Ireland's indignation at the French president's comments about our Lisbon No betrays a lack of respect for democracy, writes Noel Whelan.
THE WORD "hubris" is of Greek origin and is defined in modern English dictionaries as "a shortcoming or fatal flaw of excessive pride which leads the tragic hero to disregard warning of impending doom, eventually causing his or her downfall".
It is the best word to describe Ireland's current condition and the attitude of many among our media and electorate to our role in the world - and particularly our role in Europe.
Not since the late 19th century warning issued by the Skibbereen Eagle to the tsar of Russia that it was "keeping an eye" on him, have the Irish displayed such regard for themselves on the international stage.
This exaggerated view of our own importance was evident in some of the debate around the Lisbon Treaty. Many convinced themselves that we were voting for the whole of Europe and that Europe would have to follow whatever we decided.
There was much hubris evident again this week in the reaction to comments made by the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, apparently in private to fellow parliamentarians, suggesting that Ireland would have to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. His remarks have been met with a chorus of criticism here in Ireland from No campaigners and also, somewhat peculiarly, from the Labour Party leader, Eamon Gilmore.
We Irish need to get over ourselves. It is absurd to think that a major European leader who also holds the presidency of the European Union should not be free to offer his view to his own party on the most significant challenge faced by the European Union.
Sarkozy may actually have done us a favour. The publication of his remarks may serve to disturb the complacent notion that persists here in Ireland that our vetoing of the Lisbon Treaty has no consequences.
While most European politicians have publicly adopted a polite and patient tone in response to the Irish No vote, privately many have expressed bemusement, resentment and even anger that the Irish, who have benefited so much from the European Union, now think they can frustrate the agreed wishes of the democratically elected governments of the other member states.
While we Irish are entitled to decide our future relationship with Europe, we are not entitled to decide the future of Europe. Nor are we entitled to silence anyone in Europe who wants to comment on our choices and their implications for their own countries.
It is arrogant of us to ask that Europe's leaders should hold their tongues while we take time to reflect upon the consequences of the No vote.
Sarkozy has been accused of interfering in the Irish democratic process, but many of his critics have themselves shown blatant disregard for the democratic choices made by other member states.
Each member state has decided how to ratify the treaty in accordance with its own democratic system. In some countries, this requires a simple or weighted majority vote in parliament, while in others it involves ratification at both national and federal level or rulings by constitutional courts.
It is arrogant of the Irish to assume that our ratification process is somehow the best or the most democratic.
Some criticism of Sarkozy feeds off the media caricature drawn of him since his election last year.
Of course, his whirlwind romance with Carla Bruni feeds that caricature, but much of the criticism is shaped by the latent anti-French sentiments of the British tabloids which enjoy large circulations here.
Sarkozy is also being punished for the "crime" of having so decisively defeated Ségolène Royal, about whom so many left-wing media here and in other countries swooned before last year's French election.
Those who are dismissive of the French president would do well to note the scale of his direct democratic mandate and indeed the many successes of his first year as president. Only this week, his initiative in gathering a summit of Mediterranean leaders significantly altered the dynamic around peace efforts in the Middle East.
Sarkozy is now one of the most significant powerbrokers in Europe and his visit to Dublin should be welcomed. If he needs to hear arguments on both sides of the Irish Lisbon debate, they can be summarised by his own ambassador here.
Requiring the president of France to subject himself to a public haranguing by self-appointed spokespersons for No voters serves no purpose.
Indeed subjecting him to lengthy presentations from Aengus Ó Snodaigh, Patricia McKenna and Kathy Sinnott repeating their vague and contradictory arguments against the Lisbon Treaty borders on cruel and inhumane treatment, and could set back the course of Hiberno-French relations for centuries.
It would be far more productive for Sarkozy and his entourage to maximise the couple of hours face-time available with Brian Cowen and his officials.
In those private meetings, he is more likely to get a frank assessment of the state of Irish public opinion and, more importantly, to find out whether there is any course that Ireland and Europe can safely take together out of the uncharted waters in which we find ourselves.