Ireland and the Middle East
I am greatly honoured by the invitation from the King Faisal Foundation to address this distinguished audience on Ireland’s relations with the countries and the peoples of the Middle East.
The objective of my visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates this week is to widen and strengthen the economic and political links between our countries. In the past, we have focused on cooperation in the construction, medical, education and agricultural sectors. The impressive business delegation which has travelled with me from Ireland reflects this experience. But it also reflects the massive transformation of the Irish economy over the past twenty years, which has opened up unparalleled new areas of achievement and opportunity for Irish business and new scope for partnerships with the Gulf region and beyond.
In the global knowledge-based economy, human talent and creativity remain the key resource. The communications revolution has helped to change my country more quickly in the past two decades than in any other period in our history. I am sure you also find that it is key to the remarkable vitality of the Gulf region in recent years, as it transforms into a global financial and commercial centre.
Our common challenge is to harness this revolution for the benefit of our ambitious young people, overcoming obstacles which have separated our peoples in the past, and encouraging the sharing of knowledge, with freedom of expression. This process must be based on true respect for each other’s beliefs, traditions and cultures.
More broadly, I am convinced that the principle of mutual respect must underpin all aspects of relations between our two regions, Europe and the Middle East, which are inextricably linked by geography, by history and by millennia of cultural and religious interchange. Ireland is a modern and pluralist State. We believe that fundamental human rights are inalienable. At the same time, we accept that it is most effectively through dialogue and co-operation that all States can over time meet the standards to which they have committed themselves as members of the United Nations.
We in Ireland always seem to find it easy to get on with the people of this region. That is what the many Irish people now living and working here tell me. Our cultures are both marked by the importance we attach to family life and to hospitality, good humour and conversation.
Moreover Ireland, unlike most of our European partners, was colonised, not a coloniser. We gained our independence at much the same time as many modern Middle Eastern States - including this Kingdom itself - took shape. Always sympathetic to the disadvantaged, we were the first EU Member State to call unequivocally for an independent Palestinian State – our then Foreign Minister, the late Brian Lenihan, did so in 1980 in Bahrain. Irish troops have served in successive UN missions in the Middle East over fifty years.
So our interest in the Middle East is by no means confined to the economic dimension. And when we approach the political problems of the region we do so with a long track record of sympathetic involvement and with a distinctive perspective.
It has become commonplace to describe the situation in the Middle East as volatile, unpredictable, and dangerous. While this may be true, it is by no means the whole truth. Commentators sometimes ascribe these characteristics not only to the region but to its people. Problems are described as intractable, people as unreasonable. Whole communities are labelled as moderate or extreme, those with whom the international community can engage, and those with whom it cannot. The truth, of course, is that this is a historically vibrant region of different peoples – the cultural wellspring of so much which we in Europe value today. It has perhaps been more blessed and more burdened by history than any other part of the world.
The global conflicts of the 20th Century have left a deep impression on the Middle East. The unresolved consequences are not just the responsibility of the people of the region. There is an historic obligation on the international community, in particular on us, your European neighbours, to work in partnership with all the people of this region to forge political settlements which will at last enable them to live together in peace, security and prosperity. We must together have the political imagination to foresee the day when all the people of the Middle East benefit from the wealth of its natural resources – building a zone of prosperity rather than conflict. A day when they can together play a global role in competition with the great world economies, and are a source of assistance and inspiration to the less developed world.
The situation across the Middle East today continues to represent the greatest single threat to world peace. A comprehensive settlement to the interlinked problems of the region is more urgently needed than at any time over the past sixty years. At its heart must be a negotiated, two-State solution to the Israeli – Palestinian conflict.
This continues to be the most significant foreign policy challenge facing the European Union. It is at the top of Ireland’s foreign policy agenda – as pursued in our bilateral relations, with our partners in the EU and at the United Nations. Our overall approach as a small, relatively young State has consistently been based on a strong commitment to the peaceful resolution of international disputes, and to the application of the principles of international law and international justice. We remain steadfastly committed to the principles of multilateralism, even when the obstacles to their application can be portrayed as insurmountable.
There are no military or unilateral solutions available which can provide lasting peace, security or justice for anyone. Following another terrible year of diminishing hopes, the Israeli and the Palestinian people know this truth in their hearts better than anyone else.
The question of Palestine is not, of course, the sole or even the primary cause of all the inter-related problems of the Middle East, but it affects every one of them, to a greater or lesser extent. Its resolution is not only an historic and moral imperative, it would transform the prospects for the whole region.
