2026-02-17

144. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Defence if she will outline her proposals to remove the triple lock neutrality protection; when she intends to bring forward a Bill; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12539/26]

The question will be introduced by Deputy Seán Crowe.

Again, it is the issue of the triple lock. The triple lock neutrality protection is something that is valued by Irish people. It is extremely concerning that the Cabinet would so easily approve moves to dismantle the triple lock neutrality protection on the deployment of Irish troops abroad. Most evidence points to the fact that most Irish people believe that the triple lock neutrality protection is necessary and that it is an important protection to ensure our neutrality. If it is to be dismantled, the Irish people need to know exactly how that is going to happen.

I will answer this one on behalf of the Minister. As the Minister has already set out, the defence (amendment) Bill is included in the Government legislative programme for priority publication. There are also some other amendments to the Defence Acts in the legislation. What the triple lock legislation or the defence (amendment) Bill will do is remove the requirement for the UN Security Council mandate because, quite frankly, it is almost impossible to get one and we do not know what the UN Security Council will say in terms of renewing peacekeeping mandates. Effectively, by keeping this in place, we allow members of the Security Council a veto. There are five permanent members, and each of them has a veto. That is Russia, China, France, the UK and the USA. They can veto or use the threat of a veto. In fact, as the Minister said, we have seen UNIFIL end because of, essentially, one member of the Security Council. It is not possible either to go to the General Assembly. What is being suggested regarding the General Assembly cannot happen because it does not have responsibility for international peace and security. In any event, what Deputy Crowe is asking for is not just to give a veto to five members of the Security Council but to canvass every country on earth, including Israel and other countries, on whether Ireland can send peacekeeping troops into areas where they are required. This is something that really is untenable. We are a neutral country. We send peacekeepers. We will send them in accordance with UN law, human rights law and the honourable tradition that we have, but we will not continue in a situation where individual countries can veto our decisions of the Dáil. I should say as well that there is no suggestion that this removes our neutrality in any way whatsoever. Nothing changes the protocol to the Lisbon treaty. There is nothing in the legislation that can or will affect the protocols of the Lisbon treaty on neutrality.

I remember the Nice treaty and the Lisbon treaty and the assurances given to the Irish people at the time. I made the point that the Irish people do not trust the Government, they do not trust us and I do not think they trust the people in this Chamber. People have huge difficulties about this. The world needs more honest brokers like a neutral Ireland. We have never been a coloniser. We have never invaded another country. We are respected as peacekeepers and peacemakers. We have experienced conflict and division on our own island and we have practical experience of building peace. This is the approach and it has also allowed us to do vital work, including nuclear non-proliferation, disarmament and humanitarianism. By removing the triple lock we are signalling to the world that we are ready to cast off our neutrality and embrace the wave of militarism sweeping Europe and the rest of the world. It is not good enough that the Government would use the Irish Defence Forces as a political bargaining chip when it has singularly failed to address the serious problem with retention and recruitment that the Army, the Naval Service and the Air Corps have been experiencing for years. The problem is not with the Security Council or anyone else but that people in this House have run down the Defence Forces. This is the biggest challenge with our Defence Forces as we move forward.

We want to make sure our Defence Forces can, first of all, engage in their primary function, which is the protection of the security of the State and, when called upon, to go abroad to serve as peacekeepers, as they have honourably done. Removing the triple lock will not change this in any way. There are many neutral countries and I do not think any of them have as restrictive a law as we do. I agree with Deputy Duncan Smith who said we must protect our neutrality. I was in Switzerland last week when the subject of neutrality was very strong on the agenda. They speak about an armed neutrality. Deputy Gibney spoke about non-militarism or antimilitarism with regard to Trinity College students. We have to protect our neutrality and build up our Defence Forces. We have to make the decisions here as to what we do in terms of peace and security and the work our people do. I am very confident that we can do this. It does not affect neutrality. What was agreed in the Nice and Lisbon treaties in terms of neutrality has not changed and is not changing. In fact, it cannot be changed without a referendum of the people. That does not affect this in any way whatsoever.

Surely any decision that could lead to significant shifts in foreign and defence policy must only be considered following robust engagement with the Irish people, and we have not seen this. This is the big weakness in the Minister of State's argument. We have not seen that engagement with people. People have not had the opportunity. I have no doubt that if there were a plebiscite, the Government's proposal would be rejected. If the Government is so sure and confident of its position in relation to the Irish people, why does it not put forward a plebiscite on this? It is a simple question. Will the Minister of State give us a simple answer on it? People want to know why the Government is intent on going down this road. We remember previous elections. Fianna Fáil ran in favour of Irish neutrality and said it would not do away with the triple lock and Fine Gael was the same. What has changed?

The reason we have a constitutional amendment is if we want to change the Constitution. We are not changing the Constitution, it is simply changing legislation. What was agreed at Lisbon is still in the Constitution by virtue of the protocol to the Lisbon treaty. This does not affect it in any way. I am quite sure that whatever referendum the Government would put forward on Europe or defence, Sinn Féin would oppose it as it has opposed every one of them over the years, but what was agreed by the people in the Lisbon treaty is still there. It is still in the Lisbon treaty and, therefore, it is still in our Constitution. This is a change in legislation and a change in procedures as to how we decide and make our own decisions to send troops abroad. It is not a change in our neutrality policy and it does not affect anything. There are many paragraphs in Article 3 of the protocol to the Lisbon treaty that discuss our neutrality policy and describe it, and this does not impact on it in any way.