LAST UPDATE | 19 Jun 2023
PRESIDENT MICHAEL D Higgins’ strongly worded intervention in favour of continuing Irish military neutrality at the weekend has forced the government to defend its Consultative Forum on International Security Policy.
The controversy came days before the event kicks off, turning up the heat in the already contentious debate on Ireland’s future foreign policy.
The forum could be a stepping stone towards significant changes in Irish security policy, including the Triple Lock on mandating new military missions.
But President Higgins is not the first politician to raise questions about the event; it has been heavily criticised by opposition politicians since it was announced in April.
Here’s what we to expect as the debate on one of the thorniest questions in Irish politics gets underway this week.
The Consultative Forum on International Security will happen over four days, kicking off on Thursday in University College Cork. The remaining sessions will happen in the University of Galway on Friday, followed by two days in Dublin Castle next week.
The sessions will be live-streamed and members of the public have had the chance to register to attend, although places are limited. Members of the public can also make submissions in writing.
The forum differs from a Citizens’ Assembly – the format favoured by the Opposition for any discussion of neutrality – in which an assembly that broadly reflects the demographics of the country would be selected from randomly chosen households.
A Citizens’ Assembly would issue recommendations following information sessions with experts and deliberations among themselves.
Some of the outcomes of previous Citizens’ Assemblies, for example on abortion, have been treated with great respect by politicians and have been influential on subsequent policymaking.
When the consultative forum was announced, Martin said the reason the government had not gone for a Citizens Assembly was that two were already planned: one on drugs – which is currently underway; and another on education.
Moderated discussions at the forum will be held among experts, such as academics from universities and researchers at think tanks such as the influential Chatham House.
For example, a debate on Thursday on cyber security two years after the attack on the HSE will be moderated by the head of the National Cyber Security Centre and involve Brigadier General Seán White, director of cyber defence at the EU Military Staff, and Richard Parker, vice-president of cyber security at Dell, the technology company.
The chair of the forum is Louise Richardson, an Irish counterterrorism expert who now works in philanthropy. She is a former vice-chancellor of Oxford University.
President Higgins disparaged her in the Business Post for being a Dame of the British Empire, an accolade she received in recognition of her service to education. The Áras apologised on Monday for what it described as a “casual remark” by the president.
Opposition politicians have alleged there are too few pro-neutrality voices on the forum’s roster of speakers, while President Higgins suggested there were no speakers from neutral countries such as Austria and Malta, whereas formerly neutral countries who have recently applied to join Nato had been invited as panellists.
The Department of Foreign Affairs told The Journal: “Representatives from the embassies of all EU member states, including Austria, Malta and Cyprus, have been invited to attend and we look forward to hearing from them during the forum”.
The Department said representatives from Finland, Sweden, Norway and Switzerland were invited to speak as panellists because “all of these countries are, like Ireland, active participants in peacebuilding, conflict prevention and resolution, human rights and international humanitarian law globally, but take different approaches to their security policy”.
Sweden and Finland applied to join Nato after Russia invaded Ukraine.
After the forum has wrapped up, Richardson will draft a report to submit to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The minister will then decide whether to bring recommendations to Government based on her report.
The Government has been keen to emphasise that the forum is a not a “binary debate” on neutrality and Richardson’s report is likely to be wide-ranging, reflecting the broad scope of the four days of discussions at the forum.
The Department of Foreign Affairs told The Journal that those sharing their expertise at the forum have experience in peacekeeping, conflict revolution, cyber security, disinformation, maritime security and critical infrastructure.
Nonetheless, all eyes will be on the question of military neutrality. The forum’s outcomes relating to the so-called Triple Lock on mandating new missions and to Ireland’s relationship with the Nato military alliance are likely to be particularly politically sensitive and controversial.
The Triple Lock refers to the requirement for separate approval by the government, the Dáil and a UN resolution to mandate deploying more than 12 Irish troops abroad.
The programme for the forum notes the increasing use of vetoes at UN level by Russia, preventing new peacekeeping missions from being established. The forum’s programme poses the questions: “What does this mean for Ireland’s ability to pursue an independent foreign policy? What implications does this have for the Triple Lock?”
On Nato, the forum will consider how the decision of Finland and Sweden to join Nato affects European security and what the implications are for Ireland.
Ireland is a member of Nato’s “Partnership for Peace” (PfP), a programme of bilateral cooperation with some European states.
Last year, Nato outlined a range of existing and new areas for PfP members to engage in, including maritime security, cyber and hybrid, and critical infrastructure.
The forum’s panellists will be asked to consider “areas of mutual interest and relevance” as Ireland is currently negotiating a new partnership framework under PfP.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar reiterated on Monday that Ireland “is not going to join Nato” or sign any mutual defence clauses.
There is no discussion planned at the forum on the idea of enshrining neutrality in the constitution, as called for by Sinn Féin and People Before Profit. This would mean a referendum.
However, opposition TDs have been critical of the forum since it was announced.
Sinn Féin has branded it “less about public discussion than an attempt to reshape public opinion”, with Matt Carthy, the party’s foreign affairs spokesman, telling the Dáil he feared it was “a blatant attempt to undermine” neutrality.
This argument was aired again in a fractious Dáil debate last week, leading to a visibly angry Minister for Foreign Affairs, Tánaiste Micheál Martin accusing People Before Profit TD Paul Murphy and his party colleagues of trying to shut down discussion, undermining freedom of speech.
The Tánaiste defended the forum as “a genuine debate with a huge, wide range of speakers with different perspectives”, after Murphy claimed there was just one anti-war speaker lined up for the event and “multiple people who are on record as being in favour of joining NATO”.
President Higgins also expressed similar thoughts on the forum to those aired by the opposition. In an interview with The Business Post, he said the various panels at the forum largely comprised “the admirals, the generals, the air force, the rest of it”.
A spokesman issued an apology for some of his remarks earlier today.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought the question of Ireland’s security policy to the fore.
Tánaiste Micheál Martin said last week that “the security situation in Europe has changed fundamentally” in the past year, necessitating an “ honest and open debate to examine whether our current policy approach remains fit for purpose”.
What doesn’t seem to have changed is the broad support among the Irish public for the long-standing policy of military neutrality.
A poll for the Irish Times last week found 61 per cent of people favour retaining the current policy of military neutrality, although the poll also indicated majority support for increased defensive military capacity.
Given the popularity of neutrality as a watchword of Irish foreign policy, any potential changes to come out of the forum are likely to be sensitive and contentious.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say