Dail
Eireann re-elected Bertie Ahern as Taoiseach on 14 June 2007 on the basis of a
programme agreed with the Greens and the PDs.
It contains a section on foreign policy entitled Ireland in the World, which begins:
“We want to ensure that
“Making
Neutrality Count” is to be
“Neutrality is central to our vision of
“We believe neutrality enhances our standing internationally. Our goal is
to use that standing to build peace and deliver development.”
From
this, you could be forgiven for thinking that
The
reality is that
(a) the US/UK wars in
(b) the US/UK punishment of Iran for enriching uranium, which is Iran’s right
as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); and
(c) the US/UK backing for the Israeli occupation and colonisation of Arab
lands.
From
the outset,
“Up to the end of September this year, 1,059,382
“Figures released by the Shannon Airport Authority have
confirmed that since March 20th 2003 an average of 640 troops on five flights
every day have stopped off at Shannon on their way to
ISAF
was established, initially for 6 months, by Security Council resolution 1386,
passed on 20 December 2001, shortly after the US/UK military intervention in
“to assist the Afghan Interim Authority in the maintenance of security in
Kabul and its surrounding areas, so that the Afghan Interim Authority as well
as the personnel of the United Nations can operate in a secure environment” [5]
The
Afghan Interim Authority, headed by Hamid Karzai, had just been put together by
the
When
ISAF was established, it could be said to have had a peacekeeping role. At the same time, much larger forces under
separate
The
Irish Government justifies its participation in ISAF on the grounds that it was
established by and continues to operate under UN Security Council
resolutions. This is true: all military
action taken by ISAF in
However,
The
Irish Government justifies allowing the US the use of Shannon by saying that
military action by the US-led occupation forces in Iraq is authorised by the UN
Security Council. Again that is true today,
but it wasn’t true at the time of the invasion in March 2003, when
What
is more, paragraph 14 of resolution 1511 “urges
Member States to contribute assistance under this United Nations
mandate, including military forces, to the [US-led] multinational force” in
Iraq. The Irish Government can say that
it is responding to the UN request in resolution 1511 in allowing the
Of course,
Green Party breaks
commitment
Prior
to the elections in May 2007, the Irish Anti-War Movement (IAWM) attempted to
get candidates to pledge that, if elected, they wouldn’t enter a government
that continued to allow the
6
Green Party candidates signed the pledge.
More fundamentally, Section 13 of the Green Party manifesto committed
all its candidates unequivocally to
“end the use of
The
programme for government that the Green Party agreed with Fianna Fail [1]
doesn’t mention the use of
EU Common Foreign and
Security Policy
In
each of two other areas –
The
CFSP mechanism was initially established by the Maastricht Treaty, which came
into force on 1 November 1993. Under
this mechanism, member states seek to arrive at common foreign policy
positions. In theory, each state has a
veto, but in practice the large states, and especially the
Where
there is a common policy, the EU speaks and votes as a bloc in international
organisations, for example, in the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly
and the Board of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA).
In
the Amsterdam Treaty, which came into force on 1 May 1999, provision was made
for the appointment of an EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security
Policy, with the task of representing the EU abroad where there is a common
policy. The former Secretary-General of
NATO, Javier Solana, has been the sole holder of this post.
A
Secure
In
December 2003, the EU adopted a “security strategy” drawn up by Solana,
entitled A Secure Europe in a Better
World [8]. It is an imperialist document, dedicated to
remoulding the world beyond the boundaries of the EU. It could have been written in
“Spreading
good governance, supporting social and political reform, dealing with
corruption and abuse of power, establishing the rule of law and protecting
human rights” are declared to be key objectives of EU foreign policy (page 16).
These
objectives are to be achieved primarily by the exercise of the EU’s economic
muscle but the document looks forward to the strengthening of its military
muscle as well. The document says:
“Trade and development policies can be powerful tools for promoting
reform. As the world’s largest provider of official assistance and its largest
trading entity, the European Union and its
“Contributing to better governance through assistance programmes,
conditionality and targeted trade measures remains an important feature in our
policy that we should further reinforce.”
It
continues:
“A number of countries have placed themselves outside the bounds of
international society. Some have sought isolation; others persistently violate
international norms. It is desirable that such countries should rejoin the
international community, and the EU should be ready to provide assistance.
Those who are unwilling to do so should understand that there is a price to be
paid, including in their relationship with the European Union.”
On
developing the EU’s military muscle, the document says:
“We need to develop a strategic culture that fosters early, rapid, and
when necessary, robust intervention.
