Is 'Neutrality' amendment to constitution a belated referendum on NATO and PfP

spongebob

(my thanks to Cork of all people for highlighting this)

1997 Fianna Fáil promise people referendum on PfP a NATO scheme, in their manifesto. May 1997.
1999 FF forgets about 'de paypil' and 'de manifeshto'and JOINS PfP anyway. Nice Speech Dave
2000 Punters do NOT believe FF on Neutrality what a surprise...NO vote ensues .
2001 FF get widdly declaration from EU but not from NATO in Seville saying ye Paddies can ...ehm .....uhm ....not join in if ye don't want. Where is the corresponding NATO declaration, they have summits twice a year too !
2002 FF say that EU declaration will keep us out of alliances knowing that we are regularly on Exercises with NATO.

How can we be neutral and on NATO exercises at the same time and what does Crisis Management mean ....what with a referendum on Neutrality coming up quietly on Saturday next?

/me finally goes NO heavy.

M

Typedef

Good point Muck.

The Treaty of Nice clearly states in Article 2.2 that the Rapid Reaction Force can be used for 'combat' in crisis management situations. To my mind this is extremely lax and etheral terminology. The government have been banging on about the so-called triple lock on the action taken with the Rapid Reaction Force, however as has been shown time and time again UN mandates can be invented out of thin air to 'justify' war and ignored by others in perpetuity (like Israel).

The government claims the Rapid Reaction Force is not a European Army, therefore the article being voted on to insert into the Irish constitution about keeping Ireland out of a European Army is meaningless, because the governmnet doesn't recognise the Rapid Reaction Force as the European Army, this means that with or without that article inserted into the Irish constitution, Irish troops 'will' participate fight, and yes perhaps even die due to the Rapid Reaction Force. Irish troops (600 of them) will participate in the Rapid Reaction Force, Enda Kenney has told me as much in person and I have no reason to believe the Fianna Fial position has any significant divergence at all.

Where I differ with mainstream political parties on support of this Rapid Reaction Force, is, I don't think the force will be used exclusively for 'humanitarian' intervention, because if you look at the reality of the world it is quite obvious that terms like 'combat' in 'crisis management' situations are too plyable, too open to interpretation and ultimately too open to abuse.

spongebob

OK

Why did we not have a referendum on the PfP and NATO as well as the Treaty of Nice.

Why did we not seek a declaration from NATO (who have a rapid reaction force too) on the lines of the Seville Declaration, NATO have had summits since the EU Seville summit...is it too much to ask or do NATO not do declarations....short of war.

I personally think we should join NATO but by the front door and not thru this sleeveen 'are we in OR out OR hanging off the side of it' gobsh1tery from Bertie and Co.

The people have THE right to decide, the current proposed arrangement could have the Supreme court saying we are in because we did not SPECIFICALLY exclude the NATO RRF as we did the EU RRF in the 191002 referendum.

M

DadaKopf

The reason we're voting on Nice is because of the Crotty Judgement (Crotty having been a Euro-sceptic) which narrowed the scope for unrivalled Irish integration with Europe. The reason we didn't have a referendum on PfP was because it didn't challenge the constitution. Nice does. That's not to say we shouldn't have had a vote on it, I think we should, just that it wasn't legally necessary.

spongebob

was because the constitution sez the people should vote on 'external treaties'

(BTW the Dutch government colapsed so I nuked 'that' thread)

M

Cork

Originally posted by Muck
(my thanks to Cork of all people for highlighting this)

1997 Fianna Fáil promise people referendum on PfP a NATO scheme, in their manifesto. May 1997.
1999 FF forgets about 'de paypil' and 'de manifeshto'and JOINS PfP anyway. Nice Speech Dave
2000 Punters do NOT believe FF on Neutrality what a surprise...NO vote ensues .
2001 FF get widdly declaration from EU but not from NATO in Seville saying ye Paddies can ...ehm .....uhm ....not join in if ye don't want. Where is the corresponding NATO declaration, they have summits twice a year too !
2002 FF say that EU declaration will keep us out of alliances knowing that we are regularly on Exercises with NATO.

How can we be neutral and on NATO exercises at the same time and what does Crisis Management mean ....what with a referendum on Neutrality coming up quietly on Saturday next?

/me finally goes NO heavy.

M

I think most Irish political partys have no regard for nuetrality. I am not a supporter of the left - but I believe they are right on this issue.

The EU is being militarised & we are being drawn into it.

I think FF is lukewarm on nuetrality. When - did you last hear a FF or Fg politician making a passionate speech on it?

PH01

Originally posted by Cork
I think most Irish political partys have no regard for nuetrality.

"No regard" is probably a bit strong. A better discription would be that Ireland doesn't really believe or understand the concept of Nuetrality.
I mean what's it all about anyway? We say we're nuetral but how nuetral are we. If you look at our foreign policy, you couldn't tell from that if we're a nuetral nation.
Maybe it's just a concept that has revelence to WWII, and it has no meaning today in this ever increasing globalised world.

