|
Volume 1 (1999/2000)
Issue
1 (March 1999)
Issue
2 (Nov. 1999)
Issue 3 (Dec. 1999)
Issue 4 (Feb. 2000)
Issue 5 (March 2000)
Issue 6 (April 2000)
Issue
7 (May 2000)
Volume 2 (2000/2001)
Issue 1 (Sept. 2000)
Issue 2 (Oct. 2000)
Issue 3 (Jan. 2001)
Issue 4 (March 2001)
Issue 5 (April 2001)
Issue 6 (May 2001)
Volume 3 (2001)
Issue 1 (Sept. 2001)
Issue 2 (Nov. 2001)
Categories
Sport: 1
2 3
Lifestyles: 1 2
3
Commentary: 1 2
3
Review: 1 2
3
Writing: 1 2
3
Event: 1 2
3
|
Patrick Nulty
Riversdale CC
Since the Second World War Ireland has adopted a policy of military neutrality.
However, our recent entry into the NATO led "Partnership for Peace"
(PFP) has brought the future of our defence policy into sharp focus.
The policy of military neutrality has become ingrained in the Irish psyche
and many Irish people wear the badge of neutrality with unquestioning
pride. Indeed many people's previous belief that neutrality was enshrined
in the Constitution of the State, and not simply the policy of successive
governments, was shattered by our entry into "Partnership for Peace".
It is clear that the old policy of neutrality is just another Cold War
relic. Irish neutrality is, and always has been, an excuse for moral ambiguity
and political cowardice in relation to foreign affairs.
In my opinion, Irish foreign and security policy and that of all European
countries can go in two separate directions. The first is the strengthening
of NATO, and by extension closer ties with the United States. The alternative
is the creation of a European Union defence alliance that would act on
behalf of, and in conjunction with, the United Nations.
The United States of America likes to portray itself as the land of the
free and the defender of civil liberties everywhere. Unfortunately, it
does do not live up to its own standards when it comes to foreign affairs.
There are countless examples of America's hypocritical approach to foreign
policy. One of the several examples of this was in Chile in 1974 when
the United States helped to overthrow the democratically elected Socialist
government and helped to put in place a military government led by one
of the most brutal dictators of the century, General Pinochet. The United
States was also a party to the most appalling slaughter of civilians in
Vietnam during the nineteen sixties and Central America in the eighties.
Although these events must be placed in the context of the Cold War with
an equally hypocritical Communist government in the former Soviet Union,
this still does not justify their actions in each case. These events show
Ireland's entry to PFP is one of the most dangerous policy decisions ever
made by an Irish government. This is because any organisation which has
the United States as its driving force cannot be trusted to operate properly
in international affairs.
The only organisation that has moral integrity to act or to delegate responsibility
internationally in military matters is the United Nations. Ireland has
played its part in humanitarian peace keeping forces - Lebanon and The
Congo to name just two. The UN should not be the ally of any faction or
group involved in a conflict but rather the ally of democracy and human
rights.
Recent events in Kosovo and East Timor show that at times military intervention
into a country's internal affairs may be necessary to prevent mass murder
and great human suffering. Any action of this kind should have UN approval
if it is to have the moral integrity necessary to do its job. In such
situations it is also important to try and ensure the minimum amount of
damage to civilians and their property and where damage occurs compensation
should be provided. I believe that the European Union should have a Common
Foreign and Security Policy that would, when all diplomatic alternatives
have failed, engage in peace-making activities. For such an action to
take place there must be two key requirements. First, every member of
the European Union must be in agreement with the action and second, the
action must have the support of the UN Security Council. Although such
a system is by no means perfect, it is the only way to ensure democratic
accountability to the process.
I believe that Ireland should be an enthusiastic advocate for such a
system. The European Union is slowly creating an alternative global economic
approach to the United States, should also create a clear alternative
in foreign policy and defence matters. It can do this by strengthening
co-operation between its members in international affairs as well as promoting
the importance of the role of the UN in global affairs. The future of
Irish defence policy lies not in neutrality or in any NATO orchestrated
organisation but in the creation of democratic structures that, when necessary,
are prepared to defend human rights for the many and not a select few.
Back to the top
|