Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Jun 2024

I thank the Tánaiste for taking this oral parliamentary question this morning. Will he give consideration to changing the selection criteria for the appointment of ambassadors in order that a broader range of people beyond those who work in the Department of Foreign Affairs could potentially be considered.

I thank the Deputy for tabling this question. I do not propose to change the criteria for the selection of Irish ambassadors. The legislative framework for diplomatic relations is governed by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, an international treaty that provides a framework for diplomatic relations between states. The Vienna Convention was ratified by Ireland in 1967 and incorporated into Irish law by the Diplomatic Relations and Immunities Act 1967.

Irish Ambassadors to countries abroad are appointed by the President on the advice of the Government following nomination by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Ireland has a successful tradition of a non-political Civil Service whose mission is based on the principles of integrity, impartiality, effectiveness, equity and accountability. Assignments as ambassador are drawn from existing officials and I believe it would be a mistake to change a system that has contributed to Ireland’s very strong international reputation.

Ireland has consistently demonstrated its capacity to exert influence and make a distinctive contribution on pressing issues such as peace and reconciliation on this island, leadership within the European Union and UN multilateral bodies, services for our diaspora and consular care as well as in the delivery of an excellent programme of international development. The women and men of the Department of Foreign Affairs who are appointed as ambassadors, acting under the direction of the Minister and Government of the day, have played a decisive role in these efforts.

In considering nominations of people to serve as ambassadors, a range of factors are taken into account, including political, economic and trade priorities and their skills and experiences for the role. In addition to considering people's relevant skills, gender balance is a further important consideration. I am pleased that more than half of Ireland's diplomatic missions abroad are headed by women. My Department will continue to work closely with Publicjobs.ie to build diversity in recruitment to ensure that the Department is representative of the people we represent.

Maybe the Deputy could outline what ideas he has in mind but it is important to point out there is a diversity of background coming into the service in the first instance which then gives a breadth and depth of available talent.

A colleague quipped yesterday evening, "Are you looking for a way out of politics?". No, my plan is to go for the next general election, win a seat and hopefully gain another seat for our party in Clare. Back to the point, I agree there are so many talented people and Ireland has led the way particularly with female appointments. We have excellent ambassadors. Those of us in the Dáil who have had the pleasure of travelling overseas on official business would have always been greeted by Irish ambassadors who carry the flag for the nation overseas, who do an excellent job and who are supported by embassy staff.

The real point here is that there are many talented public servants outside the Department of Foreign Affairs. We are in unanimous agreement on that. Any Department I can think of would have excellent people working within it. Perhaps there could be a conversion course for them to switch across to the Department of Foreign Affairs and climb to the rank of ambassador. Indeed, there are former holders of elected office who have incredible diplomatic skills.

Then there are the many people who have represented Ireland in the business world and in the fields of sport and culture and who have proven leadership and acumen. There is a broader range of people and perhaps there is a pathway or conversion mechanism for them to be able to serve our people as ambassadors overseas.

People can cross departmental lines. People move from other Departments into the Department of Foreign Affairs. For example, our ambassador in China would have been a Department of agriculture vet originally, which was very useful in the recent issues in China relating to veterinary matters, Irish beef and so on. Her experience was clearly on hand and very valuable. This is my second stint in the Department of Foreign Affairs. In all our lives, we build up experience on the job. Many young people, for example, worked on the Security Council during the two years of our stint. The experience they have got as young people is invaluable. You do not pick that up later on in life, coming from business, sport or whatever, the contacts and the understanding of how the UN works. Experience matters in diplomacy. It is like any other discipline in life; you learn on the job but you also have to learn the skills. I often feel that in our academic sphere, we do not give enough attention and focus to the value of diplomacy itself. I thank the Deputy for raising the issue.

I agree with all of the sentiments expressed by the Tánaiste. Diplomacy is a delicate skill that absolutely has to be always practised in the right way. It is good that there is a pathway for people in other Departments to transition across to the Department of Foreign Affairs. However, I again make the point that there are many people who represent Ireland, some of whom will be doing so in the Olympic sphere this summer. It is a different type of leadership and a different way of representing our country. There are many people who really carry the flag very well for Ireland. There are also people in this House who will not be coming back after the next election. Deputies on both sides of the House have already announced that they will be retiring. Some who have already served in political office would make excellent ambassadors.

