Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I hope the Tánaiste will join me in condemning outright the illegal and immoral air strikes conducted by the United States, the United Kingdom and France against Syria last weekend. I do not know who these people think they are that they can appoint themselves as judge, jury and executioner.

6 o’clock

I do not know who these people think they are, appointing themselves as judge, jury and executioner. They demand that international law is upheld by others but seem to have no problem with ignoring it themselves. The auspices given that this was to enforce the prohibition of the use of chemical weapons is a joke when we know that the system to deal with this was outlined in the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention. International investigators were en routeto Syria, due to land there within hours when these so-called world powers decided to strike without any lawful basis. Can the Minister imagine what would have happened in a similar situation? We all know that the US, UK and Israel have used, for example, depleted uranium and white phosphorous. What would have happened if the Russians or Chinese decided to bomb Maryland or Porton Down in the UK without a proper, independent investigation? It is ludicrous. These are the same powers that lied about Iraq and Libya. These are very dangerous times.

We, as an independent country, should firmly stand up and argue for diplomatic solutions and an end to war, not its continuation. We do not know whether chemical weapons were used at all. If they were, it is abhorrent. Unlike others, we condemn the use of all weaponry, not just chemical weaponry. We do not know if they were used and if they were used, we do not know by whom. The people who were charged with carrying out the investigation have not got there yet. The Minister may have read today's article in the British Independentby Robert Fisk, hardly a radical, who was in Douma yesterday. He spoke to some of the doctors who were present who put forward the idea that what happened there was not a gas attack at all but hypoxia caused by bombing that was taking place, dust clouds, wind, and people being withheld from oxygen underground, causing the symptoms that were displayed. The Minister can read the article. It is incredibly illustrative. Robert Fisk is hardly a radical and is on the ground in Douma, talking to people today and yesterday, including survivors of that incident. We have to be very careful in this situation and we should be taking a lead on it. It is somewhat ironic when one considers that ISIS has used chemical weapons provided by Saudi Arabia on multiple locations in Iraq and Syria and that no action was taken. These powers could not care less that the Saudi dictator who supplied the weaponry in Yemen is slaughtering innocent women and children. No action has been taken there relating to gas or the killing of civilians. We cannot choose our battles. We have to stand up for the upholding of international law for everybody and we should make a stand on this.

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

We have been the first to say, and have said most loudly, and there is no doubt that the Assad regime is a brutal, callous, murderous, authoritarian regime supported by a very cynical Russia. I have no doubt about the brutalities it has committed and is capable of committing. The idea that US, UK and French missiles and a massive dose of hypocrisy and double standards from those powers will assist in the humanitarian disaster in Syria is stomach-churning. For Government representatives to talk about the attacks being understandable is shocking. Let me refer to the double standards we are talking about. In 2009, Israel rained down chemical weapons, white phosphorous, in the full view of day, on the UN school in Gaza and on densely populated areas. A report was done by Human Rights Watch afterwards called Rain of Fire: Israel's Unlawful Use of White Phosphorus in Gaza. This was well-documented and proven. The shells were found all around the place. They were chemical weapons. Guess where they were produced? Louisiana in the United States. Were there sanctions? No. Were there expulsions of diplomats? No. Were there threats of military action by these politicians who told us, in the context of bombing Syria, that they could not sleep with the thought of the use of chemical weapons? They were able to sleep very soundly when Israel rained down chemical weapons on the people of Gaza. Incredibly, the Israelis said at the weekend that it was absolutely right to take military action to uphold international law but in the last few weeks, 36 unarmed Palestinians were killed who were marching to assert their rights under international laws to return to their homes as confirmed by UN resolutions. Sanctions? No. Military action? No. Expulsions? No.

This sort of rank hypocrisy is corrosive of politics and is responsible for the mess in the Middle East. There is cynical interference of big powers, whether Russia, Donald Trump, Theresa May or Emmanuel Macron, trying to shore up their collapsing popularity by diverting people's attention with a war abroad and furthering the interests of imperial powers in that region, to gain influence on the back of the suffering of the Syrian people. We have to speak out against this sickening hypocrisy and have nothing to do with this murderous assault by Trump and his gang of allies.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Over 100 missiles rained down on Syria from the US, France and Britain. Our Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade says he can understand why the airstrikes were launched. Instead of understanding the actions of Donald Trump, Theresa May and Emmanuel Macron, does the Minister not think we should have had condemnation of this military action which ratchets up tension across the world and brings us closer to a new world war? We know that neutrality has never been a reality in this State but it has rarely been so blatantly flouted repeatedly by our Government. It is only weeks since we had the expulsion of diplomats on the say-so of unpublished British intelligence. It is only months since the Government signed Ireland up for the European military alliance, permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, and now it is giving implicit support to western imperialist intervention in the Middle East. Does the Government not agree that the use of Shannon Airport and the support that represents for US military action abroad has to be ended by the US military? Can the Minister even give a commitment that Shannon will not be used for the US military either going to or coming from Syria? We know what the pretext of the attack was: an abhorrent chemical attack in eastern Ghouta which has been blamed on Assad. Is Assad capable of such an act? Absolutely. That corrupt regime has defended itself through rivers of innocent people's blood repeatedly.

