If being an unaligned country with a large army is no deterrent to Putin's ambitions is it time for ROI to join Nato?
Not Dublin 4's children.
The north atlantic treaty organization was recently trying to get India to join (nato+).
Nato has changed.
It was about the Ussr and Europe and the cold war, but that era ended. A great idea for the time, the name was appropriate.
Now its just slowly drifted and morphed into a projection system for US geopolitical and macroeconomic interests.
The name is no longer true to its new mission of promoting Americas interests around the globe.
Im glad that nowadays we can all all agree without a single dumb objection that Russia is exposed as a paper tiger and that any attempt by them to invade the greater western European continent would end in their disasterous defeat. Incapable as they are to even beat Ukraine without nearly sparking internal collapse.
This wasnt always the case in the recent past when we would often be reminded that the only thing between us and complete Russian control was good old Nato, and that therefore we should all get down and thank the lord for the US, ... not that its a US institution.
No, Europe can and is developing its own means of taking control of that job.
Thats where we belong. Not in some American led circus looking to have India as a member
Neutrality is not "enshrined" in our constitution, other than in reference to Article 29, section 4, subsection 9, which states that "The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union where that common defence would include the State."
Threads merged
What NATO meat grinder?
Our govt make decisions that will impact our lives and the lives of our children to a far greater degree on a very frequent basis without constant referendums.
I’d propose that anything that may send thousands of Irish troops to be grist in the NATO meat grinder should 100% be voted on. These will be your children, my children, everyone on heres children, and their children’s children.
I believe the constitution says something about us not being involved in war unless the government decides to, so not really any amendment needed.
I understand that our neutrality is enshrined in the constitution
It is not.
I understand that our neutrality is enshrined in the constitution, so we do have a say on NATO membership as any change to the constitution must pass a referendum, I stand to be corrected, but that is my undestanding.
We have no need to join NATO anyways. So we shouldn't, only people interested in war join military alliances. We have enough problems domestically.
Chyna
Very far away though
So given its location and our location, why is being mentioned in a conversation about Nato? Is Nato going to swerve to being both an anti China and anti- Russia military alliance now?
It is a country in the far East of Asia, near Japan and South of Mongolia.
Its the most murderous state of the last century and ruled by a party with the most murderous ideology in human history.
You surely have heard of them.
No, our policy was never a "fiction". We are militarily neutral in that we don't get directly involved in other people's wars. That doesn't mean that we can't have or express an opinion on those wars or the conduct of the countries involved in them. Or that we can't send non-military aid which we do.
Since the foundation of the state, that policy has served us very well and it should continue.
However, getting involved in NATO changes the paradigm completely and it will inevitably place a target on our heads, whether we like it or not. More than likely what would happen, certainly in the short term, is we would become a static aircraft carrier for armed US military aircraft and personnel, much like Britain was in WWII. Because, realistically, we don't have anything else much to offer.
In any case, we aren't joining NATO. There's no political will for it and there's certainly no public desire to see it happening, that's for sure. So, it's all "moot", as Varadkar said last year.
Why, it works fine for the austrians
You even used the word defense forces, the idea is in the name
I'm ambivalent about joining for what its worth, but we don't really know what will happen in the future. However, joining NATO is, if its ever going to be on the table, quite a long way away and I'm sure will be in manifestos etc. It would require years of investment in the defence forces for one. If it is indeed an emergency situation then that is what we have elected governments to handle.
Our policy of military neutrality a)is something of a fiction and b) was never put to a referendum either.
This isn't about being blasé about anything. Direction and control of the Defence Forces is quite clearly a matter for the government.
Can you flesh that one out for us
I'm not speculating just saying that I think a party should have it in their manifesto or hold a referendum. Considering nato is basically an anti russia alliance and Russia is so weak now I can't see an occasion where we would be forced to rush into joining ala Sweden and Finland.
China.
There is, to be fair, non-constitutional referendums referenced in the constitution. Interestingly the burden is on vetoing them rather than approving them, including a turnout requirement which could certainly get messy.
Article 47
2
1° Every proposal, other than a proposal to amend the Constitution, which is submitted by Referendum to the decision of the people shall be held to have been vetoed by the people if a majority of the votes cast at such Referendum shall have been cast against its enactment into law and if the votes so cast against its enactment into law shall have amounted to not less than thirty-three and one-third per cent. of the voters on the register.
2° Every proposal, other than a proposal to amend the Constitution, which is submitted by Referendum to the decision of the people shall for the purposes of Article 27 hereof be held to have been approved by the people unless vetoed by them in accordance with the provisions of the foregoing sub-section of this section.
I still don't think they are a good idea though.
When there is a possible amendment to the constitution.
However, our joining of NATO comes with many strings attached and may have an impact on our policy of military neutrality in the future. And that is why it would be important to put it to the people of the country. Joining NATO makes us a target for NATO's enemies and something like that shouldn't be a thing to be blaise about.
It's only the armchair generals who won't be putting a tin hat on and going off to fight in the wars that NATO gets involved in that are looking for this. It'll give them something to yap about on the social media accounts.
I know why they had a referendum because they had to give the laws of the eu supremacy over our own because of the constitution
If nothing else is added to the constitution to set things in stone then everything will be the pervue of the whims of the dail
There is no fear of us joining NATO, they don't even want us anyway.
The hysteria from the crusties and the commies was hilarious over the last few days.
Yes. Do you know when and how a referendum can be called in Ireland?
"Should Ireland join NATO"? Vote Yes or No.
Do you know what a referendum is?
What makes you think any party would do this without it being in the manifesto in the first place? Nonetheless, governments need to react to situations that are very different from when they were elected and we elect them to make those decisions.
Joining the EU required a referendum. I suspect if in some distant future the government mooted joining NATO there would be cases brought to test the constitutionality of the decision without one also.
And in what context could this be put to the people? What constitutional amendment is required?
Sure everything is the purview of the Dail untill it isnt
For something as big as this you should ask the people, just like joining the eu etc, enshrine it in the constitution
If a party has it initially in its election manifesto then I would agree but if not then why not bring it to the people through a referendum. Joining a military alliance is a big decision so it would be pretty underhanded to vote on getting rid of along standing national policy without consulting the people either through a manifesto or referendum.
It is not the stated policy of any of the government parties to join and its not remotely imminent.
However, demanding a referendum of matters of state that are already constitutionally solely the purview of the Dáil is a questionable precedent to set.