In the context of Global Ireland 2025, the Tánaiste might briefly explain if there are further plans to place our diplomatic imprint on the world beyond that being made by our existing 69 embassies. Global Ireland 2025 is a fantastic initiative led by the Department of Foreign Affairs. The year 2025 is only a few months away. Beyond Bogotá, Amman, Santiago de Chile, Manila, Rabat, Kyiv and Monrovia, are there plans for other embassies?

I repeat that there are many pathways into the Department of Foreign Affairs and into ambassadorial positions. For example, people who would have worked in the area of development aid initially have moved into the Department and brought that experience to bear as ambassadors in Africa, the Middle East and so forth. We have very good examples of that also within the Department. I have been struck by the fact that those applying to join the Department come from all backgrounds - engineering, education, you name it. We have a good system and a good service. I would be a strong defender of the system we have and I would critically analyse any potential changes that might look good on the surface but that could erode the strengths of our diplomatic service.

In terms of future plans, we should distinguish between envoys and ambassadors. Eamon Gilmore, for example, was a very effective European Union envoy in Colombia in the context of the peace process there. My immediate focus now is on the western Balkans. We recently announced a number of proposed ambassadorial appointments there.

The Tánaiste touched on the western Balkans. I commend my colleague Deputy Crowe. It is a very interesting proposal to broaden the pool. We have heard a lot of discussion this morning of bloodshed and slaughter in Gaza but we have not heard any reference yet this morning to the bloodshed, slaughter and territorial attacks that are happening in Ukraine. My question goes to the western Balkans, the legacy issue and of course the slaughter that took place there in the late 1990s, which was saved by the West, dare I say, and the international community coming to the rescue of that annihilation. What is the status of the accession talks for the western Balkan states as per the recent meeting?

At the Foreign Affairs Council on 24 June, I met with my counterparts from the western Balkans to discuss shared challenges for Europe in foreign and security policy. The EU and the western Balkans have built up a positive track record of co-operation in foreign and security policy. We discussed the region’s high rate of Common Foreign and Security Policy, CFSP, alignment, and the important contribution that armed forces from the western Balkans are making to EU Common Security and Defence Policy missions. Western Balkans Ministers noted that aligning with CFSP comes at a cost, including increased risk of hybrid attacks. We agreed that in that context, initiatives such as the new growth plan for the western Balkans are needed and justified.

Ireland believes that the EU and western Balkans countries need to intensify their co-operation to tackle global challenges, such as support for Ukraine’s defence against Russian aggression, and the security consequences of climate change. Our new embassies in Belgrade, Sarajevo and Chisinau, to open in 2025, will enable us to increase our engagement across the region. It is essential that attempts by external actors to undermine the peace and progress that have been carefully built in the western Balkans do not succeed. Missions such as EUFOR Althea and KFOR, where Irish Defence Forces serve, continue to play an essential role.

At this week's Foreign Affairs Council, I also emphasised that parties within the region must utilise the dialogue channels open to them to comprehensively resolve disputes. I made it very clear at this meeting with the western Balkans countries that Ireland will continue its strong support for the EU membership perspective of countries in the region in accordance with the established criteria. Montenegro seems to be making particular progress, and North Macedonia as well.

I recall that in 2004 when Ireland held the EU Presidency, by chance I happened to be in Dublin Airport and saw the flags of the accession states as the EU enlarged massively along its eastern border. That was very positive - former Soviet bloc countries embracing democracy and the economic success of the EU. Enlargement generally has been positive. It is spreading the wings of the EU further afield. However, we have to treat carefully with the western Balkans. It is not a homogenous bloc. It has its own issues. I am particularly concerned about the attitude of Serbia and its approach to Russia, with which it has ongoing connections, its reluctance to condemn or sanction Russia and its implicit approval, it seems, of Russia's actions. As is also evidenced by its attitude to Kosovo and the territorial claims it advances, Serbia appears to have the Russian attitude of territorial domination and of a wider state or empire under its remit. This is problematic. Enlargement cannot be a one-way street. We have to ensure that accession states have the values of liberal democracy, free and fair elections, respect for territorial integrity, and judicial independence. These are values that our own party enshrined in our own constitution recently under the aims and objectives. They are fundamental to European democracy and liberal democracy. We need to tread carefully. We do not want fifth columnists coming into the ranks.

