Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

5. To ask the Minister for Defence his plans to continue to buy military hardware from Israeli companies. [34813/14]

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is the same as a question the Minister dealt with earlier, but I want to develop it a little further. Undoubtedly, it is of considerable concern to the people of Ireland that we are involved in commerce with the arms business in Israel. I got the Minister's response to my letter. Regardless of the framework, we must make our own decisions in these matters.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is important to qualify my answer by saying that I am the Minister for Defence, and much of what Deputy Mac Lochlainn is asking about, and what Deputy Clare Daly asked about earlier, is to do with foreign policy issues: whether we want to make decisions that will target Israeli companies and Israel in order to make a foreign policy statement. In my view, given my experience as a foreign policy spokesperson in the European Parliament for a number of years, and a human rights spokesperson at that, such a decision would not be the wisest course of action. In my view, engagement is what brings about change. However, as I said, those are foreign policy issues.

As regards the Department of Defence, we comply with all of the existing procurement rules of competitive tendering for services and equipment and we comply fully with decisions that have been made collectively by the EU and the UN in terms of arms embargoes or other restrictions on companies or countries that may be subject to such restrictions at an EU level. Generally, European countries act together in making decisions on embargoes because it is a much more effective way to achieve results, and it would be unusual for a country to take strong unilateral action against another country.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Normally I would not disagree, but I am thinking of Russia. Currently, we have sanctions against Russia and our agriculture sector is facing the same sanctions reciprocally. Another example is the sanctions against Iran. I am sure there are other countries that face sanctions now. There should be severe sanctions against Israel. The reason there are not any sanctions against Israel is that it is protected at the UN Security Council.

How can we, who are proud of our neutrality and our international contribution to human rights, stand over doing commerce with the military-industrial complex in the country that bolsters a defence force that slaughtered 1,500 Palestinians a number of years ago in Gaza, and recently more than 2,000, most of whom were women and children?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, the examples given by Deputy Mac Lochlainn of Russia and Iran are decisions that were taken collectively by the European Union. The European Union decided that it needed to respond collectively to what was happening in Ukraine and to Russian involvement in that, and, of course, there have been consequences. One does not impose sanctions on a country as powerful and large, and which is as big a trading partner, as Russia and expect nothing in return. Russia has decided to target the agrifood sector, which, of course, we need to manage. It is difficult for a country such as Ireland which exports 80% of the food and drink that it produces, but we will manage. We will find alternative markets and we will work with our EU partners to try to bring about a non-military solution to what is happening in eastern Ukraine. That is the right thing to do. That is a classic example of the European Union acting together. If individual countries started acting unilaterally with regard to Russia, we would be significantly weaker. That is why I say we would be well advised to make decisions about the relationships between Europe and other countries collectively rather than taking unilateral actions.

With regard to what has happened over the summer, there are two sides in this conflict. It is not simply a case of talking about Israeli slaughter.

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

I will allow the Minister to speak again.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a much more complex-----

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

There are two sides to Ukraine.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are.

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

There is a clock. It is over time.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is a helpful discussion. It shows the conundrum we face around our neutrality and our partnership with European countries that are members of NATO. It is destroying our neutrality when we take collective decisions. For example, we abstained on the vote in the UN on the need for a report into what one, being gentle, would describe as human rights abuses that were taking place in the conflict in Palestine. How was it in the interests of the Irish people to abstain on that vote? We have coalesced with NATO countries which are often aggressors and we are undermining our own independence. We are also undermining our potential to use our neutrality in a positive way, to be involved in UN peacekeeping, to use our conflict resolution experience and to be one of the biggest per capitacontributors to overseas development aid internationally. We can be leaders in conflict resolution and human rights, but we are losing our credibility because of our alliances with NATO countries in the European Union. That is not in our national interest. I ask the Minister to reflect on what we are losing here and the positive role we can play in these conflicts if we just do right by our own people.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Neutrality or military non-alignment allows us to make decisions on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes we decide to work in partnership with NATO, such as in Afghanistan and the Balkans, sometimes we work in partnership with EU member states, such as in a training mission in Mali with British colleagues, and sometimes we are involved with UN efforts such as UNIFIL in southern Lebanon and in UNDOF on the Golan Heights. All of those missions have UN support. We have a triple-lock system which is there to protect our neutrality in terms of decision-making and sending troops abroad.

I agree with Deputy Mac Lochlainn's aspirations for Ireland to be a world leader in conflict resolution and peacekeeping and in making independent decisions, but that does not mean we cannot work with other countries that have similar outlooks and objectives on a case-by-case basis in trying to achieve solutions for destabilised regions following conflict. Just because there is an association or partnership with NATO countries from time to time does not mean we have an aspiration to be a member of NATO, but we should be open to working in partnership for them when it can result in a positive outcome that is consistent with Irish foreign policy.