Taoiseach rejects US politicians' claims that Occupied Territories Bill is ‘diplomatic intoxication'
Mike Huckabee's comments came amid similar criticisms from a number of senior
US
politicians, who warned the
Government
that enacting the
Occupied Territories Bill
would be harmful for
Ireland
.
The proposed Bill is expected to go before the Dáil in the autumn. The legislation would prohibit trading with companies operating in illegal settlements in the West Bank and other occupied territories.
At least 10 members of Congress have shared their criticisms of the Bill on X (formerly Twitter) in what would appear to be a concerted campaign.
READ MORE
On Wednesday Mr Huckabee posted: 'Did the Irish fall into a vat of Guinness & propose something so stupid that it would be attributed to act of diplomatic intoxication? It will harm Arabs as much as Israelis. Sober up Ireland! Call
@IsraelMFA
& say you're sorry!'
[
Government effort to ban occupied territories trade gets EU boost
Opens in new window
]
Responding, Mr Martin said: 'I reject the comments made by the ambassador. The situation is very serious in Gaza, including an appalling loss of human life. Terrible war crimes are being committed.'
Mr Martin said there is 'continuing shocking behaviour' in the West Bank, including 'the freedom that's given to extreme settlers to destroy settlements and housing belonging to Palestinians who've been there on that land for generations'.
There have been claims that US companies based in Ireland could be subject to fines and penalties if the Bill passes, as it could breach American laws that prohibit BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) activity against Israel.
Mr Martin said BDS legislation could 'inadvertently' affect companies.
'We don't want companies that are based in Ireland and employing people punished in any shape or form. That would be counterproductive in terms of the objective being to leverage pressure on Israel, not on Ireland,' Mr Martin said.
'But we will consider that, and obviously we will take legal opinion on it.'
But the Taoiseach added that the 'situation has moved on', with the European Union confirming member states should consider the legal opinion of the International Court of Justice in the context of member states' trade relationships with the occupied territories.
'To be fair to president Trump, he's a man who doesn't like war, and I would hope that he can exert pressure to bring about an end to the terrible and horrific killing in Gaza.'
Lisa McClain, the chair of the House Republicans, said 'any legislation boycotting, divesting or sanctioning Israel would be a huge mistake for Ireland'.
'This type of extreme anti-Semitic hate is unacceptable and should be rejected.'
Republican senator Lindsey Graham posted: 'I hope that Ireland will reconsider their efforts to economically isolate Israel [...] I do not believe these efforts would be well received in the United States and they certainly would not go unnoticed.'
Senator Rick Scott, also a Republican, said: 'This foolish move not only wrongfully targets Israel & the Jewish Community, but also harms American businesses. They should think twice about the message they're sending by passing this Bill, which complicates our economic relationship & targets our ally.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
6 minutes ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the State's new investment plans: the work is only starting
The Government's plan to invest more to address the infrastructure deficits in the Irish economy is a move in the right direction. Shortfalls in housing, water, energy and transport are not only crippling competitiveness but affecting people's daily lives. The Government is correct to push ahead with its planning, despite the international uncertainty. A growing economy and a rising population have left recent administrations running to catch up. International investors have been increasingly outspoken about Ireland's infrastructural shortfalls. All of this needs to be addressed. And Taoiseach Micheál Martin is correct when he says that State investment spending must be protected no matter what. However, the plans published yesterday raise of number of important questions. The lack of any detail of the projects to be included in the plan is somewhat puzzling. Everyone knew in the final period of the last government and the opening months of this one that the review was due. So why has no list of projects been completed? Because of this, as Prof Alan Barrett of the Economic and Social Research Institute pointed out, we do not have any of the essential detail on how the projects all fit together. READ MORE There are, of course, a significant number of projects which we do know about and which will be funded by the money now being put aside. The focus on vital areas such as water, wastewater and energy is important. But with last-minute rows over housing in particular, it is unclear that the Government yet has a convincing plan in this key area. An updated housing plan, due in the autumn, needs to give a clear view . The Government is also – belatedly – looking seriously at the blockages and delays to project planning. This is welcome but long overdue. These issues have been hiding in plain sight in recent years, leading to extraordinary delays and additional costs in projects large and small. Too much time was lost here by the last government. This one needs to get serious on the issue of the delivery. This will be uncomfortable politically and it remains to be seen if the Government has the stomach for the necessary fights. The scale of the investment commitments being made are significant. And paying for it will use a lot of the leeway in the national finances and also the cash put aside from the Apple tax payment and the sale of AIB shares. This means a higher level of risk. To create the required leeway in the national finances – and ensure yet more cash is not pumped into the economy – the increased investment spending must be combined with much tighter control of day-to-day spending. This is the trade off. If this does not happen, then the scale of the financial risks facing the State will increase yet further. And they are already high enough.
