Micheál seems intent on ending Irish neutrality

Well now, Micheál Martin is looking for trouble. I offered him a bit of good advice last week suggesting that, as President of the European Union, he should commence the dialogue that would bring Russia in from the cold. Perhaps the advice was a bit late and he did not have the time to properly assess it, but to go and invite Mr Zelensky to be a guest at his inauguration as President was hardly the wise thing to do and it was ingratiating to hear Micheál addressing Mr Zelensky as “Volodymyr” as if they were bosom buddies.

Mr Zelensky is the President of Ukraine and is entitled to be addressed properly. The bosom buddy act was quickly shattered by the hard-nosed Mr Zelensky when he interfered in the business of the Irish government by telling Micheál to get on with the job of sorting out Aughinish Alumina and not to take too long about it. He was not prepared to wait a month for results. Fair play to him he delivered a very direct message to his “buddy” Micheál.

It seems to me that Mr Zelensky is in danger of losing the run of himself. He has become a most demanding man. He demands that the EU man up and arm themselves at considerable cost. He demands that Mr Trump give him Patriot missiles (perhaps Mr Trump had a point when he told Mr Zelensky that he did not hold all the cards). And he demands a resolution of the Aughinish issue with scarce recognition of the 1,500 jobs in the Mid-West that will be placed in jeopardy.

In fairness he did offer thanks to the Irish people for the support given to the 90,000 of his fellow citizens who were offered refuge here after Russia invaded Ukraine. And well he should. Ireland did more, as was correct, than any other EU country in accommodating displaced Ukrainians.

“We will stand unswervingly by the people of Ukraine,” Micheál promised Mr Zelensky.

I don’t know if the Ukrainian President knows much about Irish history but it would be no harm if he was told what another Cork Taoiseach, the esteemed Jack Lynch, told the Irish people some time ago when the British Army ran riot in Derry. He declared that the Irish Government could no longer stand idly by and see innocent people injured. Well, we all know what action was taken by the Irish Government of the day. Damn all. And we all know what the British Army did on Bloody Sunday just three years after Jack’s promise.

Then there was the Ukrainian rejection of the offer by the Irish Defence Forces to donate 27 armoured vehicles to the Ukrainian army for use in the war with Russia. Now it appears the armoured vehicles were not in the first flush of youth and were 27 years old… but they were only slightly used as they frequently broke down. The Ukrainian army is a modern and well equipped army so they rejected the offer of the second-hand, prone-to-breakdown vehicles. Hardly a surprise, and the episode could be written off as a comical interlude in the sombre business of war but for the fact that the issue has serious implications.

It would seem to any casual observer that the Irish offer to provide weaponry to a foreign country for use against another country (even an invading country) has implications for Ireland’s neutrality status. I readily admit to not being an expert on neutrality but it would seem the offer of armoured vehicles must in some way breach our position.

Micheál Martin, as Taoiseach, seems intent on leading Ireland out of its neutral status. He is intent on removing the triple lock which requires the United Nations, the Government and the Dáil to give assent to the deployment of Irish troops on UN mandated peacekeeping operations. Dismantling the triple lock would, of course, be a first step in abandoning the country’s stance on neutrality. de Valera must be spinning in his grave.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a problem with abandoning neutrality provided it is the Irish people who make the decision. Micheál Martin may think, like de Valera, that all he has to do is to look into his own heart to decide how the Irish people think. But Micheál is no de Valera and it seems to me he is getting ahead of himself and certainly ahead of the Irish people if he thinks he can, Moses like, lead the Irish people out of the promised land of neutrality and into NATO. There is no limbo. It is either neutrality or NATO.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation has not exactly covered itself in glory over the past decade or two. In the aftermath of World War II, NATO was probably a good idea, The victors of World War II divided the spoils in the way they thought best and as Stalin’s Russia had led the way to Berlin they forced a deal on the United Kingdom and the United States with little consideration for the interests of other countries. So a bulwark against any further aggression by Russia seemed a good idea at the time.

But like all good ideas it has become frayed at the edges and fed up with carrying the cost of “defending” Europe from the Russian hordes, Mr Trump decided to cut his losses and told Europe to fend for themselves. So instead of discussing who they were defending themselves from, the EU/UK decided to re-arm at considerable cost to the taxpayer and providing a great boost to the US arms industry.

Now, the bigger EU powers are gearing up to provide the weapons of destruction themselves and generating employment with the result that the EU minnows, who don’t have arms industries, will end up bearing the cost of this re-armament. That includes the Irish taxpayer who may also have to find replacement jobs for the Aughinish Alumina workers. That is what our esteemed Taoiseach is signing the Irish people up to.

As we know, Sabina Higgins, wife of then President Michael D, got into hot water with the politicos and the Irish media when she had the temerity to write a letter urging talks with Russia to try to bring the Russian invasion to a halt. It was a sensible suggestion from a concerned lady but she was excoriated by the politicians (who had nothing to offer other than spies in the Dáil) and the media (talk about freedom of expression) for daring to offer thoughts above her station.

There’s a Russian ambassador above in Dublin who is practically a prisoner in his Embassy. As we know, one very thoughtful Irish lorry driver took it into his head to reverse invade into the Embassy but was stopped by the gates and the gate pillar. When charged, he was exonerated by his peers in the Irish courts, as you would expect. The Irish are peace loving and just.

It seems to me that Micheál’s government is not conversing with Mr Yuri Filatov. They are boycotting him to the extent that he is reduced to writing letters to The Irish Times. In fairness The Irish Times, though it is fiercely anti Russia in its reporting and editorial content, prints Mr Filatov’s letters, as they should. However, it is hardly correct that an ambassador to this country has to resort to this kind of diplomacy. We did introduce boycott to the English language and are good at it, but this is daft.

It is past time to start the dialogue. Even Mr Zelensky has appealed and continues to appeal for dialogue with Mr Putin. Now, he has his own agenda and places conditions on how that dialogue might begin, knowing full well that Mr Putin will refuse or ignore his call for talk. Shakespeare put it well in Julius Caesar: There is a tide in the affairs of men, which leads on to fortune. The flood has built up, the time is right but will Micheál seize the opportunity? He is in a powerful position. He is President of the EU. He could start the dialogue. What harm could it do?