I thank the Deputy for his remarks. He asked earlier about the enlargement agenda. This week the EU will confirm that Montenegro has made all of its interim benchmarks on rule of law reforms. This is a significant achievement and clears the way for Montenegro to close additional negotiating chapters confirming its position as accession front-runner. I hope this acts as an inspiration to Montenegro's neighbours that reform efforts will be rewarded by the EU. We are also hopeful that the new Government of North Macedonia can implement the necessary constitutional amendment to allow its candidacy to move forward. The new North Macedonian Foreign Minister reiterated that EU integration is his Government's overriding objective. The European Union has rewarded Bosnia and Herzegovina for its accelerated reform efforts, including by granting candidate status in December 2022 and opening accession negotiations in March 2024. There are continuing issues around tensions within Serbia and Kosovo. I note the Deputy's comments in respect of Serbia. We have concerns in respect of its alignment with EU policies.

I appreciate that it is a delicate balance and that there is a degree of carrot and stick involved. Much as we want to reach out and reward those democratic initiatives that are in play in Serbia, elections which were questionable were contested before Christmas. Looking beyond the Balkans, places like Belarus have democratic oppositions that are in exile. Moldova is less problematic democratically but is economically turbulent. It often piggy-backs on Romania in order to get access to the EU. There is a massive benefit in encouraging economic growth and democratic activity in those states. We need to encourage the good actors in those accession territories by reaching out the hand of friendship and saying, "Join the club." However, we must do so in a way that does not reward or allow access to others. We have seen how problematic Hungary has been in terms of undermining EU values and giving others a foot in the door.

I appreciate that it is a difficult balance throughout. We need to continue rewarding the positive factions within those states while at the same time not allowing free access to our democratic Union for others that may have more malign intentions.

Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I ask the Tánaiste whether the invasion by Russia of Ukraine has in any way impacted the accession talks for the other countries in the western Balkans that have been scheduled for EU accession. Similarly, has the progress towards extending potential membership to Ukraine been in any way affected by the same invasion?

I am a passionate believer in enlargement, notwithstanding all the challenges that come with it and that Deputy Lawless outlined in terms of rule of law and alignment. As regards the constant challenges, it is clear that the populations of many of these countries want to be in the EU and want the norms we have in democracy and economic development and the Single Market benefits that brings.

There is no doubt that the war in Ukraine has been a major catalyst for this new phase of enlargement. I would argue that the European Union, after the last big enlargement, slowed down the pace. I have sympathy with the countries of the western Balkans, such as Montenegro and North Macedonia. They have been waiting a long time. They are being kept on the long finger. Geopolitically, it is essential that we proceed at pace with enlargement because in its absence a vacuum emerges, and Russia will exploit that vacuum, as it has done in respect of Ukraine. There is no doubt that the acceleration of the Ukrainian candidacy, which I strongly supported as Taoiseach at the EU Council, has helped the western Balkans in their application processes.

Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. As the Tánaiste knows, we had commemorations in both Dublin and Monaghan on 17 May last to mark the 50th anniversary of the deadliest day of all during the Troubles, when 34 innocent people were killed and 300 injured. On a number of occasions in this House we have requested the British Government to co-operate with a full investigation by giving access to all papers to an independent, eminent, international legal person to ensure those investigations can be advanced. There is clear evidence of collusion between the Glenanne gang and British intelligence. We have to make progress on these investigations.

I thank the Deputy for his persistence and his advocacy for the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

On 17 May this year, we marked the 50th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, a brutal and devastating act of violence in which 34 people lost their lives and 300 people were injured. Alongside the Taoiseach and President Higgins, I attended the very moving and powerful memorial event in Dublin on 17 May, organised by Justice for the Forgotten, where I spoke to some of the survivors and families of the victims. The strength and dignity they have displayed throughout their fight for truth and justice for their loved ones should be acknowledged.

On 14 May, the Dáil unanimously supported a fourth motion calling on the British Government to allow access by an independent, international judicial figure to all original documents relating to these atrocities, following all-party motions from 2016, 2011 and 2008.

The continuing absence of a substantive response from the British Government to requests for access to material is a matter of significant concern and one which I raise consistently in my engagements. At the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference on 29 April in London, and during a meeting in Dublin on 18 April, I reminded the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland that the victims, survivors and families of those affected by the Dublin and Monaghan bombings have now been waiting half a century for answers and I urged him to respond to the calls made by this House.

