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

6. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the efforts he is making to ensure that the EU is in no way a party to supporting neo-fascist or ultra nationalist elements in Ukraine in view of alarming reports of violence and intimidation against ethnic minorities and political opponents by these elements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15395/14]

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

8. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views in relation to Ukraine, his views on whether a more balanced approach from the European Union is required as further moves to integrate the country with the West may lead to increased social and economic chaos for Ukrainians; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15400/14]

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

14. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he supports placing stronger sanctions on Russia due to its actions since Crimea’s referendum vote; if he has held any meetings with the Russian ambassador to Ireland since the vote; and if he fears that violence could escalate in the region in this volatile situation. [15390/14]

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

18. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will provide a further update on his engagements with counterparts at European Union level in relation to the ongoing political crisis in Ukraine; and if he will indicate his position on the recent actions of Russia in the Crimea region. [15174/14]

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

We will discuss this issue in more depth later. I, and other Deputies, want to challenge the one-sided presentation of the very serious conflict in Ukraine. Russia is acting in its own interests and flouting international law. A referendum held at gun point is not legitimate and military incursions into another territory are not acceptable but equally, there are very dangerous elements in the Ukrainian Government, some of which are taking over the armed forces. There are alarming indications of intimidation, violence and so on against minorities and political opponents of the Ukrainian regime. The Government must view this in a more balanced way and not line up with a NATO-EU-US manipulation of a crisis in Ukraine.

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 8, 14 and 18 together. As we have previously stated, Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity has given rise to the worst crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War. Ireland has strongly condemned Russian actions from the outset of the crisis.

The referendum held in Crimea on 16 March was illegal and its results without legal effect. Ireland and the great majority of the international community do not recognise the legitimacy of the vote which only served to exacerbate an already dangerous situation. The heavy troop presence in Crimea meant that the so-called referendum was not conducted under what could be considered remotely acceptable conditions. Furthermore, any decision relating to Ukraine's sovereignty or sovereign choices can only be taken without undue external pressure. That 100 UN member states, including Ireland, voted in favour of the UN General Assembly Resolution on Ukraine’s territorial integrity on 27 March, with only eleven votes against, is testament to the grave international concern which Russia’s actions have generated. For its part, the EU has commended the measured response shown by the government in Kiev in the face of this provocation. The crisis in Ukraine has dominated the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council, FAC, over the past few months, leading to the convening of two extraordinary sessions of the FAC and further meetings of the European Council and Heads of State and Governments.

As a small country, which relies on respect for the rule of law as the fundamental guarantor of stability in the international system, Ireland has taken a strong view on what has happened in Ukraine. At its meeting on 20 and 21 March, the European Council made clear that there is no place for the use of force and coercion to change borders in Europe in the 21st century. The council also expressed the view that the Russian actions are in clear breach of the Helsinki process, which in the past 40 years has contributed to overcoming divisions in Europe and building a peaceful and united continent. As a country which had the honour to serve as the Chair in Office of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, as recently as 2012, I do not see how we could fail to take a strong view on such matters.

In regard to the EU’s approach to Ukraine and its integration, it is worth recalling the strongly pro-European sentiments which were in evidence at the mass demonstrations which were held in Independence Square in Kiev following the then President Yanukovych’s decision on 21 November 2013 to suspend talks on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. While there were many factors behind the almost entirely peaceful demonstrations, such as anger with political corruption and economic hardship, the presence of the European flag was testament to the desire of a great number of ordinary Ukrainians to see their country adopt an orientation towards the West. Throughout the period when the protests were taking place, the EU had been clear on the need for a democratic solution achieved through negotiation that would meet the aspirations of the Ukrainian people.

At their earlier informal meeting on 6 March, the EU Heads of State and Government set out a three-stage roadmap to which I have referred on several occasions. The European Council adopted conclusions recalling that any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilise the situation in Ukraine would entail far-reaching consequences. In this respect, the European Council has tasked the Commission and the member states to prepare possible targeted measures. Ireland is engaged in the continuing discussions with our partners in Brussels on this matter.

We strongly support the new interim Government in Kiev which took up office on 27 February. The Government’s Ministers are drawn from a range of different political groupings, including the Svoboda Party. The new Government faces extraordinary challenges as a consequence of the Russian Federation’s flagrant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The European Union has encouraged the new Government to ensure that the presidential election on 25 May will be free and fair.

Meanwhile, the OSCE monitoring mission in Ukraine is already on the ground and includes an Irish staff member on temporary deployment from other field presences.

Ireland and EU member states want to see a peaceful solution to the current crisis and stand ready to support all talks to achieve this objective.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

We will work with the United Nations and the OSCE to facilitate a peaceful resolution of this dangerous situation and urge Russia to engage in serious talks including with the government in Kiev.

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

Again, we are getting the completely one-sided take on this. It is absolutely true that the demonstrations in Kiev were partly motivated by the corruption of the Yanukovych regime. Unquestionably, it was a corrupt and rotten regime. It is unquestionable that many Ukrainians - in certain parts of the country at least - may look towards Europe as against Russia but that is not the end of the story.

The other side of the story is that Europe knows damn well that there are significant minorities which would look to Russia and that any expansion of the European Union or NATO would be seen as a direct provocation and threat to those minorities. Do not tell me the EU-NATO strategists do not understand these things and that they are stupid or blind to them. They know damn well that it represents a provocation and that Russia has traditionally seen states and places like Crimea as buffer states against rivalry from the West.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A question, please.

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

That stuff is archaic but, none the less, Europe knew that. Crucially, now in the Kiev Government, which the Minister of State said he fully supports, there are extreme right-wing and fascist elements which are dangerous. We have seen some pretty horrific examples of the sort of stuff they are doing. These people have hijacked what may be a legitimate desire for more democracy in Ukraine essentially to implement a dangerous far right and, in some cases, neo-fascist agenda but the Minister of State fully supports this gang.

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

I have a question for the Deputy in return. We were dealing with a Government in Ukraine which said it wanted to join the European Union and on which the European Union engaged in good faith and which reflected the views of many people within the country. What would the Deputy have done in response to that? Does the Deputy really believe there is parity and equivalence between what the European Union has done and what the Russian Federation has done?

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

I would start by understanding that there are different cultural and linguistic groups and that there is a history of tension between those groups. Any changes to the orientation of Ukraine must take those things into account if one does not want to spark the sort of disaster we saw in the Balkans. The unilateral recognition by Germany of Slovenia and Croatia sparked the civil war in Yugoslavia with disastrous consequences which were absolutely predictable because Yugoslavia was an ethnic patchwork. Everybody knew that if one started to unilaterally recognise certain states, it would be a provocation to others and the result would be ethnic cleansing. The EU is playing with fire in a very dangerous way and giving succour to extreme right-wing elements. The Minister of State should not tell me that EU-US-NATO did not know that. What the hell is NATO doing expanding into eastern Europe when it was supposed to be a Cold War entity? This is dangerous geopolitical expansionism by the EU-US-NATO and it could have very dangerous consequences.

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

The Deputy may feel there is a tradition of Ministers coming into the House not answering his questions. He raised his voice and waved his pen at me. I asked him two questions. The first question I put related to the chain of events leading up to this. An elected Ukrainian Government said it wanted to develop a further, deeper and peaceful relationship with the European Union. What should the European Union have done in response to that?

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

It should have talked to all elements.

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

The EU talked to the Ukrainian Government, which was democratically elected as the Deputy well knows. The second question, which I put to him again, was whether the Deputy believes there is parity and equivalence between what the European Union has done, which has been peaceful and based on negotiation, and the actions of the Russian Federation.

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

I feel that the self-righteous stance taken by the US and the EU beggars belief. We listened to John Kerry tell us that this is a completely unacceptable breach of international law for which there will be costs. It was interesting to read Seamus Milne in The Guardian last week. He said:

That the states which launched the greatest act of unprovoked aggression in modern history on a trumped-up pretext – against Iraq, in an illegal war now estimated to have killed 500,000, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, all without UN authorisation – should make such claims is beyond absurdity.

It's not just that western aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out – removing any credible basis for the US and its allies to rail against Russian transgressions. But the western powers have also played a central role in creating the Ukraine crisis in the first place.

The US and European powers openly sponsored the protests to oust the corrupt but elected Viktor Yanukovych government, which were triggered by controversy over an all-or-nothing EU agreement which would have excluded economic association with Russia.

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

I am very happy to come into the House to debate all the other points the Deputy made in regard to what happened in international law over the past ten years and his views and concerns in regard to that but the questions tabled relate to Ukraine. I visited parts of the Balkans in January and saw many of the difficulties still there and the current consequences of the bloodshed and pain that occurred in that region throughout the 1990s. I am well aware of the historic consequences and risk involved in the current situation but I put the same question to Deputy Wallace, which Deputy Boyd Barrett refused to answer.

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

I said talk to all elements.

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

Does Deputy Wallace believe there is equivalence between how the European Union has conducted itself in regard to this and how the Russian Federation has behaved?

