Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann: recognises:

— that Irish neutrality has served us well, allowing Ireland to play a constructive role in the world, contributing to nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament, humanitarianism, and peacekeeping missions; and

— the bravery and courage of Irish peacekeepers currently deployed around the world, and in particular those serving with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in the Golan Heights;

notes that:

— the rejection by the Irish people of both the Nice I and Lisbon I referenda were informed in part by their concerns that those treaties of the European Union would diminish Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality;

— the response of the Irish Government to these concerns in advance of the subsequent Nice II referendum was outlined in the Seville Declaration on the Treaty of Nice, wherein the Government of Ireland made "a firm commitment to the people of Ireland, solemnized in this Declaration, that a referendum will be held in Ireland on the adoption of any such decision and on any future Treaty which would involve Ireland departing from its traditional policy of military neutrality";

— the Seville Declaration further reiterated "that the participation of contingents of the Irish Defence Forces in overseas operations, including those carried out under the European security and defence policy, requires (a) the authorisation of the operation by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations, (b) the agreement of the Irish Government and (c) the approval of Dáil Éireann, in accordance with Irish law";

— the response of the Irish Government to these concerns in advance of the subsequent Lisbon II referendum was outlined through the Irish Guarantee on the Lisbon Treaty, wherein through national declaration, Ireland reiterated "that the participation of contingents of the Irish Defence Forces in overseas operations, including those carried out under the European Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) requires (a) the authorisation of the operation by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations, (b) the agreement of the Irish Government, and (c) the approval of Dáil Éireann, in accordance with Irish law";

— the national declaration contained within the Irish Guarantee on the Lisbon Treaty further declared that Ireland would participate only in European Defence Agency projects or programmes "that contribute to enhancing the capabilities required for participation in UN-mandated missions for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter";

— on 25th June, 2013, An Tánaiste, Micheál Martin TD, in a statement to the Dáil stated "It appears that Fine Gael is arguing that Ireland is failing in its European responsibilities and is allowing Russia and China to have a veto over our peacekeeping activities. This is nothing more than an out-of-touch ideological obsession on the part of Fine Gael which ignores the facts of Ireland's international standing";

— the Fianna Fáil 2020 General Election Manifesto stated under the heading "Fully maintain neutrality and the Triple Lock" that "Fianna Fáil reaffirms its commitment to the retention of the triple lock of UN mandate or authorisation, Government and Dáil approval, prior to committing Defence Forces personnel on overseas service. Ireland has correctly conferred primacy to the UN since joining in 1955, working with other UN members in supporting international action in areas such as disarmament, peacekeeping across its full spectrum, humanitarian/development actions and human rights implementation. We will fully maintain neutrality and the triple lock mechanism";

— the current Programme for Government: Our Shared Future commits this Government to "ensure that all overseas operations will be conducted in line with our position of military neutrality and will be subject to a triple lock of UN, Government and Dáil Éireann approval";

— an IPSOS/MRBI poll of 15th April, 2022, showed two-thirds of voters did not want to see any change in neutrality "generally understood as...[requiring] a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution for Irish troops to be committed abroad"; and

— the Report of the Chair on the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy stated that "A considerable majority of those who spoke or wrote on this topic expressed the view that there is presently no public appetite for a change to the current position on neutrality";

further notes that:

— the Government is presiding over a worsening recruitment and retention crisis that is seeing more members leaving than are recruited to the Permanent Defence Forces on a yearly basis;

— there are currently 7,671 members of the Permanent Defence Forces, against an establishment figure of 9,600, and a Level of Ambition 2 (LOA2) contained in the Report of the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces requirement of 11,500;

— arising from this worsening recruitment and retention crisis, the Naval Service can currently only put between one and two ships to sea to patrol and secure Irish waters;

— Ireland currently lacks the primary radar which is a pre-requisite to adequately monitoring activity in Irish skies;

— LOA2, as outlined within the Report of the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces, required a need of investment of €246.5 million annually over ten years and that the Government fell short of this investment by €70 million in 2023, and will also fail to meet this target by €70 million in 2024; and

— the Government has decided to withdraw Irish Defence Forces participation from the UNDOF mission to the Golan Heights, to which Ireland has contributed over 2,700 troops within the past decade; and

calls on Government to:

— adequately fund the Defence Forces in 2024, to meet the minimum requirements outlined within LOA2 of the Report of the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces;

— review the decision of Government to withdraw Irish participation in the UNDOF mission to the Golan Heights;

— establish a Citizens' Assembly tasked with agreeing a wording of a constitutional amendment to enshrine the principle of neutrality in the Constitution of Ireland;

— engage with EU institutions and member states with a view to recognising the integrity of neutral states within the EU treaties, should a constitutional amendment be carried;

— ensure that members of the Irish Defence Forces deployed on overseas missions do so with a mandate from the UN; and

— ensure that any proposed substantive change to Ireland's neutral status, particularly the removal of neutrality protections such as the so-called triple lock, be put directly before the Irish people through referendum.

