A chara, - I wish to reject the argument being put forward that the people who advocate a No vote in the forthcoming Amsterdam Referendum do so because they wish to roll back the tide of progress brought about by our membership of the European Community. Indeed some of the leading politicians putting forward this argument are the very people who were loath to implement EEC/EU directives over the years.
Those opposed to the Amsterdam Treaty are, by and large, people who are worried about the common foreign and security policy of the Treaty. Such people genuinely fear that in voting for this aspect of the treaty we are endangering our status as a neutral country. This is why The Workers' Party, the Green Party, PANA and others advocated a postponement of the Referendum until such time as an opt-out clause for all military entanglements had been achieved. Denmark has achieved a Protocol to this effect.
This is the last treaty in which all countries must agree before the EU can go forward as a collective body. At present nothing is agreed until everybody has agreed. However the new rules on "flexibility" change all this. In other words we may, at a future referendum, decide that Ireland should not join the WEU but such a decision will not prevent the WEU becoming the armed service of the EU and acting in our name. Article J1.2 makes it explicit that not only can this happen but that when it does happen "The Member States shall support the Union's external and security policy actively and unreservedly in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity".
Matters referred to in Article 7 include humanitarian and rescue tasks, peace-keeping tasks and tasks of combat forces in crises management, including peacemaking. It is a matter of serious concern that peace-enforcement is not specifically excluded. The embargo on Iraq, including an embargo on vital medical supplies which resulted in the deaths of thousands of children, was peace enforcement.
It is quite clear that people have good reason to fear the consequence of a Yes vote in the Amsterdam Treaty. As a result of the Maastricht Treaty we already have 50 troops serving under NATO in Bosnia and one colonel serving at the Headquarters of NATO in Brussels. A No vote is our opportunity to call a halt to this process.
If there are people who wish to argue that neutrality is outdated, they should do so in an open and honest fashion. They should cease the underhand tactic of claiming that the status quo will be maintained when this is patently not the case. - Is mise, Mary Diskin, Central Executive Committee, The Workers' Party,
Bray,
Co Wicklow.