Fine Gael has become the first Irish political party to call for the abandonment of traditional military neutrality, saying Ireland should sign up to a European defence structure and substantially increase its defence spending.
In a move condemned yesterday by Fianna Fáil, Labour and the Green Party, Fine Gael has endorsed a document from its foreign affairs spokesman, Mr Gay Mitchell, saying neutrality is no longer a viable position.
"Neutrality is a sham. We are non-aligned; and Fine Gael is suggesting we end that non-aligned status," Mr Mitchell declared yesterday.
Publishing the document as party policy, the party leader, Mr Enda Kenny, said Europe was now on the brink of setting up a mutual defence arrangement, and Ireland should join in and be one of the states shaping it.
He said the party's proposals would require a constitutional referendum.
"I'm calling for Ireland to move away from its traditional stance of neutrality, but on conditions that are defined by ourselves," Mr Kenny told a press conference yesterday.
The most important condition, he said, was that this common defence arrangement did not compel its members to come to the defence of others.
Such a requirement - known as an Article V commitment to mutual defence - should be voluntary, allowing states such as Ireland to opt into or out of specific military actions.
This would be done through incorporating this Article V commitment as a protocol in a future EU treaty, rather than in the treaty itself. In this way states could sign up to the common defence arrangements, but opt into or out of the mutual defence commitment. The Dáil would make such decisions on a case-by-case basis.
Calling for an open debate, Mr Mitchell said: "There was a time when you couldn't talk about sex: now you can't talk about neutrality."
Mr Kenny said there was no logical reason why international terrorists would not attack US interests in Ireland. No European state alone had the financial or military resources to respond to the global terrorist threat.
He said the war on Iraq had accelerated debate in Ireland on this issue. He condemned the Government for its decision to "sign up to the posse that emasculated the most successful arbiter of international law and order in over 50 years: the United Nations." The "posse" to which he referred was the US-British force which invaded Iraq.
However, a Fianna Fáil backbencher, Mr Peter Power, said the Fine Gael plan was "irresponsible, misguided and would prove to be extremely costly for the State".
Ireland's neutrality "has benefited us and served our interests well over the years". It did not mean complete opposition to the use of force in all cases and allowed Ireland form a view on the merits of each situation.
Labour's foreign affairs spokesman, Mr Michael D. Higgins, welcomed the Fine Gael document insofar as it contributed to debate, but disputed its central thesis. He rejected the idea that neutrality was "an obstruction" to a proper foreign policy.
"It's a positive instrument if we choose to use it correctly," he said. "However, the Government continually plays games with the definition of it, trying to operate in the shadow of US foreign policy."
The Green Party chairman, Mr John Gormley, called on the "establishment parties" to spell out the economic cost of abandoning neutrality.
At yesterday's press conference Mr Kenny acknowledged it would require a significant increase in defence spending, but declined to put a figure on it.
Mr Gormley said Ireland currently had the lowest defence spending in the EU. "This situation would no longer be tenable if any form of common defence existed, and if we were part of the European Arms Agency.
"For the Green Party, spending on health, education, the environment and public transport will always take precedence over spending on defence," he said.
"Europe should not, under any circumstances, repeat the mistakes of the United States. A European military industrial complex is not superior to the American military industrial complex."
Fine Gael favours a EU common defence policy based on the following principles:
1. Adherence to UN principles;
2. A commitment to universal nuclear and biological disarmament, and a solemn undertaking not to use either type of weapon;
3. A commitment to mutual defence and support with specific opt-in provisions for individual states;
4. A commitment to the provision of peacekeeping and peace-making operations, and to "Petersberg Tasks";
5. Respect for the right of other member-states to be involved in other military alliances.