Should we let US troops land at Shannon en route to Iraq?

Head2Head: NO argues Edward Horgan , who says the role of Ireland and Shannon airport in the Iraqi debacle has been shamefully…

Head2Head: NOargues Edward Horgan, who says the role of Ireland and Shannon airport in the Iraqi debacle has been shamefully selfish

Like many Irish people, I am part American. My mother was a US citizen and my nephew served with the US marines in Fallujah last year. But Irish/American friendship does not justify helping to attack our Iraqi neighbours. The US and UK launched an invasion of Iraq in contravention of the UN Charter. By allowing the passage of US troops on their way to this unlawful and unjustified war, Ireland was also in breach of international law, and complicit in unlawful killing.

In the meantime more that one million US troops have passed through Shannon airport. It is now widely accepted that this war, and the consequential civil war, has caused, according to the Lancet study, the deaths of over 655,000 people, including about 262,000 children.

The Irish Government has argued that UN Security Council Resolution 1546 (June 8th, 2004) approved the occupation of Iraq and that therefore the Irish Government is only complying with the UN in allowing US troops through Shannon. However, the UN General Assembly decreed in 1970 that it was as a principle of the UN that the occupation of territory by aggression cannot be legitimised post facto. Therefore the US is engaged in a continuing unlawful occupation of Iraq and UN approval of this occupation is in breach of its own charter.

READ MORE

However, such niceties of international law hold little sway on the bloody streets of Baghdad. If the US troops were in Iraq for humanitarian reasons, and if they were additionally succeeding in preventing crimes against humanity, pragmatists could argue that the occupation was justified, as was the case with the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia that overthrew the genocidal Pol Pot regime in 1978. US troops are not succeeding in Iraq, and their presence is literally inflaming the situation. The primary reasons for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq was to preserve US "national economic interests". It did not invade oil-starved Rwanda in 1994, or Zimbabwe to date.

Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has admitted (in the Dáil on March 20th, 2003) that Ireland is supporting the US war efforts for reasons of "our long-term national interests" and that to withdraw US military permission to refuel at Shannon "would be a hostile act". Was helping to kill 655,000 Iraqi people a friendly act?

Local politicians have supported US military and CIA torture rendition use of Shannon because of the questionable economic benefits to Ireland and the midwest. These actions make Ireland a "rogue neutral state", and the Iraq war makes the US and UK "rogue UN member states" .

Peace, freedom, democracy and the rule of law cannot be achieved by unlawful wars, internment and torture, imposing client governments, and gross breaches of international laws.

The argument that we are helping our American friends raises the question:

Who designated the people of Iraq as our enemies? The answer is that Dáil Éireann did, on March 20th, 2003, when all Fianna Fáil and PD deputies voted to support the US in its war against the Iraqi people. Remember this on election day.

Bush administration supporters argue that violence would be worse if the US withdrew from Iraq. The present token surge of US troops amounts to little more that a US presidential face-saving device, and is having the predictable effect of stirring a hornets' nest. Because the US has suffered its most embarrassing military defeat since Vietnam, it wishes to replace the type of panic-stricken withdrawal from Saigon by going out of Iraq with all guns blazing. Air attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities are also being planned (see Tom Clonan, The Irish Times, February 3rd), all regardless of the local and regional consequences.

The mayhem in Iraq was predictable, predicted, avoidable, and caused by the US invasion and occupation. The beginning of the end of this mayhem can only happen when US forces withdraw. The use of Shannon airport should be denied to US forces immediately because it is inherently wrong, and was never militarily necessary, as shown by the move of World Airways from Shannon to Leipzig.

The solution now is to restore the UN as the only lawful international peacekeeper, and interpose UN peacekeeping forces between the US and the various Iraqi factions, to facilitate a rapid US withdrawal, and help negotiate peaceful compromises between Shia, Sunni and Kurdish factions. The troops for such a UN force should come from relatively neutral Islamic states such as Indonesia, Yemen, and Bangladesh.

