I pay special tribute to organisations such as the Red Cross family and UNICEF that continue to remain active on the ground despite the threat to lives and operations. The heroic work of the mainly Iraqi personnel of these organisations undoubtedly saved and continues to save many lives, as they selflessly address the needs of the most vulnerable.

It is important to revisit the social and economic facts underpinning the humanitarian situation in Iraq. In short, Iraq is a nation whose collapse is etched in its social indicators. Iraq's position in the UN Human Development Index, or HDI as it is commonly known, has fallen from 76 in 1990 to 127 in 2001. I cannot think of another country that has fallen so dramatically and so rapidly. In 1990 per capita income was estimated at US$3,500. It is now estimated by some to be US$1,100 and by others to be as low as US$583.

The health care system is in a state of extreme disrepair. For example, in 1989 the health budget for Iraq was US$450 million. In 2002 it was a mere US$20 million. One fifth of the children under five are underweight, and infant mortality has more than doubled to 100 per 1,000 live births over the past decade. Under-five mortality has increased from 50 per 1,000 in 1990 to 131 in 1999. This level of infant and child mortality is similar to that prevailing in parts of sub-Saharan Africa. The equivalent figures for both infant and under-five mortality in Ireland is six per 1,000.

Water and sanitation systems have been badly degraded. Before the war only 60% of Iraqis had access to potable water. This has deteriorated even further, leading to a situation where today UNICEF is providing over 14.4 million litres of water on a daily basis to deprived areas of Baghdad, Basra, Mosul and Kirkuk.

The news is not all bad. Senators will be aware that before the most recent war, 60% of the Iraqi people were absolutely dependent on government distributed food rations. There were great fears that food shortages and further malnutrition could result from the war. However, owing to the tremendous efforts and dedication of the World Food Programme, its partners, donors and especially the many thousands of Iraqis involved in the Oil for Food Programme, a humanitarian food crisis has been averted. However, on the ongoing food needs of the country, there are still some major challenges ahead, including the onset of winter, the absolutely precarious security situation and the large numbers still dependent on food aid assistance.

The planned United Nations handover of the Oil for Food Programme, as outlined in Security Council Resolution 1483, to the CPA on 21 November 2003 will need to be carefully executed in order to ensure that particular attention is paid to protecting vulnerable groups after the phase out.

I am encouraged that it is intended that the World Food Programme will continue to assist with food distribution, to finalise the delivery of commodities and to facilitate a smooth handover to the CPA, in co-ordination with the relevant Iraqi authorities.

I am delighted that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan recently stated that the UN commitment in providing humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people remains steadfast. The violence and general instability have left little choice but to reduce UN international staff in Iraq to a bare minimum. Nonetheless, those that remain, with more than 4,000 committed and courageous Iraqi national staff, are continuing to provide assistance as best they can.

I stress that based on the humanitarian information available from our key partners, overall assistance programmes in Iraq continue to be severely hampered by the security and unstable operating environment. In particular, movement around the country is limited. The current situation turns each humanitarian and development action into a challenge. Logistics and communications are more important than ever to ensure assistance reaches the most vulnerable.

Humanitarian actions, however effective, are designed to meet the immediate needs of the most vulnerable. However those of us passionately interested in seeing the establishment of a peaceful and prosperous Iraq must look to the future. We must engage in recovery and reconstruction. We must look at rebuilding the livelihoods of the people and facilitating an environment in which the tremendous potential of the Iraqi people can be realised. We must examine the optimal way in which this recovery and reconstruction can take place.

In this context I welcome the report of the United Nations-World Bank Joint Iraq Needs Assessment. This report was presented to the donor conference on the reconstruction of Iraq, which took place in Madrid on 23-24 October 2003. I express my deep appreciation to all members of the assessment mission for their dedication and commitment to producing this valuable document, despite the enormous difficulties and challenges faced by all during the mission. The mission itself was interrupted by the tragic events of 19 August.

The report depicts a country in distress and disrepair with reconstruction and development needs on a huge scale. This needs assessment examined 14 priority sectors. These included the key social sectors of health, education, water and sanitation, employment, agriculture and food security. It is estimated that US $56 billion will be needed to carry out reconstruction activities in Iraq up to 2007.

The donor conference in Madrid provided an important opportunity for the international community to come together, to co-ordinate efforts and support, to build a modern, open, democratic and prosperous Iraq. Representatives from 73 countries, including Ireland, and 20 international organisations attended the conference.

In Madrid donors announced overall pledges and indicative pledges amounting to more than US $33 billion, equivalent to €28 billion, in grants and loans from now until the end of 2007. It was stressed at the conference that the disbursement of these pledges should begin as soon as possible and practicable. Many donors offered support in the form of export credits, training, technical assistance and aid in kind.

The conference agreed that, to maximise donor co-ordination, an international reconstruction fund facility for Iraq should be established into which contributions by the international community may be channelled. This facility will be administered by the World Bank and the United Nations, in close co-ordination with the Iraqi authorities and donors. The establishment of the facility is to ensure that donor concerns in relation to transparency, accountability, monitoring and implementation are met and that activities are carried out in a way that meets the benchmarks of best development practice.

Ireland will play its part in this critical endeavour. As Senators will be aware Ireland has already delivered €5 million in humanitarian assistance to Iraq in 2003. At the Madrid conference Ireland pledged up to €3 million to the future humanitarian and recovery needs of Iraq. It is intended that this pledge will be mainly channelled through the UN window of the international reconstruction fund facility for Iraq, and through valued partners such as UN agencies, international organisations and NGOs. Discussions will take place over the coming months with these partner organisations to examine sectors and priorities on a needs basis.

As I have continually stressed, and as we made clear in Madrid, it is essential that the recovery and reconstruction process be owned by the Iraqi people and that high levels of international engagement are sustained for many years. Senators will be aware of my strongly held belief that the UN should be at the heart of the recovery process. I cannot help but see the comparison between Iraq and Liberia which I visited recently. After a horrific 15 year conflict in which people suffered greatly and the country was destroyed, Liberia now has a process in place, an interim government in place, and an election planned for 2005. It has a clear peace process and a pathway to recovery. All of the elements are in place, the United Nations, NGOs and a security, political, humanitarian and development process.

