Shortly after the Commission on the Defence Forces published its report last year calling for a large increase in military spending, defence contractors around Europe began showing a heightened interest in Ireland.
For decades Ireland, with its tiny defence budget and an army built around peacekeeping duties, has been no more than an afterthought for the industry. The size of the market was simply not large enough to bother expending much energy in lobbying or salesmanship.
However, in interviews with defence officials and documents released following Freedom of Information requests, that is starting to change and some of the world’s biggest defence manufacturers now see Ireland as a potentially valuable customer.
The most ambitious proposal of the Commission on the Defence Forces was a three-fold increase in spending, bringing it to roughly €3 billion a year and closer to the norm for small European countries.
Protestant churches face a day of reckoning with North’s inquiry into mother and baby homes
Pat Leahy: Smart people still insist the truth of a patent absurdity – that Gerry Adams was never in the IRA
The top 25 women’s sporting moments of the year: 25-6 revealed with Mona McSharry, Rachael Blackmore and relay team featuring
This piqued the interest of a big international manufacturer of fighter jets used by various Nato members.
In particular, the company was interested in the commission’s recommendation that the Defence Forces acquire a squadron of interceptor jets capable of policing Irish skies.
Discreet inquires were made through defence officials: would Ireland be interested in acquiring a small number of jets and support systems for its air defence?
However, the plan soon floundered when the scale of the task became clear. Ireland would require not just jets but the entire surrounding infrastructure, including advanced radar, an expansive new training and maintenance programme and many new pilots. The cost would be multiples of Ireland’s entire yearly defence budget. Correctly assuming the Irish Government would balk at this, the manufacturer went no further with its enquiries.
In the end, the Government opted for the commission’s less ambitious recommendation to increase defence spending by 50 per cent by 2028. But this increase was still enough to get the attention of some of Europe’s biggest defence companies.
Some sales techniques have been covert, comprising discreet enquiries through political contacts and defence attaches attached to embassies in Dublin.
Others have been more overt. Over the last year, the Department of Defence has received various proposals, catalogues and brochures from arms companies advertising their wares.
Documents released by the Department of Defence in response to a Freedom of Information request show a broad range of communications from big companies such as the French multinational Thales and the Swedish arms manufacturer Saab.
Like all advertising, these feature slogans, flashy graphics and boasts about the products’ effectiveness. But unlike other advertising, that effectiveness is often measured by how lethal the products are.
In June, Expal, a Spanish arms manufacturer, pitched the Department of Defence on its 120mm mortar system capable of reaching targets almost 10km away.
The system, it boasted, has been “designed and used with a high level of reliability of operation in extreme environmental conditions”. The detailed proposal also pitched the use of various types of ammunition, from “high explosive” to “smoke white phosphorus” (a controversial munition which is restricted under international law) and a transport system.
If the Defence Forces require rockets, they may want to consider the FZ275 “laser guide rocket”, Thales Belgium suggested. These 70mm “precision strike” munitions can be fired from helicopters, planes or ground launchers and can take out targets up to 7km away, the company stated in a brochure sent to the department last January.
One priority for the Government is to bolster the Naval fleet and bring it back to a nine-ship flotilla fitted with the most up-to-date equipment. This likely caught the attention of Diehl Defence, a German conglomerate focused on missile production (slogan: “technology for peace and freedom”). It offered various types of naval shells, guided and unguided, as well as sensors capable of detecting seaborne threats or “man overboard situations”.
It also sent the department details of its SIMONE ship monitoring system “for early detection of threats facing vessels from pirate and terrorist attacks”.
Several companies seem to have noted Ireland’s lack of an adequate air defence system. Diehl pitched its Iris-T SLM “modern air defence missile system” which can protect cities and facilities from aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles and ballistic short range missiles”.
In another detailed proposal, Thales Netherlands offered its GM200 MM/C “multi-mission radar”, which it stated can provide air defence over a 400km area when combined with other systems.
Some of the proposals offer an insight into the future of military equipment; Diehl sent the department information on its 40mm high velocity infantry grenade, which can be remotely programmed to detonate “at a point above or beyond the target”.
The department also received a range of proposals on military drones such as the Aeronautics Orbiter 2 mini-UAV.
Not all the pitches are from overseas companies. Several proposals on maritime drones were received from the Shannon-based company A-techSYN which develops “unmanned aerial systems”.
Its drones could be used for a wide range of purposes, from target practice to drug interdiction to firefighting, the documents stated.
Although Irish Defence officials have always received proposals and advertising material from arms manufacturers, this has increased significantly in the last year or so, several sources said.
In the six months before that, proposals received by the department were dominated by brochures for more mundane equipment, including outdoor canopies and coverings (likely reflecting the Defence Forces’ role in setting up Covid-19 testing centres during the pandemic), and maintenance and transport services. Arms manufacturers hardly figured.
One reason for the change is the commission’s report and the Government’s commitment to increase defence spending. The other is the impact the war in Ukraine has had on government leaders across the EU.
“A large part of it is down to Ukraine,” said one defence source. “It was a wake-up call for defence planners in the EU more generally and these companies want to make sure they receive a piece of the pie.”
Irish manufacturers also see an opportunity. Ireland does not have a defence industry in the traditional sense but it does have a growing number of companies developing dual-use products. This is technology, such as simulation software or the drones, that can be used for both military and civilian purposes. By some estimates the Irish industry is worth well over €2 billion a year.
The industry is represented by the Irish Defence and Security Association (IDSA), which believes Government defence spending should enhance security while also benefiting the economy by creating Irish jobs and attracting investment.
Irish manufacturers will not be able to provide ships, tanks or aircraft. But they are capable of providing some of the components that will go in them. Having some components made in Ireland serves a strategic purpose, IDSA chairman Pat O’Connor has said.
When Ireland is making big purchases, policies are required to “ensure the capabilities developed are sovereign, supported and maintained locally to ensure knowledge transfer, security of supply and data, while enhancing supply chain resilience”, he said.
The Government must abide by EU procurement rules in purchasing equipment but, as O’Connor points out, there are exceptions that allow it to give preference to the domestic defence industry “for the protection of the essential interests of a country’s security”.
Furthermore, he said, “every procurement that occurs without this policy, is a lost opportunity for the local economy”.
