Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

By the time the European Council meets late next week, there will probably have been new and significant developments in Ukraine, including the results of the one-sided and clearly illegitimate referendum about Crimea becoming a part of the Russian Federation. Ukraine will quite rightly dominate the summit. As we do not know the exact context in which the summit will hold its discussions, it is difficult for us to make specific proposals. However, there is much that will not change and there are core principles that must be upheld.

There has been an ongoing attempt by Russia to throw up a cloud of distractions about Ukraine in the past three months, but it is clear that what we are dealing with is a former imperial power that is acting with aggression against a sovereign state. This crisis has been directly created by the mindset that Russia has the right to control the destiny of a state that used to be a part of the Soviet Union. Russia hopes that the strength of its verbal and commercial counter-attacks will prevent the democratic world from standing up to it.

It is the wish of the strong majority of Ukrainian people to be part of the European, democratic mainstream. This has led to Russia's reaction. First there was the threat to crush the Ukrainian economy if an association agreement was signed with the EU. Now there is the operation to take Ukrainian territory.

Let there be no mistake about this - every single element of Russia's story for the annexation of the Crimea is illegitimate. First, there is the story that it is acting to defend Russian civilians being from being suppressed by Kiev. The fact is that the only people who have been beaten off the streets in the past two weeks are Russians protesting against their Government in Moscow and Ukrainians supporting their Government in Sevastopol. No evidence whatsoever of the mistreatment of the Russian minority has been produced. The initial claims of more than 500,000 people fleeing to Russia were so transparently bogus that Moscow has dropped them from its narrative. The only fleeing populations have been Ukrainians and Tartars from the Crimea.

Second, there is the statement that no Russian troops are involved. Russia seems to believe that, by taking markings off uniforms, it has the right to sell this nonsense. All of the vehicles being used to control Crimea have Russian military number plates. These vehicles include light and heavy armour. The weapons available to the pro-annexation troops are standard issue for Russian troops. Most conclusively, the warships blockading the Ukrainian fleet are Russian. Unless Moscow expects us to accept that replica warships to ones in its fleets have appeared and are under the control of local militias, the evidence is absolutely conclusive – Russian troops have invaded and taken control of Ukrainian territory.

Third, there is the idea that Viktor Yanukovych is still the legitimate Head of State in Kiev and he has asked Russia for help. Mr. Yanukovych is responsible for killing demonstrators on the streets of Kiev. It was he who refused to implement agreements to resolve the crisis and it was he who fled the country. The evidence of the kleptocracy he ran is now so overwhelming that no one is asking for his restoration to office.

Finally, there is the claim that there is nothing to hide. If that is the case, why are extraordinary steps being taken to prevent any external agency from getting a presence on the ground? The OSCE is directly charged with being able to monitor these situations quickly. It has groups on constant standby, ready to go into areas of unrest or conflict and create the basis for a unified international reaction. However, the OSCE monitoring team has repeatedly been refused access to Crimea by Russian forces. This has included an incident where an OSCE monitoring team, including a colonel of the Irish Army, had warning shots fired at it. In addition, a United Nations representative has been subjected to mob intimidation while Russian troops looked on.

There is no point in engaging with the Russian position in detail because it is transparent nonsense. It is about trying to engage the international community in a diplomatic dance while Russia gets on with creating facts on the ground.

One does not need to be an historian to see the uncanny comparison with the tactics of Germany in the late 1930s. Were the Baltic states and other former communist states not now members of the EU and NATO, the logic being used by Russia to threaten Ukraine would apply to them as well. Russia is not Nazi Germany, but it is an increasingly authoritarian state and a consistent opponent of basic democratic norms and the right of the international community to promote those norms. Its support of the Assad regime in Syria has helped the latter to survive and create a humanitarian catastrophe.

For those who assert that this is none of our business and that we should, in fact, only be concerned with business and trade, I could not disagree more. We cannot charge around the world insisting that every nation we talk and trade with become a western European liberal democracy. That would be naive and foolish. However, if we genuinely believe in the rule of law in international relations and if we believe in basic human rights, there are times when we must speak up and be willing to act with others.

The Russian Government is working on the basis that business means too much to European governments for them to do anything meaningful. The Prime Minister of Poland, Mr. Donald Tusk, stated on Monday that he feared that the reliance of Germany on Russian gas and trade was such that it compromised European sovereignty. If a European country can be torn apart in such an aggressive and dishonest way without real consequences, then we should consider repealing all of the founding declarations about the Union's commitment to democracy and the rule of law.

Unfortunately, the EU's response so far has been extremely weak. Strong words at press conferences have been followed by active work to weaken all proposed actions. It is primarily because of the work of foreign Ministers Mr. Carl Bildt of Sweden, Mr. Radoslaw, or Radek, Sikorski of Poland and the three Baltic member states that Europe has not yet disgraced itself. In particular, I commend Mr. Sikorski on his work. From my time serving with him on the Foreign Affairs Council, I know that he is a passionate believer in building a prosperous and democratic Europe. He is also someone who remembers how Europe standing up for its values helped societies suffering under totalitarian regimes in the past.

It is not clear what, if anything, our Government supports. The words of the Taoiseach and Tánaiste in condemning Russia's actions have been strong and welcome. I support them in that regard. What is unknown is what is meant by the "severe actions" to which they referred.

Are we supporting the minimalist approach of Germany and some other major trading partners of Russia or are we supporting the much tougher approach of others? Perhaps we are waiting for something to be agreed and whatever that is we will support it?