The reality for us Europeans is that the most searching test of our ability to work in partnership with the peoples of the Middle East in the 21st Century will be the extent to which we can contribute to the establishment of a sovereign, independent and democratic Palestinian State living together in true peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours.
The tragic events of 2006 demonstrated conclusively that the adoption of unilateralist approaches to the sharing of a small piece of territory by two peoples is doomed to failure. The contours of the only possible permanent settlement are by now crystal clear. They have been set out unambiguously in Security Council Resolutions, at the Madrid Conference, in the Oslo Agreements and in the Quartet Roadmap.
In Riyadh this evening, I want to salute the courage and the vision of His Majesty King Abdullah for inspiring and developing the historic Declaration by the Arab Summit in Beirut in 2002. It represented a remarkable political move by the Arab States which cannot be ignored. I welcome the significant statement by Prime Minister Olmert in recent weeks that he is ready to engage with the Arab States and to explore the Arab Summit Declaration further. It would surely strengthen the position of the Palestinian people in seeking to achieve their rights if the Hamas Government were now to demonstrate the courage and the self-confidence to explicitly accept and support the Arab initiative, rather than waiting for others to present new formulations of the same terms for a settlement.
Over the past thirteen years, the European Union has been the strongest supporter of the Oslo Process, through its support for the establishment of the institutions of a future Palestinian State. Regrettably, the Oslo Process ground to a halt in the face of a belief among Israelis that it was not providing for their security and among Palestinians that it was being applied in an unbalanced manner and was failing to produce any improvements in their daily lives. The Quartet Roadmap, likewise, is now effectively in abeyance. But it continues to represent the set of principles and compromises which both parties must act on in parallel if there is to be a settlement.
The European Union has continued to state with great clarity that Israel and the Palestinian Authority must act on their obligations under the Roadmap and under international law. This involves a definitive end to all violence in and from the Occupied Territories – and this imposes obligations on both sides.
It also entails a definitive end to the expansion of settlements, the construction of the security barrier on Palestinian land and all activities in and around East Jerusalem which are contrary to international law and which increasingly threaten the viability of a two-State solution. The Israeli and the Palestinian people have an absolute right to live in peace and security. Terrorist attacks can never provide this. Nor can security responses which in the longer term serve only to generate bitterness and hopelessness in another generation of young Palestinians.
The vital challenge today is to summon the political will, which is so far lacking, to end the pernicious deadlock in the peace process. The European Union and its Member States, including Ireland, increased our assistance to the Palestinian people last year – in our case by some 40%. And yet the humanitarian situation in Gaza in particular is today unsustainable. Only a credible political framework for negotiations between the parties, supported and facilitated internationally, can provide hope that the Palestinian people can overcome the immediate crisis. Only with such an approach can the Israeli and the Palestinian people provide a proper future for their children.
How can this be achieved in the current dangerous stalemate? Over the past year, there has been a focus on the implications of the Hamas victory in the democratic Palestinian legislative elections. Nobody has argued that Hamas won the elections because the Palestinian people opposed a two-State solution. The victory was the product of domestic politics and of frustration at the failure of the peace process to deliver. It has been argued that the Oslo Process would have succeeded if it had been implemented by the parties exactly as envisaged thirteen years ago, and in keeping with the agreed timelines. But missed opportunities are never the end of the story. Hamas opposed the Oslo Process but demonstrated sufficient political pragmatism to engineer an effective ceasefire and to use its institutions to enter Government by democratic means.
Our consistent message to Hamas over the past year has been that there can be no twin-track approach. Hamas must complete the transition from violence to politics; accept the logic of the process it has entered; commit to the negotiation of a two-State solution.
The Palestinian people know well from the history of the past sixty years that there are those who are ready to exploit their suffering for their own political purposes, domestically, regionally and internationally. The Palestinian people did not seek this central political role, but they have an opportunity now to engage the region and the world in guaranteeing a settlement which meets their interests as a people.
In recent months, we have strongly supported the courageous efforts of President Mahmoud Abbas to negotiate a Palestinian Government of national unity with the aim of moving to early and meaningful negotiations with Israel. Despite the difficulties and the obstacles, we continue to support all efforts to recreate a Palestinian political consensus around the concept of a two-State solution. Above all, the Palestinian people must at this uncertain time avoid further violence and a slide into a catastrophic civil war.
Armed confrontation between Palestinians will serve the interests of no-one other than those intent on spreading chaos, distrust and hate across the region. It will drive Israelis and Palestinians further apart. It will render a viable political settlement more difficult to attain, and impossible to sustain. Just as it is a fantasy for Hamas to pretend that there is any alternative to a negotiated two-State solution, it would surely be equally a fantasy to believe that the views and interests of Hamas and their supporters can be set aside or bypassed. At the same time it must be clear that no party, on any side, can have a veto on progress, or dictate unilaterally the terms of a settlement.
