UN response to the Namibia crisis
Flaherty questioned the UN’s handling of the crisis and its limited presence; the Taoiseach defended its estimates and said he would provide further information. The Chair invited brief supplementary questions.
I should like to thank the Taoiseach for his comprehensive reply. Did I gather from it that he is by and large satisfied with the way the UN handled this matter and that he does not anticipate taking initiative to express the range of concerns included in the questions tabled by Members? I respectfully suggest that rather than clapping the UN on the back we should be asking them very specific questions as to why on 1 April the UN were there in such tiny numbers and allowed the situation get out of control. What do they propose to do to retrieve that situation? Will the Taoiseach consider taking on board the view of many Members of the House, including those who were in the general area and were considerably critical of the UN at the time, that if the UN are to establish control there they should increase resources and the full strength of the reserve force should be drawn up? Will the Taoiseach undertake to discuss with us our concern about this matter with a view to the Government taking a more aggressive stand with the UN rather than accepting the lines handed down from them?
Comment on this
I do not think the Deputy is being quite fair. The UN have assumed an enormous responsibility there. They made their best estimate of the strength of the observer force required, put the figure at 4,650 and retained 2,000-odd in reserve. This is a totally unpredictable situation and all they could do was make the best estimate of what would be required. I suggest that had it not been for the SWAPO intrusion there might not have been any problems and the numbers might have been quite adequate. I am certainly prepared to arrange for the Deputies who are interested to get as much information as possible about the situation. We can arrange briefings, perhaps, through the Department of Foreign Affairs.
We are a contributor and the role of a contributor is a tenuous one. Our sole duty is to supply the personnel when requested. We do not have any official control over the operation as a whole; that must be left to the UN and the Secretary-General. If all the contributor countries tried to control the operation there would be chaos.
Over the years we have worked out a fairly satisfactory way of handling these situations by being good and responsible contributors. At the same time, if the need arises we make our concerns known to the UN but, apart from that, we must leave it to the good judgment of the UN authorities to handle this very tricky and sensitive operation which has to be centrally directed by the UN. In the course of my reply I said that we would monitor the developments in the implementation of the UN plan. We will do that continously and if any other action appears desirable we will certainly undertake such action.
By and large, this is a UN operation and it must be conducted by the UN who have the responsibility. The important thing from everybody's point of view would be for all parties, South Africa, Angola, Cuba and SWAPO, to adhere to the settlement. If that occurred we would not have the sort of problems that are concerning the Deputy.