The current European position is to suspend future actions but leave everything else in place. This is not good enough. At a minimum, we should match the measures announced by President Obama. In addition, we should make it a genuine priority to lift the reliance of many states on Russian gas. This gas has been and will be used to support other Russian political objectives. There comes a point where letting things drift must stop. Instead of adopting the current innocuous draft conclusions on energy, the summit should adopt more radical ones about liberating Europe from potential energy blackmail. Given the current situation, it is inappropriate for the Irish Government to proceed with any direct government-to-government activities in Moscow for St Patrick's Day. Surely, we cannot hold social receptions with people we are simultaneously proposing to sanction. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Alex White, has a busy portfolio. Given the significant challenges facing his free GP care and compulsory health insurance proposals, it would be understood if he were to remain in Dublin. I ask the Taoiseach to consider that approach to the engagement on St. Patrick's Day in Moscow.

On the new Government in Ukraine, we should not forget that the people of that country experienced a false dawn ten years ago. The Orange Revolution did not deliver for the people. There was no real attempt to show respect for civil society and end the rule of wealthy elites. The European Union should condition its support on the implementation of a programme, which the EU should fund, to increase the role of civil society and bodies which promote transparency and accountability. We should also insist that financial aid to Ukraine sets it on a realistic path to growth. If this requires the restructuring of the debt amassed under the last regime, so be it. Ukraine needs investment and hope, neither of which it can obtain if it spends years desperately managing these debts.

The summit will formally sign off the latest fiscal and economic oversight documents. This is not a success. The European semester leaves in place every element of existing economic orthodoxy. Most importantly, it is following the policy of austerity for all which has undermined the positions of all European economies. Many member states do not have the opportunity to implement significant extra investment. While the idea that all austerity has been avoidable is populist nonsense, there are economies which are certainly strong enough to follow a more growth-oriented approach which would benefit them and the whole of Europe. European recovery remains weak. Growth rates are significantly lower than forecast this time last year. This summit will again sign off on a policy of leaving policy unchanged. Thankfully, ECB President, Mario Draghi, has not followed the policy of doing as little as possible as late as possible. I welcome his statement that he is willing to implement new measures if he feels deflation is a rising threat. The various decisions of Mario Draghi in his two years as ECB President have been absolutely central to any progress in Europe. They have been far more significant in helping Ireland than any decision of our Government. This must explain why the Taoiseach and Tánaiste and their parties have ignored him in the lengthy and still ongoing speeches of self-praise the Dáil has been hearing for the last week and more.

The annotated draft agenda for the summit states that issues around the single resolution mechanism may be discussed, but not as a priority item. The existing proposal for the SRM is wholly inadequate and goes nowhere near breaking the link between sovereign and banking debt. The entire package for a watered-down banking union is also delayed. Reports are appearing again about difficulties in Belgium and other members states. While the Taoiseach and his EPP party colleagues engaged in an extended backslapping session about banking union last week, the reality is very different. The essential bank resolution fund, to which the Taoiseach signed up, will take ten years to build up its funds. After a decade, it will have €55 billion available to it. This has been estimated at only 0.2% of the total asset base of the covered banks.

The Taoiseach and his staff have once again been briefing journalists that they have everything in hand on banking debt but only the most gullible could take any of this at face value. The Government has never said what it is looking for in terms of either the type or level of funding. It is now well over a year and a half since the Ministers for Public Expenditure and Finance, Deputies Brendan Howlin and Michael Noonan, respectively, gave a giggling press conference at which they indulged the idea that €68 billion would be on the way after they had, I quote, "changed the game". After 19 months, the game has not been changed. The figures that were talked about then are in excess of the entire fund available from the European Union for past, present and future recapitalisation of the entire European financial system. There is also the problem of the June 2012 communique, which the Taoiseach likes to tell journalists gave a specific commitment to sort out Ireland. It did nothing of the sort. The exact text, which is more referred to than read, states that "The Eurogroup will examine the situation of the Irish financial sector with the view of further improving the sustainability of the well-performing adjustment programme".

It is over three months since the Taoiseach declared the adjustment programme over. He also declared that he and his Ministers had already delivered debt sustainability and growth for the economy. There is no commitment whatsoever in that to transfer to Europe Ireland's bank-related debt. It may be that we can sell them some bank shares but, as we have seen in the last week, this is not a problem. It is simply not true that we agreed to wait until the banking union was up and running before looking for debt relief. What has emerged is a permanent campaign to refuse to be straight with the people and to constantly change the briefings about what was agreed. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, said, by way of reference to the fair at Glynn, that he would not reveal his bottom line. That is fine, but more than a year and a half later the public has a right to at least hear the opening bid.

The Commission's work on taxation may also be raised. There is nothing in the EU treaties to prevent member states from setting different tax rates. Enough time has been wasted trying to construct a case to get involved in the corporate taxation issue. The idea that the German or French economies are suffering because of how Ireland taxes business profits is ridiculous. There are much more important issues which should be taking up the time of leaders at this summit. I welcome the fact that the summit will review the area of climate and energy policy. The influence of climate change deniers is thankfully receding rapidly. Unfortunately, this is being driven by the increasingly severe evidence of man-caused climate change. Ireland should support the reinvigoration and not the watering down of action on climate change. The area of competitiveness will also be covered but it appears that there is nothing new on the agenda. A real competitiveness agenda would include a proper investment programme.

The people of Ukraine, who went onto the streets to demand a European future for their country, deserve our support. Some of them paid for their dreams with their lives. The country as a whole is facing an aggressive invasion from its powerful neighbour. If the Taoiseach returns from the summit having done only one thing, it must have been to stand with the people of Ukraine through supporting concrete action to develop their country and rebuff the Russian aggression. The Taoiseach has had his photo opportunities with Yulia Timoshenko and Vitali Klitschko. It is time for some concrete action.

See this speech in context