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

I find both of them have behaved abysmally. I remind the Minister of State that when Gorbachev agreed the deal on German unification, the cornerstone of which was that a united Germany would remain in NATO, US Secretary of State Baker assured him that there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction one inch to the east. Gorbachev repeated that any extension of the zone of NATO would be unacceptable and Baker's response was that he agreed. One reason Gorbachev has publicly backed Putin - he would not be a fan of his either - is that he has been completely betrayed. Washington believed Russian leaders would blindly do what was bidden, which Yeltsin usually did, and being drunk while he was at it.

In Chechnya, the US, Britain and Blair gave their blessing to the Russians to go in - "that's different, that's okay". Tens of thousands of people were killed in Chechnya. The Russians raped and absolutely pillaged the place and the US and the EU had no problem with it. Can the Minister of State not see that they play games with this stuff and lives get destroyed? We are taking sides now. Why are we not neutral? I have no time for how Putin or Russia behaves nor do I have time for how the US behaves. We should not take sides with either of them.

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

At least what we have attained, in what has been a debate here, is clarity on where the Deputy is coming from. While the Deputy has condemned what Russia has been doing, he also said that what the European Union has done recently is equivalent. The European Union is not the body which had troops in place when an illegal referendum was being held. It is not the body which has broken international law in regard to what has happened in Ukraine. I have been to Ukraine and, with respect, I feel the same way the Deputy does about the loss of life, about violence and about the misery inflicted on people. I have seen the strength of feeling in Ukraine in response to all of this.

The point I want to put to the Deputy, which he seemingly failed to recognise in any of the points he made, is that what the European Union did in its response to what has happened in Ukraine, was in response to the desire of the government in place then, which reflected the views of the country and the communities in it.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

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

I will conclude on this point.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are two more Deputies-----

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

On the point made in regard to the expansion of the European Union into central and eastern Europe, that expansion has been continually affirmed by the peoples in those countries in election after election.

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

The Minister of State is telling people what he wants.

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

What the Minister of State calls the goodwill of the European Union is in fact open sponsorship of the protest movements that up-ended Yanukovych, as Deputy Wallace said. Although Yanukovych was corrupt, he was certainly elected. The bottom line concerns what is now in place. I find it quite shocking that the Minister of State said he fully supports the new regime, which contains fascists and anti-Semites and which is absolutely not very healthy. The Minister of State's analysis has failed to take into account the role of the European Union. It is the case that the external struggle to dominate Ukraine has played a key part in this set of circumstances. The point we are making is that the struggle is not confined to Russian interests because the European Union and United States have displayed their interest also at the expense of the Ukrainian people. The Minister of State said he was in Ukraine. Was he in Crimea? Did he talk to the people there? It is absolutely true that the conditions of the referendum there were not healthy and also that a majority in that state support the idea of linking in with Russia. The European Union and the United States are playing a very dangerous game here.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to bring a bit more modern reason to the thinking here, bearing in mind the sensitivities in the area in question. That somebody was elected does not necessarily mean he has ultimate and uncontrollable power. I can think of at least one gentleman who was elected in Europe in the past 70 or 80 years who certainly did not prove to be a democrat when it came to the test.

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

It was not a democratic election.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To what extent can the European Union exert a positive influence in the absence of NATO given that the latter has been seen in the past as controlling without being an aggressor?

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

I thank the Deputies for their questions. On what Deputy Daly said to me, we should be clear that there is absolutely no equivalence between the values of the European Union in respect of dealing with Ukraine-----

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

That is what they said in the First World War.

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

-----and what we have seen from Russia. Has the Deputy seen the European Union seek to expand its borders unilaterally and change those of another country?

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

Yes; Yugoslavia is an example. Germany did-----

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

We have seen the European Union work with countries on the basis of the wishes of their peoples. On the question of whether the European Union sought to put in place armies on the territory of another country, as happened in Crimea, the answer is "No". I welcome the debate here. It is the kind of exchange of views we should have on the floor of the Dáil. I am happy to express mine just as the Deputy is happy to express his.

With regard to what Deputy Durkan stated, the difficulties and problems that can arise with democratically elected governments are the reason for the current focus of the European Union on creating a mechanism to allow for a fair, inclusive presidential election that will put in place in May a government that respects law and the rights of minorities and that does not allow some of the behaviour to occur that I condemn and which I have condemned on other occasions. We need to have a government in place in Ukraine that respects international law and the rights of minority groups within its borders. That is why the elections to take place in May are so important and why the European Union has placed such value on making them happen again. I reject again the contention that there is an equivalence between what the European Union has done to date and what the Russian Federation has done.