The situation in Iraq is imperfect in comparison to the involvement the UN has in Liberia. It is a stark contrast. Admittedly, Liberia has a smaller population and it has passed through a different process. However its situation, with all the elements in place, is the ideal. Security in Liberia has the UN at the heart of the process and works with NGOs and civil society. It is a process that allows democracy to grow from the bottom up and that is what we want to see. The UN's experience, capacity and neutrality are essential ingredients in carrying forward the recovery of Iraq.

We know from the experience of Northern Ireland how difficult it is to achieve lasting peace where deep divisions and suspicions exist. It would be counterproductive for us to impose absolute conditions. Motivation and support are required rather than prescription and this is what we must aim to achieve. We have had good and detailed discussions on this process in this Chamber and this debate will help us move the situation forward.

I welcome the unanimous adoption of Security Council Resolution 1511. Last night, I heard my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, speak of this as an important development. I am pleased that it took as its starting point the reaffirmation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq. It has also underlined the temporary nature of the CPA's powers which will cease when an internationally recognised representative Government, established by the people of Iraq, is sworn in.

I recognise that the resolution does not meet all the wishes of all the members of the Security Council. It is by necessity a compromise which will not solve all problems. However, it is a step forward, representing an important advance towards the earliest possible restoration of sovereignty to the Iraqi people under a representative Government. I also recognise that there are major practical security and institutional problems. These must be overcome if an Iraqi Government is to be able to function effectively. Institutional arrangements must be put in place and security and stability must be restored.

I welcome the strengthened role given to the UN in the physical and political reconstruction of Iraq. I hope the role of the UN outlined in Resolution 1511 will prove sufficient for it to carry out its work effectively. The resolution also calls on the UN to lend its expertise to the Iraqi people in the process of political transition. The Iraqi Governing Council is required to provide the Security Council, by 15 December, with a timetable and programme for drafting a new constitution and for holding elections. This is a significant step towards a clear timetable for the transfer of sovereignty. Having been at the inauguration ceremony for the new transitional government in Liberia, I underline the significance of this. It gives people the opportunity to vote and provides a process leading to that.

A clear timetable is important in order to give the Iraqi people a clear understanding of the transition which lies ahead. It would also lead to a greater sense of confidence that representative government will be achieved sooner rather than later. It is crucial that the Iraqi people be given a sense of ownership over the political reconstruction process. It is clear that this can happen only when security and stability have been re-established in the country. Iraq will remain very much a focus of the Security Council over the coming months. It is now up to the Security Council members to monitor the progress under Resolution 1511 and work towards meeting the Council's aims. The earliest possible restoration of sovereignty to the Iraqi people under a representative government remains the shared key goal. The Security Council deserves Ireland's full support and that of the entire international community in its efforts to achieve this goal. I very much welcome the Secretary General's comment at the Madrid conference that he will do his utmost to implement the mandate established by Security Council Resolution 1511, bearing in mind the inevitable constraints on building the required capacity and his obligation to care for the safety and security of UN staff.

I wish to take a minute to pause and reflect on the needs of Iraq in the context of the global requirements for poverty eradication and the international community's commitment to meeting the millennium development goals. One of the Members of this House, Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú, referred to my comments when I was leaving Ethiopia after a visit there some months ago, prior to the conflict in Iraq. I noted the amount of money it would take to help deal with a pre-famine situation in Ethiopia, as distinct from the amount of money the conflict in Iraq would cost. That is history now. It is important that we keep in context the actual needs of the global community and in particular the most vulnerable and the poorest of the poor throughout the world. I make this comment in that context.

These millennium development goals reflect the international community's commitment to halving key indicators of world poverty by 2015. Earlier I congratulated the efforts of the joint UN/World Bank needs assessment mission. This mission very quickly and efficiently assessed the needs of Iraq to be $56 billion over the next few years. Equally rapidly, the international donor community came together and pledged $33 billion to meet some of these needs. Some $33 billion was pledged to a country which is sitting on top of the world's second largest oil reserves. This is also a country with a rich and deep vein of human capital in terms of its educated workforce.

The poorest and most vulnerable people in the world live in sub-Saharan Africa. The continent is being ravaged by HIV-AIDS, conflict, food insecurity and natural disasters. In spite of this, there are hopeful signs as communities, governments and the international community seek to find new ways of reversing this economic and social decline. Yet in 2001 total aid flows to Africa, a continent of over 30 times the population of Iraq, amounted to a little over $16 billion. This is a stark comparison to the $33 billion pledged to Iraq at the Madrid conference. Surely, the energy and commitment devoted to Iraq and its recovery should be equally bestowed on the countries of Africa. Their needs are equally pressing. The poorest of the poor of Africa deserve the same commitment, the same energy and the same support as those in Iraq.

As I have said in this House on several occasions, the primary focus of our aid programme remains on sub-Saharan Africa, where the greatest numbers of poor countries in the world are located. This focus will not change. I assure Members that the emergency humanitarian budget, which currently stands at €23 million, is by its very nature designed to be flexible. It is not allocated in advance to any particular region or emergency but is available to save lives and livelihoods in whatever region of the world there is greatest need. Our pledge of funding to Iraq has not shifted resources earmarked for major emergencies elsewhere. I have sufficient funding under the programme as a whole to deal with the full range of humanitarian needs and also to tackle the longer-term or development challenges in Africa and elsewhere. I wish to underline that in this important debate.

In previous addresses I have made to both Houses of the Oireachtas on the issue of Iraq, I have emphasised the importance of a secure operating environment for the effective and impartial delivery of humanitarian recovery assistance. The same requirement is necessary to ensure ownership of the development process by the Iraqi people. I am heartened to note this view reflects that of Secretary General Kofi Annan, who stated in Madrid that success depends not only on the availability of resources but also on security. According to the Secretary General this will be the primary constraint now and into the foreseeable future. It is also critically important, however, that we should not lose sight of the humanitarian needs in Iraq which are still enormous. Helping the people to survive from day to day must be no less an imperative for the international community than the task of rebuilding the country and laying the foundations for lasting peace and stability.