The Government stands ready to engage with the new UK Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when appointed and will continue to press the British Government to respond positively to the demand for answers.

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply and recognise that he has been raising these issues for some time. As well as the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and other atrocities, I appreciate that he raised with the former British Prime Minister the bombing of Belturbet in December 1972. I assume that the Tánaiste will meet at an early date the new secretary of state and the new Foreign Secretary after the British general election on 4 July. I ask the Tánaiste to ensure that this particular issue and the whole legacy issue are on the agenda for those meetings. Thankfully, the UK Labour Party has given a clear indication that it will repeal the legacy legislation. That is all relevant to the question before us as well.

I am particularly anxious that the British Government can no longer try to use the excuse "for national security interests" in not providing access to an independent person to all files and papers pertaining to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. It is long beyond time the British Government recognised the requests of successive Irish governments and the requests of a sovereign Parliament, our Oireachtas, to give access to those papers to an independent, eminent legal person.

In the context of whatever happens after the British general election and a new government being formed, we stand ready to engage with a new government to press these issues and to get resolution to them. We have consistently raised the provision of original documents with my British counterpart since taking office. I recognise that governments have a responsibility to protect national security, but the passage of time since events took place also matters. That is the point I have made, and it is made in the report of Operation Kenova. The bombings in Dublin and Monaghan happened five decades ago, and I do not believe there is any reasonable excuse for continuing to prevent access to information and truth for the families after all that time.

I reiterate that people who lost family members and people who were injured say to me that they are getting older and the truth has not been established. It is more than 50 years ago now that these atrocities were carried out. We have to get the truth established. There is a moral, international, legal obligation on the British Government to co-operate with investigations. I would also like the Tánaiste to insist to the British Government and the Northern Ireland authorities that there must be full co-operation with the Garda investigation into the Belturbet bombing of December 1972, in which two young teenagers, Geraldine O'Reilly and Patrick Stanley, were killed. There were horrific incidents that night, on 27 December 1972, in Clones and Pettigo as well. We need full co-operation by the Northern Irish authorities and the British authorities in the full and comprehensive investigations into those bloody atrocities, which cost the lives of innocent people.

I will absolutely do that. I agree with the Deputy that this has taken far too long. We recently had the Seán Brown case, for example, which I have raised with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I hope that with the new British government we will be able to revisit the legacy Act because the Operation Kenova report points in the right direction. It is a hugely significant report. It underlines the need for a comprehensive, collective and victim-centred approach to legacy issues and places a strong emphasis on the importance of the European Convention on Human Rights as a safeguard of the Good Friday Agreement. It lays bare also the futility, the immorality and the sordid nature of the Provisional IRA campaign and the failure of republican leadership to acknowledge and apologise for those activities and the intimidation of families. Legacy is multi-sided, and there has been a huge failure on the part of Sinn Féin and others to deal with that aspect of the legacy in respect of Enniskillen and so on. It is all laid bare in Kenova. I look forward to Operation Denton. I hope it will create an opportunity to really move on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings case. I have met with Sir Iain Livingstone. Given the frankness of the Operation Kenova report - he did not pull his punches in any direction, and it was fair and upfront and dealt with legacy across the board - I would like to think the Operation Denton report might do likewise. It could give us a basis with a new British government to move forward on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings as regards inquiries.

I ask the Tánaiste to set out the reason US planes stopping at Shannon Airport are not searched to see if they are carrying arms for use in Palestine; his views on whether these actions are compatible with the historical and foundational Irish position of neutrality; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

There is absolutely no evidence that any airport in Ireland or any Irish sovereign airspace is being used to transport weapons to the conflict in the Middle East. All foreign military aircraft wishing to overfly or land in the State are required, without exception, to obtain diplomatic clearance. This has been the case for many years. Such permission is granted only where all relevant conditions are met, including that the aircraft is unarmed, carries no arms, ammunition or explosives, does not engage in intelligence gathering and does not form part of a military exercise or operation.

