Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MICHÉAL MARTIN HAS announced that government plans to bring forward legislation to get rid of the triple lock for Irish military involvement in operations abroad.
Such a departure from the mechanism is a major change in Ireland’s foreign policy.
Speaking in the Dáil this afternoon on a debate on the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy Martin said there was no single consensus over how to proceed with the Triple Lock.
“It would therefore make sense, I believe, to amend our existing legislation in a manner which would allow us to respond to crisis situations with more agility, and where in making these important decisions, we are not surrendering our sovereignty.
Martin said:
I have therefore instructed officials in the Department of Defence to prepare legislative proposals without delay that would govern the future overseas deployments of our Defence Forces.
The “triple lock” is a mechanism that sets out the conditions under which more than 12 Irish troops may participate in overseas peace support operations.
For troops to take part, the operation must be mandated by the United Nations; it must be approved by the Government; and it must be approved by Dáil Éireann by means of a resolution.
There has been a lot of talk over the years about the triple lock system and whether changes are warranted.
In 2013, the Green Paper on Defence, published by former Defence Minister Alan Shatter, argued that the positives of the system outweighed the negatives, recommending to retain the policy, and cited “substantial public support”.
In 2014, the then-Defence Minister Simon Coveney noted that keeping the triple lock system could result in a situation “where there is a pressing moral or security imperative and overwhelming international support” for a military response, but that a UN sanction might not be forthcoming as a veto could be exercised by a permanent member of the Security Council.
A change to the system was mooted by Coveney in 2022 after Fine Gael members voted in favour of such a move at its annual conference. At the time, Coveney said he didn’t see a move away from the triple lock as “radical change”.
The Journal reported earlier this year that the Government was considering new legislation that could allow Irish special forces to be dispatched on foreign missions.
In what was seen as signal that possible changes were on the cards in terms of government policy, the Green Party dropped its insistence on retaining the triple lock.
The party’s policy council voted unanimously to drop the necessity for a UN resolution.
Instead, the party says defence personnel could be deployed overseas with Dáil approval and a decision by a regional organisation as authorised in the UN charter.
The consultative forum, chaired by Louise Richardson, took place in June at various locations across Ireland. It took the form of panels and public debates and looked at Ireland’s place in global foreign affairs.
Martin defended the holding of the forum at the time, stating that there was no preconceived outcome.
The report from the forum was published in October and said the State’s defence strategy will continue to “pose challenges” to Government and diplomats on the international stage.
However, the report also suggested that there is currently “no popular mandate” to change the State’s ongoing policy of neutrality.
Despite the identified problems regarding defence policy the report also found: “It was frequently expressed, and rarely contradicted, that there is currently no popular mandate in Ireland to abandon the policy of neutrality”.
“Maintaining a policy of military nonalignment along with active political engagement in global forums will continue to pose a challenge for Irish governments and diplomats, as will the need to balance a values-based foreign policy with taking seriously the security concerns and responsibilities of our partners,” Richardson wrote.
A number of Opposition TDs hit out against the forum and questioned why a Citizens’ Assembly on Irish neutrality was not established instead.
Martin defended the forum, stating that he felt it was the more appropriate mechanism to discuss such issues.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar was forced to defend the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy after Opposition TDs labelled it “rigged” and said they’ve been excluded from the debate.
Varadkar said that the forum was not about whether Ireland should join NATO or any other military alliance, but a “deep dive” into the state’s security policy.
He said the country faced “very different threats” today and that he believes it’s time to begin to look at upgrading Ireland’s Defence Forces and putting investments in place.
People Before Profit TD Mick Barry said the speakers list was biased and criticised the “audacity of the government” to choose such speakers, stating that there was not enough contrary voices speaking at the events.
At the time of the forum was taking place, President Michael D Higgins weighed in, much to the discomfort of those in government.
In an interview with the Business Post Higgins spoke about his views on the impending Consultative Forum on international security policy.
In a strongly worded rebuke of the Government’s move ahead of the public engagement discussion on foreign policy the president said: “the most dangerous moment in the articulation and formulation of foreign policy and its practice, since the origin of diplomacy, has been when you’re drifting and not knowing what you’re doing”.
“I would describe our present position as one of drift.”
In relation to the Consultative Forum he criticised the various panels claiming they were stocked with “the admirals, the generals, the air force, the rest of it” and also of formerly neutral countries that have now joined NATO.
Higgins asked why there was no representation from still-neutral countries such as Austria and Malta.
In somewhat of an unexpected announcement, Martin stated today he has instructed officials in the Department of Defence to prepare legislative proposals without delay that would govern any future overseas deployments of our Defence Forces.
Opposition TDs criticised the move, with some stating that a referendum on neutrality is the best path forward as it would allow the public to have their say.
Independent TD Catherine Connolly told the Dáil that the consultative forum was dubbed as the start of the conversation and Martin has now ended that conversation.
Connolly said those that opposed the policy change have been ostracised and labelled as people that are not rational.
She said Martin should consider his position given the announcement he made today.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This explains the FFG pro israeli stance dangerous times
@Kevin O Brien: The government are not and should not be on any side….they are both as bad as each other.
@Kevin O Brien: how the fk did you arrive at that conclusion?
@Ian: Events dear boy, events!
Not exactly a great stretch in fairness
Close the borders while hes at it
@DC: close your head.
@Ian: His mind is already shut down tight
NATO here we come..
@Pato: best thing for us. Protected on all sides
We’ll join NATO, “over my dead body”.
@Dissasociated Follower: good for you. Hopefully you will be the first to sign up and fight for your country if anything happens since we would be isolated and on our own.
Ireland does not need military forces. There is no threat, and
the Yanks and Brits have our back.