In conclusion, I assure Members that I will continue to do everything in my power to monitor the developments in Iraq and to assist where possible in alleviating the suffering, facilitating the transition to democracy, putting in place the building blocks for recovery and ensuring the UN plays its rightful central role in that process.

The humanitarian situation in Iraq is inextricably linked to the politics and security situation there. It would be difficult to make lasting positive changes on the humanitarian side without resolving those issues as they are all part of the one jigsaw. The politics of "I told you so" is not going to add anything constructive to this debate and will not provide support for the beleaguered Iraqi population. It might give some satisfaction to a small minority of commentators but it will not put bread on the Iraqi tables, remove weapons from the Iraqi fields of conflict or reduce the daily killings in Baghdad or elsewhere. I am surprised at people's surprise at what is now happening on the ground in Baghdad and Iraq in general. No one could have been surprised at the outcome of the initial attack by the US and British military forces. The inevitable happened – overwhelming power and might won an easy victory. That was not in any way unexpected.

Just as that initial invasion of Iraq was successful we should not be surprised that Saddam's loyalists are offering strong resistance to the American forces. The phrase "they have not gone away" applies to Baghdad and Iraq as much as it applies to any part of this island because the tens of thousands of people who were part of Saddam's armies and who propped up his brutal regime may have retreated during March and April but they have not gone very far. We should not have expected them to disappear. It was sadly inevitable that they would reorganise and to some degree regroup and carry on daily attacks.

These attacks pose an interesting political question for us. If American forces alone were facing the brunt of the current resistance one could argue there was a strong Iraqi opposition and ground swell of popular opinion against the Americans. As the Minister of State said, however, some of the attacks have been against the United Nations and the Red Cross proving that the resistance is not just anti-American. The bombing of the UN and Red Cross targets is a sign that certain groups in Iraq are pursuing a straightforward terrorist trail of bombing and destruction and I am sure that those people who bombed the Red Cross and the United Nations buildings, and who murdered and killed people in those organisations, have no interest in building a new Iraq but want to return to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. These people were the beneficiaries of the Saddam regime. They were his protectors and his police and they want now what they had before. It is in the interests of the United States and of all groups who favour democracy to try to foil these attacks. Above all, it is in the interests of the future of the Iraqi people and their nation to ensure the people who tortured, maimed and murdered tens of thousands of their own citizens over the past ten or 20 years will not set the agenda for the building of a new Iraq.

Since last Christmas, or thereabouts, we have been debating the Iraqi situation in the Oireachtas. While it has caused much division and some conflicting opinions there was a unanimous view in this House, namely that the United Nations would have to have a central role. There was very strong and valid opposition to the United States for going it alone. It has to be conceded without question that by going it alone the United States and Britain severely undermined the United Nations. That is our starting point now. We cannot replay what has happened but we must ask what should come next. Every person who spoke in the House during previous debates stressed the absolute prerogative of the Iraqi people to be in charge of their own destiny and resources.

In a sense what the Minister of State said concerning UN Resolution 1511 recognises those facts. We should now demand that the invading countries transfer power and responsibility to the locals at the very earliest stage. There is an opportunity for this early transfer of power to be part of a broader plan of rebuilding the work and the role of the United Nations across the globe. The United Nations cannot replay what has happened since last Christmas but if it can now seize a supervisory role in the handover of power from the present coalition to a broad-based Iraqi administration it would be a major step forward, not just for Iraq but also for the United Nations. There is a great degree of urgency about this issue because as long as there is a political vacuum – the Minister of State referred to this – and no clear route map or timetable for handing over power, the uncertainty and doubt among the Iraqi people will fuel the opportunity of Saddam's henchmen. The terrorists on the ground will gain more momentum and support and a vicious cycle of killings, mayhem and murder unfortunately will continue.

It is not easy to solve this problem but as we have seen at home and abroad a political solution is the only way forward and where there is optimism about a political future or solution support for violence plummets. When hope for a political future declines mayhem and terror rise again. The most urgent task today for the United Nations, the European Union and for all international friends of the United States is to press for, insist upon, and agree a political way forward. Just as the lack of a political process in Northern Ireland, in the Middle East or any part of the globe causes a dangerous vacuum and a lack of hope so too with the situation in Iraq. It is imperative that the political process of building new institutions which will be inclusive and all-embracing is put in place. When the people of Iraq see this agenda they will truly feel that there is a new beginning.

In that regard it is worth pointing out something not often mentioned, namely that the only semi-accurate means of ascertaining current public opinion in Iraq is an independent Gallup poll, carried out by one of the major polling organisations about five or six weeks ago. Interestingly, the poll showed that most of the ordinary citizens of Iraq feel their future will be better than their past, despite the difficulties in their country and its occupation by armies they do not wish to have there. Let us resolve to ensure their hopes and wishes in that regard are fulfilled. We may argue in this House and elsewhere about the methods used to bring about Saddam Hussein's downfall, but nobody can say that the Iraqi people are not better off without him. However, eaten bread will not sustain forever, so the new political future for Iraq must be carved out. The European Union has a big role to play in that regard, as well as the United Nations.

On the question of the European Union, there have been major divisions between, on the one side, the British, the Spanish and others, including some of the countries about to join the EU, and on the other side, the French, Germans and some others. I hope all the countries of the EU and all the aspirant states will now come together as a positive force for change and, working with the United Nations, try to put in place new structures for a better future. Those who opposed the war in Iraq, whether their opposition was based on the lack of a UN mandate or, in a minority of cases a rather old-fashioned anti-American view of the world, can simply wring their hands and say, "I told you so". That would be a betrayal of the Iraqi people. If the UN is to have a viable future and if the EU wishes to build itself into a strong and reasonable counterbalance to the only remaining world superpower, we must now show we can lead as well as oppose.