Our policies on diplomatic clearance and the carriage of munitions of war on civilian aircraft are fully understood by the United States and other international partners. My Department regularly engages with the US and other embassies in Dublin on this issue and monitors compliance carefully. It is also expressly prohibited to carry munitions of war on civil aircraft in Irish sovereign territory unless an exemption has been granted by the Minister for Transport. In 2023 and to date in 2024, no applications have been received or exemptions granted for the carriage of munitions of war on civil aircraft to Israel. In respect of military aircraft, the only transit to Israel has been of senior political and military officials from the US travelling for meetings in the region.

To ensure full transparency, information on all military flights is published on the gov.ie website and updated on a monthly basis. The Department of Transport regularly publishes information relating to requests for exemptions for the carriage of munitions of war on civil aircraft. It should be noted that sovereign immunity, a long-standing principle of customary international law, means that a state may not exercise its jurisdiction in respect to another state or its property. This principle applies to foreign state or military aircraft in Ireland just as it applies to Irish State or military aircraft abroad. This means foreign military aircraft that are permitted to land in Ireland are not subject to inspection.

I appreciate the Tánaiste's response. Since the conflict began, 37,202 Palestinians have been killed and nearly 85,000 injured. I acknowledge that 1,200 Israelis are reported to have been killed, with nearly 5,500 reported as injured. Some 17,000 children are now known by the descriptor, wounded child with no surviving family, WCNSF. Approximately 70,000 homes have been destroyed and 1.7 million people in Gaza have been displaced.

On 18 June, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle asked in the Chamber whether aeroplanes are being inspected, as is our right to do and as we used to do prior to 2020. The Taoiseach replied that no exception has been applied for this year. The Tánaiste has said the same in his response. Given that 1,000 exemptions were granted in 2023, it is surprising that applications should drop so suddenly. The Official Report records Deputy Pringle asking whether inspections are being carried out, to which no response was given. Are inspections taking place?

I am very clear that there is no weaponry going via Ireland to Israel and certainly, as I have said, not through any airport. There is absolutely no evidence at all to suggest any airport in Ireland or Irish sovereign airspace is being used to transport weapons to the conflict in the Middle East. There is a distinction drawn between civil aircraft and military aircraft. Civil aircraft come under the Department of Transport. Diplomatic clearance comes under the Department of Foreign Affairs. That is the long-standing situation. In our view, the permission given by Ireland to foreign military or state aircraft to overfly or land in this State is fully compatible with our policy of military neutrality.

Under the terms of the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952, all foreign military aircraft seeking to overfly or land in the State require diplomatic clearance from the Minister for Foreign Affairs. This is subject to strict conditions, including stipulations that the aircraft must be carrying no arms, ammunition or explosives and must not engage in intelligence gathering, and that the flights in question must not form part of any military exercise or operation. Civil aircraft come under the Air Navigation (Carriage of Munitions of War, Weapons and Dangerous Goods) Orders 1973 and 1989, which prohibit such aircraft from carrying munitions and so forth.

I echo the concerns expressed by colleagues in the House and by the people of Ireland. I appreciate the Tánaiste's statement that there is no evidence of weaponry being transported through Ireland to Israel. However, there is also nothing to point to the contrary. The question is: how do we know? Do we take the word of those who possibly are supplying the arms being used in the genocide in Palestine? Do we accept that the oppressors of Palestine are not carrying arms through our airspace to perpetuate oppression and genocide in Palestine? I have been subject to a lot of lobbying on this issue. People are trying to find out definitively whether aircraft are being inspected or if it is the case that applications are being made for a diplomatic exemption and we are just taking the word of the applicants that no weaponry is being transported.

I take the Deputy's point. We condemn the bombardment of Gaza. What is happening in Gaza is absolutely shocking. It needs to stop and it must stop immediately. There has been a long-standing relationship between the United States and Israel, going back to the foundation of the latter state, and likewise between many European Union states and Israel. We are a militarily neutral country. We apply conditions to aircraft overflying or landing in the State. Aeroplanes will overfly Irish airspace, including thousands of civil aircraft. Any military aircraft requires diplomatic clearance to do so. There is full transparency in terms of both civil aircraft and aircraft seeking diplomatic clearance. As I said, there is a long-standing principle of customary international law that a state may not exercise its jurisdiction in respect of another state or its property. That long-standing principle applies to foreign state and military aircraft overflying or landing in Ireland, just as it applies to Irish State and military aircraft abroad.