No evidence has been presented. We are expected just to accept what has been put forward. The question that has to be asked is why it would launch a chemical attack now, giving a reason for western imperialism to intervene. Everybody should remember that it is just over 15 years since the dodgy dossier about weapons of mass destruction was used to justify going to war in Iraq. The disaster is there, right across the region, for everybody to see and yet we are expected to believe them again. The use of it as a pretext for another imperialist intervention, regardless of who is responsible, should be rejected. I echo the points about the utter hypocrisy of these people, including Trump, May and Macron, all of whom recently rolled out the red carpet for the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, the architect in chief of the carnage and deliberate starvation in Yemen, where a child dies every ten minutes. They all celebrated the re-election of el-Sisi in Egypt and they gave a free pass to Israeli snipers gunning down unarmed Palestinians in Gaza. Imperialist intervention is a disaster. It has been a disaster, including both Russian and western imperialism. Instead, we need to build an international anti-war movement like we did 15 years ago to say hands off Syria, to stop the escalation of tension worldwide, to have no more airstrikes and to demand the withdrawal of all foreign forces.

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

The EU is doing exactly that: it is advocating for an end to all military activity in Syria because no lasting solution in Syria will be delivered through military means alone. The apparent chemical attack in the city of Douma in Syria on 7 April was horrifying, even by the standards of the Syrian conflict to date. It was distressing to see images of children choking to death, their lives cut short by a conflict they did not understand and in which they were not involved. Whole families were wiped out in basements in which they had sought shelter from bombs falling overhead. I remember seeing very similar images when I visited Halabja, as I said when Deputy Wallace and others asked questions on this matter previously. There, I spoke to families who witnessed similar incidents in 1988. I wish to make several matters clear before I deal with the military intervention. Ireland condemns the use of chemical weapons by anyone, anywhere and in any circumstances. I wish to take this opportunity to reiterate my unreserved condemnation of this callous act perpetrated on civilians, particularly women and children.

As has been mentioned, on 14 April the United States, France and the United Kingdom launched a series of strikes on a number of facilities which have been linked to the Syrian Government’s use of chemical weapons. From what we were told yesterday, notice was given to ensure that there were no civilian casualties. The stated objective of the strikes was to ensure that chemical attacks such as that in Douma do not reoccur. When a chemical attack as horrific as that occurs and in the absence of the UN Security Council being able to take action because of the repeated use of a veto, I can understand why the military strikes happened, as I have stated. That is not the same as an implicit endorsement of or support for that action. Last week I was asked about military strikes in advance of their happening but when they were being discussed. I urged caution and very clearly stated that I did not see how further military activity in Syria would improve an already very difficult situation.

Yesterday, at the Foreign Affairs Council, I continued to urge caution and asked that the focus be on political solutions. Anyone who reads the entirety of the resolution that was agreed will see that there is a short reference to military strikes but all its emphasis is on humanitarian support, accountability in Syria and legal mechanisms to deliver that, inspections, a more comprehensive UN response and a conference on Syria to be held next week in Brussels, at which Ireland will make a further significant financial contribution towards supporting the millions of refugees who need international assistance. I discussed the situation in Syria with my EU colleagues at the meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council. We condemned in the strongest possible terms the use of chemical weapons in Syria and stressed the need to ensure full legal accountability for those responsible for such crimes. Our focus should remain on the horrors inflicted by the Assad regime on its own people. We also reiterated our support for the UN-led political negotiations to end the conflict and recognised the urgent need to reinvigorate the political track.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste, whose time is up. I call Deputy Clare Daly.

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

Do I not have more time, given that four Members posed questions on the matter?

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. The Tánaiste had four minutes.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think he only had three.

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

I had four minutes to reply but those raising the Topical Issue had four minutes each.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, they got two minutes.

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

We got three minutes.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We got three minutes.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will revert to the Tánaiste.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He should be allowed to finish.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If Members wish to allow-----

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

I do not want to break the rules.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must implement the rules as they are; I do not make them up on the hoof.

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

Time could, perhaps, be taken from my next contribution. I ask to be allowed to finish my contribution and put several things on the record of the House.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste may proceed.

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

Ireland is strongly supportive of efforts to strengthen prohibitions on the use of chemical weapons and supports a range of initiatives to increase accountability for their use, as well as supporting an end to all war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria. It supports the international, impartial and independent mechanism established by the UN General Assembly, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic established by the Human Rights Council, and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and its fact-finding mission in Syria and joint investigation mission with the UN. We regret that Russia has used its veto at the UN Security Council to prevent a proper international investigation into the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

The situation in Syria is appalling and the suffering of the Syrian people must be addressed in a far more comprehensive manner than has been done to date. As I stated, the EU will host a donor conference for Syria next week, as it did last year. The EU, including its member states, is the largest single donor to the effort to support the Syrian people. Since 2012, Ireland has contributed over €95 million, including €25 million in 2017 alone, to the humanitarian effort in response to the conflict in Syria and will again make a significant contribution next week. Our approach is UN-led but, as I stated yesterday, I understand why some countries decided to move ahead while the UN Security Council is paralysed to respond to human rights abuses such as this because of the inappropriate use of a veto. Those countries have published the legal justification for their actions and that justification will be tested, as it ought to be. Ireland has not supported military action in this case. We continue to focus on civilians and their protection and the use of multinational mechanisms, in particular through the UN and, to a certain extent, the EU, to try to find lasting solutions that focus on an absence of future military intervention.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that the Minister urged caution and made the point that further military action was unlikely to do any good and I welcome his comments in advance of the bombing in that regard. However, his points about the UN being paralysed do not add up. The rules are there for a reason. An inverted scenario would be the US and the UK using depleted uranium, for example, in the Middle East, the UN proposing action against them and Britain vetoing said action, followed by Russia bombing Portadown in the UK. Does the Tánaiste think that a bombing such as that would happen without him batting an eyelid and saying we cannot support it because the UN is paralysed?

It is utter nonsense. There is a legal process by which these attacks could be investigated but it was precisely in advance of that independent investigation laid out by law that those three countries struck. They are the ones, if one likes, who are belligerent in this matter and we should be doing a lot more to argue a neutral line.

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

Saying the attacks were understandable in any shape or form is tacit support. Quite frankly, the Tánaiste is not applying uniform or consistent standards when it comes to the behaviour of the big powers who dominate and who are currently paralysing the UN Security Council. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. People like Macron, May or Trump, with Israel cheering them on, said we must uphold international law and the prohibition on chemical weapons. Despite this, although the Tánaiste and I know that those same powers have used chemical weapons, nobody said a bloody word when they did it in Gaza. There were no sanctions or expulsions and nobody said it would be understandable if Hamas lobbed a few rockets back in retaliation. I bet the Tánaiste would not say that. There are double standards and that is what is fuelling the conflict that is tearing the Middle East apart.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Tánaiste is at pains to emphasise that Ireland has not supported military action, but that is mealy-mouthed in the sense that he has said he understands it. He made a clear, unreserved condemnation of the particularly callous attack on civilians using chemical weapons. I agree with the Tánaiste in that regard and I join him in making that unreserved condemnation, no matter who did it, but will he also make a condemnation of military strikes by the United States, Britain and France in Syria? He will not.

I also join the Tánaiste in rightly criticising Russia over its use of the veto on the UN Security Council, but will he criticise the United States for using its veto on the UN Security Council to veto condemnation of the gunning down of unarmed Palestinians by the Israeli defence forces in Gaza? I bet he will not, precisely because he has double standards and all of that points to implicit, tacit support for western imperialism. The Tánaiste is on that side as opposed to the other side, even though he might not have an army at his disposal.

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

My record is pretty strong in relation to disagreeing with the United States on certain issues in the United Nations. We voted for a motion that was very critical of the United States on the Jerusalem issue, despite being asked not to. My record is pretty clear in that regard.

I do not think some of the comparisons are relevant. As far as I am concerned, it is a warped idea that one would equate condemnation of the use of chemical weapons on women and children with the need to condemn airstrikes on buildings where notice was given to make sure that no civilians were killed or injured.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Tánaiste condemn it at all?

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

What I have said-----

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

What about the chemical weapons attacks in Gaza?

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputies should please not interrupt.

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

What I have said is that I condemn any chemical attack on any population, military or civilian. We are trying to put chemical weapons out of use permanently. The reason behind the motivation for targeted strikes was to act as a very clear deterrent to make sure that we do not see repeated use of chemical weapons on civilian populations and targets in Syria, which is a country that has already been ripped apart by war, yet now we are seeing repeated use of chemical weapons there. In the absence of the UN Security Council being able to respond comprehensively, I said that response was understandable. I did not say I supported it, but I can understand the motivation behind it. That is all I said yesterday.

I listened to the French and British Prime Ministers outline in detail why they took part in that action. I responded by saying I felt the focus should not be on military strikes but should be on diplomatic and political solutions, which is what the European Union has been pushing for and supporting the UN on for some time. That is where Ireland can be relevant and focused. We have no role or capacity in terms of military strikes. After they had taken place, it would not have achieved anything for me to have been strongly critical. Instead, I want to focus on the positive agenda that the European Union and the United Nations are working together to try to achieve, which is the implementation of ceasefires that have been signed up to but are being ignored. We will continue to focus on trying to create positive outcomes that can bring about an absence of the kind of continuing military activity and misery we are seeing across Syria.