Interesting articles

No, thats not what this is.

The NYTimes has been invited onto a NS OPV for the express purpose of describing in detail the security situation and challenges the DF must face.

This is obviously a government propaganda exercise of sorts, to coincide with the publication of the Defence Bill which will ultimately end the Triple Lock.

It is an international piece aimed at shutting up the opposition parties here in Ireland for their stances on neutrality and the Triple Lock in the face of the facts.

Do you think the multinational companies will think ireland is too much of a risk to work with because of this article?

Eventually the Ukraine Russian war must end but I dont think Russia wants or would be even able to maintain a conflict with the rest of Europe. They are not powerful to try to emulate the Soviet Union.

I guess after Georgia it wouldn't have seemed that unlikely. Russia have had their regime, economy and military have been severely damaged. If they are our bogeyman, they are very weak.

Seems it didn't, or at least I did see any of the usual suspects posting it anyway?

In other news, you sort of have to admire the balls of the Government trying to talk about defence to the rest of the EU with a straight face. Or perhaps admire the restraint of everyone else in the room when we open our mouths on the issue…

https://www.thejournal.ie/eu-defence-priorities-thomas-byrne-irish-eu-presidency-7062643-Jun2026

building up basic defence capabilities which in the end is what LoA3 is (with LoA2 being “dip the toes in”), isn’t basing anything on “irrational fears”, it’s literally just building the states capacity to handle normal defence taskings/roles.

In other news, the Examiner is reporting the changes to the Triple Lock go before Cabinet tomorrow.

https://archive.ph/xYxyP

That's very optimistic. The opposition will just double down on their existing arguments against Defence spending.

The tankies will say it's part of a NATO conspiracy to coerce Ireland into abandoning neutrality.

The likes of the Soc Dems will say "Yes the world is dangerous but the solution is neutrality, diplomacy and multilateralism, not an arms race".

In a bit of random news story time, an article on how the French are having to slow recruitment as they are already ahead of target, maybe we can ask the French to have a look at our systems for recruitment and retention?

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2026/06/08/french-army-has-recruitment-surplus-but-lacks-equipment-deputy-chief-says/

Although in all seriousness, when an armed force, especially one as large as that of France, is able to exceed its recruitment targets, without any element of mandatory service, its usually a very bad sign economically for that country....

So accorrding to many media reports today Ken o Flynn was not informed by a Defence Forces member on questions hd asked about the defence forces on PQs he submitted both rather AI it seams.

That feels like a bit of a watershed moment.

The UK's bridging funding for GCAP development expires at the end of June.
The constant budget worries have the Japanese wound up to the hilt.

Healy's resignation, in the face of Starmer & Reeves talking a big game but refusing to actually fund it.
Is IMHO the right thing to do.

The UK needs to look at what the French military planning laws and their procurement structures are achieving for France, with less spend and contrast it to their own basket case of failures.

France operates a CASD, but also has independent tactical nuclear strike capability via AdA & ASMP.
The UK proposed buying 12 F35A and joining US nuke sharing to fulfil that role.
That option is likely to be cancelled.
It's navy isn't collapsing, it's armoured vehicles are at the very least, functional and at best, world class.
France's domestic industry can deliver equipment to cover the entire gamut of its requirements from pistol ammo to SLBMs and every niche betwixt them, and does it all for a lower spend than the UK.

There are drastic issues with UK military budget, procurement and implementation.
Politically, the argument has to be made for perhaps as Malcolm Rifkind has proposed, a hypotecated Tax increase of 1% that is specifically ring fenced for defence.
It's that, or abandon Reeves' fiscal rules and borrow more.

Claiming that UK & Europe are under severest threat since Cold War and not seeking to build public support for spending increase, whilst ensuring it isn't done so at expense of services?
Is actively ignoring the threat.

Hell of a bun fight in the UK over cheesparing on defence. Another senior man has resigned. Maybe our people should be looking at the "winds of change" and step up to the plate with an appropriate level of defence.…given the strategic importance of Ireland in terms of Atlantic Cables etc....and not be leaning on UK etc.

The PPS of Defence has gone as well, Dan Jarvis a former member of the Parachute Regiment has been made Secretary of Defence. It will be very interesting to see how he plays things, given Starmer's letter to Healey, he's not willing to override Treasury, did he get Jarvis to commit to accepting the announced figure?

Honestly I don't think either the UK or EU would want to go there. The UK's body politic is still absolutely broken 10 years on, a new application would set the whole thing on fire. As for the EU, they get a nation whose still has at the very least a sizeable voting block that have self radicalised over anything to do with the EU. It would be a never ending Psychodrama.

I mean I don't disagree with you about the economic disruption Brexit has caused and the ramifications and costs that still play out, I just don't see how the UK could even talk about Rejoining without breaking itself further.