I am deeply saddened by the unnecessary deaths of over 3,000 US soldiers, many of whom were Irish American. Almost one third of the people of Iraq (over seven million) are now either refugees or displaced within Iraq.

However, it is the children who have suffered most. Some died when US bombs fell on their homes, but far more are dying of cancers caused by depleted uranium munitions, and from diseases because the water and sewerage plants were deliberately targeted by US warplanes.

The role of Ireland and Shannon airport in the Iraqi debacle has been shamefully selfish, and criminally irresponsible.

Retired commandant Edward Horgan is a former UN peacekeeper and took a constitutional case against the Irish Government over US military use of Shannon airport.

YESargues Frank Groome, who believes that the economic argument, although tired, remains vitally important

Nearly half a million US troops, politicians and diplomats have travelled through Shannon airport since 2003. Many of the soldiers go on to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan but some travel to US military installations around Europe. The debate surrounding Shannon airport can be broken into two separate but related questions, though for many in opposition these two questions form part of the same issue. The first relates to the passage of US military troops through the airport on the way to Iraq and Afghanistan, and the second concerns the use of Shannon airport for the covert transfer of prisoners. Those opposing the use of Shannon have argued a moral case that in the first instance the Irish Government is complicit in the killing of Iraqi and Afghan citizens and in the first and second instance the Government is in breach of international humanitarian and human rights standards.

Although the Irish Government has accepted US State Department assurances that no rendition flights have stopped at Irish airports, the Minister for Foreign Affairs still maintains that if evidence did emerge to support the allegations, then American aircraft would not be welcome in Ireland. According to a recent Amnesty International report, 76 per cent of the Irish public want "to play no role in the grotesque practice of renditions" and want the Government to investigate each apparent CIA flight through Shannon. On the issue of rendition, there is a strong moral argument in favour of adhering to the highest standards in international humanitarian and human rights law and I would not attempt to refute this position. However, when assessing the transit of US troops on the way from America to Iraq and Afghanistan and back again, it is important to consider the following issues:

First, an historical assessment of the Irish-American relationship offers some interesting reading. The relationship has never been as smooth in practice as the rhetoric suggests. Until the 1970s, it was a somewhat uncomfortable alliance. It is only in the last generation that Ireland and the US have developed the positive, productive and dynamic interaction that defines the relationship for many today. The development of a close diplomatic and political relationship between the two countries has grown and been cultivated over recent years. Today, the Taoiseach is the only world leader that has guaranteed access to the White House each year on March 17th - a situation that has augured well for Ireland.

Second, the economic argument, although tired, remains vitally important. According to recent estimates, there are approximately 600 US companies employing roughly 90,000 people in Ireland. Collectively, American companies have invested nearly $60 billion in Ireland. Importantly, however, this relationship is reciprocal. Over recent years, Irish companies have invested more than $25 billion in America and employ almost 70,000 people. For former US ambassador to Ireland James C Kenny, the Shannon issue is a commercial and not a political arrangement. Moreover, it is an arrangement that has been in place for decades. The commercial agreement is supposedly worth more than €37 million a year in fees and services to Shannon airport. In a statement to the Irish Parliamentary Society in March 2006, the ambassador was candid. If the use of Shannon was denied to America, there "are dozens of other airports across Europe that will jump at the business . . . closing it to US forces will not end the war in Iraq, but it will end the jobs of hundreds of people who rely on that trade to provide for their families."

Against this backdrop, maybe dissent would be more usefully directed towards the Government's recent economic pandering to dictatorial leaders in the Middle East and China. Perhaps the Government should discontinue efforts to generate new economic links that will ultimately make Ireland reliant on countries that are brazen human rights violators.

Third, the anti-war movement certainly raises some interesting and vital issues regarding possible breaches in international law and international human rights standards. On the other hand - and not to dismiss the ambiguity regarding the reasons for war in Iraq in the first instance - Article 49 of the United Nations Charter does call on member states to afford "mutual assistance in carrying out the measures decided upon by the Security Council". This can be interpreted to include Security Council resolutions 1483 and 1511 on Iraq and 1623 on Afghanistan. Furthermore, this "mutual assistance" could include facilities at Shannon. I doubt many would advocate that Ireland should breach our commitment to the United Nations Charter; the very act some accuse America of doing.