@Mickey D.: hahaha.. no they don’t. They wouldn’t help us in some war.. that’s not how it works. You need allies for that of which we have none. We have no agreements in place at all.. the best we would hope for is some aid. Even then that would be difficult as we would be overrun within days. So any aid would be useless.
@Jason: We are in a strategic location and NATO would not want the island to fall into enemy hands. Shannon Airport for example would be perfect as a launch pad for big bombers.
So they do have our backs!
This seems a very reasonable way of managing military involvement.. or does the government seek agility to decide on military operations as they please?
Love the NATO comments, like NATO would let us join even if we wanted too :))
@Paul C:
Oh you can be sure our current govt. wants to and you can be sure NATO wouldn’t wipe their eye.
Are you still of the opinion that Ireland doesn’t have “free speech” Paul? You went awful quiet when I brought the view of an Associate Professor of law into our conversation. I’m here if you’d like to correct yourself ;-)
@Sean: I’ll go back and look. I kinda moved on when more articles came up. Cheers though.
@Sean: I can’t remember the article. Let me know which one it is. “You can be sure the govt. want it” No. I can be sure that’s what you think it wants. Two different things.
This government cannot be trusted.It is hellbent at every opportunity to undermine our much respected neutrality.
@Patrick Presley: ha, as if we are neutral. Our politicians keep pushing other countries while claiming we are militarily neutral but not politically neutral, that makes us not neutral. It’s like calling someone out and then when they try to fight you your excuse is “you wouldn’t hit a guy with glasses would you”? we will see ourselves soon to be running for cover when we get attacked if a war broke out.
Might explain and justify why there’s thousands of young men being brought into the state, without explanation. One wonders are these soldiers? Our new army recruits ready to don our uniforms? Answers please
@Derek Blake: That is a unique way of looking at things and totally of subject. But points fr originality!
First NATO and then the reverse vampires and lizard people or something……
@Alan Leahy: Oh yes, this joining NATO business.. Such a fairytale.. Anyone suggesting a move in that direction must be one of those tinfoil hat types, I’m sure!
Why are people complaining about this?!? The triple lock needs to go. Not to mention our army needs a serious upgrade in equipment and manpower. We need jets, real artillery, helicopters, air defence systems, better navy ships some tanks and better radar systems. unless you’re all happy about our fishermen doing the job the army should be doing? I bet if we where attacked you would all complain about why we don’t have these things.
You all think America or the UK would help us, well I’m here to tell you that’s a complete fantasy. I don’t see anybody with boots on the ground in Ukraine.. they send aid but they sure got bored of doing that quickly enough.
The only reason Ireland can be neutral is because they hide behind NATO . Time Ireland got a set of Ba.Ls . In WW2 the unionists in the north 38th Irish brigade based in Lisburn fought in N Africa and played a part in liberating France and Italy while republicans in the south did nothing . Shameful .
@Jack Moss: It is well accepted that a greater number of ROI men volunteered to serve in the British army in WW2. 50000 is the minimum accepted number, but it could be x3 times that according to some sources.
Furthermore, it must be remembered that many non-unionists made up a significant proportion of volunteers from NI and also that some ROI men volunteered to join the NI brigade.
@Thomas Sheridan: yes but they didn’t represent Ireland . They had the courage to go fight evil facists and where punish for it when they return after the war .
@Jack Moss: No. Why should our children go to fight in wars that are usually about vested interests disguised as invasions or liberations? We are a tiny island, with a tiny population. We don’t want to, nor are we able to, play war games. Luckily, we are nestled nicely between the USA and the UK. Imagine your son or daughter dying in the Iraq war and later finding out that it was all based on lies. We never started a war, invaded a country or had a colony. We’ll leave that to others.
@Helen Murphy: actually Ireland was part of the UK and part of the British army for 340 yrs . The Irish where pro British and pro empire . It play a part in the administration of the empire and profited from the empire . Iraq was not a NATO war . NATO IS A DETERRENT . It prevents wars from happening . I’m sure if Ireland was invaded tomorrow you be wondering when American families will be sending their sons and daughters to die liberating Ireland.
@Jack Moss: 100% agree.. this neutral bull is getting old. Time to put some real funding into the military and be ready, rather than waiting for something to happen and be caught with our pants down.
@Helen Murphy: we invaded England plenty of times, even managed to invade Scotland and gave it it its own name “Scotland” because of the Irish tribe known as Scoti. The Irish where little feckers for raiding England all the time. Not to mention we invaded America with mass emigration.
@Jack Moss: After the lies spun by John Redmond in WW1 which cost the lives of 50,000 Irishmen….Freedom for small nations the biggest Bullshit ever….Thousands of Irish served in WW2 to defeat the Facist regime. As for hiding behind NATO…It is conveniently forgotten the NATO policy played a part in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Michael Martin going for a photo opp in Ukraine and pointing at a hole in a ceiling in a house in Israel…Now thinks he’s a military genius…Sweet Jesus the hypocrisy is comical.
@Jack Moss: Many southern troops fought and died in WW1n and WW2 as well as Korea and elsewhere.
You really need to learn some history!
@Jack Moss: That is not what you said. You are trying to make excuses for your statement that is completely wrong!
bums are starting to squeak all over the place rn
I think the ‘triple lock is good’ but the figure of 12 personnel being able to deploy probably needs to be looked at.
It needs to cover sufficient active personnel, support, and hardware to meet the needs of the nation.
Hostage recovery is probably a likely scenario including assisting our citizens caught up in conflict or terrorist activities..
A unit or units of safe operational size needs to be deployed when the need arises . We have some off the best trained special forces in the world, we need the capability to utilise them?
have your say