Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

rejects the validity of the referendum held in Crimea on 16th March without the minimum democratic guarantees which cannot pave the way for a change of borders between Russia and Ukraine;

condemns the illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation which violates the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine in breach of the Charter of the United Nations and the 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as Russia’s specific commitments under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation and the 1991 Alma Ata Declaration;

calls on all parties, and particularly the Russian Federation, to pursue immediately the peaceful resolution of the situation regarding Ukraine, in full respect of its bilateral and multilateral commitments to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right of its people to democratically decide their own future and self determination, through direct political dialogue, to exercise restraint, to refrain from unilateral actions and inflammatory rhetoric that may increase tensions and to engage fully with international mediation efforts;

commends the measured response shown so far by Ukraine and calls on the interim government to ensure they maintain inclusive and representative governmental structures, reflecting regional diversity, to ensure the full protection of the rights of all persons, including those belonging to national minorities, to undertake constitutional reform, to investigate all human rights violations and acts of violence and to fight extremism;

welcomes the holding of Presidential elections in Ukraine on 25th May and underscores the right of the Ukrainian people to choose their own constitutional framework without outside interference; and

pledges its solidarity with, and support for Ukraine, including through multilateral organisations of which Ireland is a member such as the United Nations, the OSCE and the Council of Europe and welcomes Ukraine’s signature of the political elements of the Association Agreement with the European Union and its Member States.

Ukraine has rightly been the focus of much concern by all parties and Deputies represented here since peaceful demonstrations started last November in Kiev. In moving this motion, I want to address three points in the House. I will explain why these developments matter, I will elaborate on the Irish and EU responses to them and I will address some questions and issues that have been prominent in the debate in recent times. The Irish people watched as the demonstrators were met with repressive and ultimately lethal force, and subsequently as Russian forces in a matter of weeks seized a part of Ukrainian territory, installed a compliant local regime, orchestrated an invalid referendum under a heavy military presence and finally announced the illegal annexation of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation.

Our greatest concern must relate to what these developments mean for the future of all countries, particularly small countries like Ireland, that support an international system where respect for the rule of law is fundamental to stability and the well-being and prosperity of all nations. It is necessary to be clear that this is not a debate about cultural affinities, the language that is spoken or the flag that is flown. We must debate the sorts of values that we want to see embedded in our societies and institutions and how we want public life and international order to be structured. We want democratic values to underpin a global international system that is based on co-operation, rather than confrontation, and allows each country to determine its own future free of external pressure, or the threat or use of force. That is why our message has been consistent from the outset. We have spoken clearly about the need for inclusive dialogue, full respect for global norms and laws, including fundamental rights and freedoms, the exercise of restraint from all sides and a total rejection of intimidation and violence.

As it has developed over recent months, the crisis in Ukraine has presented the most significant and dangerous political crisis in Europe for several decades. We must take a strong view on what has happened in Ukraine because of our respect for the rule of international law and the values and the culture that underpin this. We must recognise the scale and gravity of the events that have unfolded in Ukraine and Crimea. We have strongly condemned Russian actions from the outset of this crisis. The Tánaiste called in the Russian ambassador on 3 March to express his deep concern and asked him to convey this to his authorities in Moscow. The Russian ambassador has been advised repeatedly by senior officials in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of our continued concern. He has been told that Ireland does not recognise the outcome of the illegal referendum in Crimea. We are not alone in our actions. The European Council has expressed the firm view that there is no place for the use of force and coercion to change borders in Europe in the 21st century. On 6 March last, in response to Russian actions, the Heads of State and Government set out a three-stage roadmap to target measures against the Russian Federation in the absence of steps to de-escalate the situation. They also endorsed an earlier decision to suspend talks with Russia on visa matters and on a new agreement, both of which are priorities of the Russian Government.

Following the referendum in Crimea, the Foreign Affairs Council implemented a second phase of measures, including the imposition of travel restrictions. On 20 and 21 March, the European Council added a further 12 names to this list. The council clarified any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilise the situation in Ukraine would have far-reaching consequences for the federation's relations with the EU and its member states in a broad range of economic areas. In preparation for such a contingency, the Commission and member states were tasked to prepare possible targeted measures. This work is ongoing in Brussels. It is right that we prepare these decisions carefully. We continue to hope that further steps will not prove necessary and that a diplomatic and peaceful solution to the current crisis can be found, but there is a need to be prepared. I emphasise to Deputies that at each stage, the EU has taken a very careful and meditated approach to the actions that could be taken. It has been clearly acknowledged that the three-stage framework, which I have already mentioned, sets out clearly what the EU will do and will consider doing in response to each set of actions.