We cannot ignore the fact that weapons of mass destruction have not been found, but neither can we forget that Saddam Hussein was killing his own people and that he was setting up torture centres and totally ignoring the United Nations over the past 12 years. I fully accept that Hans Blix and his team should have been given more time, but I cannot pretend to be upset at the demise of Saddam. However, if the United States wants to be the policeman of the world, it must bring morality and good authority to its role. It cannot do it alone. The United Nations and the EU must become equal partners in the enterprise.

Those are the political priorities. The immediate social priorities were outlined by the Minister of State. They include the development or redevelopment of a health service as well as sanitation services throughout the country and the provision of education. There has been a degree of progress over the past couple of months, which is somewhat better than we might have expected. That is welcome, but there is a long way to go.

The pages of history turn slowly and the jury on what is currently happening in Iraq will not report for at least five years. All of us must ensure, by our work in this House and the Government's work in Europe and at the United Nations, that in the next five or ten years, the people of Iraq will be able to look back on a very difficult period in their history and see that things have improved, with the help of the United Nations. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1511 is a major step in the right direction. I commend the Minister of State and his colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, for what they are attempting to do. We must keep the focus on the UN and on joint EU policy as well. That is the way forward. We cannot solve the humanitarian jigsaw unless it is part of the overall political equation. To replay what happened six or 12 months ago is not going to make a whit of difference to any citizen of Iraq. Only what is happening at UN and EU levels can make a difference. I wish the Minister of State well in his ongoing efforts in that regard.

I was speaking in recent days to Mr. David Horgan from Petrel Resources, who was in Iraq. I understand he was on "Questions & Answers" last evening. He has been in Iraq four times since June and he has travelled all over the country, not just to Baghdad. He has been staying in small hotels and meeting the people. He talked to me about the changes that happen week by week and mentioned a few surprises he had come across. He emphasised what the Minister of State has said as regards internationalising the conflict by having the UN as pivotal to the restoration of authority and legitimacy in Iraq. I hope the points he has made will be listened to because I believe he has first-hand experience of what is happening on the ground. He advocates that elections should be held as soon as possible, which would lead to the restoration of a sovereign government.

One of the issues to which Mr. Horgan referred was the question of criminality. That is important, given the fact that we are now talking about the hiring of police and the establishment of an Iraqi army. As a person involved in the oil business, Mr. Horgan has his own reasons for advocating extra oil production. The current production figure is 1.7 million barrels daily on average, less than half the pre-war level. At that time we used to talk about sanctions and I have spoken in the House on many occasions on the depression caused by sanctions. Now that sanctions have been removed, hopefully the bottlenecks that arise within the oil industry should be relieved. The natural resources of this very wealthy country should be used for the benefit of the Iraqi people. That is important.

Currently, oil production is less than half the 1990 level. That is something one could expect should be improved in the future. We need reform in Iraq. I have already mentioned the security situation. There are also issues I have raised in the past in the House as regards electricity and water supplies. Security, electricity and water supplies in Iraq must be re-established. We are moving from the warm weather of the summer to the freezing temperatures of winter and it will be a difficult time for women, children and old people. People are not prepared for the coming conditions, raising questions about the delay in improving those areas. The Minister of State mentioned that the health budget in Iraq was $450 million in 1989 while in 2002 it was a mere $20 million, demonstrating the need to fund the humanitarian effort.

At least 60% of the Iraqi people are absolutely dependent on the food rations obtained through the oil for food programme. Amazingly, that aid programme continued throughout the war when logistics would have been a major issue. The short duration of the war may have helped the continuation of the programme and now the United Nations is to hand over the oil for food programme under Security Council Resolution 1483. That is very important and I hope those in charge of the programme will continue to assist with food distribution.

The Minister of State mentioned the Madrid conference. I was glad that Ireland was represented at it and made funding available to humanitarian agencies, the Red Cross and NGOs as the need arises. People were critical of the pledges made in Afghanistan because those pledges are very different from cash. The conference, however, stated clearly where the money would go.

Regional involvement is vital. There have been allegations that some of the atrocities in Iraq were committed by foreigners who have arrived in the country. The involvement of Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia has helped previously and they could be a positive influence in resolving the problems in Iraq. Senator Bradford mentioned that the weapons inspectors should have been given more time and I agree with that. The neighbouring countries should also have been allowed greater influence. We must secure such regional involvement because it could help to achieve a lasting peace.

The suicide bomb attack on the local headquarters of the ICRC and the number of lives lost was appalling, as is the number of Iraqi people who have been killed. The attack on the Red Cross and the bombing of UN headquarters in Iraq were atrocities and I hope the United Nations will come centre stage and help the people of Iraq.

Amnesty International has produced a report on human rights in Iraq, an area we may have neglected because of the urgent need for security and humanitarian aid. The report makes a good point about the need for justice for hundreds of thousands of victims of state abuse and points out that, as we go about the reconstruction of Iraq, human rights must be a priority for any new government. I congratulate Amnesty International on its report, entitled Iraq: On whose Behalf? Reconstruction must ensure the human rights of Iraqis.

Last week I read the report in The Irish Times by Conor O'Clery on a speech made by the Irish ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Richard Ryan, at the University of St. Thomas and St. Paul in Minnesota on the theme of Ireland on the world stage. He pointed out how much we managed to do on the Security Council, particularly on Afghanistan, when we insisted that humanitarian and human rights concerns be at the centre of the engagement in that country. Senator Kitt was right to stress the human rights aspect in Iraq which, unfortunately, has gone by the wayside in the invasion and occupation. If we have such a good relationship with America, we deserve to be able to point out to a much greater extent that it has taken on huge responsibilities it is not fulfilling.

It is hard to see how humanitarian aid can be distributed in large parts of Iraq. Senator Kitt mentioned the first hand experience of Mr. David Hogan, who is involved in the oil industry. Humanitarian concerns are not being put centre stage by occupation forces which are obliged under the Geneva Convention to put the protection of civilian life first. This is not happening according to the reports coming out of Baghdad. It is sad that everyday, the number of American deaths and those of other occupying forces, all of which are regretted, are reported but no figures are given for the number of Iraqi dead, the vast majority of whom are civilians. They are shot at random, not necessarily by the occupying forces but by common criminals, although this makes no difference. It sends a terrible message to the Iraqi people about the lack of value the occupying forces put on their lives that the Iraqi death toll is not announced. Journalists are also denied access to the casualty departments of hospitals, so they cannot see for themselves what is happening there. If this can be brought up with the occupiers, it will serve some good. One cannot expect respect from people unless one shows them respect in turn. The first figure we must start getting is the Iraqi death toll.

