Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Are war crimes different if they take place in different countries? Is illegal occupation different if it takes place in different countries? Are systematic abuses of human rights different if they take place in different countries? Are crimes against humanity different if they take place in different countries? I would say most people would answer "No" to those questions. Abuses of human rights are abuses of human rights. Crimes against humanity are, as the words suggest, crimes against any of humanity. War crimes are crimes committed anywhere using war and aggression. Illegal occupation is illegal occupation, regardless of where it takes place. It seems the Irish Government and the European Union have a totally different view on that.

There have been nine rounds of sanctions against Russia as part of an absolutely justified condemnation of illegal aggression, murder, illegal occupation, human rights abuses and crimes against humanity. The very same things are happening every day in Palestine and there is not one round of sanctions. Not only have there been no sanctions but there are preferential trade agreements. Europe is Israel's biggest trading partner, with €31 billion of trade.

The United States, which was also mentioned favourably in the Taoiseach's speech, this week specifically insisted that the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh should not be referred to the International Criminal Court, ICC, as a crime. It specifically said it should not. Mr. Ned Price, a spokesperson for the State Department, stated, "We maintain our long-standing objections to the ICC’s investigation into the Palestinian situation". The official position of the United State is that whatever it does, we must not investigate Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. What does the Minister of State think of that? What does the Government think about its allies and friends in Washington insisting we do not look into the crimes committed by Israel in the murder of Shireen Abu Akleh? What is the Government's official response to the reports of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International condemning Israel for apartheid, crimes against humanity, the siege of Gaza and so on? What is the official position of the Government on what we will do about that? What has the Government asked the European Union to do about that? What has the Government demanded in response to the specific request in the recommendations of that report that there should be sanctions in terms of selling weapons or defence-security trade with Israel that in any way facilitates, perpetuates or supports the apartheid regime in its prosecution of crimes against humanity? What is the Government's official response? What is the European Union saying? The answer is "Zero, zilch."

Has the Minister of State seen the video of the cold-blooded execution of Ammar Mefleh in the past week in Huwara, a town south of Nablus? Has the Minister of State seen it? It shows a man shot in cold blood by the Israelis? I have seen it. It is horrendous. The middle eastern representative of the UN described with absolute shock what he was looking at, stating it had to be investigated. There was not a word in the Taoiseach's speech. Does he honestly believe that anybody can credibly give credit to the humanitarian pretensions or the pretensions to being a force for peace or a force driven by principle rather than strategic self-interest if he remains silent about that? Of course, in some ways the agenda is given away when one sees us being evaluated by NATO in Cork. I thank the Minister for the reply in which he stated that we have made a voluntary decision to be evaluated by NATO. I got this letter. It is quite extraordinary voluntarily deciding to be evaluated by NATO. Of course, in that, we see the real agenda.

See this speech in context