Politics, diplomacy and living in human society mostly requires people to pull their punches and to act and respond to situations in a measured way, writes Martin Mansergh
Kant equated human civilisation with constructive control of the passions, in contrast to the instinctive behaviour of the animal world (though many animals probably exercise much more intelligent self-control than humans credit them with).
It is often argued that in unequal relationships the restraint is exercised by the weaker party. On the contrary, in any legal framework, the onus is primarily on the stronger party to show restraint. The main nuclear powers, even those involved in wars, refrained from using nuclear weapons against those without them. Reports that Mrs Thatcher might have used them as a last resort in the Falklands War should be treated with scepticism.
As Northern Ireland showed, if conflict is not to be unnecessarily prolonged, strict adherence to the rule of law by States greatly reduces opportunities to make propaganda out of its breaches. It also denies plausible justification for the routine use by insurgents, subject to no such norms, of barbarous methods, like setting off bombs amongst civilians, which is now part of the international definition of terrorism.
The ongoing conflict in Iraq is an object lesson in the consequences of militarily powerful countries embarking on inadequately justified crusades (no matter, how noble the stated cause) and the disastrous effects of short-circuiting international law, whether in the use of banned weapons or the treatment of prisoners.
A superpower can win a walkover in conventional warfare, but then find themselves struggling for control, when subjected to constant attack by those with far superior knowledge of the terrain.
Since 2004, the UN has backed efforts of the multinational force to bring about democracy and stability in Iraq. Member states have been asked to facilitate this. For a responsible member like Ireland, there should be simply no issue today about the correctness of allowing American troop movements through Shannon. Prior to that, it was for the State, which is neutral by policy rather than claiming any international legal status of neutrality, to decide on balance what was best, failing an explicit UN resolution.
The high electoral turnout in Iraq is encouraging. So is acceptance of Republican Senator John McCain's Bill explicitly outlawing US use of torture as internationally defined. There has been great public concern about places of detention not subject to legal protections, whether known like Guantanamo Bay, or secret locations somewhere in Europe. Europe has a variety of collective institutions able to investigate this claim, and, if necessary, demand a response to findings of fact.
In a context where Ireland has a close and friendly relationship with the United States, and, for example, is looking for regularisation of the position of the undocumented Irish there, we should not take unilateral decisions against the United States, without proof or even prima facie evidence to contradict official denials at the highest level that prisoners have been transported through Shannon in the process of "extraordinary rendition". It is perfectly legitimate, however, to underline our strong concern that continued use of unconventional procedures and suspicion of outlawed practices are fuelling the conflict in Iraq and further afield and diminishing chances of successful extrication from the mission.
Despite vehement criticism of the US and its allies, its conduct does not begin to compare in savagery with the suicide attacks against civilians or the abduction and beheading of hostages that have been tactics of the insurgents. Nonetheless, the restrained use of power has a better chance of prevailing against unrestrained violence.
The president of Iran showed dangerous lack of restraint, in calling for Israel to be wiped off the map, its citizens transported to Europe, and denying the Holocaust, which is a crime in many countries.
The state of Israel was created by the international community, which, as the invasion of Kuwait showed, will not allow any state to disappear. The government of Iran is unfortunately reappearing in the guise of a dangerous and fanatical theocracy, and will find that there is a serious external cost to such wayward behaviour.
Coming closer to home, the public bewilderment of the Taoiseach at the outcome of the Stormontgate affair, a dubious piece of theatre which brought down the Executive in October 2002, masks a restrained anger, anxious not to jeopardise future progress.
The decision not to prosecute, long after the damage is done, is no surprise to close observers of the pattern of certain security actions over the years. The raids on an alleged spy ring by armed police televised entering the parliament building were not scenes that one expects to see in a democracy. Then secretary of state John Reid was transferred to another cabinet post within a week, so had to answer few questions.
The idea of a non-prosecution being justified by a public interest that is not capable of being explained to or grasped by the public is an absurdity. The whole episode, probably a form of outdoor relief for the Ulster Unionist Party, reeks of bad faith, and in the long run hurts everyone. There may even have been an agent provocateur.
This is in a context, where many of the political difficulties of the peace process since 1998 can be attributed to the unwillingness till recently of the IRA to subject itself to rigorous and comprehensive self-constraint, the whole Colombia Three episode being a particular example.
Much of the related comment about Frank Connolly and the Centre for Public Inquiry misses the point. The issue is simply whether an ethical watchdog is ethically accountable and politically independent.
Releasing details of a passport application in a false name cannot infringe anyone's personal rights or privacy. If there is a certain wariness in Government, it is because it was not due process that brought down Ray Burke, however deservedly, or that harassed Martin Cullen over Monica Leech, or that drove the Taoiseach to take a successful libel action. It is also wary of the politics of sea-green incorruptibles.