Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the establishment by the Minister of the consultative forum on international security policy. The brutal invasion by Russia of Ukraine has significantly altered the international security environment. War has broken out in Europe again. The rules-based international order is under threat and like-minded democracies need to show solidarity with each other at this time.

Countries in Europe are reassessing their security and defence policies. Sweden and Finland responded immediately by applying to join NATO. New and emerging threats are all too apparent to us in Ireland. Cyberattacks, hybrid warfare, disinformation, election interference and threats to critical infrastructure have become a reality in the world of today. It is not that long since our health service was crippled by a cyberattack on the HSE. Russian navy and merchant ships continue to be observed off the south and west coasts in our exclusive economic zone in the vicinity of the underseas cables connecting the US and Europe. It would be negligent and irresponsible if our Government did not assess these new threats and bring forward policy responses in respect of our security and defence position. As we heard, the forum will consider these matters in June in counties Cork, Galway and Dublin. We need a respectful, honest and mature debate on these matters. There should be maximum engagement and all points of view should be considered. I welcome the fact that there will be no predetermined or preconceived outcomes from the discussion at the forum, according to the Minister.

Since the Second World War, Ireland has pursued a policy of military neutrality and that policy continues to serve us well. We do not participate in military alliances or mutual defence arrangements, and I do not see the need to change this fundamental policy. We are not politically neutral, however, and we co-operate with other states both in the UN and EU in respect of security and defence matters. When we joined the UN in 1955 and the European Economic Community, EEC, in 1973, we accepted that we could not act alone as regards our foreign policy. In my view, the forum needs to pay attention to how the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy is evolving and how Ireland is responding to these changes. We have been active participants in the CSDP. We have been involved in PESCO missions. We have agreed to the concept of EU battle groups. We pay into the European Defence Fund. We have signed up to the EU training mission for Ukraine that is under way in Cyprus. We provided non-lethal support for Ukraine under the European Peace Facility. We have also signed up to the strategic compass, which commits member states to spend more on defence to develop their military and security capacity and co-operate with NATO. Under the strategic compass, a rapid reaction force will also be established. At the end of the day, however, it should be remembered that defence remains a national competence within the EU and similar to other member states, we can opt in or out of missions having regard to our unique history, traditions and circumstances.

Central to Irish foreign policy should be peacekeeping, conflict prevention, peacebuilding, arms control and nuclear disarmament. We have a proud tradition as regards UN and EU peacekeeping, crisis management and conflict resolution. We need to continue to advocate for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear arms. It should also be noted that our signing of the 2017 UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is incompatible with NATO membership anyway. Fighting global hunger and food insecurity must also be key objectives for Ireland and we should continue with our special interest in the welfare and development of the global south, in particular.

This brings me to the issue of grey zone warfare, that is, cyberattacks, hybrid warfare and threats to our critical infrastructure, which includes natural gas, electric subsea interconnectors and subsea cables that make up our telecommunications infrastructure, many of which are critical to global communications. We have seen interference with the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines. There have also been warnings of potential cyberattacks on our energy grid. The forum needs to examine the implications of the EU directive on network and information security, NIS2, and how this will be transposed into Irish law. It also needs to examine the role of the Naval Service and Air Corp in protecting our critical infrastructure and consider whether it has the necessary capacity to do this. We also need to hear more about reports that Ireland is likely to join a NATO Partnership for Peace project to protect undersea cables from a possible Russian sabotage attack. The Dáil needs to be kept informed about this initiative as it evolves.

The forum also needs to take a long, hard look at the so-called triple lock whereby the Government and Dáil must give approval for deployment of our Defence Forces overseas and any decision in this regard must be backed up by a UN Security Council resolution. It is not acceptable that Russia or China, for example, can veto a mission in which Ireland would like to participate.

It has also become very clear that Ireland must be able to defend its neutrality. We need an armed neutrality, if you like. That is why the establishment of the Commission on the Defence Forces was timely, as was the subsequent decision to increase defence spending on the Army, Air Corps and Naval Service. As the Minister just said, Ireland has now committed to multi-annual funding increases to reach a defence budget of €1.5 billion by 2028 linked to inflation, which I welcome.

We also need to hear more about the secret arrangement dating back to 1952 that allows RAF aircraft to intercept hostile aircraft in Irish airspace and to use lethal force, if necessary. We are told that this involves a memorandum of understanding and not a legal treaty. I acknowledge what the Minister had to say about this. I appreciate that he believes secrecy is needed to some extent in this regard. It has been widely reported in the media in recent days, however, and the UK Minister of State for the Armed Forces, Mr. James Heappey MP, has confirmed that the arrangement is, in fact, in place. I believe the Dáil needs to be given some information about this arrangement at this stage given the comments of Mr. Heappey in the House of Commons.

I welcome the Minister's remarks on concerns that the CSDP is a stepping stone to a European army. I agree with him about that. It is a fact that no EU nation state is contemplating the creation of a European army or wishing for one to be established. At the end of the day, the EU is first and foremost a peace project created out of the ruins of the First World War and the Second World War and is founded on liberal democratic values. This is something that should not be forgotten as the CSDP evolves in the years ahead.

I have listened to the debate as to why a citizens' assembly has not been set up to examine this issue and I appreciate what the Minister said, that the matter is urgent and that there are already two citizens' assemblies under way in respect of drugs and education. I accept what he has to say in that regard. The matter is becoming urgent and I agree, therefore, that the forum is the way to proceed at this stage.

In respect of military neutrality from a legal point of view, we need to first consult with the EU treaties, specifically the Lisbon treaty, but also the Irish Constitution. A protocol to the Lisbon treaty states that it "does not affect or prejudice Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality". Article 29.4.9° of Bunreacht na hÉieann, which was added following the defeat of the first Lisbon referendum, states, "The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 42 of the Treaty of the European Union where that common defence would include the State." It is interesting to note that the word "neutrality" does not appear in the Constitution. Article 42 of the Lisbon treaty makes provision for a national assistance clause. That is the legal position as I see it and I do not think there is any need to revisit that legal position at this stage.

We are having a constructive and mature debate and listening to all points of view. I hope the forum will also adopt a similar position. Times are changing and, as I have said, the brutal invasion by Russia of Ukraine has certainly forced a reassessment of security and defence policies by the EU member states and countries in the vicinity of Europe. I thank the Minister for this initiative. The matter is becoming more and more urgent by the day. We see developments with Russian ships off the west and couth coasts of Ireland, as well as all sorts of other developments. The debate is timely, if not overdue. I look forward to engaging with the forum as it sets about its task next month.

See this speech in context