution more generally. I have read the report and presumably it is some extrapolation of our overall net contribution. Ireland is a net contributor to the European Union. We do not have a strong defence industry in Ireland. That is why we do not draw down significant funding in terms of that defence fund. If the companies are looked at, they were in the technology space. Some were in the recycling of weaponry space, if I read the report correctly in the newspaper. It is not surprising given the absence of a significant critical mass defence industry in Ireland.

Ireland has been known for pharmaceuticals, life sciences, technology more generally and the food industry. They are the big ones in Ireland rather than defence.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think the Deputy's points are very valid. In my case, it was fake advertising encouraging people to get involved in a cryptocurrency company and they can become a millionaire. I was described as a millionaire, which I am not. I caught the one on X, there was one on Google and there was a series on X that was more refined. There was the Irish Independent and a journalist from the Irish Independent and for all intents and purposes it was an article in the Irish Independent. What disturbed me more was that the companies do not respond at all. They suggest one has to go to the courts to get a court order to find out who is behind the ads. When the information is received from the company, forensic people are required to try to sift through the material and identify the source of the information.

The disturbing aspect of this is that it is part of the revenue model of these companies. Legally, the Government could do something in respect of an obligation on the companies rather than requiring citizens to go to the courts to find out who is behind fake ads. They are defamatory and can undermine a person's character and ability, and they can also lure unsuspecting citizens into losing money or investing in something that is fraudulent. The Electoral Commission must develop capacity to deal with it because this could get much worse, in terms of the sophistication of how various political people could be undermined in the course of an election campaign with very little recourse during the campaign.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They do not all have to be foreign actors. I know of one case in Ireland in the last general election where there was a significant victim of this and it had impacts.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would the Deputy ask them from the get go?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is quite shocking that Sudan is getting nowhere near the profile that the humanitarian crisis that is Sudan represents. It is one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent human history. It has generated the world's largest internal displacement and hunger crisis. On 3 May, the famine early warning system network warned of famine with millions of people experiencing severe hunger. The conflict parties had again deliberately denied access to aid and attacked health and humanitarian infrastructure. Parts of Khartoum were in particular under siege. About 14.7 million people need humanitarian assistance. That is the plan for which the UN wants to provide for at a cost of €2.7 billion. The displacement is very significant. Million of people are on the move in Sudan now.

We had pledged €12.3 million in humanitarian assistance to Sudan and neighbouring countries to respond to Sudanese refugees. Egypt and others have now received substantial support from the European Union to accommodate and try to absorb Sudanese refugees from this terrible war. There is also a need for the neighbouring countries, which are in many ways sponsoring some of the armies in Sudan, to desist. That is a factor in the creation of the conflict between the Rapid Support Forces on one hand and the Sudanese Armed Forces on the other. Both groups has external supporters. It is quite shocking.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It all speaks to a massive migration phenomenon across the world that is fundamentally caused by war, authoritarian regimes and climate change. If you are a young Eritrean of years of age and are facing a life under an autocratic military leader, that is a reason to try to get out. The problem is they are smuggled out; they pay or their families pay. They have terrible journeys. They end up in a warehouse in Libya. They have to pay more money and they end up in a very desperate boat and they sink. People are dying.

The migrant story is a fairly horrific story in many cases, particularly coming from countries in Africa and the Middle East. The world has to more fundamentally deal with this level of conflict and war. It just is not sustainable from a humanitarian point of view. The powers that be on all fronts have to collectively get together to try to create a new era of stabilisation and de-escalation of conflict.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Stanton. I call Senator Ardagh and thank her for her patience.

Catherine Ardagh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat. I know the Tánaiste has other commitments so I will be very brief.

I thank him for attending and for being very candid with us. I also thank the officials for opening the Department to us.

Like the majority of Irish people, we support the Tánaiste's narrative and beliefs when it comes to the crisis in the Middle East. He outlined the huge amount of work he and his Department have done in terms of coaxing partners in Europe and the US to change their ways and policies when it comes to the Middle East. Declaring Palestine a nation state in the next few weeks is a major part of that. There is much to be done in the context of the work that is ongoing. We and the people watching these proceedings are very proud of what has been achieved. The work that is being done at the International Criminal Court is welcome. What is frustrating is that it feels that the impact of this will be in the future rather than here and now. Irish people are very frustrated that they cannot reach out and pull out the vulnerable and those who are dying. It is extremely heartbreaking to see the daily scenes of people, especially children, being murdered. We all feel as though we need to do more. I know the Tánaiste is doing as much as possible. He should keep doing what he is doing and fighting on our behalf.