Last week, the Tánaiste told the Dáil that he had instructed his officials to bring forward legislative proposals to abolish the triple lock neutrality protection without delay. The term "without delay" stuck with me because the Tánaiste does not use it often. In fact, whenever I ask him for updates on capital investment for the Defence Forces or the implementation of the working time directive or for other measures to be taken that might address the retention and recruitment crisis in the Defence Forces, I am met with excuse after excuse for each year that passes. Under the Tánaiste's watch, more people are leaving the Defence Forces than are joining, but he tells us nothing can be done quickly to address it.

It is not so for the core policy that underpins our neutrality and foreign policy. That can be waived without delay. Why? Perhaps one of the Ministers before us tonight will finally tell us what overseas mission or missions they are currently prevented from sending troops to that they want to send them to. What is the rush? Do they accept the Irish people have a right to know, especially as this move is happening at exactly the same time as the Government is withdrawing the Defence Forces from an important UN mandated peacekeeping mission? It is one for which our soldiers have earned high praise, in the Golan Heights in Syria. On the one hand, Irish soldiers are being withdrawn from a UN mission of value, not at the behest of the Russians or the Chinese, but at the Government's insistence and on the other hand, the Government wants to change the rules so that Irish soldiers can be sent on other missions - we do not know what they are - that do not have a UN mandate.

It is an entirely legitimate argument that we should abandon the triple lock protection. I fundamentally disagree with it, but people are entitled to make the argument. They are not entitled to mislead or pretend that such a move would not bring us beyond neutrality or that it would not allow a government to shift the premise of Irish foreign policy from conflict resolution to participation in conflict. How do we know? It is because Fine Gael told us. Twenty years ago, Fine Gael was upfront and stark about its intentions. It produced a document blatantly called Beyond Neutrality, which clearly set out the party's ambition to abandon Ireland's neutrality and independent foreign policy. Key to the proposal in the document was the abolition of the triple lock mechanism. As it happens, the proposals were quietly dropped, although some were later adopted by stealth. They were dropped for three reasons. First, it was clear that the Irish people vehemently opposed the trajectory. Second, Fianna Fáil at least presented some optics of principle. Fianna Fáil leaders were against it, including the Tánaiste who, while in opposition, called out the proposed move away from triple lock neutrality protection as "nothing more than an out-of-touch ideological obsession on the part of Fine Gael which ignores the facts of Ireland’s international standing". Third, the triple lock became a central guarantee to secure the support of Irish voters for the ratification of the Lisbon treaty in 2009. For a while at least, governments knew that any suggestion of removing this neutrality protection would be a gross betrayal of the mandate they had sought and secured in that vote.

Last week's speech by the Tánaiste could have been taken directly from the Fine Gael document of 2003. We are hearing the same old arguments that were made 20 years ago with the additional cynical cloak of manipulating recent events in Ukraine as a guise to implement a two decades-old Fine Gael policy. Interestingly, the Fine Gael document had a term for the approach of Micheál Martin's party. It said that the nod-and-wink approach of the Fianna Fáil Government on Partnership for Peace cannot be allowed to be a precedent to be followed. It is no surprise that the public is suspicious when we have a Government committed to hiding the reality of discussions at EU level on new security arrangements. The document also said that the underhand way of managing such an important aspect of Ireland's foreign policy cannot be allowed to continue. However, continue it did.

Twenty years later, Fianna Fáil under Micheál Martin has become indistinguishable from Fine Gael. It has adopted hook, line and sinker a Fine Gael foreign policy position it knows the Irish people do not support. In return, Fine Gael has adopted the Fianna Fáil nod-and-wink approach by bringing this motion forward together in the most underhand, duplicitous and dishonest manner imaginable. They pretend this is about sovereignty and standing up to the Russians when in fact this proposal is about undoing decades of neutrality and independent foreign policy. My appeal to the Government is for it to be upfront about what it is proposing and then honourable enough to let the people have their say.

See this speech in context