Should Ireland just call it as it is and stop pretending we're a Nuetral nation. We never were and we'll never will be.

Typedef

The ammendament the government are asking the people to ratify as a sweetner for the Nice Treaty, will not under any circumstances prevent Ireland from participating in the European Rapid Reaction Force.

What that means is that under the terms of the Nice Treaty (if ratified) is that Irish troops could be sent to do combat in a situation that is deemed to be 'crisis management' and whats more is that Ireland will have virtually no say in how the Rapid Reaction Force is deployed.

You have a point PH01, in such circumstances Ireland wouldn't be in the least bit neutral and effectively Ireland would be fighting in a conflict situation for the interests of France, Germany & Britain.

To my mind that is a damn far cry from Neutrality where Neutrality basically means peace keeping abroad and military self defence if it comes to it. Notice the difference between self defence and 'combat in crisis situations'.

Again the ammendment to the constitution will not prevent Irish participation in the Rapid Reaction Force, nor give Ireland any meaningful say in how that Force is depolyed.

spongebob

Agreed guys.

I don't believe we are neutral either...so we require a military doctrine (as in a basic constitution for our armed forces) that explains our position.

As a bare minimum there should be an EU coastguard in which we should play an integral part.

I also think there should be an EU army with a defined zone of interest...in which we play our part.

Frankly I think we should join NATO if the EU will not define its own military doctrine which is...of course...not at variance with ours.

This constant pretence and dithering serves nobodys interest.

Were we to formulate a military doctrine of active neutrality such as the Swedes or Swiss I would not object to that either but I have no faith in our ability to think like that and act accordingly.

Alternatively we could abolish the army and 'air corps' and replace them with an armed Coastguard and an air arm of the Coastguard. They would be much smaller but with better equipment like a few F-18s or similar for enforcement were it ever needed.

That would be commensurate with our needs and that is why countries have military doctrines. Our involvement with the UN came about because others have paid for our soldiers not to get fat and lazy in the past.

As we are neutral we do not need a constitutional amendment to 'prove it' so I will vote No to that as well.

M

bonkey

Originally posted by Muck
I don't believe we are neutral either
...
As we are neutral we do not need a constitutional amendment to 'prove it' so I will vote No to that as well.

Err hello? You dont believe we are neutral, but our neutrality existing is why we dont need it in the constitution?

For the record, Ireland has never claimed to be a neutral nation - it has claimed to be militarily neutral. It has never claimed political or ideological neutrality.

Furthermore, I think the reason there was never a referendum on the PfP Nato thing was simply because it was determined that one was not needed at the time.

The government will not ask the people if it does not need to. To do so would be pointless. If the constitution doesnt come into conflict with the government's chosen actions, then they dont call a referendum. There's nothing sinister about it, despite what this thread seems to be implying.

Typedef

Besides if Ireland is to have Referenda sorry I mean Referendum (Freudian slip in the circumstances) on Neutrality or more specifically on joining NATO then what should be done is to have a clear and unambiguous plebiscite on the issue, not attempt to could the issue with multiple issues lumped into a Yes or No scenario nor ambiguous innuendo like (voting no means No to NATO).

Simply put having Referenda with a lexicon of appended issues never really gives a clear and concise answer as people will vote against or for a single issue or issues ostensibly even though those people 'might' favour or not favour other issues in the plebiscite.

That is one of the beauties of single issue Referenda, you get a clear and concise view from the people on a single issue. That is why the current Referendum is slightly skewed as not only will the ammendment not stop Ireland participating in the European Rapid Reaction Force, but people will think that voting in favour of Nice will keep Ireland out of a military alliance within Europe, when if you examine the Treaty itself you will find that voting No will keep the operational mandate of the Rapid Reaction Force suspended and will make it much more difficult to deploy the Rapid Reaction Force (which Ireland currently participates in).

Regards
Typedef.

spongebob

opting out of something in order that it may exist.?

Most peculiar.

Very badly thought out piece of twaddle this NICE treaty.

Back to the drawing board lads

M

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Cork

It is a bit pathetic and selfish of us to say that we won't intervene when any of our partners are attacked, but should we be attacked we will expect to be defended by them.

No Flag ever stopped a bullet from a gun. We are a NUETRAL Country.

How dare Irish Political partys - play around with Irish Nuetrality.

NICE is a further step down the like torwards EU militarisation.

I believe - the neutrality is useful. Being a small member of a military allience - we would be expected to follow the herd.

If we vote Yes to Nice - Will this effect our defence budget at the expense of Health?

spongebob

Lemme restate the logic as I see it, I am talking about the final Paragraph of the constitutional amendment we are meant to be voting on.

