Shannon Election Pledge Published

national | anti-war / imperialism | news report Tuesday May 22, 2007 16:14 by Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM

The pledge was drawn up in the context of the recognition that there was huge opposition to Ireland’s involvement in the occupation of Iraq. Over 100,000 marched against the war and over half the population feel that the use of Shannon by US troops is wrong.

The pledge was drawn up in the context of the recognition that there was huge opposition to Ireland’s involvement in the occupation of Iraq. Over 100,000 marched against the war and over half the population feel that the use of Shannon by US troops is wrong. Yet the election is giving no coverage to this and political leaders are increasingly distancing themselves from taking any position that would be different to that of the present government. The Irish Anti-War Movement and PANA wanted to reveal exactly where candidates stood on Shannon so that people could vote accordingly in the general election.

1. 72 candidates for this election have signed the pledge.
We have focussed on the Dublin constituencies but also some others – Galway, Cork and Kerry - where local anti-war groups strong. The IAWM would like to thank all those that have signed and congratulate them on their unequivocal stand on this core issue (see full list on IAWM website)

2. Fianna Fail
Dermot Ahern responded for the Taoiseach (Dublin Central) putting forward two main arguments in his letter to us in April 2007.

The first was that the international community was “attempting to improve the situation in Iraq” and he laid emphasis on “ Multinational Force in Iraq authorised by UN security council resolution 1511 of 16 Oct 2003” (and others more recently by resolution 1723 adopted by Security Council on 28 Nov 2006). In relation to this we would like to make a number of points:
* Resolution 1511 was passed seven months after the invasion of Iraq–
* the Multinational Force reference seems a strange emphasis given the reality of the occupation of Iraq . It is a “U.S.-led coalition” not multinational force”and the term is more accurate since nearly 92% of the troops are from the US
* Apart from UK , the EU dimension almost non existent – especially now as those EU countries that were there have withdrawn – Italy, Spain - Norway, Hungary, Portugal,
* this is a war involving private armies and mercenaries who operate outside international law ( there are 20,000 private military contractors and 158,902 regular troops)

His second justification was that Ireland has been making overflight and landing facilites available to the US over a period of 50 years. The fact that there is a war on does not seem to impinge on our Minster for Foreign Affairs’ consciousness.
Other FF candidates seem to want to both assert their anti-war credentials and allow Shannon to be used by US troops on their way to the occupation of Iraq. Jim OCallaghan, for example, Dub South East has said that they would not be signing but assured us that their party is anti-war “ a stance which has informed Irish neutrality since the foundation of the state”.

3. Fine Gael
Fine Gael feels little need to even justify its support for US troops through Shannon. Sean Barratt (Dun Laoghaire) sees no difficulty in extending facilities to “friendly powers”. Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central) is against the war but reserves the right to assess whether Shannon being used “for relief of human suffering or the protection of human rights”. Only the Progressive Democrats are as unperturbed as Fine Gael by the use of Shannon as a military stopover: Keith Redmond(Dublin North East) and Ben Doyle (Dublin South Central) responded that they see no problem with Shannon being used.

5.. Labour Party
Three of Labour’s outgoing TD’s - Joe Costello, Tommy Broughan, Michael DHiggins have all signed the pledge. Yet this is not their Leaders position. Pat Rabitte on Thursday 17th May on Today on Pat Kenny “Would not stop military stop-overs at Shannon because they were happening on the basis of UN mandate”. When questioned why Labour Youth seemed to have a different position Pat Rabitte invoked his authority as the party leader and that that this was the party position.

But on 20th March 2003 in the debate in Dail, the same Pat Rabitte accused the Taoiseach of “creative interpretation of UN resolutions” to justify US facilites at Shannon. Now he is adopting the same stance that he was so critical of then.

It has to be said that the Labour Manifesto is somewhat more robust in its opposition to the use of Shannon as a military stop-over and Brendan Ryan (Dublin North) referred us to this when we asked him to sign. Indeed the Labour Manifesto as it appears on the party website states:
Labour believes that the international community should learn from the recent illegally declared war in Iraq. We believe that positive compliance with international law and the policy principles of positive neutrality require us to not allow our airspace or facilities to be used for such purposes as facilitating such a war, or preparing for such a conflict……… Furthermore, in government we will not allow Shannon Airport or other Irish facilities to be used for the prosecution of any war, or military preparation for such, outside of international law, international humanitarian law, or in breach of the Charter of the United Nations.

7. Green Party
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North) has not signed claiming that the GP had “no pre- conditions” in negotiations for government, including the use of Shannon. Ciaran Cuffe (Dun Laoghaire) referred us to Section 13 of the Green Party 2007 manifesto which commits the party to ending the use of of Shannon Airport by US forces, but did not sign the pledge. However six Green Party candidates did sign: Patricia McKenna (DC), David Healy(DNE), Bronwen Maher (DNC) Niall O Brolchain (Gal West) David Grey (Kerry N) and John Hickey (Kerry S)

8. Sinn Fein, Socialist Party and Independents..
All Sinn Fein candidates have signed. All Socialist Party and People before Profit candidates have signed. Tony Gregory and Finian McGrath independent outgoing TDs have signed.

Our seeking pledges on Shannon has showed that political accountability is difficult to pin down amongst the parties in this election. The electorate is being given very mixed messages from the candidates. Some candidates feel strongly against the use of Shannon in this illegal war and have come forward to commit themselves to stopping Shannon being used in this war. Party leaders and candidates - from those same parties of those that have signed - have either shifted their positions or refused to be held to any commitments.