It is unfortunate that so much misinformation goes out in the US media. For example, it is tragic that the media have been censored to the extent that soldiers' coffins, draped with the American flag, cannot be shown on US television. This is an unbelievable insult to those who have died. It may help the Bush regime, but if I were related to anyone who lost their life in Iraq, I would take it as an appalling insult.

I am glad that the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, brought up the statistics from the UN human development index. In the most recent report on the state of the world population, the maternal mortality rate in Iraq in 2001 was 336 per 100,000. In neighbouring Iran, it was 75. Fifteen years ago those figures would have been the reverse. One dreads to think what the maternal mortality rate will be this year in Iraq. While everyone in Iraq is suffering, women and children are suffering disproportionately. Many Iraqi women now cannot go to work because they are molested and raped. There has been a considerable increase in the number of illegal abortions in Iraq. As the Minister of State is aware, there is a system of "honour killing" among some tribes in Iraq, where, if a woman is raped, it is considered a disgrace to the family and she is killed to restore honour. These women are now resorting to illegal abortions to hide what has happened to them.

There are other ways we can ask the US to show respect for the Iraqi people. The Minister of State rightly pointed out that we are attempting to get more notice taken of UN Security Council Resolution 1511. How can this allow the sale of Iraqi assets, apart from oil and gas? If I was an Iraqi, I would fight myself to stop such action. Iraqis, who have been abroad for the past 20 years, when interviewed on radio and television, ask why they have not been given two to three years so they can buy their own property for themselves. It seems extraordinary that this is allowed. It makes the most reasonable of people fight as they believe that if they do not get rid of the occupying force now, they will have nothing left for themselves. In an interview, Mr. Bremer, when asked if property could be sold to Israel, replied it could. Has he any notion of how this could inflame Iraqis? As such actions are against international law, we can object to them.

As the US does not recognise the International Criminal Court, there is no possibility of US citizens who commit crimes in Iraq – this is happening – being brought before it. Countries have signed waivers not to extradite US citizens indicted by the court. Otherwise, they will not receive military aid from the US. Furthermore, no effort seems to have been made to get the Iraqi court service going. I know a judge who was helping them was killed over the weekend. However, something more has to be done to show that the occupying force considers the rule of law to be of some importance. The prison at Guantanamo Bay, however, sets a terrible example.

Weapons of mass destruction, of course, have not been found. I gather they have been reduced to an anthrax medium which was probably thrown down a drain in an environmentally unfriendly moment. We must bring pressure to bear on the US to resurrect the verification of the 1972 UN convention for biological weapons and toxins. Ireland has put in terrific work in the past and our delegation to the UN in Geneva is working on it again. However, we must make the US understand that it is included in the world order, not outside it. If we are its friend, as we are said to be, we must work to ensure this is the case.

I am glad the Minister of State said that our financial contribution to Iraq will not be deducted from our contribution to sub-Saharan Africa. He is right to point out how dire the situation is there. I am also glad that we are to spend most of it through UN and international relief agencies and non-governmental organisations. Good as the IMF, the World Bank and the international reconstruction fund facility are, I heard a suggestion from the US that some money should be spent on PR, so that the situation would look better. I would not like to think that any Irish euro was spent on PR to make the situation look better. The Minister of State is right to concentrate on this aspect.

After the 1991 Gulf War, I visited, on behalf of the Red Cross, the Kurdish refugee camps in the Turkish-Iranian mountains. I was delighted that Irish aid got to the Iranian border. The Iranians, however, were never given enough credit for what they did for the Kurds at the time, considering their own problems with them. At least in this war there has not been the same dislocation of the population and not as many refugees to be dealt with. I hope the Minister of State sends the contributions to UNICEF and UNFPA. Senator Michael Kitt referred to his conversations with Mr. David Hogan who works in Iraq. Ireland had a large number of people working in the PARC hospital until the first Gulf War. Is it possible to contact some of them to inquire of people in Baghdad, in particular, that could deal with the small scale operations that we, when giving aid, are so good at?

It was sad to note that, while the US Senate voted for $87 billion in aid to be given to Iraq, most was to be spent on armaments. When they had to cut back on items, it was not on stealth bombers, but a children's hospital. We must be careful where our money is going because Irish people look on this as an important issue. I congratulate the Minister of State on what he is doing and he has support from all sides of the House for his efforts.

Not all the options were exercised before the US, the UK and Australia launched a war against Iraq.

We should consider who suffered most. Although he lost two sons, it was not Saddam Hussein. Although he has disappeared, apparently he still exists. The republican guard was supposed to stand up to all forces of invasion. While many of them have been killed, most seem to have melted into the undergrowth. The people who suffered most were ordinary Iraqis, who are still suffering. We still have not discovered any weapons of mass destruction and now we are faced with a huge reconstruction of a country. Other sanctions could have been imposed to avoid this war. However, as Senator Henry said, we must start from where we are and not from where we would like to be.

Civilians are being killed on an almost daily basis. Young soldiers, mainly American, are being killed almost on a daily basis. Where will this all lead? As the Minister of State said, the UN must take over as soon as possible. We must remind ourselves of the state of the Iraqi people at present. I repeat some figures quoted by the Minister that show how Iraq's position in the UN human development index has fallen from 76 to 127 in a matter of 11 years. The gross per capita income has dropped in some estimates to as little as €500 or €600. Infant mortality has more than doubled to 131 per 1,000 live births. These are horrific figures. We are now being asked to help these people. As the cold winter is about to start and with shortages of food, the whole country is dependent on assistance, as it was before the war took place.

