No. 464 NAI TSCH/3/S16113/A

Handwritten minute by Maurice Moynihan

Dublin, 3 November 1956

At a meeting of the Government held on the 2nd instant, there was an informal discussion of the situation created by the Anglo-French intervention in the conflict arising out of the recent Israeli invasion of Egyptian territory. The Taoiseach read to his colleagues the reports concerning this matter, dated the 1st November, 1956,1 from the Embassy in London, and the Minister for External Affairs stated, in substance, the instructions which had been sent on the 1st November to the Mission to the United Nations,2 following a discussion between the Taoiseach and the Minister which took place on the 1st November. Reference was also made to the speech delivered by the Minister for External Affairs at a dinner given by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce on the 1st November.3

The question of a possible need for petrol rationing was raised, and it was arranged that the Minister for Industry and Commerce would discuss the supply position with representatives of the oil companies immediately. The Minister for Industry and Commerce stated that a petrol rationing scheme could be put into operation without delay, if necessary, and that the necessary forms, etc., were already available.

1 See No. 458.

2 See Nos. 455 and 456.

3 The relevant section of Cosgrave’s speech to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce on 1 November 1956 was ‘But what are we to say of the action which has now been undertaken by two respected members of the United Nations? Article 2(4) of the Charter binds all members to “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”. Despite this article and contrary to the whole spirit of the Charter, Israel has invaded Egypt, and now the Government of Great Britain and France have compounded this aggression and are actually using force not against the aggressor but against the victim. I should make it clear that I am not setting up in judgement on the issues that divide Israel and her neighbours, or Egypt and the users of the Suez Canal. These are complex questions and probably no side is altogether blameless. But in this particular instance – whatever the provocation may have been – it is clearly Israel that is the aggressor; it is Israel not Egypt that ought to be restrained and it is the United Nations, not England and France, that ought to do the restraining. As I have said, a small country like our own can only exist if international obligations are respected, including this vital obligation to seek a peaceful solution to differences. It is therefore in my view the duty of an Irish Minister for External Affairs to speak out when these obligations are flouted and when countries – even countries with which we have many ties – resort to war as an instrument of policy. It may be said – indeed it often is said – that since a country in our position cannot have any military influence over the course of events, it is in vain for us to declare our views. I do not share that opinion. The very existence of the United Nations and of its charter is a testimony to the moral force of public opinion. We can play our part in forming and in expressing public opinion where important matters of principle are involved.’
See NAI DFA 5/305/173/II, telegram 2 (immediate), Murphy to Boland, 1.30pm, 1 November 195


Purchase Volumes Online

Purchase Volumes Online

ebooks

ebooks

The Royal Irish Academy's Documents on Irish Foreign Policy series has published an eBook of confidential correspondence on the 1921 Anglo-Irish Treaty negotiations.
 

Free Download


International Counterparts

The international network of Editors of Diplomatic Documents was founded in 1988. Delegations from different parts of the world met for the first time in London in 1989.
Read more ....



Website design and developed by FUSIO