Finally, it is important to take account of the historical precedent set by the Irish Government regarding the use of Shannon by US military personnel. Successive Irish governments have allowed US and other military aircraft pass through Shannon during the Cold War and during the first Gulf War. In light of our over-reliance on US foreign direct investment, perhaps we cannot expect the Government to backtrack eagerly from this position. In fact, set against historical evidence, perhaps the question becomes why should we now deny access to US forces travelling through Shannon?

Frank Groome is a researcher at the Clinton Institute in University College Dublin.

Last week, we asked whether God Save the Queen should be played at Croke Park. Here are edited versions of some of your comments:

YES:If we do not have the maturity to listen to another nation's national anthem being played at a sporting event, then it places into question our maturity as a nation. Hatred and political bitterness have no place in sport, and rugby, as a sport, has headed the table in terms of accommodating all political beliefs (the very fact that the Irish rugby team normally uses its own anthem is a clever case of accommodating non-nationalist players from North of the Border). - Laura, Ireland

NO:Gerald Morgan hits the nail on the head with one of his eminently reasonable reasons why God Save the Queen should not be played at Croke Park. In a rugby game between Ireland and England, the anthems of Ireland and England should be played. England's insistence on the respect of others towards an anthem glorifying the long-since smashed British empire would be a curiosity if it did not have the extra baggage of being so emotive. - James Connors, Ireland

YES:What an unnecessarily divisive debate. God Save the Queen has been played for years at the RDS before the Aga Khan Cup and on other occasions during Horse Show week. Why on earth should we now stop being tolerant, sportsman-like and welcoming? - Kerry Holland, Ireland

NO:Irish nationalists should respect the nationalities of other countries, and therefore their national anthems. However, the problem with God Save the Queen is that it contains sentiments which are repulsive to modern democratic ideas. It is rooted in medieval superstitions that the privilege and wealth of the monarchy is "God-given". It does not express English nationalism in a positive way, but rather the subservience of the English people to an outdated class system which has no place in modern society. - Owen Bennett, Ireland

YES:Time and time again here in Boston, where I now live, I have the difficult task (only when asked) of explaining our Irish history in a five-minute summary to people who are largely ignorant of the details and emotions. I find myself more and more focusing on the incredible work done between our two countries to make peace, rather than the bigoted view I grew up with in the sixties and seventies. It was with trepidation I clicked to see how the voting was going and it brought a smile to my face to see a majority say yes to a sports tradition (not history) and once again the great feeling that never goes away - I'm proud to be Irish! - Clare Waldron, United States

NO:As soon as the English have an anthem that honours the nation of England and not one unelected, irrelevant, and anachronistic individual who lives in a palace paid for by the taxes of working people, I will have no problem standing to attention for an English national anthem at Croke Park or anywhere else. I will never pay respect to an anthem that honours the ridiculous concept of monarchy regardless of what country it is intended to represent. - Siobhán Ní Bhuachalla, United States

YES:The fact that this issue has been raised shows that in some respects some portions of the population have not matured to what is required as international norms on such occasions. Not to play the national anthems would be a great insult to the status of international sport and a great disrespect to the visiting international team. History is in the past, we should look to the future. - Joe Brady, Afghanistan

NO:The bigots that grunt out God Save the Queen while giving fascist salutes will no doubt enjoy the paddy-baiting in Croke Park. It's a pity that the GAA will facilitate the bigots that follow British rugby in Northern Ireland, with their sashes and bowler hats and oval balls, I hope the Brit anthem is overshadowed by a rousing rendition of Come Out Ye Black and Tans - Ray, Ireland

www.ireland.com/head2headOpens in new window ]

Head2Head is edited by Fintan O'Toole