Mr. Patrick Smyth:

The problem is that what the public sense is neutrality is a very complicated issue. I have a sense that, in some ways, as part of the political culture of the State, it is like being against sin. It is a good thing and we have always been like that. Therefore, it is necessary to dig into that to see what it means in practice. That is why I placed much emphasis in my contribution on the positive security doctrine of the State, which is to see that international conflict would be resolved through the UN. That necessarily means, perhaps, getting involved in wars, which necessarily involves the use of military force, and an automatic commitment by us to support and assist UN-mandated operations, regardless of whether we like them. I believe our public understanding of neutrality is more sophisticated than just saying that we want to be on the side of the good guys and that we are anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist. It involves an understanding of, and pride in, our UN commitment. There is a slight contradiction then in terms of what their attitude is to the use of military force, because they recognise and support-----