Instead of recognising Higgins’ valuable and timely interjection, a cynical campaign has been whipped up to distract attention from his crucial contribution to an issue of enormous importance to every person in Ireland. Why this issue matters so much is quite straightforward.
By remaining neutral and rejecting involvement or alignment with any and every military block, we avoid inviting the devastating consequences of contemporary warfare. The alternative, joining in military pacts with other countries, offers no protection. On the contrary, it would simply make us a target. Consider for a moment what Michael D said. ‘Ireland is playing with fire during a dangerous period of drift in foreign policy - and should avoid burying itself in other people's agendas’. It is possible to disagree with this assessment.
In a recent interview with the journal.ie Brig Gen Ger Buckley, who manages both the Irish state’s military engagement with the European Union and NATO is quoted saying,:
… I lead the military element of our office out in Nato, which is a very small office. I see partnership for us as giving us opportunities and benefits’.
The Journal further reported that Buckley also interacts with NATO as Ireland has been a partner nation of the alliance for a number of years. This makes it abundantly clear that Michael D has every reason to be concerned.
Let us be clear, there can be no ambivalence about what constitutes neutrality. There is no halfway house. No partial neutrality. No picking or choosing sides. We are either neutral or we are not and Brig Gen Buckley demonstrates we are certainly ‘playing with fire during a dangerous period of drift’. Sane and sensible voices are being raised calling for a return to a position of unambiguous Irish neutrality including having neutrality inserted definitively in the constitution.
For the sake of everyone living on this island, this is a campaign that we must endorse and engage with.
🖼 Micheál Choilm Mac Giolla Easbuig is an independent councillor on Donegal County Council.
I couldn't agree more, the 26 county administration are 'playing with fire' and have been for some years. The use of the US using Shannon Airport raises a huge question over our supossed unambiguous neutrality. These are dangerous times to be tinkering with our neutrality, and it appears that pleasing the bigger NATO war mongering countries, the US and UK, is more important to the government than maintaining Irelands neutrality. For the record without putting two finer point on it; one SS 20 with multiple nuclear warheads would obliterate Ireland, all of us north and south.
ReplyDeleteCaoimhin O'Muraile
Caoimhin - it is alarming. Yet, it will be sold to us on the basis that those within NATO are safer than those outside. If my geography is correct (or more accurately if my memory of someone else's geography is correct) Russia now has a 800km border with a NATO country - Finland, which only joined after the war on Ukraine.
DeleteAnthony I've never suggested Putins stratergy was correct, though his fears of NATO expansion and, more concerning, the presense of neo- Nazis in Ukraine is with much foundation. Now, what does the idiot do? He employs a former hot dog seller and criminal and his army of ex cons, who in my view are eqally as sinister of Azov, to sort out fellow Nazis. The recent events would not surprise me could have been concocted by Azov and Wagner.
ReplyDeleteThe Waffen SS General, Sepp Deitricht, was a former butcher with no military experience of relavence, was put at the head of a bunch of criminals the murderous SS. The man in charge of Wagner, whose name I cannot spell, is, like Deitricht, an out and out fascist. I think he may have done a Nazi style deal with Azov? If turns out to be the case, which we'll probably never know necause the west will not tell us, a very dangerois situa.tion is evolving!!
Caoimhin O'Muraile
Caoimhin, does it not seem that he has caused NATO expansion? He has given it the excuse to expand. And he can't be that worried about the Nazis given that there are so many of them on his own side.
DeleteSepp Dietrich got where he did because he was one of the old Nazis. He was no Kurt Meyer but not wholly incompetent. One of the senior Wehrmacht generals described him as stupid. But the Waffen SS could fight. Strange that they were not sent to Stalingrad.
The people of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia sleep soundly in their beds every night because their membership of NATO is their guarantee against their reoccupation by Russia. Caoimhin, what is happening to do is nothing to do with Azov Brigade and everything to do with the mob falling out with each other. As I have said so many times, Putin's Russia is the lodestar of the modern European far right (and Stalinoid fragments of the far left); he invaded Ukraine to reconstitute the ancient territory of Greater Rus. "NATO expansionism" and the Azov Battalion are just non-existent pretexts. And btw Putin was all for joining NATO in the time when George W. Bush claimed to be able to look into his soul and perceive his soul.
ReplyDeleteWell, Barry, as you are pro NATO and would like to see Ireland lose our neutrality and join them, or so it sounds, lets ask the people. Let us have a refferendum on the issue, as it is vital to our future, so how would they vote? I accept it is not neccessarily a constitutional issue and technically there is no need to bother the population on whether they wish to become a target or not! So lets ask them, it is, after all the people who have no nuclear shelters to run to who may suffer as a result. Lets see if the Irish people will "sleep soundly" and there is only one way to find out, ask them.
ReplyDeleteAs for collusion between Azov and Wagner I suggested its a possibility not a fact. Wagner and Azov share much ideology and, as many Ukrainian and Russian Nazis sided with the Third Reich could such collusion be happening now? May be, maybe not, but do not dismiss it out of hand.