President Abbas has made clear his determination to work for the urgent regeneration of the political process. His recent meeting with Prime Minister Olmert was an important first step. But tangible results are needed urgently, and the Israeli Government has a particular responsibility at this point, including in relation to its promises on greater freedom of movement and access and the unfreezing of tax revenues.
Negotiations can only take place between the parties themselves. But it now seems certain that unless the international community acts, the process will not begin of its own accord. The role of the international Quartet will be vital in the period ahead. The EU is determined to take a lead, based on the clearly defined positions worked out in consultation with the countries of the region, and our international partners, over the past twenty years. It is no secret that the Quartet needs to be reinvigorated. It needs to work more closely with the countries of the region, including Saudi Arabia.
I believe there is great merit in the suggestion that the Quartet now move to set out with absolute clarity the elements which any permanent settlement must include. They will come as no surprise to the parties. But it is important that we demonstrate that the international community is now ready to act decisively to promote a settlement which ends the occupation of 1967 and provides for the establishment of two sovereign, viable and independent States, Israel and Palestine, based on the 1967 borders. It must include a just solution to the Palestinian refugee issue. It must also involve agreement – no matter how complex – on the final status of Jerusalem, a city holy to Jews, Muslims and Christians, and of supreme political importance to all Israelis and Palestinians.
A comprehensive settlement by definition requires the involvement of all the interested parties. If the parameters are clear and accepted by all, the possibilities for real dialogue open up dramatically. We need urgently to focus on ways to promote structures for dialogue which will lay the groundwork for real progress.
At every meeting of the European Council which I attend, and in all of my discussions with Prime Ministers across Europe, there is a deep yearning to play a constructive role in the Middle East, clearly based on the need to accelerate progress towards a comprehensive settlement.
The European Union is ready to underpin such a settlement, in whatever way is necessary. In Lebanon last summer, we demonstrated clearly the will to act on our stated positions. The EU is providing the backbone of the new UNIFIL force, and Ireland is playing its part in keeping with our longstanding commitment to Lebanon and to UN peacekeeping. I have no doubt that a Middle East settlement would involve demands on Europe to demonstrate the reality of its ambitions to forge an effective and dynamic common foreign, security and defence policy. We will be ready to meet the challenge, and Ireland will play its part.
Any comprehensive settlement will guarantee the independence, security and sovereignty of Lebanon. The terrible events of last summer, and the continuing political turbulence there, underline the fragility of the situation. The EU is actively and firmly committed to Lebanon’s independence, to the full implementation of Security Council Resolution 1701 and to the resolution of the country’s internal problems exclusively through the democratic process.
Lebanon’s neighbours have a vital role to play. Syria in particular must now demonstrate convincingly its commitment to Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence and desist from cynical interference. Syria is indispensable to any comprehensive settlement, and has its own vital interest in the return of occupied territory.
The historic land of Syria has been a centre of political thought and action, of philosophy, of religion and of artistic achievement for century upon century. It is time for Syria to reclaim its place in the region and in the world through the adoption of a constructive and imaginative approach to the problems of the Middle East. Europe would be more than ready to return to dialogue and full cooperation with Damascus on this basis.
The EU also wants a genuine and wide-ranging political dialogue with Iran. The European Union and Iran should be close partners. However, we are very seriously concerned about the negative impact of Iranian policies on the stability of the region. We know that this is also a matter of deep concern to its neighbours.
Iran’s relations with the international community have been dominated in recent years by the nuclear issue. The European Union is united in its strong support for a diplomatic, negotiated solution. We do not seek to deprive Iran of its rights, but to ensure and verify that its exercise of those rights is consistent with international peace and security.
We regret that Iran did not engage seriously with the wide-ranging proposals presented by the EU last summer, but we reaffirm that the diplomatic path remains open. It remains, without qualification, our preferred approach. But we are also firmly united in demanding that Iran take the steps set out so clearly by the IAEA and the UN Security Council in relation to its nuclear programme. We know that this is also the approach of its responsible regional neighbours.
Ireland is firmly committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as the basis for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. Ireland took the initiative in the UN in the late 1950s which resulted in the creation of the NPT in 1968, and our commitment to the Treaty has not wavered. We will continue to work to ensure that this region is freed of all weapons of mass destruction, as part of a wider effort to end the international nuclear threat. And we remain convinced that in this area, as in others, a strong rules-based multilateral system is the best way to seek to preserve and promote international peace and security.