“As a
This
EU “security strategy”, to which
On
Access
to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is central to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). By signing
up to the NPT, as
“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable
right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use
of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in
conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.” [9]
The
International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) hasn’t found any evidence that
So,
You
can see what the EU means when it states in A
Secure Europe in a Better World (page 14) that “a rule-based international
order is our objective”.
On
“Whatever the Quartet was at the inception, let us be frank with
ourselves: today, as a practical matter, the Quartet is pretty much a group of
friends of the
As
a member of the Quartet, the EU with
In
June 2007, the EU went further and supported the overthrow of the
democratically endorsed National Unity Government in
Annex A Security Council Resolution 1511
The
Security Council passed resolution 1511 on 16 October 2003. Since that date, all military action by the
US-led occupation forces in
On 16 October
2003, the Security Council passed resolution 1511 authorising the US-led
occupying forces in
The
authorisation is given in paragraph 13 of the resolution, which states:
“[The Security Council] Determines that the
provision of security and stability is essential to the successful completion
of the political process as outlined in paragraph 7 above and to the ability of
the United Nations to contribute effectively to that process and the
implementation of resolution 1483 (2003), and authorizes a
multinational force under unified command to take all necessary measures to
contribute to the maintenance of security and stability in Iraq” [11]
“All necessary measures” is the phrase customarily
used in Security Council resolutions to mean military action. It is derived from Article 42 of Chapter VII
of the UN Charter, which states that the Security Council “may take such action
by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international
peace and security”.
Paragraph 14 of resolution 1511 urges states to
“contribute assistance” to the “multinational force”:
“[The Security Council] Urges Member States to
contribute assistance under this United Nations mandate, including military
forces, to the multinational force referred to in paragraph 13 above;”
Lest
there be any doubt that the entity referred to as “a multinational force under
unified command” is the occupying force commanded by the
“[The Security Council] Requests that the
United States, on behalf of the multinational force as outlined in paragraph 13
above, report to the Security Council on the efforts and progress of this force
as appropriate and not less than every six months;”
And here is what
“ … the resolution
establishes a United Nations authorized multinational force under unified
Resolution
1511 was passed unanimously. In March
2003,
Annex B The present Palestinian “government” is not
legitimate
The present
Fayyad-led Palestinian “government” is not a legitimate government formed
according to the requirements of the Palestinian constitution (the Basic
Law). It is not legitimate because it
has not been endorsed by the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC).
Article 79(4) of the Basic Law [13] states:
“The Prime Minister and
any of the Ministers shall not assume the duties of their positions until they
obtain the confidence of the PLC.”
Article 67(3) of the Basic Law
states that
“Confidence shall be
granted to the government, if it obtains the absolute majority of the PLC
Members.”
In other words, the Palestinian
constitution forbids a new set of Palestinian ministers from assuming “the
duties of their positions until they obtain” the endorsement of “the absolute
majority of the PLC Members”, that is, 67 members since the PLC has 132 members
in all.
Hamas won 74 seats and Fatah 45 in
the January 2006 PLC elections. Both of
the Hamas-led governments formed since these elections did receive proper PLC
endorsement and were therefore legitimate governments under the Basic Law. The present Fayyad-led entity has not
received proper PLC endorsement and is therefore not a legitimate government
under the Basic Law.
On 14 June 2007, President Abbas
declared a state of emergency and dismissed the second Hamas-led government
(the National Unity Government). He is
entitled to do this under Article 45 of the Basic Law. He then appointed Salam Fayyad, the Finance
Minister in the previous government, as Prime Minister and invited him to form
a government.
Salam Fayyad is an elected member of
the PLC and the leader of the 2-member
Salam Fayyad nominated a set of
ministers as requested by the President, with himself as Foreign Minister and
Finance Minister as well as Prime Minister.
However, he has not made any attempt to obtain the confidence of the PLC
for himself and his ministers, so the Basic Law bars them from assuming “the
duties of their positions”. In fact, the
PLC has never met. So, the Fayyad-led
entity is not a legitimate government under the Basic Law.
State of
emergency
President Abbas has attempted to
give the Fayyed-led entity legitimacy by describing it as an emergency
government, which, it is implied, does not require the normal constitutional
procedure to be followed, in particular, endorsement by the PLC. It is true that Abbas was entitled to declare
a state of emergency under Article 110(1) of the Basic Law, which states:
“The President of the
National Authority may declare a state of emergency by a decree when there is a
threat to national security caused by war, invasion, armed insurrection, or at
a time of natural disaster for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days.”