Ireland, together with its EU partners, strongly supports the new interim Government in Ukraine. The EU Heads of State and Government and the acting Ukrainian Prime Minister signed the political provisions of the association agreement in Brussels on 21 March last. This was an important symbol of our support. It was also a clear signal that the EU is ready to offer significant assistance to Ukraine on its path to closer co-operation. It is estimated that the total international support to be provided by the EU and the IMF will amount to approximately $27 billion over the next two years. While the new Government in Ukraine faces extraordinary challenges, it has shown admirable restraint. The EU has encouraged it to ensure the presidential elections to be held on 25 May will be free and fair. We welcome the Ukrainian Government’s commitment to ensure full protection of the rights of people belonging to national minorities, undertake constitutional reform, investigate all human rights violations and acts of violence and fight extremism. I emphasise that those issues are given some prominence in the text of the motion before the House.

We have also been active at the UN in New York. Following a Russian veto of a Security Council resolution on 15 March, Ireland co-sponsored a General Assembly resolution which underscored that the referendum had no validity and could not form the basis for any alteration of the status of Crimea or the city of Sevastopol. A UN human rights monitoring mission has been deployed to Ukraine. Similarly, Ireland has been strongly supportive of the many efforts by the Council of Europe and the OSCE to establish a presence on the ground that can assist in providing an accurate and independent assessment of developments in Ukraine. On 21 March, the OSCE permanent council adopted a decision to deploy an OSCE special monitoring mission to Ukraine. This decision sanctions an initial deployment of 100 civilian monitors and provides for an increase in this number to 400. A number of Irish experts with experience of OSCE field operations have volunteered for the mission.

I will conclude by addressing some of the questions and issues that have been raised by Deputies during previous debates on this issue. It has been suggested that the situation in Crimea is in some way comparable to events in Kosovo. There can be no such comparison.

In view of the conflict of the 1990s and the extended period of international administration under UN Security Council Resolution 1244, Kosovo constituted a sui generiscase which did not call into question the principles of the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act. This point was specifically stated by the European Council in 2008.

Furthermore, the declaration on friendly relations confirms that no territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force by one state against another shall be recognised as legal. Amid the complexity in the debate, that is a core point I commend to the House. The acquisition by one country of another country's territory cannot be recognised as legal if it takes place through the use of force.

Throughout this crisis, the European Union has been united and strong in its response while ensuring, above all else, that co-operation with the Ukrainian Government has been maintained in respect of its decisions and in full compliance with international law. While it is not unusual to have different perceptions among member states on global issues, all member states have been and are united in their view that what has happened in Ukraine is completely unacceptable and that it will have consequences for Russia.

I wish to end where I began with the issue of why this should be of concern to the people that we are all privileged to represent. Why should Ireland be concerned about developments many thousands of miles away from here with all the other challenges and needs that our people have? Why is the motion worthy of support by this House? We stand here as representatives of a country with a very clear history in areas such as this and obviously a clear history of our own. We have a track record of absolute insistence that the rule of law is the fundamental bedrock and guarantor of stability in the international system. As a country which has always defended the values on which the very foundation of peace and stability in Europe is based, we must reject the validity of the referendum in Crimea, condemn its illegal annexation and pledge our support for Ukraine.

I commend the motion to the House and I urge Deputies to do the same.

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

I join you, a Cheann Comhairle, and the Minister of State in welcoming the Ukrainian ambassador. In the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade we had the opportunity to engage with the ambassador on these very important issues.

I very much welcome your initiative, a Cheann Comhairle, in suggesting a common motion on the crisis developing in Ukraine and we welcome that the motion before us today is one which evidently has very strong support in this House. On behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party, I am glad to welcome the motion.

The situation in Ukraine is a stark reminder of a more troubling past when Europe was divided by walls, border checks and two very diverging political ideologies. The reunification of East and West can only truly be said to have come about on 1 May 2004 when the European Union welcomed ten new member states from eastern and central Europe. This day was a homecoming of sorts for those countries who had suffered so much under previous totalitarian regimes of both left and right. On that historic day many Members of this House attended ceremonies to mark the accession of those ten new member states to the European Union.

What we have seen in Ukraine in recent weeks is an unfortunate return to Cold War politics. The gradual collapse of the previous Ukrainian regime was inevitable once it resorted to attacking its own citizens. Fianna Fáil has raised the Ukrainian crisis in the Dáil on a number of occasions since January through numerous parliamentary questions and a number of Topical Issue debates. We were not afraid to be an independent voice for what was right then and we are certainly not afraid of being an independent voice now.