Irish Times
6 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Omagh bombing survivor wants High Court to compel State to hold public inquiry into atrocity
Two people directly affected by the Omagh bombing want the High Court to compel the Irish government to establish a public inquiry into the atrocity. Emmet Tunney, who survived the 1998 dissident republican bombing, says the Government is obliged to establish a public inquiry in circumstances where state authorities allegedly held 'actionable intelligence' relating to the attack. Mr Tunney's case states that a public inquiry is required to ensure an effective investigation of the atrocity. He alleges the State's failure to hold such an inquiry is a breach of his rights under the Constitution and under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). According to Mr Tunney's court documents, article two of the ECHR requires an 'effective, independent, prompt, and public' investigation in circumstances where state agents knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to life. READ MORE Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution require effective investigations of deaths involving potential state failures, his papers say. Shawneen Conway, whose 18-year-old brother Gareth was killed in the bombing, is seeking to bring an action similar to Mr Tunney's, the High Court heard on Tuesday. A total of 29 people, including a mother pregnant with twins, died and hundreds were injured when a car bomb planted by the Real IRA exploded in the centre of the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998. An independent inquiry into the bombing established by the UK government opened in Omagh in January and is continuing. That inquiry is examining whether the atrocity could have been prevented by UK authorities. In the High Court on Tuesday, Ruaidhrí Giblin, for Mr Tunney, sought an early date for his application seeking the court's permission to bring the case. Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty said she would hear Mr Tunney's and Ms Conway's applications for court permission next week. Mr Tunney, from Omagh, Co Tyrone, is seeking an order compelling the Government to establish a public inquiry into the bombing and he wants a court declaration that the Government's failure to establish such an inquiry to date is in breach of his rights. He wants to bring his case against the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General. His case claims some of the perpetrators of the bombing are believed to have operated within the Republic of Ireland. He alleges there were failures in intelligence sharing and co-operation between Irish and UK authorities before the bombing. Authorities in the Republic may have had prior knowledge of the Real IRA's planning, his documents claim. Mr Tunney also argues an Irish government inquiry is required in circumstances where there are limitations on the jurisdiction of the UK government's inquiry. For example, he says, the UK government cannot make findings as to whether Irish authorities are culpable for a failure to supply information relating to the bombing. In the UK Omagh bombing inquiry, its chairman, Lord Turnbull, heard arguments over the last two days regarding applications from some survivor and family groups seeking to be represented by special advocates. They said their interests should be represented in closed hearings and they raised a risk of damage to confidence in the inquiry if they were not. However, a lawyer for the UK government said no statutory public inquiry has had special advocates to date and there was no justification to have them in this case. Katherine Grange KC also contended no provision was made for such appointments in the 2005 Inquiries Act and she cautioned around avoiding unnecessary costs. At the conclusion of the hearings around special advocates on Tuesday, Lord Turnbull said the issue raised is 'important and interesting'. He will provide a written decision 'in due course'. – Additional reporting PA
Irish Times
6 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Budget plan for €9.4bn public spending boost will be reconsidered if tariffs hit
Plans to spend an extra €9.4 billion on public services , tax cuts and building projects next year will be reconsidered if the US imposes tariffs on EU imports, Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe and Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers said on Tuesday. But they, along with Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris , pledged that if there is pressure on spending plans, they would protect infrastructure budgets and cut growth in current spending on public services, welfare and tax cuts to realise the necessary savings. The Coalition leaders launched a review of the National Development Plan (NDP), promising to spend €100 billion between now and 2030 – a €30 billion increase over what was planned – to improve water, energy, transport and housing infrastructure. [ National Development Plan shows the Government is about to bet big on capital expenditure Opens in new window ] The ambitious plans were overshadowed by the threat of a trade war between the European Union and United States, which Mr Donohoe and Mr Chambers admitted could compel them to revise plans published on Tuesday for a budget day package of €9.4 billion in October. READ MORE In the event of high tariffs, the Government would 'recalibrate its fiscal strategy' and reduce the budget package to keep public finances stable, said Mr Donohoe. Already, the plans for October's Budget 2026 envisage growth in public spending being trimmed from 8-9 per cent of recent years to 6.4 per cent next year. Mr Donohoe said there would be a package of tax cuts of some €1.5 billion. But he added that the cost of cutting VAT on hospitality – a Fine Gael election promise included in the programme for government – would amount to nearly €1 billion in a full year, meaning the scope for any tax adjustments to rates and bands would be reduced significantly. Tariffs: Why has Donald Trump threatened the EU again? Listen | 47:35 'It would not be right to grow the scale of our tax package,' said Mr Donohoe. The Coalition published the amended NDP and summer economic statement at Government Buildings on Tuesday. The NDP promises expenditure of €25 billion on capital projects in 2026, with the amount increasing every year and peaking at €28 billion in 2029. The total is set to reach more than €100 billion by 2030. The plan was immediately criticised for not identifying individual projects, though the Government did point to a small number of 'megaprojects', including the Dublin Metro and two big water schemes: the Shannon to Dublin water supply project and Greater Dublin Area drainage initiative. Social Democrats spokesman on public expenditure Cian O'Callaghan said the plan is 'so vague it doesn't even rise to the level of wish list'. Sinn Féin 's health spokesman David Cullinane said the allocation for health falls 'far short of what is needed' over the next five years. Labour 's Marie Sherlock, meanwhile, has said the €2 billion allocated for the MetroLink is 'hardly a vote of confidence that the project will be substantively progressed in this decade'. The summer economic statement, normally a key document in the preparation of the October budget, was considerably shorter and less detailed than usual. It contained several warnings, however, about threats to the State's public finances from several sources. [ NDP shows Government about to bet big on capital expenditure Opens in new window ] 'Even before the full impact of tariffs takes hold, it is increasingly evident that heightened levels of uncertainty have prompted firms to delay investment plans and households to step up precautionary savings. These headwinds are set to slow the pace of economic expansion,' it said. The document also warned that the 'headline surplus is now likely to be considerably lower than set out in the spring'. It flagged that spending pressures in several Government departments will require additional funding above their agreed allocations, prompting Mr Chambers to warn of the need for spending discipline and an end to bailouts in the second half of the year – a now familiar necessity in some departments.