Since the Palestinian territories
are under Israeli occupation (and have been for 40 years) it would seem that a
state of emergency could lawfully be declared at any time. But, the President cannot maintain it for
more than 30 days without the support of two thirds of the members of the PLC,
since Article 110(2) says:
“The emergency state may
be extended for another period of thirty (30) days after the approval of two
thirds of the Legislative Council Members.”
That would appear to mean two thirds
of the 132 PLC members, that is, 88.
President Abbas declared a state of
emergency on 14 June 2007. It hasn’t
been renewed by the PLC under Article 110(2), so it came to an end on or about
14 July 2007.
More fundamentally, the Basic Law
provisions with regard to a state of emergency (Articles 110 to 115) don’t
allow the President to amend the Basic Law itself to do away with the Article
79(4) requirement that
“The Prime Minister and
any of the Ministers shall not assume the duties of their positions until they
obtain the confidence of the PLC.”
The Basic Law is unambiguous on the
question of its own amendment, Article 120 stating:
“The provisions of this
Basic Law shall not be amended except with two thirds majority of the Members
of the Legislative Council.”
So, with or without a state of
emergency, the Fayyad-led entity is not a legitimate government under the Basic
Law.
From the
horse’s mouth
This conclusion is confirmed by Anis
al-Qasem, who led the drafting of the Palestinian constitution. Questioned by Reuters on 8 July 2007 [14], he
said:
“It is clear from (Basic
Law) Article 45 that the president has the power to dismiss the prime minister.
However, under Article 78(3), the dismissed government continues to run the
affairs of government temporarily as a caretaker government until the formation
of the new government in the manner provided by the Basic Law.
“Under Article 79(4) of
Chapter 5 (on executive authority), neither the prime minister nor any minister
shall assume his office except after a vote of confidence from the Legislative
Council (parliament) ...
“Conclusion: The
president has the power to dismiss the prime minister and to start the process
of the formation of a new government. The basic ingredients of this process
that give legitimacy to the new government are a vote of confidence by the
Legislative Council and the oath of office.
“Until the formation of
the new government in accordance with the procedure laid down in Chapter 5 of
the Basic Law, the dismissed government continues to act as a caretaker
government. The Basic Law contains no special provisions for what is sometimes
called ‘emergency government’.
“As to the powers of the
president in a state of emergency, the only power specifically given to him is
to declare the state of emergency in the manner provided in Article 110. He
cannot issue decrees suspending any provisions of the Basic Law.
“The Legislative Council
continues to function (Article 113), and none of the other provisions of the
Basic Law may be touched except as provided in Article 111, which deals only
with restrictions that may be imposed on basic rights and freedoms, and even
these may only be affected to the extent necessary to fulfil the objective of
the emergency as stated in the emergency decree.
“It is worth remembering
that the whole Basic Law has been amended to reduce, rather than increase, the powers
of the president as a result of the power struggle between Mr Abbas when he was
Prime Minister and the late President Arafat.
“Of course we anticipated
that, in a system where both the president and the legislature come to power
through popular elections, there is the likelihood that the president may
belong to one political party while the majority in the legislature may belong
to another, with the possibility of divergence of policies, as it has happened
frequently in democracies like the United States and France.
“In a situation like
this, compromises through dialogue are struck and neither the president nor the
legislature would attempt to thwart the will of the people. If a deadlock is
reached, the president may exercise the power given to him by the Basic Law and
dismiss the government and appoint a new government that would, ultimately,
receive the approval of the Legislative Council. Through this requirement of
approval the elected representatives will determine the propriety or otherwise
of the action of the president and the will of the electorate will not be
thwarted. That was the expectation.”
David
Morrison
Irish
Political Review
November
2007
References:
[1] www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/
NewProgrammeForGovermentJune2007.pdf
[2] www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2007/1017/1192565608472.html
[3] www.state.gov/documents/organization/94601.pdf
[4] www.nato.int/ISAF/docu/epub/pdf/isaf_placemat.pdf
[5] www.david-morrison.org.uk/scrs/2001-1386.pdf
[6] www.david-morrison.org.uk/afghanistan/ireland-isaf.htm
[7] www.greenparty.ie/en/election_07/manifesto_2007/manifesto
[8] www.iss-eu.org/solana/solanae.pdf
[9] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf
[10] image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2007/06/12/DeSotoReport.pdf
[11] www.david-morrison.org.uk/scrs/2003-1511.pdf
[12] www.david-morrison.org.uk/scps/20031016.pdf
[13] www.usaid.gov/wbg/misc/Amended_Basic_Law.pdf
[14] www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L0880166.htm