Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Foreign Conflicts - 24th October 2006

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Foreign Conflicts - 24th October 2006
Senator Norris: I apologise as I will have to leave the committee briefly in a few minutes to deal with another matter. I welcome the clear and cogent presentation, which is what we would expect from Mr. Montgomery and his team.
Mr. Jan Pronk is a very distinguished and humane man and I would regret if, despite what may have been an indiscretion, we did or said anything that would further undermine his position. He responded in a very human way to what is a calculated horror perpetrated by a Government on its own people. There should be room for this kind of undiplomatic indignation in the face of such a catastrophe. I would tend to support him.
With regard to support for the African Union forces, is it not the case that many countries, as is typical in these situations, stepped up to the television cameras and claimed they would give all kinds of money but then failed to cough up? We are talking about 17,300 UN troops and 5,300 civilian police. Is there any prospect of the UN being able to raise such an army given that it is having difficulty scraping up troops as it is? I note the reference to 180 military police and technical staff. Are any of these personnel Irish, as I had heard?
I refer to Mr. Montgomery’s comments that although the Darfur peace agreement was wonderful it its way, little had been achieved in terms of implementation. That is true but there is another way of looking at the situation. Much has been achieved in the way of fragmentation, which is disastrous, so that the non-signatories are now fighting among themselves and against their former partners.
I see this as a very human situation because, like my colleagues, I have been briefed on it by constituents who are ordinary Irish people disgusted by what is happening. They have written to inform me of what they know, either at first hand or through reports, of the situation in the camps where the conditions are desperate. As the men are afraid to leave the camps, the women are sent out to gather firewood and other basic essentials. When they go out, they are routinely raped. It should be put on the record that rape is a weapon of war consistently used by and with the approval of the Sudanese Government against its own population. That should be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
There is a further aspect the committee might consider at some stage. I have been approached by a group concerned about investments. China could certainly help to resolve this problem, if it so chose. The reason it does not do so is because it is pursuing its own interests in the area of mineral resources such as oil, gas and so on. A series of shadow companies with names such as China Gas, PetroChina and I do not know what else - I forget their names but Mr. Montgomery and his colleagues will know them - and including companies from the United States and Canada, have a strong interest in what they can get out of this situation.
I have been told it is quite likely the National Treasury Management Agency, which is investing for our pensions, has wittingly or unwittingly invested in these companies. The group that has been lobbying me and others suggested it would be useful to disinvest as this would send a practical signal of disapproval. The group also suggested it is perhaps time - I feel it is time - that we insert into the terms establishing the National Pensions Reserve Fund an ethical framework with regard to funds invested on behalf of the people to provide for our pensions. We all look forward with relish to getting our pensions but at the same there is an argument that we do not want our pensions paid for with dirty money.
I apologise for having to leave briefly. I should be back in five minutes. I do not intend any discourtesy.