In January and February we criticised the Ukrainian authorities for their fatal attacks on their own citizens which left the world in shock. We did not hesitate in calling on the European Union to impose sanctions on the Ukrainian rulers who were responsible for these reprehensible attacks. We are now calling on the European Union to respond in an appropriate manner to the Russian policy of aggression which threatens to destabilise the whole region if not confronted properly.

The European Council meeting on 20 and 21 of March focused on the Ukrainian crisis and issued a number of welcome conclusions. EU member states signed the political provisions of the association agreement with Ukraine. The rejection of this association agreement by the previous Ukrainian Administration was central in beginning the protests which have resulted in a dramatic change in the political landscape in that country.

Fianna Fáil also welcomes the European Council's strong condemnation of the annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol to the Russian Federation and supports the decision not to recognise that annexation.

In the absence of any steps towards de-escalation, the European Council has correctly decided on an extension of the visa ban and assets freeze and cancelled the next EU-Russia summit. While we agree that we must always ensure that the EU remains open for dialogue, we welcome the European Council decision not to exclude additional and far-reaching consequences for relations with Russia in case of any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilise the situation in Ukraine.

In fact, we would support US style sanctions on Russia to show that Europe is not afraid to stand up for what is right despite the impact these sanctions might have on European trade. If there is any update on the Council's request to the Commission and the member states to prepare possible targeted measures, the Minister of State might update the House in this regard. The decision to advance the signature of the association agreements with Georgia and Moldova must also be welcomed.

It is Fianna Fáil's position that the results of the one-sided and clearly illegitimate referendum about Crimea becoming a part of the Russian Federation have far-reaching consequences for the concepts of national territory and sovereignty which must concern us all.

It is obvious to everyone here that there has been an ongoing attempt by Russia to muddy the waters and create distractions about Ukraine in the past three months, but it is clear that what we believe 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 counterattacks will prevent the democratic world from standing up to it. We should ensure that its contention is incorrect in this matter.

It appears to be the wish of the strong majority of Ukrainian people to be part of the European democratic mainstream. If that is their wish, then our belief in the supremacy of democratic principles must ensure that their wish be respected. Russia's reaction thus far has been antidemocratic and aggressive. The Russian authorities began by threatening to crush the Ukrainian economy if an association agreement was signed with the European Union. They have now succeeded in undermining the sovereign territory of Ukraine.

It is our contention that every single element of Russia's story for the annexation of Crimea is illegitimate. We have already outlined our thinking on this matter in the Dáil and at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade but it is important to re-emphasise that again here today. Along with colleagues from all parties we engaged in strong and vigorous debate with the ambassador of the Russian Federation to Ireland at that time. My party's leader, Deputy Martin, referred to the work of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade in discussing and having the opportunity to bring in the Ukrainian and Russian ambassadors to hear at first hand our concerns and also give them the opportunity to put forward their points of view. At that committee Members of all political parties and none were very vigorous in their condemnation of the Russian actions.

Russia had begun its efforts to undermine the sovereign territory of Ukraine by stating that its actions were to defend Russian civilians from being suppressed by Kiev. The facts remain that, at that time, the only people who had been beaten off the street were 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. Of course, we would not stand for any minority being denied their basic rights in any country. The initial claims of more than 500,000 people fleeing to Russia lacked any credibility and, as a result, Moscow dropped these claims from its narrative. The only fleeing populations have been Ukrainians and Tartars fleeing from the Crimea.

Second, there is the falsehood that no Russian troops were involved in actions on Ukrainian territory. The Russian authorities seem to believe that by taking markings off uniforms, they will convince the rest of the world they are not involved. The evidence in this regard is clear. All of the vehicles being used at that time to control Crimea had Russian military number plates and these vehicles included light and heavy armour. The weapons available to the annexation troops are standard issue for Russian troops. Most conclusively, the warships blockading the Ukrainian fleet were Russian. Unless Moscow expects us to accept that replica warships to ones in its fleets appeared and were under the control of local militias, the evidence is conclusive, namely, Russian troops invaded and took control of Ukrainian territory.

Third, the legitimacy of Viktor Yanukovych as Head of State in Kiev is still being supported by Russia, he having fled to Russia seeking help. What is lost in this argument is the fact that 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 he who fled the country. No one is asking for his restoration to office given the evidence of the kleptocracy he ran, and that evidence is now overwhelming.

