Speaking ahead of an EU and NATO dinner in Madrid this week, Taoiseach Micheál Martin expressed his desire to see a Citizens’ Assembly on ending Irish military neutrality. Because if there’s one thing this country doesn’t have enough of, it’s Citizens’ Assemblies.
Before even addressing Martin’s comments, of course, there’s probably a question to be asked about how appropriate it is in the first place for the Taoiseach to attend a NATO dinner as the head of a neutral country.
If one didn’t know better, they might start to believe that Martin had already made up his mind about this issue, and isn’t too concerned about appearing neutral even before the public have had their say.
Regardless, Martin went on to tell the media about his desire for yet another Citizens’ Assembly – this time, on ending our hallowed tradition of military neutrality. As reported by RTÉ:
“On the question of changing neutrality generally he said that was something people would ultimately have to have a say in. He said a Citizens’ Assembly could allow for an informed discussion on the issue.”
Now at this point we have to ask who exactly is calling for this, other than Neale Richmond? Because as IPSOS polling has shown, the overwhelming majority of Irish people support the current model of neutrality, even in the face of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Overwhelming support for retention of Ireland’s military neutrality
via @IrishTimeshttps://t.co/l0Y1Q1IT0o— Richard Chambers (@newschambers) April 15, 2022
Only 24% of people said they support ditching neutrality, and 11% replied that they “don’t know.” Over 65% were happy with things the way they are.
So the general public is absolutely not calling for this. There is no indication that the Irish people have any appetite for an end to neutrality. And Citizens’ Assemblies, in addition to taking a long time, cost anywhere from hundreds of thousands, to millions of euros in taxpayers’ money – all of which will effectively be farted away on this useless question for which we already have a decisive answer.
The only people who are still confused on this issue are politicians – the public know where they stand quite clearly.
Of course we would be remiss if we didn’t point out the Taoiseach’s previous statements on Citizens’ Assemblies back in 2016, where he claimed that, generally speaking, they don’t reflect the views of the majority.
Micheál Martin, 2016 in relation to abortion, trashing the idea of Ctizens' Assemblies as just a mouthpiece for the loudest lobby groups: pic.twitter.com/6QV8Sk9h9W
— JRD (@JRD0000) June 29, 2022
He said that at the Constitutional Convention:
“…I am not so sure what transpired on the day reflected where the vast majority of the Irish people were.”
In fact, he said it shouldn’t even be called a “Citizen’s Assembly” because those who participate in it aren’t elected by the people:
“A citizens’ assembly is a wrong term. There is only one citizens’ assembly, that is, the one elected by democratic franchise – direct election by the people.”
He said that often the Assembly just ends up being a mouthpiece for “the loudest lobby group of the day”:
“What tends to happen when such structures are established is that those who are selected – they are well meaning and I have no difficulty with that – very often become subject to the loudest lobby group or advocacy group of the day, but the vast majority of people living in the country are going about their daily lives and are largely removed from its deliberations.”
Note that just this year alone, the Taoiseach has launched Citizens’ Assemblies on biodiversity loss, a directly elected mayor for Dublin, and now he’s planning one on Irish neutrality.
So apparently the Taoiseach believes that the Citizens’ Assembly is generally extremely astroturfed and subject to fringe lobbying groups who do not represent the majority – and also, he wants loads of them, on all sorts of pet issues which the public have little appetite for. Funny, that.
Martin also attempted to claim that the HSE cyber attack highlighted why Irish neutrality was a problem. As reported by RTÉ:
“We know from the attack on the HSE last year that we can’t be neutral on that either and we have to work with like minded states,” [Martin] said.”
It’s quite telling that not only would the Taoiseach make an argument this patently absurd and fallacious, but that nobody in the press pool would dare to call him out on it.
In what possible world is the HSE cyber attack related to military neutrality?
First of all, to the best of our knowledge, that attack was carried out by criminal gangs from eastern Europe. There have been no claims or pieces of evidence provided that it was carried out by a foreign state. So what exactly does a load of criminal dirtbags robbing our country have to do with neutrality?
No neutral country tolerates criminality – it’s not like you can run down the road in a neutral country robbing banks and decking old people with impunity. Obviously criminals who are victimising your country, domestic or foreign, need to be held accountable. It’s an absolute non-sequitur and totally unrelated to the question at hand.
Furthermore, let’s say it turned out that the HSE cyber attack was carried out by an enemy state. Again, what would that have to do with neutrality?
Do neutral countries not defend themselves? If tomorrow Russia decided to drop bombs on Switzerland, would the Swiss just sit there and take it? “Sorry, we’re neutral, so we can’t do anything about tanks rolling into our living rooms.”
Obviously not. Neutral countries defend themselves vigorously when attacked or when their territory is invaded. So even in this situation, Ireland would be well within our rights to defend ourselves, while remaining totally and utterly neutral.
The two things could not have less to do with each other. It’s an utterly daft argument that doesn’t stand up to the mildest scrutiny.
Either the Taoiseach hasn’t thought it through for even a single second, or he’s hoping that the people listening won’t and will just accept it at face value. Either way, it’s a very poor indictment of the media and political classes that he seems to have gotten away with it. It seems to just be thrown out there with the aim of defending this hobby horse agenda of flushing our neutrality tradition down the toilet by any means necessary.
For a country that claims to value democracy above all else, does it ever seem like the voice of the demos isn’t actually that relevant to our leaders at all?