The Minister said:

We must engage in recovery and reconstruction. We must look at rebuilding the livelihoods of the people and facilitating an environment in which the tremendous potential of the Iraqi people can be realised. We must examine the optimal way in which this recovery and reconstruction can take place.

Who is doing this reconstruction? US companies have been awarded reconstruction contracts worth not just millions, but billions of dollars. All of these companies were major donors to President Bush's election fund. The biggest contracts have gone to the company in which Vice-President Chaney was formerly involved. Are we supposed to pour in aid to help this process? I previously said here that if Iraq produced bananas rather than oil, the war would never have taken place and I still believe that. The war was primarily about the control of Iraqi oil resources, then about reconstruction contracts – regardless of the cost in human life and misery – and finally about the removal of Saddam Hussein's violent regime.

Having said that, we must ask whether we should adopt the same position as the French, Russians or Germans who want nothing to do with this issue. I do not believe we should. Having supplied many arms to Iraq, the French did not want to lose arms contracts. I understand the Russians did not want to join the war as the Americans refused to give them 50% of the reconstruction contracts. I do not know about the Germans.

There is much hypocrisy. Despite the vagaries of international capitalism, the Iraqi people need help and it is incumbent on us to help in any way we can. Whatever help is provided should be done under UN control. It is time for the withdrawal of coalition forces. Any forces there should be UN peacekeeping forces in which Ireland might play a part. All aid should be distributed in the same way. Following the regime change, the Iraqis are not incapable of running their own country. There are millions of intelligent people and if they have sufficient food, grants for reconstruction and assistance from outside they can take back their country and run it properly with a democratically elected Government. That should be our goal.

The Minister of State mentioned the Madrid Summit. I welcome the €3 million committed by the Government and the previous €5 million mentioned by the Minister. I ask the Minister to state whether we have increased our overall international aid this year. While he was at pains to stress he was not taking from elsewhere and the importance of maintaining our assistance to African countries, with which I completely agree, my reading of what he said is that the overall funding is still the same. This is not acceptable. We must recognise that the war happened and Ireland must accept part of the international culpability. We must also take responsibility for addressing some of the problems that have arisen as a result.

While I hope the $33 billion, which the Minister said has been pledged by the international donor community, will materialise, I wonder if this will be the case. The Minister of State mentioned the international reconstruction fund facility. It is very important that the fund is administered in a transparent and accountable manner and that it is used properly and effectively. The NGO representatives on the fringes of the Madrid summit a few weeks ago raised the issue of the transparency of the administration of the oil for food funds. It should be top of the Irish agenda to ensure that the money is spent properly in an open and accountable fashion. I agree with the points made by other Senators and the Minister of State that the money should be spent for the benefit of the Iraqi people and that they should have a say in how it is spent. Various suggestions have been made as to how that would be done.

I draw the Minister of State's attention to the recent Amnesty report on the reconstruction process, entitled Iraq, On Whose Behalf? The report makes a number of recommendations for the attention of the occupying powers and also other governments. Other speakers already mentioned some of these matters. The report states that human rights must be paramount in the reconstruction process and that all parties involved should prioritise projects that relate directly to the protection and realisation of human rights, concentrating in particular on projects relating to enhancing personal security and ensuring access to food, health, education and housing and reform of the justice system. Other recommendations include the involvement of Iraqis in decision making, involving women in the reconstruction process and protecting women's rights. It states the importance of ensuring that tendering and contracts for infrastructural projects are awarded in a transparent manner and that oil revenues are managed in a transparent and accountable manner.

The Minister of State spoke of the necessity to involve the Iraqi people but I ask the Minister of State to say what action the Government plans to ensure this happens. We do not wish to see another mess created ten years from now.

Senator Henry raised the issue of the importance of handing over responsibility for administration to the Iraqi people, but the manner in which it is done is very important. I read an article in The Irish Examiner today which used the term "Iraqification" which is modelled on the term "Vietnamisation" used to describe an approach by the United States which was basically an exit strategy when the Americans did not want to deal with the problem any longer. This article suggests that the same approach would be adopted by the US in the case of Iraq and it outlines the dangers such a strategy would pose.

There are problems with regard to the ineffectiveness of the Iraqi army and police force. The Minister of State and other Senators spoke about the importance of security and it has been mentioned by Kofi Annan and Chris Patten. It is essential that security is restored so that all the other things can be done, political responsibility can be handed over and humanitarian aid and reconstruction can be provided. This issue was also raised in a recent Amnesty report which detailed the overwhelming climate of fear and insecurity. There has been a failure by the occupying forces to address the need to provide security. There is evidence of abuse of human rights by the occupying troops, such as unnecessary civilian deaths and ill-treatment of civilians. The police force and the infrastructure must be brought up to standard.

Senator Henry spoke about the problem of women and girls and the general population living in fear. The Amnesty report was published in the UK and makes a number of recommendations applicable to the UK. It recommends the need for an international civilian police force to assist the Iraqi police in carrying out its law enforcement functions until it can operate effectively. It has a number of recommendations regarding the prevention of violations of human rights and recommendations to do with the restoration of law and order. I ask the Minister of State in his reply to state what are the Government's plans for assisting international efforts to restore security and the reform of Iraqi institutions and to ensure that human rights are respected.

I note a report in the Irish Independent where the language used in the report demonstrates a sense of confusion. Those who take part in attacks are not referred to as "terrorists". The media refers to them as "guerrillas". That in itself is an indication of the confusion which exists. The terrible onslaught on the local headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross and on the headquarters of the United Nations mission would have been regarded as absolutely impossible six or nine months ago. The Red Cross and the United Nations were always regarded as agencies of balance and fairness. The developments in the situation have become more complex.

My position on the Iraqi war has been recorded in this House several times and in public debate outside the House. At the beginning of the war I said clearly that I considered it to be unjustified, illegal and immoral. Nothing has happened to change my opinion. That is not to suggest I hold another person's view in any kind of contempt because we are all so far removed from the scene. On the subject of humanitarian aid, I am pleased that Ireland is to the fore as it has been in all parts of the world where humanitarian aid was required. This was admirably reflected by the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt. It is particularly important that Ireland continues that role. Apart from the financial contribution we make, in many ways we will be seen as people who, down through the decades if not the centuries, have always endeavoured to give help for help's sake without having any underlying political agenda. That has been the strength of Ireland's involvement in the Third World and in other areas where war is raging.