On women, peace and security, it is one of the primary themes of our committee that women and girls are the first victims of any sort of destruction of democracy. That is what we are seeing. We attended a conference recently in Athens, the home of democracy. For all of the parliamentarians who attended, that was the main theme. They feel that the attacks on democracy, especially when it comes to the weaponising of cyberspace, are becoming intense. We are funding the fight against these attacks properly. I was taken by what was said to the effect that we need a great deal more collaboration and that adequate funding is required. At the moment, we spend 0.23%, or €1.23 billion, of GDP on defence. We are going to have to look at properly funding cybersecurity, climate security and maritime security.

We have come out of a 70-year period of peace in Europe, which is amazing. In the US, there is so much cohesion when it comes to military capacity, weapons and the levels of interoperability. In Europe, there is great disparity when it comes to the different defence agencies. That is because we have only started looking at this again and building up our capacity when it comes to defence and investment in defence, which is down to the fact that we have emerged from such a long period of peace. In such a short period over the past few years, we have seen a major change on the world stage in the context of war and conflict. We do not know where we are going to be in the next few years, which is really frightening. The Balkan states have been here before. They understand what is possible because they have come out of a shorter period of peace. They understand what the Russians are capable of. We probably do not understand how much of a threat we are living under. The threat to use is in the area of cybersecurity. We have seen the scenes in Georgian Parliament. I do not know what we are going to see when it comes to the elections around Europe and in Ireland over the next year. Things are changing extremely quickly. As a previous speaker stated, we need to invest in ensuring that people have the correct information and that they understand that what they seen on their phones is not always right and that they need to question it. It is difficult to get people to that point because they believe what they see. That is my tuppence worth.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Ardagh for her comments. I take her point on the International Criminal Court and the international legal system more generally. I have always been very clear that it takes time and that the impact is not immediate. However, the court is an important forum of accountability. Among EU member states, Ireland has been one of the most proactive at the ICJ and the ICC so far in the context of Palestine. Accountability matters. We know that because Israel takes the court seriously in terms of its response. That is not in the media, however. The feeling of helplessness to which the Senator referred is something I pick up regularly as I travel around the country. People are appalled that women, children and other innocent civilians are being killed. They feel helpless in terms of what we can do. We have to keep pushing for a ceasefire. Public opinion has changed, but, more importantly, the position of countries in response to this war has changed. There was a much different view in October of last year. Now, the vast majority of countries in Europe want and are calling for an immediate ceasefire. The vote at the UN in recent days was substantially in favour of admitting Palestine as a member. This type of international pressure has to be kept up in order to get a cessation of hostilities.

In terms of women, peace and security, that is a key objective of our foreign policy and our international engagement. We provide significant resources towards it. When we were on the UN Security Council, we were particularly active on that front and brought women who had experience of conflict situations before the council to articulate their experiences. When I was in Colombia recently - we are involved in the peace process there - we highlighted the importance of that strand to any peace process.

In the context of military and defence spending, we are coming from a low base. Given the strength of our GDP, it will be a long time before we get to 2%. That is because our GDP is quite artificial in one sense. However, we can only increase in line with our capacity to absorb. We are building up the level of expenditure; it is growing. The other aspect in respect of which we need to build capacity is procurement. We must ensure that we have the capacity to procure additional capability. Radar has been identified as a key area. I am pursuing this in very practical terms because we need to know what is in happening in our airspace and all other domains. We have implemented significant infrastructural improvements across all barracks. We are close to completing a master plan for Baldonnell. There is a very aggressive and proactive enhancement of facilities for the Defence Forces across the country. That is being done in a very programmatic, proper way. There will be master plans for every site and we will make sure that we build on the investment that has already been made.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste. I am anxious that Sentor-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Investment in cybersecurity has grown exponentially in the past five years.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious that I did ask Senator Craughwell to hold off with his questions. I will give him some latitude and then I will bring in Senator Higgins.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am going to come in very quickly-----

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste has to go-----

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste might not be able to answer these questions straight away. I am happy for him to come back on them. The first relates to the Secretary General being a member of the external oversight body. There has been quite an extensive debate on the matter here. There is a conflict of interest. It was confirmed by the chairman of the external oversight body that there would be times when the Secretary General-----

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry for interrupting, but that is not what the Tánaiste is to discuss today.