More than 8 million people are displaced in Sudan, which is the same number as have been displaced from Ukraine. The country is on the brink of famine. There are widespread allegations of war crimes. The siege of Al-Fashir is now looking very like what we are seeing in Rafah. I am interested to hear what Ireland and the international community are doing in this sphere.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 37 together.

I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue, which has not received as much attention as it should in our national Parliament and in general discussions in Ireland. The Government shares the Deputy's serious concern at the situation in Sudan. Since the outbreak of conflict in April 2023, well over a year ago, official estimates put the death toll at some 14,000. The true toll is likely to be significantly higher, with widespread attacks on civilians, appalling gender-based violence and attacks on humanitarian workers and infrastructure.

There have been repeated warnings from the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide that the risk factors for genocide and related crimes in Sudan are present and very much increasing. More than 12 million people have been displaced from their homes, comprising 10 million inside Sudan and 2 million as refugees outside the country. This makes Sudan the location of the largest displacement crisis in the world today. The conditions of conflict and the deliberate blocking of humanitarian access by both parties to the conflict are creating a humanitarian disaster.

Last week, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs warned that famine was imminent in Sudan, with more than 2 million people at severe risk. In response to the crisis, Ireland has increased our support to the country. At the international conference on Sudan in Paris in April, at which I represented the Government, we pledged €12.3 million in bilateral aid for 2024. That aid is being delivered.

This is in addition to our core funding to key partners in Sudan, such as the UN World Food Programme and the UN Central Emergency Response Fund. Humanitarian aid, however, is not enough to end the suffering of the Sudanese people. Ireland is working with European Union and international partners to promote an end to the conflict. We were to the fore in calling for the establishment of an EU sanctions regime to pressure the parties to come back to the negotiating table to permit humanitarian access and end attacks on civilians. The first set of targeted sanctions were announced in January. This week, on 24 June at the Foreign Affairs Council in Luxembourg, we agreed a new package of measures aimed at six individuals responsible for undermining peace and security in Sudan, including attacks against civilians. At the UN Human Rights Council, we have prioritised support for accountability mechanisms, including championing a UN fact-finding mission to collect evidence of violations of international law. We are also working with partners to bolster the capacity of Sudanese civil society to help to bring an end to the conflict and return to a democratic transition.

The foremost question really is this: what is the situation in relation to progress towards a ceasefire? There have been a range of mediation initiatives to date. These have included regional efforts led by the African Union and the Treaty of Jeddah process led by the United States of America, Sudan and Saudi Arabia. The UN Secretary General has personally appointed his own envoy to the region and a high level panel on Sudan was established by the African Union in January 2024. Unfortunately, none of these efforts have succeeded in brokering a cessation of hostilities to date. Work must continue on this area.

Meanwhile, the EU special representative for the Horn of Africa, Dr. Annette Weber, has been encouraging greater co-ordination between the various initiatives that have taken place to date. We support Dr. Weber in her office and in her efforts. On 21 June the African Union Peace and Security Council issued a set of decisions that may create fresh momentum. An extraordinary summit on Sudan is under preparation alongside a new round of dialogue between civilian and political forces.

I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. Everything he sets out there is on the direction we need to travel but a concern is that there is not the urgency or the momentum to make it really stick. There is still a supply of weapons to the warring parties. Humanitarian aid is not getting through on the scale needed to prevent famine. I wonder to what extent the gathering of evidence of war crimes is to the standard we need to actually cause people to pause for thought. Obviously the sanctions are still not in place. It is a concern. Is there any way this can be elevated? From the Tánaiste's efforts on Gaza I know how difficult it is, even by taking a really proactive role, but this is a huge concern really. Eight million people are displaced. There is the threat of genocide. The disruption and displacement this will cause will have huge reverberations over the coming years.

As I mentioned, we did take concrete actions at EU level in imposing sanctions just very recently. The big question is whether the warring parties are receiving support from outside the country. Unfortunately this is the case. A number of states from the Gulf to Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Russia are all alleged to be providing material and other supports for the warring parties. This clearly works against any push to return to the negotiation table. Together with our EU partners we have been very clear that this external engagement must end. This is really the primary focus at EU level for outside countries to stand back and let peace negotiations commence in the region without the influence of other governments and other countries that are assisting the different parties and thereby extending the actual conflict. In the meantime we are working on the sanctions. We want to get negotiations at an African level and other levels improved and commenced as soon as possible. In the meantime we want to continue delivering the humanitarian aid that has been placed at various conferences and which is making some impact. Obviously the situation is so serious on the ground that we need a ceasefire of hostilities in the first instance.

