Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 56: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position Ireland proposes to take as a member of the nuclear suppliers group in relation to the implementation of the recent proposed US agreement with India on nuclear capacity; and his views on the implications of this proposal for the future of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and the perceived inconsistency between this proposal and the US and European Union response to recent events in Iran. [19803/06]

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The 45 participating countries of the nuclear suppliers group, NSG, including Ireland, have agreed guidelines governing the export of items that are specially designed or prepared for nuclear use and for nuclear related dual-use items and technologies. Under these guidelines the export of such items to India is prohibited. The US-India agreement on civil nuclear co-operation was reached on 2 March 2006 between President Bush and Prime Minister Singh during the former's visit to India. Under the agreement, India has agreed, inter alia, to identify and separate civilian and military nuclear facilities and programmes and to file a declaration regarding its civilian facilities with the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA. India has agreed to classify 14 of its 22 nuclear power reactors as civilian facilities and voluntarily to place these under IAEA safeguards.

We are currently analysing the details of the agreement both within the European Union and bilaterally with like-minded countries. The agreement is a complex one on which we have yet to reach a final considered judgment. We wish to assess carefully all its elements and all its wider implications. Within the NSG, in particular, it will be important for Ireland to act in concert with like-minded partners.

There have been expressions of support from some countries and the Director General of the IAEA, Dr. El Baradei, has also welcomed the deal.

We have genuine concerns about what is envisaged. For Ireland, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, NPT, remains the cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime. The treaty is the most universal of all the international instruments in the field of disarmament and non-proliferation and we will continue to press for the universalisation of the NPT and for India's accession to it without conditions. In official level discussion, we have been active in raising many of the difficult questions to which the agreement gives rise.

Before the US-India agreement can be implemented, the US Congress will have to approve an amendment to US law. The Bush Administration has recently submitted such a proposal and hearings in Congress on the matter are under way. The hearings in the House of Representatives and the Senate will provide further opportunity for additional clarification which will assist our analysis. It would be preferable to await the outcome of deliberations in the US Congress before taking a final decision within the NSG. Moreover, the approaches taken by a range of key international partners will also be crucial in determining the NSG's course of action.

The US-India agreement certainly adds a further complication of discussion on the Iranian nuclear programme. At the same time, the two situations are distinct. Iran is a member of the NPT which has repeatedly failed to comply with its safeguards obligations and to take the steps required of it by the IAEA and the UN Security Council.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State is somebody for whom I have respect so what I have to say is in no sense personal. However, this is an entirely misleading presentation not the situation. On Friday, there will be a meeting in Rio of the nuclear suppliers group, otherwise known since 1977 as the Club of London. Ireland will be called upon to make up its mind. It will have an opportunity at that meeting, because decisions are taken by way of consensus, to block this agreement.

From what the Minister of State has just said, I put it to him that he is proposing to agree to allow India the same regime as the existing five nuclear powers, France, Britain, China, the United States and Russia. These five nuclear powers have a regime which allows them to nominate certain installations for examination. This is precisely what is on offer to India and it is a stab in the back for the NPT, which the Minister of State correctly describes as one of the most important treaties and which should be aimed at universalisation.

I put it to the Minister of State that what is on offer from India is not membership of the NPT. Will the Minister of State not agree that India does not accept the disciplines of the NPT? Ireland, as a member of the Club of London, where decisions are taken by consensus, is required to vote. Where decisions, which Ireland can block, are taken by consensus, the disciplines are called full scope safeguards. I put it to the Minister of State, then, that to allow the agreement to come into being is the greatest destruction of the NPT that could possibly happen. I also put it to him that it is gross hypocrisy to say that Iran has departed from the safeguard disciplines when Ireland is about to allow a country with no membership of the NPT and no requirement of any discipline whatsoever to agree something that is much lesser.

What Dr. El Baradei has agreed to is not the principle of the agreement, but the concession that has been offered to India, which will allow it to join the five nuclear powers with the same loose arrangement, little less than that. It is a scandalous contradiction of the position taken by Ireland in New York at the New Agenda, when it is widely recognised to be one of the author countries of the NPT. To allow a new country to join five others which have not observed the disciplines of Article 6, to become a new threat, next door to Pakistan, will be the single biggest betrayal of the NPT. To suggest that the NPT can survive after this is quite ridiculous and scandalous. I repeat that the meeting is on Friday, 26 May, in two days' time. To suggest that it is under consideration is misleading this House. By now the Minister of State should know what he should do — I know what the Irish people would want him to do.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Alas, I never intended, nor would I ever attempt, to mislead this House. I will give the House the facts as they are. As this matter evolves there is still a long lead-in time before we reach——

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Two days.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, that is presumption. There is still a long lead-in time in this situation.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How will the Minister of State vote at the meeting? Will he refuse to deliver at the Rio meeting on Friday? That is a straight question.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did not interrupt the Deputy. As I made clear, this is a complex matter which we are still analysing. Many aspects of it demand serious and rigorous analysis and not all the details of what precisely is involved are clear.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is clear.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is the case, for example, with regard to the safeguards agreement that India has yet to negotiate with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Our final view will depend——

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is outside the treaty; it is joining China.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——on our assessment of the potential impact of the US-India agreement on the global non-proliferation regime and on the approach taken by like-minded countries.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins is right. We are proud of our contribution to the genesis of the non-proliferation treaty which the late Deputy Frank Aiken, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, championed across the world. It was universally accepted and was a major contribution to global peace and stability at the time. Ireland has great regard for this precious instrument which is critically important to the world.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

How will the Minister vote? Will he vote in favour of the treaty or of giving India carte blanche to join China, Russia, France and Britain?

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Nuclear Suppliers Group, NSG, normally takes decisions at the group's annual plenary meeting, the next of which will take place in Brazil next week.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, in two days' time.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have been told next week. This matter was discussed twice within the NSG, in October and March — I understand there is an international meeting on the issue in London today — when delegations raised several questions and concerns. It is clear that in Brazil there will be another discussion of the US proposal to exempt India from the NSG guidelines. Our current sense is that delegations are unlikely to be in a position to make a decision. It will not be possible. Some made clear in previous discussions that they wished to await the outcome of the ongoing deliberations in the US Congress before deciding within the NSG. That is also our preference. We await that debate. There is no guarantee that this will get a conclusion——

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Why must we await the US debate? Can the Minister of State not make up his mind? Is he in favour of the Indian exception?

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are clear on our position. We fully support the non-proliferation treaty and will continue to do so. Our preference is to await the legislative conclusions. If they do not arise, this does not arise. We cannot pre-empt the outcome of the legislative debate.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State could handle the legislative debate by saying he is not in favour of the exception.

Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is also a possibility of seeking an extraordinary plenary meeting in the coming months. The US has indicated that it may wish to do so, but it is too early to speculate on the timing of such a meeting. We are only on a lead-in time. There will be no de facto conclusions as we enter debate.

Bernard Allen (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Pussycat diplomacy.