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know, but he is here as Minister for Defence as well.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He is, but-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be here next week to debate that.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----he is not here to discuss that matter. The select committee will be meeting next week to-----

Gerard Craughwell (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fair enough.

The second matter to which I wish to refer is the triple lock. I sincerely hope we will be successful in removing that. If we are, I ask the Tánaiste to look at the possibility of Ireland joining the joint expeditionary force, the purpose of which is to protect the North Atlantic and the assets in the North Atlantic.

I am going to cede the remainder of my time to Senator Higgins.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am going to focus on a couple of aspects. The Tánaiste mentioned that the position of many EU countries in respect of a ceasefire has moved on significantly since October.

I acknowledge that he has been making strong and constructive statements in regard to working for peace and pushing for a ceasefire in Gaza. Unfortunately, the Irish Embassy in Israel seems to be signing up in May - I refer, for example, to a statement from 5 May - to statements which are still quoting the line from 13 October which stated unequivocally that Europe stands with Israel in response to the events of 7 October. The language used by Ursula von der Leyen in her 13 October statement, which seemed to offer a blank cheque, has been widely discredited. That statement was extensively quoted in a statement signed by an Irish delegate along with many other EU delegations on 5 May.

In that context, did the Irish Embassy in Tel Aviv seek political guidance from the Department or from officials before signing or issuing recent statements which undermine or almost counteract the work the Government seems to be doing at European Council meetings in trying to push for a more nuanced position? It is important to say that the position mentioned by the Tánaiste is not about taking sides but about international law. My understanding of neutrality is that it is not simply the absence of a military alliance or membership. Neutrality is the idea of applying international principles and international law equally to all on the basis of those principles and not on the basis of interests. It is not about having our allies and friends and thinking that different laws can apply to our friends and enemies. That is one of the reasons Ireland has been so effective internationally and at the UN. It is seen as a neutral country in that context. Our embassy in Tel Aviv built on its previous comments in another tweet yesterday. Are those statements being cleared?

There are concrete actions that Ireland can take. I am a co-sponsor of the occupied territories Bill. The Tánaiste mentioned the importance of separation. We should not be trading with occupied territories. This is a place where Ireland can give leadership. The arms embargo Bill seeks to ensure we are not complicit in the international arms transfer to Israel. We have had zero inspections of planes going through. There should be no exemptions for flights which may potentially be implicated in the arms trade and that arms channel to Israel.

The bulk of my questions are on that disarmament space. There are a few pieces here. I would like to speak about the dangers of some of the co-operation we are hearing about at European level. The fact is that not all of Europe operates on the basis of neutrality or principles. Many European countries have foreign policies and defence policies that are based on interests and assets. Indeed, Ursula von der Leyen has spoken about European interests. There is a danger that we could be complicit in military actions - or indeed the funding, researching or procurement of military actions - which are not in line with international law and its principles, but are pursued on the basis of the protection or promotion of interests. Many countries have a colonial past, with many colonial and former colonial interests. Germany has had a tenfold increase in the transfer of arms to Israel. The EU has agreed to a new ammunition fund, from which German factories will benefit, and Ireland is contributing to this. Indeed, it may be producing ammunition which we helped indirectly to co-fund, and which may be used in Gaza.

This is where it is really important for Ireland to have its unique space and to hold out, rather than simply falling into a simplistic approach. Will the Tánaiste clarify how we bring our neutrality into ensuring we are not complicit in all of this? On disarmament, how do we balance the narrative of promoting global disarmament at a time when there is a kind of rush towards armament? Frank Aiken was very strong and clear on importance of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. This idea that we all arm ourselves up and that leads to mutual defence is not actually what leads to security. On global disarmament and specifically in the Swiss peace meetings, there are concerns around point 9 of the ten-point Ukrainian plan around security architecture in the Euro-Atlantic space. That needs to be respecting of neutrality and the fact that certain countries which have a neutral position do not contribute through military participation.