Finally, Russia claims there is nothing to hide. Yet, extraordinary steps are being taken to prevent any external agency from gaining a presence on the ground in Ukraine. The Minister of State referred to the importance and potential of the work of the OSCE, which is directly charged with being able to monitor these situations. 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 senior officer of the Irish Army, had warning shots fired at it. In addition, a United Nations representative was subjected to mob intimidation while Russian troops looked on. That is not acceptable to the international community.

In order to engage with Russia on this issue, we need to ensure that the facts do not get lost in the spin over substance approach of the Russian authorities. We need to ensure that the European Union and the United States do not engage in a fanciful debate which gives any credit to false accusations which suit one agenda alone. We need the facts from both sides.

The actions taken by Russia over the past few weeks have been very disturbing in their likeness to similar actions and tactics used by Germany in the 1930s. We all hope that the confiscation of Crimea and the undermining of other nations' national sovereignty is the end of the similarities between the German authoritarian regime in the 1930s and the actions of the Russian authorities today. We are all well aware that 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.

Russia's support of the Assad regime in Syria has helped the latter to survive and create a humanitarian catastrophe. That much is clear. The non-working of the United Nations and its failure to achieve a resolution to assist in the catastrophe and major humanitarian disaster in Syria, due to this being blocked by China and Russia, is most disappointing. The United Nations Organisation, which we depend upon to promote harmony, to deal with international issues and to deal with issues concerning poverty, hunger and famine, has not been working, unfortunately. To some extent, Syria has gone off our screens and it does not get the coverage it did in the past, but the horrors of Syria remain.

Some have asserted that Ireland should not take a position on this matter, that we are a neutral country and that taking a position undermines that claim. Some state that we should only be concerned with business and trade when dealing with these issues. I fundamentally disagree with this point of view. The fact is that if we are a country which believes in the rule of law in the international community, if we are a country that believes democracy matters and that basic human rights should be respected, we must speak up about what has happened and what is happening in the Ukraine at present.

We brought motions before this House in January and February in regard to the disturbances and loss of life in Kiev under the previous Administration. We outlined at that time our concerns and, I believe, the concerns of the Irish people in regard to that situation. Equally, today, we will express the views and concerns of our own people when there is so much at issue.

I note the very recent comments attributed to a senior NATO officer, who referred to Russia's placing of its forces on Ukraine's border. He said that if it decided to carry out an incursion into the country, it could achieve its objective in three to five days. That commentary, if valid, is very worrying. It is estimated in the same commentary that a 40,000 strong force of Russian soldiers is on the Ukrainian border. Reference has also been made to the Russian forces having aircraft and helicopter support as well as field hospitals and electronic warfare capabilities. As part of the international community, we should hope there will be no further Russian intervention in Ukraine, which would be a mistake of monumental and historic proportions.

As I said to the Minister of State, Deputy Donohoe, on Question Time earlier today, we must have a strong voice at the EU Council of Foreign Ministers in regard to this very important issue. We want the issue dealt with as quickly as possible to make clear that we stand up for the rule of international law and that we will not accept, where possible, encroachment on people's sovereignty and interference with territorial integrity by a foreign power. What has been happening over the past few weeks is not acceptable. I am glad to have the opportunity to support the motion put before us by the Minister of State, Deputy Donohoe.

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

It is important that we all stand united with the Ukrainian people at this very worrying and extremely difficult time. If any message goes out from here today, it should be that while there may be differences in regard to our analysis of the way forward, the most important thing is that this House stands united in wanting what is best for Ukraine and its people. There are many similarities between both our countries. I would argue that our peoples are warm, friendly and educated and we both have young populations. There is a love of live, of music and of culture. The two countries have had a difficult relationship with their nearest neighbour. They have suffered occupation, intimidation, repression, division, censorship, war and famine, which is a particular similarity of Ukraine and Ireland. The natural resources were stripped from the two countries for the benefit of others rather than themselves.

The Ukrainian people have suffered under corrupt and ineffective governments for too long. The result has been a deterioration in socioeconomic conditions and the effective bankruptcy of the state. The recent problems in Ukraine stem from the EU, US and Russia playing a zero-sum geopolitical game with the country. Ukraine basically got an offer to throw all its eggs into the EU basket on the off-chance that, down the line, it might get EU membership in a few years time and an offer to throw all its eggs into Russia's basket and continue to be under its thumb while surrounded by countries who took the EU route. Meanwhile, the country was slowly becoming bankrupt, regressing in socioeconomic terms and was rife with corruption. Rather than trying to railroad Ukraine down one particular political route, the EU and Russia should have been working together to create mutually beneficial and non-exclusive economic, political and social relationships with Ukraine. This policy direction would have been of real and genuine benefit to ordinary Ukrainians.

