1. Neutrality and the Veto
Deputy Norton1 said something to the effect that:-
'In the event of UNO breaking up and a global war resulting, neutrality for this country would be impossible.'
Deputy Costello2 said something to the effect that:-
'What had to be realised by the country was that there could never again be any question of neutrality.'
Deputy McGilligan3 said something to the effect that:-
'The reality behind the Charter was that we gave ourselves over and took on whatever obligations there were in the Charter to be ruled by two of the three remaining Great Powers in the world.'
There were other references in the debate which suggested that Deputies did not understand the effect of the veto power on the obligations assumed by Members under Article 43 and other Articles of the Charter.
It is a question, therefore, whether it would not be worth while making clear that the obligation to take enforcement measures only arises if they are supported by seven Members of the Security Council, including every one of the Five Great Powers. If even one Great Power dissents, the Members of the Organization are free of any obligation as regards the taking of enforcement measures. The precise legal position in that event remains to be clearly defined. The best view seems to be that, from the strictly legal point of view, the individual Members of the Organisation would be free, in that event, to take whatever course seemed to them best and to remain neutral in the conflict if they so decided. That would probably be the legal position. The political position would, no doubt, depend, in the case of each State, on the circumstances of the dispute concerned.
2. Deputy Flanagan's Allegation
Deputy Flanagan suggested that the Government had been ordered by the British Government to apply for membership of UNO. Colour may have been lent to this charge by General MacEoin's4 question:-
'Did he (the Taoiseach) change his mind? A month ago he said there was no hurry about joining UNO. We should hear it.'
Deputy Flanagan's suggestion is obviously fantastic. We have naturally had informal discussions about UNO with several other Governments - five or six at least - and the British Government was one of these. The only intimation of any kind received from the British Government on the question of this country's becoming a Member of UNO was one simply confirming the attitude already stated publicly in the Potsdam Declaration that, if we decided to apply for membership of UNO, the application would have the support of Great Britain. Far from ordering, or even asking, us to apply, any indication we have received from the British Government was rather to the effect that they did not wish to be taken as encouraging us to decide one way or the other.
Now that we are thinking of becoming a Member of this world organ-isation, it might be well to add this. There is a class of people in this country who make a point, whenever we happen to be on the same side as Great Britain in any international discussion, of suggesting that we are acting under the influence of the British. Some of them talk as if, simply because Britain is on one side, we should automatically be on the other. People should have more sense. Suggestions of that kind are invariably completely false and are invariably damaging to the prestige and influence of the country. I remember we had something of that kind in connection with the taking of sanctions against Italy. It should not be necessary to assure the house that whatever we do in the sphere of international affairs we do because we think it right and proper - because it is in the interests of this country or in accordance with the obligations or duties which we have undertaken.
3. Success of Application
It seems to be generally assumed by Deputies that, if we apply, our application is certain to be accepted. This impression will, no doubt, be strengthened by the Reuter report in this morning's newspapers.
In case of any hitch, and in view of the likelihood that, if a hitch occurred, there would be a tendency to blame the Government for having mishandled the application, it might be well to remind the Dáil that, when we apply, we place ourselves in the hands of the Security Council and the Assembly and there can be no assurance beforehand what their decision will be.
4. The suggestion that the decision is being rushed
A number of Deputies suggested that the decision was being unduly rushed and that public opinion had not been given a fair opportunity of considering the whole question.
The facts are that the question of our applying for membership of UNO was first mooted twelve months ago. The Charter was printed and issued as a sales publication last autumn. Nearly twelve months ago the Taoiseach indicated that there would be a discussion on the matter in the Dáil, and he repeated that promise in replies to Parliamentary Questions in the autumn. Everybody knew, therefore, that at some time or other the matter would come up for discussion and decision in the Dáil, and, in the meantime, there has been a flood of publicity of all kinds in the newspapers and elsewhere about the constitution of UNO and its practical work.
Nobody can say, therefore, that there has not been ample notice of the fact that the question of our membership of UNO would come up for discussion and decision in the Dáil or that people have not had a due opportunity of informing themselves and making up their minds on the question.
