2026-07-16

123. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Defence to list the current UN peacekeeping missions around the world for which a request for Irish participation was made by the UN authorities and the reason Ireland is not participating in them, given that the ending of Ireland's role in the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, UNDOF, and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, means that the Defence Forces have once again capacity to consider other UN missions that are in line with our neutrality. [53650/26]

Question No. 123 is in the name of Deputy Ó Snodaigh. I understand Deputy Ó Laoghaire is taking it.

We have all probably been guilty of the offence of going over time at different stages, I am sure. Despite our disagreements in relation to the triple lock, I think the Minister and I agree that peacekeeping missions are important. They matter to the world, the communities in which they are located and the regions but they also matter to the development and progression of Defence Forces personnel. It is part of what people sign up for. There are currently 11 direct UN peacekeeping missions, with more under Chapter VIII, but this question primarily relates to the direct missions. There is now, with the ending of UNIFIL, greater capacity to consider additional UN missions in different locations across Europe, western Asia and southern Asia. Have we responded to requests from the UN?

I thank the Deputy. At the outset, I thank the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann for the outstanding professionalism and commitment with which they deploy, and have deployed, on UN peacekeeping missions. It is important to stress that there have been no new peacekeeping missions through the UN Security Council since 2014. That is a source of great regret for all of us. It is not operating as it should and I think we would all like to see the issues there being addressed. At the same time, though, we know exactly why there are issues and why the five permanent members, in the role they have, are contributing to this. This is the context in which any request for additional or enhanced participation by Ireland from the UN has to be understood. There is a limited number of missions. There are no new missions, so there is only so much we can partake in. In regard to UN requests over the past ten years, in September 2019, we had 14 Defence Forces personnel deployed to a UN mission in Mali as part of a joint operation with the German armed forces. This arose from a proposal made by Ireland rather than a request from the UN. Our participation in that concluded in 2022. In December 2021, we received a request from the UN to provide members of the Defence Forces to support the United Nations Mine Action Service in Entebbe, Uganda. One Defence Forces expert is currently serving with this training initiative under this arrangement. As of 30 June 2026, Ireland is contributing 394 Defence Forces personnel to overseas peacekeeping missions and commitments. As I mentioned earlier, 320 of those personnel are currently in UNIFIL. This will conclude in December 2026, which leaves just 74 of our personnel on other missions. We have 12 personnel deployed in an observer force in Golan in Syria. We have a number of missions in the Middle East, where we have personnel deployed. We have three personnel in the Syrian mission and 12 in the Middle East. We also have observers and staff deployed to various United Nations and Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, missions. I can touch on what the opportunities may or may not be in my next answer.

That is important and the Minister and I share that view, much as we disagree on how it is not right to get rid of the triple lock. We have made that very clear and we think there is scope to deploy on peacekeeping missions elsewhere. We would like to see the UN and the manner in which it works reformed significantly, not just in relation to peacekeeping. There is significant scope for reform there. I hope that there is going to be a list in the written response I receive to this question. The Minister gave a few examples. It is important that we understand the picture that is out there right across the world. There are five or six missions in Africa. Have we explored deploying to those? A lot of them are very long-standing missions, with some going back several decades and most looking as if they are there for the long term. Unfortunately, the conflict situations around those remain tense and require a peacekeeping presence. There is potential scope in those missions as well as in some of the other western and southern Asian locations.

Unfortunately, at this present time, there are no requests for us to participate in any other UN peacekeeping missions. I know that if you are not part of a mission at the outset, the scope for you to join afterwards is significantly impacted in terms of the number of personnel and the types of role you can take on. In regard to the mission in the Middle East that I mentioned, I would be concerned about the possibility of what happened with Operation Irini and UNIFIL, where the UN mandates were not renewed, happening there. We would suddenly have 12 personnel - it is quite a small number, but still 12 personnel - who were not able to partake in the mission. There is a smaller number in Syria. What we have at the moment are a number of posts that are filled in the UN, the EU and NATO as part of Partnership for Peace, and in the OSCE headquarters as well. There are also various training missions that we are part of, many of which are through the Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP, so they are not UN-mandated through Security Council meetings. At the moment, there are no requests or plans to participate in missions. The most significant mission we have is UNIFIL. That work is under way and those conversations are happening at the moment.

As I probably will not get more questions and it is my last contribution before the recess, I wish to take the opportunity to thank the staff of this institution and the Ceann Comhairle's office, who serve us so well. To be fair, I will also thank the officials of the Department of Defence for their co-operation over the course of the past year. They are not necessarily listening but I thank the officials of the Department of foreign affairs and the Minister's team on that side as well. I thank the Minister, who should be acknowledged for her co-operation at various stages. Returning to the question, we raised this in committee with the Minister a number of weeks ago. I am concerned that all of our eggs are in the one basket but if we remove the triple lock, then we will have more options. It seems to me as if there does not seem to be a desire on the part of the Minister or her Department to explore the existing peacekeeping missions, even though there are multiples of them. I know we have small representations on some of them but there are several that we have no relationship with at this moment in time. I think there is capacity and it would be to the benefit of those locations to have experienced peacekeeping personnel, given our track record and the esteem in which we are held, and also to the benefit of our Defence Forces.

It is the case that no mission is the same, so it is also a matter for the Defence Forces to assess and scope out the mission and then to decide whether it is a mission we can partake in. A question keeps being asked about what it is we would not be able to be a part of if we were to keep the triple lock. I am concerned that the troops we have on the ground currently are going to be removed from the missions they are on, and that is what is happening. UNIFIL is now closing. It is finishing up and we have 320 troops who will have to come home. Operation Irini is still operating but because the mandated mission fell, our troops have to come home. We have 12 who are in the Middle East but that mission could very well end because it is not renewed. Those troops would have to come home, as would the three who are in Syria. For every future mission, it will depend on the type of mission, so I cannot say exactly what missions we might be able to join if we remove the triple lock. I know that our hands are tied completely at the moment by the fact that others can decide whether we stay in missions, never mind whether we go to others. Finally, I have no doubt that my officials are listening but if they are not, I will pass on the Deputy's thanks to them as well.

The foreign affairs side as well. I am sure the Department of Defence officials are there.