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

244. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he is considering prohibiting the use of Shannon Airport by the United States military given the recent threats by President Trump to remove Palestinians from Gaza; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6082/25]

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Successive governments have made landing facilities available at a number of Irish airports to the United States and other foreign militaries for well over 50 years. Arrangements for foreign military aircraft to land in Irish airports are governed by strict conditions, including stipulations that the aircraft is unarmed; that it carries no arms, ammunition or explosives; that it does not engage in intelligence gathering; and that the flight in question does not form part of a military exercise or operation. This policy is well known and fully understood by the United States and other international partners.

The United States made an important contribution to securing the ceasefire and hostage release deal. Together with the other mediators Egypt and Qatar, the US remains a key player in pressing the parties to return to the table to resume the full implementation of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement.

Ireland, the European Union and international partners have been consistently clear that there can be no forced displacement of the civilian population of Gaza, nor occupation of the strip by Israel.

Any move to relocate the population of Gaza against its will would be contrary to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2735 of 10 June 2024, which rejected any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip.

Ireland’s position on the Middle East is clear and will always form part of our foreign policy dialogue with the United States, as it does with other partners.

Ireland's approach at EU and international level remains grounded in the belief that the only just and sustainable peaceful solution, for both Palestinians and Israelis, is a two-state solution based on 1967 borders, with the State of Israel, and an independent, democratic, contiguous, sovereign, and viable State of Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security and mutual recognition, with Jerusalem serving as the future capital of both states.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

245. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade further to Parliamentary Question No. 39 of 11 February 2025, the actions taken arising from his follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15647/25]

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On 19 July 2024, the International Court of Justice delivered an Advisory Opinion on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.

The Court’s principal conclusion was that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory was unlawful and that it must be brought to an end as rapidly as possible. The Court also identified a range of legal obligations for all states arising from that situation. These include a duty not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the illegal situation created by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory. In particular, the Court stated that all states have a duty to distinguish in dealings with Israel between its own territory and the occupied Palestinian territory.

The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion, while not in itself legally binding, represents an authoritative statement of applicable international law, which is binding on all states and international organisations, including the EU and its Member States.

My Department is continuing its follow-up to the Advisory Opinion, including through pressing for action at EU level in light of the ICJ Advisory Opinion and through follow-up at a national level on issues within its remit. In this regard, the Programme for Government sets out a commitment to progress legislation prohibiting goods from Occupied Palestinian Territories following the July 2024 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion.