Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 6 relates to reporting in respect of operations. The Minister of State has indicated that a motion on secondments will be brought before the Dáil, which is appropriate, but the purpose of my amendment, which proposes that report be laid before the Houses, is to strengthen slightly the information we have and our examination of our participation.Every two years there would be a report to both Houses of the Oireachtas. I know that a motion is being brought to the Dáil but I am seeking to include the Seanad in this. The report would give a summary of international missions in which Ireland is participating and a summary of the secondments of the contingents of the Permanent Defence Force. I recognise that there may be confidentiality reasons relating to individuals when they are seconded, so this provides that it is only where there is a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force that we would have that information regarding secondments. It would outline the delegations of operational control where a delegation of operational control has been decided upon and where the Minister has authorised that under the new powers in the Bill we are passing today. Where a Minister has authorised "participation in international missions, delegation of operational control or the secondment of a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force to an international organisation not operating under a United Nations mandate", that is, if any of those other grounds of a covered international organisation or potentially wider grounds covered by any force, the report should include information under the relevant category of international organisation. If it is under that definition that includes the OSCE, the European Union and its relevant bodies and regional or other alliances, there is clarity on which international organisation we have delegated operational control to participate in an international mission with or seconded a contingent of the Defence Forces to, and information relating to which of the purposes listed under "section 3(1)(a) to (h) of the Act of 2006" have been relevant.

Some of this information may already be available and it certainly may be available in response to individual questions, but it is important that we identify the patterns. I believe we must have further examination even under the categories of sections 3(1)(a) to (h). As I said, some of the apparently benign activities, for example, activities where we are perhaps participating with or supporting the European Union, are raising very serious questions that are actually at odds with some of Ireland's humanitarian and human rights commitments. The fact is that many of those who we partner with are not bound by the principle or idea that one only engages in military activity or in these security activities in respect of principles, but that one does not do so in respect of consolidation of powers. One of those clear areas has been in respect of immigration control. The question for us is whether we participate in or contribute to a security agenda which is, in fact, an immigration control agenda.

I believe the European Union has lost a lot of international credibility with regard to its human rights record through some of the arrangements it has made, which are security arrangements and which have involved the transfer of military and other supports not necessarily to direct conflict but to authoritarian regimes, in respect of immigration control. One has to ask if that is an appropriate purpose. The Libyan coast guard is the example I gave, but the other example, which is very sadly in my mind at present, is the support that was given to the Sudanese border guard which many humanitarian organisations identified as having connections to the Janjaweed during the military regime of Omar al-Bashir. Ireland was an example of how the European Union could have been doing something very good in that region because Ireland had an excellent diplomat, Dr. Sinead Walsh, who was the EU representative in South Sudan and doing incredibly important work, the type of work Ireland can lead on, on diplomacy and peace-building. At the same time other elements of the European Union were giving partnership, military training and supports to a border guard. Eventually that ceased, which was good, but those who were originally supported are now part of the military coup that overtook the civilian-led Government just a month ago in Sudan. That is really tragic because that was probably one of the most visionary and peaceful revolutions and transitions away from dictatorship that we have seen on the continent of Africa. It is heartbreaking that this has happened.

I am saying this to indicate why I am seeking that report. I am sure that technical information might be available mission by mission, but it would be useful to put them alongside each other and to also put it in a context of having a conversation about where we want to contribute and what we want to be part of. Ireland's humanitarian search and rescue in the Mediterranean got switched to a security agenda which involved basically ensuring that nobody crossed the Mediterranean, even though people ended up in Libyan camps funded by the EU where human rights breaches were taking place. This is the context. I am very pro-Europe and I am part of the future of Europe. I believe Ireland can be the moral standard in terms of humanitarianism, human rights and extremely thoughtful and principled military engagement in defence, security and peace-building engagement in Europe. The reason I am seeking this extra information and discussion and want the Oireachtas to get engaged on these issues, is that I believe we have something important to offer and it is important that we do not let it slip away. I hope the Minister of State can give a response on the report.