Seanad debates

Thursday, 27 November 2008

Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Bill 2008: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Peter PowerPeter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

Many speakers used the expression "an ideal world". One only wishes we lived in one, but we do not. In the situations in which we are involved, especially on peacekeeping missions, that is far removed from the ideal world. We are not dealing with normal situations here but what we are doing by passing the legislation today, by subscribing to the convention and by playing a leadership role in chairing the convention means that we are taking a leadership role throughout the world. We are a small country that has a distinguished record throughout the world. We are recognised throughout the world in this area of foreign policy as having been one of the real leaders for many decades.

This is our niche in which we have taken a leadership role. We chaired the negotiations. Would it not be very unusual if we were to champion the Oslo process and chair the negotiations using all the diplomatic skills for which we are renowned globally to achieve consensus on the narrow issue of cluster munitions and then to adopt a position on foot of which we would not be allowed to have a peacekeeping role in areas in which we have had such a role for many decades? The people would not subscribe to this view.

In in ideal world there would never have been cluster munitions. In the unlikely scenario that Irish troops will be under fire in a real conflict with their backs against the wall, they will not have a chance to choose who will save their lives. If we were not to adopt a leadership role, we would be abdicating our responsibility and giving in. We would be emboldening countries not party to the convention. History and our peacekeeping missions have shown that when we take leadership roles, we bring other countries with us. They ultimately accept what we do as the norm. Many such examples can be cited. If we were to withdraw from the process at this stage having been so intrinsically involved, we would be in very difficult circumstances.

This debate involves a question of principle versus practicality. We are trying to steer a middle course and have played an honourable role. We should not abdicate our responsibility in this regard. That is why I cannot accept the amendment.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.