There are short-term and long-term aspects to humanitarian aid. The short-term objective is to relieve suffering without, necessarily, even looking forward to what solutions might come or the manner in which that help might give confidence to people to participate in that organic development in future years. The long-term objective is political in which the aim is to create a stable society and the return of sovereignty to the people. This aspect would include the continuation of international aid.

One of the difficulties with which we have to contend is perception. A European agency-funded poll appears in today's Irish Independent. It was taken on a European-wide basis. The results will shock Members of the House if they have not already seen the report. The question was asked as to what country is considered the greatest threat to world peace at the moment. According to this survey it is the United States of America. The second greatest threat is Israel, the third greatest threat is North Korea and the fourth greatest threat is Iran.

Some 60% of Irish respondents regarded the United States as the greatest threat to world peace. I do not say this with any sense of satisfaction. If I were asked to stand up and say to which country I would like to give my loyalty, support and credence it would be the United States of America. My answer could not be otherwise, because as far as I am concerned it is a sister nation. The United States has always been supportive of Ireland. It opened its borders to us. It opened its heart to us and helped us in so many ways. I wish to highlight the perception in the report that is evident in Ireland and Europe. If this is the case then how do we begin to create a long-term solution to the Iraqi problem? If this perception cannot be changed then the next step has to be a radical reappraisal of where we are and where we want to go.

The tragedy of 11 September 2001 shocked the world. We still suffer the after effects of the trauma of the incidents which took place that day, both because of their intrinsic gravity and the manner in which they were portrayed and brought into our living rooms. Having said that, we all accepted, or many people did, that weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq. This comes back to what I said about deceiving ourselves, whatever about the protagonists deceiving the public. The fact remains there were no weapons of mass destruction.

The political leadership of the United States and Britain are both suffering in terms of popularity as a result of what some people call a lie. I do not mind what it is called. If one wishes it may be called a misrepresentation. Until such time as we can renew confidence among the general public in its political leadership then we will have a problem.

In the early stages of the war a large majority of those questioned in American opinion polls supported the invasion of Iraq. That majority is gradually being whittled away. The main Democratic Party aspirant for the presidency is now neck and neck in the polls with President Bush. The worst aspect of this is that the Iraqi conflict will be decided on domestic political issues in America and not in a manner in which we should be endeavouring to find acceptable solutions.

I praise the Government for its handling of this issue. From the time the Minister for Foreign Affairs gave that inspired address to the Security Council to the present time, the Government has kept aloof from the political agendas of the protagonists, while at the same time it has been able to show that we were willing and, as far as possible, ready to help. It is necessary to become more proactive. We must take several steps back from where we now are in Iraq and realise that this is leading nowhere. Some say in an American context that it is leading to a Vietnam scenario, but it is worse than that because here one has the interaction of fundamentalist religion with politics and the interaction of superpowers who want to have greater power within the world. The only hope we have is to speak transparently, sincerely and courageously on this, for which we will be thanked, and not just by the lesser players but by the major players in time to come.

The debates in the lead up to the war in Iraq were of a much higher quality in this House than in the Lower House, with all due respect to that institution. In the aftermath of the war it is important that we debate the matter again. This issue is a defining moment for the United Nations. Kofi Annan has referred to this. The problem has been set up as one between multilateralism and bilateralism. The suggestion is that the US position has won out in terms of the latter. If we want a genuinely multilateral world where the United Nations is a central player in the enforcement of international will within our communities then the United Nations has to enforce it. Much of the problem in this area relates to the fact that for far too long the United Nations stood back and did very little in respect of the problem of Saddam Hussein. Unlike many people who speak on this matter, I passionately believe the end of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq is a good thing. I am glad he and his regime are gone and that the people of Iraq can look to the future with some hope, albeit in this difficult time. The sooner the Iraqis are in control in their own country and the Americans leave the better. It will be better not just for Iraq but for the entire region and it is important it happens.

Ireland has a role to play in these matters. If we want multilateralism there has to be a sting in our tail and an ability to enforce the will of the United Nations, which has been utterly lacklustre and unable to have its will imposed in the world for a long period. That issue has to be addressed, otherwise bilateralism and the actions of one or two countries will become the order of the day. We have a key role to play in that.

The role of Ireland in terms of helping the reconstruction of Iraq is also important.

I once asked a NATO general what the Irish could bring to peacekeeping missions. He told me, first, that we speak English, which is a major advantage, second, that we are regarded as honest brokers throughout the world because of our work in many places and, third, that we have collective expertise in helping to re-establish and rebuild war-torn countries. We must bring our collective experience as honest brokers to bear on the situation in Iraq, particularly the experience gained by our Army. I welcome the additional €3 million committed by the Government in Madrid on top of the €5 million already earmarked this year for reconstruction projects in Iraq. I hope that commitment is unconditional and that the money is given to the United Nations as soon as possible to allow it to continue its work.

The tragedy of Iraq is not just a tragedy of the past year or so. As other speakers said, the country has been war-torn for many years and it has been governed by a corrupt leadership. This is despite the fact that it is one of the wealthiest countries in the region. It has significant resources. It is time the resources within that community are focused entirely on the Iraqis themselves. I stress the need to continue the excellent work of the UN's oil for food programme. Were it not for the United Nations, a humanitarian food crisis would be a huge issue in Iraq. We have been largely successful in turning that around. I say to the Minister of State today that we should use the resources of the people of Iraq.

I am very critical of the United States of America's decision to demobilise the Iraqi army. As Senators know, when the invasion occurred the army fled and its leaders were arrested. Standing the army down had a devastating effect on its members who no longer have jobs and resulted in much instability. Had the army been left in place under a different leadership, it would have been easier to exert influence within post-war Iraq. A great mistake was made.