Caoimhin O'Muraile
I think there should be a referendum on it. But you seem to be coming at it from the wrong angle - about putting it to people if they want to be a target or not. Other countries are applying to join NATO because they believe, given the experience of Ukraine, it is the best way to avoid becoming a target. I think this could emerge as the biggest obstacle to us when we campaign against going into NATO.
DeleteCollusion between Azov and Wagner - I suppose it always requires somebody to take a risk and raise the question, much like you did when you asked if Scap really was dead. It might seem delusional to many but the possibility exists even if slim. It is not as if you are asking if perhaps the universe is 6000 years old.
Actually Caoimhin, I believe that it is a matter for the people or elected reps in the Republic of Ireland as a sovereign democracy to decide on NATO membership. I don't live in ROI so it is not my call.
DeleteYes, Anthony, Putin may well have given NATO an excuse, but did they really need one? They never did in the past despite promises not to expand eastwards!
ReplyDeleteI firmly beleive the Nazi threat is real, and lets be honest, there are plenty of closet Nazis in the west only too keen for such a scenario. As I am sure you will agree, we should never down play the Nazi threat while at the same time not becoming paranoid.
Caoimhin O'Muraile
Caoimhin - NATO was pretty obstructive when it came to Ukraine joining. If I am right the membership Application Plan stage was never even reached. A more relevant question is why countries like Finland and Sweden wanted to join when previously they did not. That there is a debate shaping up in this part of Ireland around these matters is arguably the direct result of Russia's war on Ukraine. If citizens feel safer by joining NATO what is it they feel threatened by?
DeleteDid Finland and Sweden hold refferenda Anthony? Or did their governments just go ahead and join? Putin has provided a credible excuse for countries whose governments are hell bent on joining NATO, but do their electorate share this enthusiasm? Putin has certainly made himself a threatening figure by his invasion of Ukraine but appears to have made such a mess of things that the threat is now minimised. His main weapon is Russias nuclear arsenal, the largest of any single coountry on earth!
ReplyDeleteCaoimhin O'Muraile
No. The Finns discussed holding one but public opinion became so overwhelmingly in favour of it that they reckoned it no longer needed a referendum. The Swedish parliament also voted in favour. So by the look of things the public at large were spooked by the war on Ukraine. Two years ago it seemed unthinkable that either would join.The parliaments in both countries might have felt under more internal pressure to join than external. Sweden have not got in yet because of a veto exercised by Hungary and Turkey but I guess that will lift.
DeleteI think there should always be a referendum in these things but your point on the constitutionality of it might make one in Ireland problematic. There is a simple logic at play here - join NATO and don't get attacked. Don't join and do get attacked. If Russia wages war on Finland, that logic is upended.
I see us being outflanked in Ireland on the matter but hope otherwise.
"On December 5, 1994 the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Britain, and the United States signed a memorandum to provide Ukraine with security assurances in connection with its accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state. The four parties signed the memorandum, containing a preamble and six paragraphs. The memorandum reads as follows:[10]
ReplyDeleteThe United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons[10]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
Putin has evidently broke this treaty, that is not in question. His fears about a Nazi presence are proven correct, Azov are operational within the Ukrainian armed forces. This is equally valid but his remedy is the problem, the invasion, and, as I've pointed out months ago in TPQ he should have used the machinery available, not invade. The UN for example were set up to, among other things, sort these problems out. However, the USA and UK have undermined the UN so many times now they are effectivelly toothless. That said, Russia are permanent members of the UNSC so do carry weight.
ReplyDeleteThe UN to one side the treaty highlighled by Jim could and should have been used. The key word being "consult".
The west encouraged that old sot Yeltsin in dissmantling the former, admitedly far from perfect, USSR and look at the mess there now.
Caoimhin O'Muraile
Caoimhin, like yourself, I very much abhor Nazis. But I don't believe that Putin had many fears about them. He might have used it to stir up fear in his own population - always a stratagem for warmongers.
DeleteWould you rather live in West or in one of the Soviet societies? I much prefer the West. Having no experience of anything else I suppose that is much to be expected.
Caoimhin
DeleteThe UN for example were set up to, among other things, sort these problems out.
I have asked the same question on TPQ months ago...."Where the fcuk is UN in all this"....
The fact is, Anthony, they are present seventy eight years after the end of WWII. They model themselves on "Das Reich", their boast not mine. Whatever Putins motives were either by coincidence or otherwise his claim proved correct probably for the wrong reasons.
ReplyDeleteCaoimhin O'Muraile
Caoimhin, the fact is also that in some of their pre invasion interviews they cited Putin as their hero. Little point in being interested in Nazis in another's back yard when you have them in your own. I think by this stage few gave his ostensible concerns about Nazis any credence. At present Finland has its most right wing government in ages. He will find Nazis there also.
DeleteFrankie, the UN is hobbled by the presence of Russia as one of the Five Permanent members of its Security Council with their accompanying power of veto.
ReplyDelete