Actually, the latter point isn't strictly accurate, as @NATO acknowledges Ireland's "military neutrality" (note: they spelt out what it means to them).
Beyond that, there's no legally binding defined statement of Irish neutrality.
"Military Neutrality" is meaningless, the term is a self-licking lollipop.
Unless the country is run by a Junta, the military doesn't have a say in where it gets deployed. As an instrument of political will, it is completely indifferent.
Politically, Ireland is far from neutral
This "overwhelming support" you speak of isn't necessarily true
Yes, the pro-neutrality lobby is vocal, but ultimately Irish people are practical & identify strongly as European
Polling & public narrative suggests Irish favour more security cooperation.
Threats to internal security through malicious info ops leading to violent outcomes. Subversion. Sabotage to critical infrastructure through physical & logical means. Climate change. Second order effects from conflict on the continent.
That list can go on.
And before you ask me "who would do that to us?", ask yourself, before you lock your door at night, do you consider leaving the door unlocked and ajar thinking "sure, who would harm me?".
We should protect our interests, because it is in our interest.
I believe it was a Swedish senior minister said "neutrality was incompatible with being in a union" (I would need to find source)
The reality is that being in a union shouldnt be a pic'n'mix of contribution. We should shoulder all responsibilities in solidarity with our partners
We certainly shouldn't be letting our partners shoulder our own responsibilities for us
On SF & EU, whenever there is an EU vote, SF come out with the anti #EUArmy tropes
An EU Army is structurally, politically, & functionally impossible. It will never happen
It is an emotive bogey man to strike fear into voters
We should cooperate with our EU Partners on defence
To demonstrably prove that Irish neutrality is incompatible with being in a union, Ireland sided with its partners in expelling Russian diplomats, on numerous occasions.
🇮🇪 joins its partners in sanctions on other countries too
🇮🇪 neutrality doesnt exist. Northern Ireland membership of NATO does
A United Ireland may require certain security guarantees to be achievable, something the current Irish State cannot provide
Neutrality may have to go
When it comes to neutrality, Ireland cannot have its cake and eat it.
All we are achieving through weasel words and maintaining a weak military capability is protecting ourselves from the consequences of our own actions, at the expense of being exploited by foreign actors.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Firstly, severing a subsea fiber isnt as simple as it sounds. Breaking a cable is one thing, severing it, is quite another.
Fiber optics are lightweight glass products, but propagating light across oceans requires power, so the cable is more a power cable as it is a fiber cable.
What's worth noting is that as the technology evolves, the form factor of subsea cables start to change.
More fiber cores are being pumped into small cables, means longer cables can be spooled onto cable laying ships.
Is neutrality a hill worth a United Ireland dying on?
Hypothetically, if a #UnitedIreland was conditional on the State applying for @NATO membership, would it be worth surrendering the undefined policy of #neutrality?
One that has career structures built to develop talent in the field of technical and military Int collection, collation, analysis & effective dissemination.
We need to be capable of making big data driven decisions fast.
"With regard to the RDF, the Commission will consider a wide range of options and will make recommendations to better leverage the capabilities of the RDF in their supports to the PDF and to make service in the RDF a more attractive option."
Thankfully, the "Abolition of the Reserve" wasn't considered an option in the Terms of Reference as it was in the DoD's 2012 "Value for Money" Review of the RDF.
I would link the source, but the DoD have opted not to host it despite it informing the 2015 White Paper Policy.
The 2012 Steering Committee comprised of Civil & Military (but not a single Reservist) personnel saw no role for the Reserve as the "PDF could meet all day-to-day tasks".
8 years on, & DF capability is limited due to a crippling retention crisis as a result of DoD mismanagement.
@simoncoveney - "I will be encouraging [The Commission on Defence] to be ambitious & if necessary, quite radical to reflect the future defence & security challenges"
"I think we're in a good space here"
@BerryCathal "What the Minister has proposed has exceeded my expectations"
Solid foundations are being laid for what might well be a very progressive set of recommendations by the Commission on Defence.