1. I don't believe we are really 'neutral' ..whatever the government says. Nor do we become any more 'neutral' or any more usefully 'neutral' as a consequence of our first 'neutrality' amendment to the constitution. I don't think we should have a 'neutrality' clause in teh constitution , much less this POS

2. I outlined areas which are a must for military co-operation along with areas which are acceptable to me ..right up to NATO membership. Not all would agree but I would see a coastguard as a bare minimum collective defence structure.

3. The 'neutrality' amendment is being presented as a copperfastening of neutrality and will be an impediment to our ever having a mature debate on the issue....like the abortion issue over the last 30 years. Time to tackle it head on in a clear way. Start by voting no to this twaddle.

4. The 'neutrality' amendment opts us out of an EU military framework which will not exist until NICE is ratified by the Irish because the Irish have the Seville declaration inserted. Irony lost non?

IE The EU army probably cannot exist until the Irish People ratify the explicit OPT OUT of the EU army for themselves.

5. Why, when the Government is opting us out of the European Defence (in final para) structure.....did the government not explicitly opt us out of the NATO defence structure as well. This is illogical and hypocritical.
This is our first 'neutrality' amendment to the constitution, why was it not done properly.

Why did the government not have a vote on opting us INTO the PfP while they are at it.

Finally.

My advice to Bertie when this is over with a NO is to address the totality of Ireland military options and to present us with graduated series of options in a refendum on collective defence.

1. Should we enter into collective defence

If yes

2. Should we do so with the UN
3. Should we do so with the EU
4. Should we do so with NATO

etc etc

That will get the Defence and Foreign Policy components of NICE out of the way for the next time we have a referendum on EU structure with a view to enlargement. That will be in about a years time or so.

M

OfflerCrocGod

I dont understand the problem with Ireland stating the well know fact thats its not Neutral , we aren't neutral we never were we just haven't been involeved in the last major conflict to hit Europe which was WWII - thats all I dont want anyone to start blabering on about the balkans or any other similar joke of a "war".The matter of fact is if any of the countries in Europe are attacked then it is an attack on the whole of the European land.As a corrorarly WHO THE **** would attack us and why??? Morroco? seriously the major wars of the world are all behind us the major economies of the world are all qiuet stable Asia is also catching up with the west economically, the only possible problem is middle east and does any one see say saudia arabia waging war on lets say - Spain? Nope its not going to happen so calm down.I think the militarasation of Europe wont be such a big thing at all and expect nothing to come for it no country in Europe can afford to spend as much money as USA in defence because we all have the welfare system so calm down Yawn thats what I think this is going to end being a big yawn

Cork

.I think the militarasation of Europe wont be such a big thing

No it is a great thing.

Worse things happen at war.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
How dare Irish Political partys - play around with Irish Nuetrality.

Because Neutrality per se isnt covered in the constitution, I think you'll find that the Irish Political Parties are exactly the people who should be "playing around" with Irish Neutrality.

Same way they play around with everything else which falls outside the constitution but within our nation.

jc

spongebob

...by the external treaties provision which was inserted at a time when external treaties were primarily economic and not economic as is the EU treaties. this was during the 1930's

as we cannot easily join a military alliance we are....ummm Neutral I think?

as we refuse to enforce our neutrality we are not really neutral, try refuelling armed US aircraft in Sweden sometime.

M

Meh

Originally posted by Typedef
The Treaty of Nice clearly states in Article 2.2 that the Rapid Reaction Force can be used for 'combat' in crisis management situations. To my mind this is extremely lax and etheral terminology.

This is exactly the same terminology as used in the Treaty on European Union, which Nice amends. In other words, Nice makes no difference whatsoever here. You may have problems with the wording here, but it's not a reason to vote either for or against Nice.

Cork

Originally posted by bonkey
Because Neutrality per se isnt covered in the constitution, I think you'll find that the Irish Political Parties are exactly the people who should be "playing around" with Irish Neutrality.

jc

They are reluctant to state where they stand on the subject. Neutrality is not valued by the EU. Neutrality is not valued by some of our political partys. Neutrality is valued by the Irish people.

The EU is involved in a military project. One mans crisis management is another mans full scale war.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
The EU is involved in a military project. One mans crisis management is another mans full scale war.

Yes, and had you read the article that is being replaced in full, you would find that all the exact same provisos are already in place, and that what is being changed is references to the EU.

Meh has already pointed this out here, and (IIRC) in other threads.

Are you so set on contradicting me that you're forgetting to read the posts by other people?

jc

Typedef

Originally posted by Meh
This is exactly the same terminology as used in the Treaty on European Union, which Nice amends. In other words, Nice makes no difference whatsoever here. You may have problems with the wording here, but it's not a reason to vote either for or against Nice.

I think that for people who have misgivings about Irish Neutrality vis-a-vis the European Union, it is at least debatable that Article 2.2 of the Nice Treaty will not be affected by the constitutional ammendment to Neutrality the government have proposed in this vote.

Granted that is not my primary reason for voting No, however I think again that the concept has at least academic plausability in the context of this vote.