On the issue of cluster munitions, Ireland as a neutral country without a defence industry was able to negotiate the global ban on cluster bombs. We have seen both Russian and Ukrainian use of cluster munitions. Ukraine has been given cluster munitions from the United States. Will Ireland raise the issue of the inappropriateness of the use of cluster bombs by all sides at that Swiss meeting? What is our unique voice going to be? What are we going to bring that is different from simply saying that we back the ten-point plan? Are we going to bring learning from our own peace process on the difficulties and the complicated shifts and moves that have to happen in order to achieve peace? Those are some of my questions.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said at the outset, the Tánaiste has to be in the Dáil for 5.30 p.m. It is now 5.15 p.m.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In regard to the Irish Embassy in Tel Aviv, that EU local statement was on Holocaust Memorial Day.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand the date, not the content.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was in that context that the statement from the EU member states was signed off. To be fair to the embassy, generally we are in touch with it on multiple occasions daily. There has been a great deal of interaction between the embassy and the Government of Israel in respect of our stance on this issue. There is no ambiguity or misunderstanding about our position in regard to the Government of Israel, so much so that it has sought explanations and so forth. I have also communicated to the Israeli ambassador, at a meeting here, our clear position in respect of all of these issues so that it would be communicated directly to the Israeli Government. Of course I met with the Israelis after 8 October. I met with the Prime Minister and its foreign minister. Even then I gave our position as the need for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire.

In terms of the occupied territories Bill, the advice from successive Attorneys General - not just one - is that it is incompatible with EU law and is not implementable. That is the clear legal advice, and the trade policies and EU confidence. Our opposition to the settlements is clear. A differentiation policy distinguishes between Israel and settlements. A unilateral approach would be wholly ineffective but we work with EU member states to try to get common positions.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Just to mention that we still have not seen that Attorney General advice. It would be useful at this point as we have had successive advice that we have not seen.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Generally speaking, the advice of Attorneys General-----

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The arms embargo Bill is presented and the Minister for Transport is leading on this. To put the debate in context, we have no evidence at all that there are any flights. I am not aware we are complicit in anything in terms of overflights to Israel.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There have been no inspections.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know, but equally there have been statements from certain actors - not from Senator Higgins - who have turned the absence of inspections into a kind of confirmation that a lot of these planes are flying over Ireland. They are not, from what we can make out.

We need to have perspective when it comes to co-operation at EU level on the issue of military defence policy. We must have balance here. We are one of 27 member states. We cannot expect all of them to suspend their view on life, and their view on their security needs as they see them within their own democracies, on account of our specific policy. There is a challenge there. We can ask for Ireland's specific characteristic policy to be respected in the EU policies that are defined from time to time, like the strategic compass or other particular initiatives. That is how we approach initiatives on this front, particularly in terms of the non-legal dimension of the Ukrainian package, for example. The war in Ukraine has created a security atmosphere around Europe now.

There is a sense of vulnerability regarding what would happen if Russia was to go further. At the outset of the war in Ukraine, there was huge existential fear in Germany, leading to the Zeitwende, the massive change in defence policy. The sense in Germany is that it is ill-equipped and is not investing enough in its own defence.

As a result of the Holocaust, whether we agree or disagree, it is the reality of German politics that they see a unique relationship with Israel and the protection of Israel. They say this repeatedly. I do not agree with them entirely. Obviously, the position of Germany----

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They have also had a tenfold increase in their arms exports.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. They have made their position in respect of Israel clear, because of what happened historically. I think there is a failure there to look at it in contemporary times in terms of Israel's destruction of Gaza and killing of Palestinians. I fail to understand the German position in respect of that. Germany is still the biggest contribution of humanitarian aid to Gaza and to Palestinians. That is the other side of that coin. It is committed to that humanitarian mission as well.

I think in terms of the security architecture and the peace plan, it is the only peace plan that has been published. Remember that what is turning the dial here as well is North Korean weaponry that has gone to Russia and really helped Russia, and the Iranian drones that have been sent as well which have helped Russia enormously. If there is peace, I think most people say there has to be some kind of security architecture to give some guarantees into the future to Ukraine and to others. Sometimes the security architecture creates peace, if it is properly defined and designed. There are many ways we can look at this. Ukraine denuclearised after the collapse of the Soviet empire. Ukraine got rid of its nuclear weapons voluntarily and look at the thanks it got from Russia. Ireland maintains our focus on nuclear non-proliferation. That is one of the reasons we opted, under the peace plan initiative, to do some work on the nuclear front in terms of safety and security around the plants.

Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

And cluster munitions.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have already articulated our view and we have condemned the use of cluster munitions in this war, irrespective of who uses them.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste for meeting with us this afternoon and answering the questions in such a comprehensive manner. I thank his officials for attending. We look forward to having the Tánaiste back here in the near future. I propose that we go into private session. Is that agreed? Agreed.