There is an urgent need for restraint from all sides within Ukraine and from foreign powers at this crucial time. We have not seen that from the EU, the US or from Russia. The interim government in Kiev has very little legitimacy, particularly for people living in the east. The country continues to be divided, and attempts by the EU, the US and Russia to increase their influence merely exacerbate tensions and make complex problems worse. I am under no illusion regarding Russia's self-interest in this region and its reasons for its recent behaviour, but the EU’s actions have been just as disastrous for the Ukrainian people.

The EU has ploughed ahead with its association agreement with Ukraine, one of the primary causes of the escalation in the first place. Surely the EU should not be forcing through such an important document with an interim government that was not democratically elected. It is basically locking future elected governments into a straitjacket in respect of the EU's political and economic structures. That is unacceptable. It has been suggested that one of the first effects of this agreement will be a 50% increase in domestic gas prices on 1 May 2014. The EU and IMF are demanding this to provide financial support to Ukraine. This is a sample of what is coming down the track for the people of Ukraine. Before this, domestic gas prices were heavily subsidised by the Ukrainian Government, which literally ensured people did not starve or freeze to death during the winter. We all know the unique conditions of a Ukrainian winter. Despite this, the IMF, in its wisdom, believes that to give an aid package to Kiev, it must cut this subsidy. Let us think about the impact this will have on the people of Ukraine. It will certainly lead to deaths and extreme hardship. This is the prospect facing Ukraine indefinitely with no chance of opting out or doing down a different road.

Threats of other enormous spending cuts while so many people are in poverty and lack future prospects are enormously unpopular throughout Ukraine, but especially in the east. So far, these neoliberal, austerity measures have been spectacularly unsuccessful elsewhere in Europe, including in Ireland. They have increased unemployment, emigration, the sell-off of state assets and the destruction of social services and social protection schemes, and the same will happen in Ukraine. While some people will think that this is fantastic and that we have a way out of this crisis, if one looks at what is happening in many countries across Europe, including this country, one can see the options are not fairly rosy given what is happening to ordinary people in their communities and family homes.

Sinn Féin tried its best to get all-party support for a motion on the current situation in Ukraine and Crimea. It was and is important that a joint message is sent out in support of the ordinary people in this region. Again, I apologise for the confusion, some of which is down to my lack of experience in this area. We have difficulties in respect of the motion. I note that it is down on the Order Paper and is signed by our party leader, Deputy Adams. I originally thought the motion was a Government motion and that the Government was looking for input from parties. I did think it was looking for a cross-party motion on this issue. We put forward some amendments to the Government's motion and are willing to compromise on others, but we have difficulties in respect of this motion as it stands. I welcome the fact there was movement from the Government and that many of the concerns are addressed in the motion. I want to express solidarity with the Ukrainian people. It is not a case of people changing their minds in mid-stream. We have consistently spoken in this House and outside it about what we see as the best way forward for the people of Ukraine. We have a difficulty with the inclusion of a line welcoming the signing of the association agreement. I recognise it is a compromise motion but that was a major difficulty we had with it. I apologise for the confusion. The agenda of those un-elected EU bureaucrats who are wedded to neoliberal policies and who seek to extend their influence eastwards by spreading a destructive austerity is not something we welcome. We have a difficulty with this agreement and I have explained the background to this difficulty.

Another major issue of concern, which is shared by practically everyone in this House, is the make-up of the interim government in Kiev. Three members of the current interim government are from the far-right, neo-Nazi Svoboda party, including the Deputy Prime Minister, the environment Minister and the agriculture Minister. Until his resignation last week, the defence Minister was also from Svoboda. We are concerned about the inclusion of these far-right, neo-Nazi, anti-semitic politicians as ministers in the government. The Ceann Comhairle will come in and tell me I cannot mention people but if one looks at the history of the policies of the party, I am very concerned about some of its public utterances. The rabbi of Kiev has spoken about them and even suggested that people of the Jewish faith leave Kiev because of the lack of safety. Any of us who are conscious of history and events that happened in the past in other countries in that region have huge concerns about what is happening. We feel that the inclusion of these far-right, neo-Nazi, anti-semitic politicians as ministers in the government, coupled with the attempts by the government to impose controversial laws such as removing Russian as an official language, sends an extremely worrying signal to linguistic, religious and ethnic minorities in Ukraine. The fact that the EU sees this government as a natural ally and has not spoken out against the inclusion of neo-Nazis in an unelected interim government is extremely worrying. I know there are concerns across Europe about the composition of this new opposition-led coalition, which have been expressed publicly and privately. The new opposition-led coalition has so far failed to persuade right wing militia groups to disarm. Is it any wonder that minorities are living in real insecurity and fear?