I will just make one comment on the wider situation. Is it not the case that migration is now disrupting European politics in a way that is extremely worrying? I welcome the EU migration pact, which we agreed in the House last night, but the truth is that war, displacement and climate change are building up massive problems for us in Africa. The seriousness with which this must be taken at international level has to be elevated in some way. I commend the Tánaiste and the Minister of State on their efforts. I do not for a moment doubt their commitment but we must persuade colleagues in the multinational communities that this is a priority that cannot be let fester.

The Deputy is absolutely correct. This is having a significant regional impact as well. The arrival of waves of refugees in neighbouring countries, and economic and political implications of the conflict, are placing a strain on an already fragile region to the extent that people in neighbouring countries are at risk of being drawn into the war. This is a very serious situation. Two million people have already left Sudan. This is obviously causing strain in the adjoining countries where they have landed. Some of them are moving on into Europe as well. In South Sudan, for example, attacks on the Sudan pipeline have halted all oil exports, which is the country's main source of economic activity and stability. Economically we have a difficulty with issues like that. There are also people from outside the country providing military support. Then there is the issue of migration and people being forced to leave the country to seek safety. These factors are all the more reason we need to work to get a ceasefire in the region as quickly as possible.

My question relates to the ongoing tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan. There has been ethnic cleansing, provocation and aggression from Azerbaijan, and many false allegations. One of the few things maintaining peace in the region is the EU observer force. Can we increase this? Now is the time, of course, when there is much change in the European Union. Can we push this to ensure peace in the region?

I thank the Deputy for his continuing interest, commitment and advocacy on this issue. Tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan remain an issue of concern for Ireland and the European Union. I regularly discuss the situation in Armenia and the region with my European Union colleagues, most recently at the March meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council. The European Union has been playing an active role in mediation efforts aimed at securing an overarching peace agreement and the normalisation of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This normalisation process must be based on the mutual recognition of sovereignty, inviolability of borders and the territorial integrity of both countries, a fact we have consistently emphasised to both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Ireland condemned the September 2023 military escalation by Azerbaijan which caused over 100,000 Karabakh Armenians to flee their homes, creating an international humanitarian crisis. In response, Ireland and the EU have provided humanitarian assistance to support those affected. Ireland continues to raise the rights of Karabakh Armenians in bilateral meetings with Azerbaijani officials. We have been clear that those displaced must be allowed to return to their homes.

I welcome Armenia’s increasing European orientation in recent months as a positive opportunity for deepening relations and working towards peace in the south Caucasus. The announcement of a new EU-Armenia partnership agenda underlines the EU’s support for Armenia in light of current challenges. Ireland and the European Union are committed to deepening our relations with Armenia in all dimensions.

The European Union civilian crisis management mission to Armenia can also play an important role in the normalisation of relations. Ireland is fully supportive of the mission and its mandate. I am pleased that we have two Irish experts currently deployed with the mission. Ireland also supports the extension of the mandate of the European Union special representative for the south Caucasus, which is due to expire in August.

I thank the Tánaiste. I will just underline that what we are dealing with here is a dictatorship in Azerbaijan that has not only trampled over the rights of its own people but continues to do so with the Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh, including those who have been arrested without trial. Azerbaijan also continues to threaten Armenia.

As the Minister says, there have been attempts at normalisation and a peace treaty. There have been exchanges but what we are seeing is Azerbaijan making wild and false claims against Armenia. The presence of the EU observer force in the region has been able to damp down and quell these moves. The Armenian orientation towards Europe is definitely welcome. Armenia is doing what it can and making sacrifices in respect of some of its border villages to try to maintain peace. We should be doing everything we can to help it by increasing that presence.

I accept the basic point the Deputy is making on enhancing that presence and strengthening it with a view to facilitating greater movement in terms of the rights of Armenians in the Nagorno-Karabakh area. This has been a long-standing conflict, causing a lot of death. There are refugees on both sides, with the displacement of some 800,000 people since the beginning of the conflict. It is quite shocking and in our view unnecessary. Dialogue and diplomacy should have resolved this. The European mission could be expanded. We will take a proactive approach in line with that sentiment.