Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank him for his measured and constructive contribution. As he is aware, this House has held quite a number of discussions and debates over the past few years on Iraq before, during and after the war. We have not discussed the issue in great detail since the January elections and it is appropriate we would do so now.

I listened to the Minister of State's contribution with interest. As I have often said in this House, I was delighted to see the end of Saddam Hussein's regime. In the perfect world of ideal politics, the United Nations, other international agencies, the force of good or the force of politics in the region would have brought that cruel and inhumane regime to an end. Unfortunately, this was not to be and it took the invasion to bring to an end a regime that should have been ended two decades ago. We must recognise that politics and history move very quickly and we sometimes begin to forget who and what we were speaking about. Let us not forget that, since the time of Hitler and Stalin, only Pol Pot in Cambodia could compete with the awfulness of Saddam Hussein, a man who brought daily terror, fear, murder and mayhem to his country, people and neighbours. His regime used chemical weapons and slaughtered its own. We must agree that an Iraq free of Saddam Hussein is a good starting point.

We must also agree that today's Iraq is a chaotic, unsettled and difficult place. The coalition invasion not only brought political and military difficulties but, from the point of view of the United States, it has been a PR disaster. There has been a great divide in the European Union as well as in the broader world as a result of the invasion, which opened a gulf between the US and the EU and between Britain and countries such as France and Germany. Politically, it is important that we try to heal these divisions. The starting point of this debate and, more importantly, of the long-suffering people of Iraq must be the post-election situation. People both inside and outside this House must reflect on the election in Iraq. That approximately 60% of Iraqis decided to vote is amazing. All indications in advance of the election were that fear, daily bombings and efforts to interrupt the election would result in only a tiny minority voting. However, for the first time in several generations, the people of Iraq had an opportunity to vote in a fair and free election.

If we are to speak about trying to restore faith in the democratic process or politics, last January was a sign from Iraq that its people believe in politics and the political route. They overcame all sorts of obstacles to cast their ballots. There were attacks on election day. In Baghdad, a man with explosives strapped to his body killed six people in a queue at a polling station. Bombers killed four people at a voting centre in the Sadr City slums. A suicide bomber killed five people on a bus carrying voters south of Baghdad. The leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, claimed he would kill any "infidel" who voted. This highlights the obstacles people faced and decided to overcome. We owe it to the people of Iraq who were so brave and courageous in casting their ballots to ensure their votes work and make a difference.

As the Minister of State said, the war and its aftermath have caused division in this House, in this country and in Europe. Where do we go from here? It is imperative that the UN and the EU play a hands-on role. I welcome what the Minister of State said about Irish participation in the political dialogue but it is important that there is a much greater level of UN and EU involvement. There was UN involvement and, to a lesser extent, EU involvement in the election process. The United Nations was a major player in helping to organise, conduct and oversee the election. It was difficult for personnel on the ground but perhaps it was the first sign that the UN was willing to play a more hands-on role in Iraq. In the run up to war, the position of the United States caused great difficulties at the United Nations and while those divisions will not be easily healed, we must go forward. If we can do anything to alleviate the daily suffering and chaos faced by the people of Iraq, we are morally obliged to do so. It is not enough to say that the situation is awful; we must ensure there is a political involvement by the European Union and the United Nations.

There is much repair work to be done at UN level. The United States must be willing to accept that its decision to go to war without a UN mandate has caused profound difficulties for the United Nations. The sooner that is acknowledged, the better. The United States should face up, openly and transparently, to the issue of human rights abuses in Iraq. I would be the first to admit that no matter how bad the American human rights record is in Iraq, it does not compare to that of Saddam Hussein's regime. That is not good enough, however; we expect certain standards from the United States, yet those standards have certainly not been applied in Iraq.

A report is due out today from Amnesty International, which will contain significant criticisms of the United States' human rights record, presumably in Iraq. We cannot avoid that issue. It is not good enough to see prisoners being mistreated, no matter what regime they represent or from what section they come. If we want to ensure that Iraq is not just a fair and free country but can also function as a democracy, we must set the highest possible standards. From what we know, the treatment of Iraqi prisoners of war and insurgents by the American authorities appears to have left much to be desired.

Ireland has a special relationship with the United States, so we should put firmly on the record our belief that the same level of human rights must apply to everybody, whether they are in New York, Baghdad or elsewhere. America may wish to foster a spirit of freedom and democracy worldwide, but that cannot be done without having human rights at the top of the agenda. I hope that in the coming months, the American Administration will take seriously the question of redressing human rights difficulties.