The referendum which took place in Crimea on 16 March 2014 is another factor in this escalating crisis.

The referendum was held under the worst possible conditions with a poor security situation and tense atmosphere, international pressure, a short run-in, a lack of open and democratic debate, press restrictions and a lack of dialogue preceding the referendum. The referendum was not in line with good democratic practice in my opinion, an opinion shared by most Members of this House. I am not opposed to referendums to decide self-determination but they must be conducted in line with good democratic practice. It is clear that there is a great deal of support in Crimea for separating from Ukraine and joining Russia. However, there should first be dialogue and negotiation within Ukraine, free from outside interference, with a view to finding an overall agreement on the future of Ukraine.

Sinn Féin condemns the political, economic and military interference in Ukraine and Crimea by the US, EU and Russia. There must be open dialogue between all sides in Ukraine and respect for human rights. There is a need for foreign powers to end hostilities and rising tensions by stating they will not militarily intervene and will stop meddling in Ukraine's internal affairs. Ukrainians are the only people who should ultimately decide their own future with self-determination through democratic means.

The make-up of the interim government is extremely worrying due to the inclusion of extreme right-wing neo-Nazis in key ministerial positions. We reject the signing of the association agreement with the interim government which is un-elected and, therefore, has no mandate to sign such an agreement. That feeds into the Russian arguments and creates more difficulties rather than resolving the problem. It also ties the Ukrainian people into austerity. The austerity measures that the EU is imposing as a condition for providing aid will slash pensions and public services and will increase unemployment and further impoverish the people.

All efforts need to directed to de-escalating the crisis and allowing the people of Ukraine to discuss and seek agreement on their future. The more Ukraine improves it socio-economic development, the less likely it will be that the country can be used as a geo-political football, as it has been for so long. This should be the focus of all efforts and support in the future.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are 15 minutes now available to the Technical Group but I have not been supplied with any breakdown on the time.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is to be equally divided.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One second please. I ask the Deputy to resume his seat for a moment. Three amendments have been tabled. Amendment No. 1 is in the name of Deputies Mick Wallace, Clare Daly and Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, amendment No. 2 is in the name of Deputy Joe Higgins and amendment No. 3 is in the name of Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett. I am not interfering and whatever way the Deputies want to divide their time is their business. In fairness, though, I must call the people as they are on the Order Paper, in so far as there are amendments tabled in a certain order unless the Deputies all agree otherwise.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have agreed the order-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have you? Maybe the Deputies would give me the order then, please.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is an equal division of time between myself and Deputies Clare Daly, Mick Wallace, Joe Higgins and John Halligan.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine by me.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are opposing the Government's motion because it is adding dangerous fuel to a very dangerous fire that is engulfing Ukraine. We have put forward an alternative motion which is absolutely clear in saying that we oppose the Russian military incursion into Ukraine and that we do not accept the legitimacy of a referendum which took place at gunpoint. We agree with the Government on that but we do not agree with the entirely one-sided approach it has taken in this matter, which could and will fuel the conflict. The approach is giving succour on the one hand to the expansionist agenda of NATO, the EU and the US into eastern Europe and, on the other, to a dangerous coalition of the far right, neo-fascists and billionaire oligarchs who have been busy plundering the resources and the wealth of Ukraine since the break up of the former Soviet Union. Some of those oligarchs, including Rinat Akhmetov and Dmitry Firtash, initially supported Yanukovych but have now opportunistically switched over to the other side in order to further their own interests and garner favour from this dangerous, right-wing mob which is trying to manipulate the economic, social and political crisis in Ukraine. This has led, as others have said, to the Chief Rabbi in Kiev telling Jewish people that they had better leave the country for their own safety. It has also led to attacks on journalists who were critical of the Government line and so on. This is a dangerous situation.

Ukraine has long been at the cross roads of competing imperial interests and has suffered desperately as a result. It suffered at the hands of the Romanovs and became part of what was known as the prison house of nations in the interplay between the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires. It was partitioned after the Russian revolution, suffered under the Hitler-Stalin pact with forced collectivisation under Stalin and 4 million Ukrainians were killed under the Nazis. It is worth remembering just how that history has polarised Ukrainian society. One hero for some in the east of Ukraine is a man called Bandera. He collaborated with the Nazis who were involved in the vicious killing of Ukrainians. The same man would be seen as a mortal threat to Russian speakers in other parts of Ukraine, most notably in Crimea. NATO and the EU are well aware of these dangers. Even Kissinger, of whom I am not a fan, has said that what is going on is dangerous and that NATO and the EU knew what they were doing in manipulating this situation, with the response from Russia being inevitable.

