Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I begin with a simple assertion we can all agree with. The work Irish peacekeepers dedicate their lives to has never been more important. In 2023, we saw them work in incredibly difficult and dangerous conditions across the Middle East and other conflict zones around the world. In saying that, we should once again express our condolences to the family of Private Seán Rooney. I hope such a tragedy will never be permitted to happen again.

It is clear from this report and from the rhetoric and actions of the Government over the past 18 months that the Government intends to make a fundamental shift in our foreign policy approach and, as I and others believe, a shift in what constitutes Ireland's neutrality. That is best encapsulated by the removal of the triple lock, but also by PESCO. There is no trust in what the Irish Government intends to do. There is no trust because at its most basic, what it wants to do with the triple lock makes it easier for Irish troops to be deployed overseas on military operations. That is a statement of fact. The Tánaiste might shake his head, but the programme for Government and Fianna Fáil's manifesto for the previous general election had maintenance of the triple lock as paramount. I understand he might say that circumstances have changed, and they clearly have. What has not changed is the absence of a mandate to make a substantial change to Irish policy. It is in that that we have a significant lack of trust.

The continuation of this approach, without a mandate from the people, whether through a citizens’ assembly, a forum that has stood us well in the past, or through a very basic democratic structure of setting out the Government’s policy and manifestos for the next five years and asking whether the people will endorse it through their votes, leads to a continuation of that absence of trust. In practice, it means the State could send military personnel overseas on missions not mandated by the UN since the clause, which has served us well for decades, would be simply removed. That, more than anything else, threatens our neutrality. To date, all missions on which Irish personnel have served have been UN mandated, that is, the blue helmets. Many of my friends have served overseas during that time and they are proud to have been involved in UN-endorsed missions. To be a peacekeeper is a source of pride.

If the triple lock is removed, will it then be deemed permissible for, for example, the Government, the State or the Irish armed forces, or whatever we want to call it, to train soldiers overseas? We still do not have clarity on this, despite the question having been asked on numerous occasions. Deployment to train forces from another country could very well be deemed an act of war and could certainly be considered a breach of our neutrality. We have had examples of that.

The Tánaiste referred to the consultative forum. Many of us were initially critical of it, seeing it as a cloak by which we could advance a cause that had not been mandated by the people. I recall reading the report of the consultative forum, which clearly stated there is no mandate or appetite among the people to move away from the triple lock, for example, yet that has not been borne out in the actions, directions or intentions of the Tánaiste or the Government over the coming months, and I am worried by that. In three months, I hope, but potentially even later, there will be a general election. I cannot think of any better forum by which we could say what the policies of the various parties would be should they get a mandate to serve in government for the next five years. That these motions are being rushed through when a general election is coming down the line gives grounds for suspicion.

The world urgently needs countries working towards de-escalation, demilitarisation and disarmament, now more than ever. Ireland's colonial and postcolonial experiences, resulting in the promotion of self-determination, anti-imperialism and anti-militarism, have defined our contributions to peace at international level from the outset. We talk about a foreign policy doctrine for Ireland and what that means. It is clearly there, in our history, and has been borne out by the blood and loss of life of many of our blue helmets. If we are to make a change, we owe it to them to ensure that change will be scrutinised at the highest level, not only of our Parliament but of our democracy.

I am running out of time, so I will end on this point. I understand there are issues with the UN and that there are complicating factors but it is at this point, when the dogs of war are gathering, that we must stand up for these institutions that were born out of conflict. We should stand up for peace and recognise the fact the UN Security Council was born out of the devastation and horrors of the First World War and the Second World War. Rather than simply step away from these institutions when it is difficult, we should be that beacon that promotes peace. Our history demands it of us. We are uniquely placed, certainly in Europe but potentially in the world, to be that voice for these institutions because now more than ever they need it.

See this speech in context