As other Senators pointed out, the Madrid conference represented an important watershed for the entire international community. At least half the money sought to rebuild Iraqi society has been promised by the governments of between 70 and 80 nations. While that is important, the Minister of State was right to point out that if the same commitment had been made to Africa where the problems are much greater, we could have gone a long way towards sorting out that continent's difficulties.

I very much welcome Security Council Resolution 1511 which means the USA has at last been able to obtain full support from all of the council's members. France, Russia and other countries paid lip service support to the resolution, but are not prepared to do much to help with regard to the post-war scenario. The EU and, in particular, France have a huge responsibility to bring their good offices to bear on Iraq.

Like other speakers, I condemn utterly the appalling attack in August on the UN headquarters in Baghdad and the death, with many others, of Special Representative de Mello. Given the exceptional work it does throughout the world, the day the United Nations is seen as a legitimate target is a poor day for world order. That is why it is so important that security is the paramount issue for all NGOs and everybody else who enters Iraq. I hope the Government honours the commitments it made in Madrid and works with the UN and the EU to bring about peace and security in Iraq.

With every day that passes, we see a further deterioration of order. Former members of the Ba'ath Party are regrouping and attempting to destabilise and compromise coalition forces while improving their position and influence with their supporters. Islamic fundamentalists are trying to enforce a type of Islamic rule by targeting Christian stores which sell alcohol. Allied to Islamic elements returning from Iran which wish to install Islamic rule we have criminal and gang elements which profit from chaos and destabilisation. What the local people want most is security. In a sense, they had that under the Saddam dictatorship which dealt with anyone who stepped out of line. When that system was removed, the immediate difficulty of filling the vacuum was created. The fact that freedom brings problems was completely overlooked by the USA during the planning phases of this war. The USA did not plan the peace.

In Kosovo a job was done and a UN model of peace creation was put in place. This begs the question of why we have not speedily moved towards that model in Iraq.

One cannot remove control from people and expect them to behave properly. Unless we form some type of government in Iraq in the short to medium term, there will be a continued deterioration in security. The Americans are taking a hammering in the Baghdad area, which will continue until Iraqis embrace the international community and ask it to assist. The perception must be changed from one of the Americans as occupying forces to forces which are assisting to bring peace at the request of the Iraqi people. The Iraqis will, in turn, use existing models to bring forward local government and establish law and order in their own country. We must redress the imbalance and remove the perception of the Americans as occupying forces as a matter of urgency.

I have no doubt that the American Government accepts its responsibilities in this regard and, like Senator Brian Hayes, I am encouraged by the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1511. We now have an international willingness to move forward in a productive manner. However, the international community has a responsibility to maintain pressure on the US Government to ensure it fulfils all elements of Resolution 1511. I hope the Iraq Governing Council meets its December deadline, which will allow for elections which will establish a government of the Iraqi people. It is only by doing this that we can ensure peace and stability in Iraq.

In any conflict, the Red Cross holds an international position which is recognised by all sides. There can be no benefit to any side in promulgating an attack such as the recent one on the headquarters of the International Red Cross in Baghdad.

Many of the points I wished to raise have already been mentioned. However, I formally condemn the attacks on the United Nations and the International Red Cross offices and express my sympathy to the innocent Iraqi citizens killed during the war and since it was declared over on 1 May by President George W. Bush. I have sympathy for the American soldiers who have given up their lives for this war and acknowledge the private pain of their families. I watch American television, including Fox News and CNN, every night and have seen the pain of parents of innocent daughters and sons who died for their country unnecessarily.

President Bush and Mr. Paul Bremer, in the UN and US Congress respectively, described this aid package as similar to the Marshall Plan. It is anything but such a plan. The hallmark of Marshall aid after the Second World War was bringing adversaries together to work on rebuilding Europe. They did this successfully and it led to the EU. The reconstruction of Iraq should be in the hands of the Iraqi people, yet President Bush and his Administration have made no attempt to reach out to the adversaries in Iraq, namely, the Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and Turkmen groups, who are involved in a civil war. The US has made no attempt to resolve differences in order that these people can rebuild Iraq together, as was the case in Europe after the Second World War.

President Bush said that $75 billion will be needed to rebuild Iraq. However, the Marshall Plan had a finite annual allocation of money for each step of reconstruction. In this case, there seems to be no end to when the reconstruction will be finished. There are some 130,000 American soldiers in Iraq. Mr. Bremer and his coalition should have involved Iraqi soldiers who did not fight against the US and by so doing, for every two battalions of the Iraqi military mobilised, one American battalion could go home. In this manner, the Iraqis would soon see that they were running their own country.

The pain is that the UN and the International Red Cross, representatives of which I met in Colombia, look at everything from the perspective of human rights. The International Red Cross will ensure that even senior members of Saddam's administration captured by the US Government get a fair trial. Since its foundation, the International Red Cross has been seen as a totally independent human rights organisation. It is a tragedy that ex-patriates from the organisation and the UN must be taken out of Iraq and placed in Kuwait, Jordan and other countries. Our generation has always looked up to the International Red Cross.

Senator Minihan was concerned that food rations should go to the most needy. The World Food Programme has carried out the largest transportation and distribution of food in its history. Food is distributed on a monthly basis from 44,000 distribution points.

I would like to spend more time discussing this issue. I outlined earlier how Ireland can play its part. We will do our utmost to continue to do what we do best at a humanitarian level, but also at UN level, which is very important. Ireland can play a very important role at the UN, of which it is a highly respected member. We were asked specifically by Kofi Annan to go to Liberia. We have not been asked to go to Iraq. However, we will do our utmost to help shape the involvement and engagement of the UN in Iraq in the coming months.

I thank Senators for their contributions. From my point of view as Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, the debates in this House have been most helpful because we have had to grapple with a difficult situation. Many people have been uncomfortable, including myself, with the way this conflict has developed. We have always been realistic about the situation. We want to bring the UN back centre stage but that process has not yet been completed. Ireland should be proud of its role in all humanitarian crises throughout the world and we will continue to work together across party lines. This House has helped me across the political divide to ensure that our policies are well focused. Continued debates such as this will help us to keep that focus.