We are saying that the Government should be even-handed and neutral in this - say "Yes" to the right to self-determination of the Ukrainian people but "No" to the interference by NATO, the EU, the US or Russia in the internal affairs of the Ukrainian people.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We must be honest here. The only reason we are discussing this issue in the House is that a number of Deputies on the Independent benches refused to sign what the Government had hoped would be a cross-party motion. We objected and tabled an amendment because of the absolutely unprecedented partisan and one-sided nature of the motion proposed by the Government. We object to the Government's total failure to recognise that the recent conflict and instability in Ukraine owes its origins, in large part, to the external struggle to dominate that country. That is not just being fought by the Russians, but also by the US and the EU. The Minister of State said this morning that the EU's actions were taken in good faith but there has been a conscious strategy on the part of the EU and the US to openly sponsor the protest movement against Yanukovych and to pump in billions to destabilise the area not because Yanukovych was corrupt - which he undoubtedly was - but to further the economic interests of the US and the EU. The replacement for Yanukovych is even more corrupt. The pushing of the all-or-nothing EU agreement, which would have excluded any economic association with Russia, was a contributing factor in the conflict.

It is incredibly ironic that the Government's motion makes no mention of the role of NATO, which has been key in this situation. Contrary to the claims of the US and its allies, NATO has been relentlessly expanding up to the Russian border, taking in many former countries of the Warsaw Pact and the former USSR. In effect, what is happening is the build up of an anti-Russian military alliance across Europe and little wonder that the Russians are worried. The Guardian described it as a desire of the Pentagon to have the US navy replace the Russian Black Sea fleet in Crimean ports. The majority of people in Ukraine are against NATO membership but the oligarchs have a different view. Yanukovych actually indicated that he was also against it.

The paw prints of NATO have not been mentioned in the Government's motion and the fact that fascistic and anti-Semitic elements are in the new Government in Ukraine has not been mentioned either.

Frighteningly, the Minister of State told us he fully supports that government.

It is quite clear that referendum was held in very poor conditions, but it is also clear that the majority of people living in Crimea do support the alliance with Russia. A key part of that is the reactionary nature of the regime in Kiev which offers no way out on the policies of economic austerity. The problems in that area will not be solved by Moscow, Washington or Brussels but by the people in the region.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:“calls on the European Union and the United States to refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Ukraine”.

There is no doubt that Russia and the United States are finding it difficult to agree on how to deal with their respective ambitions in the area. Looking at the long-term perspective, the crisis in Ukraine is a product of the disastrous break-up of the Soviet Union, which was not well done. It somewhat mirrored the Versailles treaty many years ago and, more recently, the break-up of Yugoslavia. People who were content to be a national minority in an internal administrative unit of a multinational state - Russians in the Soviet Ukraine and south Ossetians in Soviet Georgia - felt very differently when those units became states to which they felt little loyalty.

In the case of Crimea, which was only transferred to Ukraine by Khrushchev in the 1950s, that is clearly true for the Russian majority. Contrary to undertakings given at the time, the US and its allies have relentlessly sought to expand NATO up to Russia's borders, incorporating nine former Warsaw Pact states and three former Soviet republics into what is effectively an anti-Russian military alliance in Europe.

The European association agreement, which provoked the Ukrainian crisis, also included clauses to integrate Ukraine into the EU defence structure. It appears that as long as Washington believed the Russian leaders would do its bidding then everything was grand. Yeltsin's attack on the Russian parliament in 1993 was justified in the western media. The wholesale assaults on Chechnya by Yeltsin and later by Putin were treated as a little local problem with support from George Bush and Tony Blair. After his meeting with Putin in 2000, Blair said: "Chechnya isn't Kosovo".

Rape, torture, homeless refugees and tens of thousands dead was the fate of the Chechnyans. No problem there for Washington and its EU allies. In the calculus of western interests there is no suffering, whatever its scale, which cannot be justified. Chechnyans, Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans and Pakistanis are of little importance. Nonetheless, the contrast between the west's attitude to the Chechen war and Crimea is startling.

The Crimean affair led to barely any loss of life and the population clearly wanted to be part of Russia. The White House's reaction has been the opposite of its reaction to Chechnya. Why? Because Putin, unlike Yeltsin, is no longer prepared to play ball. He has become "Evil man No. 1".