Iran also has an extremely important role to play, along with its other neighbours, in addressing the unfolding tragedy in Iraq. The people of Iraq are rightly proud to claim their inheritance as the inhabitants of the cradle of civilisation. Iraq’s reserves of natural resources are the envy of the world. Yet its people have endured decades of the most brutal dictatorship, war and civil strife. They are today suffering most grievously. For many, their daily life now is intolerable. Iraq’s communities are divided as never before. Many of the people who should be rebuilding their country have been forced to flee it, and those who have stayed in their homes live under constant threat of violence, kidnapping and death.
A stable and secure Iraq is essential to a stable and secure Middle East. As we survey the extremely dangerous situation in Iraq, our priority must be the welfare of the Iraqi people, of all communities. It is clear that there have been catastrophic failures in policy towards Iraq. But while there are extremely important lessons to be learned from these past failures, the focus has to be above all on the present and future.
International and regional efforts to tackle the current crisis must be based on an agreed commitment that the future of the country depends on the maintenance of its territorial integrity, the development of shared political institutions, the promotion of inter-communal reconciliation and the cooperation of all regional neighbours – in all spheres, political, economic and security. None of us can afford the further brutalisation, division and isolation of the historic nation of Iraq.
We in Ireland are no strangers to the darkness of sectarianism. Sectarianism feeds on uncertainty, political instability and inter-communal tensions. It is a feature unique to no specific society or religious faith. In the case of Northern Ireland, a conflict often described simplistically as sectarian in nature has in fact had its roots in the inability of two communities with different allegiances and political aspirations to share the same confined geographical space.
All conflicts are particular in time and space, with no necessary read across from one to another. Ireland certainly has no model to prescribe to others based on our mistakes and achievements in addressing the historic conflict on the island of Ireland and between Ireland and our nearest neighbour, Great Britain.
I am proud, however, that following decades – in fact centuries – of violence and distrust, our peace process has in recent years delivered an end to political violence in Northern Ireland and a new close and friendly relationship between Dublin and London. A long history of conflict and strife has yielded to the accommodation of diverse allegiances and aspirations. We are determined that in the coming months political institutions will finally be securely established in Northern Ireland which reflect the wish of our people to resolve their differences exclusively through the democratic political process. The process has not yet quite concluded, but we have come an immense distance along the way. The energies of our people have been released and our horizons broadened beyond anything predicted even ten years ago.
One of the few lessons I am prepared to draw is that the effort to provide a political path forward, where once violence might have been seen by some as their only option, can succeed – precisely because it offers a new life path to young people. And it is remarkable how, across Europe, a continent almost terminally marked by violence and division in its recent history, it has taken only one or two generations for attitudes to change. Our young people today know only from their history books of the divisions which threatened to destroy the lives of their parents and grandparents. From being an insular society marked by emigration and inter-communal conflict, Ireland has become a dynamic and open European society, welcoming large numbers of people from abroad who wish to live and work in our country.
We are adapting to the challenges and opportunities of multiculturalism. We are particularly proud of the magnificent role being played in our society and in our economy by members of the growing Islamic community, which now amounts to some 40,000 people, some from the Middle East but with many others from North Africa and the Indian subcontinent. There are now more Muslims in Ireland than there are members of many longer-established faiths and denominations. And many of them are planting deep and lasting roots in our country.
The rest of us have much to learn from our developing relationship with Islam. I know, not least from my own contacts with religious and community leaders, that it is truly a religion of tolerance and acceptance. I welcome the fact that the Islamic community in Ireland have consistently made it clear to all their neighbours and fellow-citizens that this is indeed the nature of their faith.
For our part, the Irish Government will protect and vindicate the rights of members of all religious faiths and of none. We look forward to the full involvement of the representatives of the Islamic community in the structured dialogue between the Irish Government and the churches and faith communities which I will inaugurate formally in the coming weeks.
In working to transform our economy, our politics and our society in Ireland, we have realised the crucial importance of partnerships, social and political. The partnership approach is also the basis on which the European Union rests.
During Ireland’s most recent Presidency of the European Union, in 2004, we promoted the concept of a Strategic Partnership between the European Union and the countries of the Mediterranean and the Middle East. We did not propose new mechanisms or structures. But we were and remain firmly convinced that it is only through the exploration together of the concept of partnership that Europe and the Middle East can surmount the problems we confront and meet the ambitions of our peoples for a better life. Above all, I believe that, in partnership, we can together seize the elusive prize of a regional peace among the nations of the Middle East and a new relationship between our two regions.
Thank you.
ENDS