Irish politicians are fond of pontificating on international events from Gaza to Ukraine. But, as they are now beginning to discover, taking the high moral ground is not so easy when it potentially threatens the national interest.
The controversy over the Aughinish Alumina plant is a case in point. The Government rightly denounced the Russian invasion of Ukraine from the start and vocally backed the EU’s policy of imposing sanctions on the aggressor.
In recent months, however, serious questions have arisen over whether the alumina refinery on the Shannon estuary is actually helping the Russian war effort and contributing to the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians.
EU high representative for foreign affairs Kaja Kallas met Taoiseach Micheál Martin on Tuesday to discuss the issue. While she was polite about her concerns, saying it was important to get the facts straight on Aughinish, it is clear that exports of alumina to Russia, as reported by The Irish Times, are causing concern at EU level.
To be fair the Irish Government has backed up its support for Ukraine with substantial cash contributions through the EU. More importantly we have taken in more Ukrainian refugees per head of population than almost any other EU country, including Ukraine’s neighbours.
Still, if the investigation into the export of alumina shows that the material is actually helping the Russian war effort, the Government will have to face the reality of whether the plant, which is majority-owned by the Russian metals giant Rusal, can continue to operate in its current form. Rusal is majority owned by a conglomerate founded by Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska.
Given Deripaska’s close ties to Putin, it is even arguable that the plant at Foynes represents a Russian asset, which could become a serious threat to the security of the EU at some future date.
Aughinish employs up to 500 people, and a similar number owe their jobs to it indirectly, in a region where alternative employment is hard to find. A decision that could lead to the closure of the plant would be a real headache for the Government.
But if the investigation into the operations of Aughinish poses a serious problem for the Government, the final shape of the Occupied Territories Bill – which is now before the Dáil – could threaten many more jobs if the Opposition parties get their way.
The final form of the Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill has been denounced by the Opposition for not including services in any ban on products coming from the West Bank.
[ US congressman renews call for Occupied Territories Bill to be withdrawnOpens in new window ]
The legislation, which was initially proposed by the Opposition, has been delayed for years due to legal and political disagreements over what it should contain and what implications it could have on Ireland’s economy and our international relations.
The main Opposition parties have expressed outrage at the exclusion of services and in various exchanges in the Dáil have made it clear that they would favour a total ban on trade with Israel, regardless of the consequences for the Irish economy and jobs.
When Martin asked if they wanted to ban Intel from trading with its sister company in Israel, Richard Boyd Barrett and others on the Opposition benches chorused “yes”. Unlike the Opposition, the Government doesn’t have the luxury of ignoring the real world consequences of its actions.
Yet the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste can hardly complain about being attacked for their stance on the Bill. For the past few years both of them have taken every opportunity to denounce the Israeli government in the strongest possible terms for its actions in Gaza, with only occasional references to the crimes of Hamas.
So it is perfectly legitimate for the Opposition to hold the Coalition to account for watering down the Bill.
On his way into Cabinet on Tuesday, the Taoiseach admitted that the final shape of the Government’s legislation was only symbolic. He added the suspension of the EU’s trade association agreement with Israel would have a greater financial impact and Minister for Foreign Affairs Helen McEntee said she would press the commission on the issue.
Applying pressure on Israel through the EU is the line that both parties in Government should have been taking all along. Irish action on its own will have no impact whatsoever on the appalling situation in Gaza, but could do damage to this country’s interests. A united EU approach might have some chance of pressurising Israel to change its approach.
A large segment of the Irish public actually appreciates this, as evidenced by an Irish Times opinion poll last summer. It showed that almost half of all voters favoured either not passing the Occupied Territories Bill at all or investigating the possible consequences for Ireland before passing it.
In an increasingly unstable world, it is time for our political leaders to be straight with the public and adopt a more nuanced approach to international relations.