We need a negotiated settlement for Ukraine, including a broad-based government in Kiev shorn of fascists. We also require a federal constitution that guarantees regional autonomy, economic support that does not pauperise the majority in the form of austerity, an end to the terrible abuse of women's rights in Ukraine, and a chance for people in Crimea to choose their own future. Anything else risks spreading the conflict and we will be adding to the problems rather than helping to solve them.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to move my amendment No. 2.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry Deputy but only one amendment can be moved. It is technical.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I refer to my amendment No. 2 to the Government motion. The hypocrisy of the Government and of the European Union in its Machiavellian manoeuvring in the Ukraine is breathtaking. The misfortune of the people of the Ukraine was to be trapped for decades in a Stalinist dictatorship. It was a very brutal regime dominated by Russia. When Stalinism collapsed control passed to robber barons and oligarchs who robbed the publicly-owned economy blind, and to right-wing regimes based on capitalism. Now again the people of the Ukraine have been caught in a ruthless pincer movement between two major capitalist, imperial powers: the EU and the US on the one hand and Russia on the other. Each is pushing its own selfish economic and political agenda, which is exactly the train of events that led to the First World War, although thankfully that is not in prospect now.

The EU is guilty of nauseating hypocrisy on these issues. For two years, I was a member of the international trade committee of the European Parliament. I saw the EU in its economic dealings with outside countries to be absolutely brutal and ruthless, pushing the interests of European big business. Kazakhstan is a case in point; it is a brutal dictatorship that represses workers and massacres those on strike. However, for its fabulous wealth its president is feted by the leadership of the EU. They are now jockeying with Russia. The Yanukovych regime was absolutely brutal and corrupt, and was hated by a majority of the people. However, the EU then backed the most right-wing reactionary forces in response to that in order to represent their interests which are now in the government.

Neither Russian capitalism nor EU neoliberalism has anything to offer the working class and poor of the Ukraine. We have the spectacle of billionaire oligarchs in the Ukraine now being placed in charge of regions by the government.

All military interference should be ended. NATO, US and Russian forces should be moved out of the region so that the people can shape their own future. Neither the Russian nor the EU's economic systems has anything for the poor or working people. The country's wealth should be placed under the democratic control and ownership of the working class in the Ukraine, and not that of EU big business or Russian oligarchs. On that basis it would be entirely possible to build a new society based on democratic socialism where only the interests of the people are predominant. In such a society all rights, including linguistic, national and religious ones, could be guaranteed.

John Halligan (Waterford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am deeply disturbed by the tenor of the motion which is completely unbalanced. While one might reject the validity of the referendum in the Crimea, it should be recalled the Crimea was given to the Ukrainians in the 1950s without the consent of the people of the Crimea. Many of the latter still consider themselves to be Russian.

My problem with the motion is that it is completely unbalanced. It says nothing about the illegal power grab by Ukraine's far right which has swept into power and is part of the Ukraine's interim government. For instance, the role of Ukraine's national security advisor was given to Andriy Parubiy. He is a founder member of the Social-National party in Ukraine, which is a fascist party that he styled on Hitler's Nazi party. I do not know if the Minister of State was aware of that but if so, he might not have considered moving this motion.

The post of vice-minister has been given to Oleksandr Sych who is a member of the Svoboda party. Last year, the World Jewish Congress called on this party to be banned along with Greece's Golden Dawn party. The Svoboda party has close connections with the British National Party and Hungary's Jobbik party which are completely racist and homophobic.

The chief rabbi in Kiev has advised all Jews to leave that city. Is this the government that we are supporting? What about the deputy prime minister? He has spoken on abortion rights and has commented on rape. He provoked an international outcry when he said that "women would not be raped if they lived the kind of lifestyle where they did not drink or did not associate and keep controversial company". That is outrageous. I am shocked and appalled but I do not know if the Government has done its research on this motion.

The interim government of the Ukraine has outlawed two of the largest and most influential political parties - the Ukraine communist party and Yanukovych's party, which I do not subscribe to.

I do not have much time left, although I would like to go into a lot more detail on what has happened, including the fact that they have disenfranchised large sections of the population in the Ukraine.

The solution must be about territorial integrity and regional autonomy. It is not going to work without the latter. Hundreds of thousands of people in Ukraine consider themselves Russian and hundreds of thousands consider themselves disenfranchised. We will have left a great deal to be desired if we do not include some criticism of the make-up of the Ukrainian Government before the motion is put to the House. It is a matter which will come back to haunt us in the weeks, months or years to come.