Early this week the Cabinet was due to consider proposed changes, including deep cuts, within the Defence Forces. But it postponed its discussions, which would have been within days of the burials of four young Army peace-keepers who died while on service on behalf of this State with the United Nations in south Lebanon.

Since 1960 some 80 young Irish men have died in foreign countries in service with the UN. In the three weeks before their deaths, the four young infantry soldiers, on their first tour of duty abroad, served through a period of intense and dangerous conflict between Islamic and Israeli forces in the region. Several Israeli soldiers died in attacks close to the area where the young Irish soldiers were serving. Last year another young Irish soldier serving in south Lebanon, Billy Kedian, died when he caught the full blast of a mortar fired by Israeli-backed forces.

The impact on morale of the Government agreeing deep cuts in the Army so soon after the soldiers' funerals might have contributed to the decision to postpone the Cabinet's consideration of the draft White Paper. It might also have been a reason for the Government leak of the news, two days after the deaths, that it had back-tracked on some of the Paper's provisions reducing the military control over arms procurement and recruitment.

But the proposals, which are likely to be passed largely intact, will have the effect of further reducing the role of the Defence Forces to that of a gendarmerie. The notion that the State should have a standing defence force ready to repel foreign invaders has gone since the second World War. The White Paper states that "there is virtually no risk of externally instigated conflict in our immediate region". Any such risk would be "preceded by a significant warning time of some years". This assessment covers the policy decision to down-grade virtually to non-existence the military defensive role.

The White Paper is even more confident about the lack of internal threat or insurrection or violence emanating from the North. Written before the break-down in the Northern political process, the White Paper describes the ceasefires and Belfast Agreement as being "firmly in place".

A "certain level" of violence from dissident paramilitary groupings is likely, it states, but "the overall dangers to security are of a considerably lower order than was the case prior to the ceasefires, and it is considered likely that the longer this period of sustained peace continues, the less danger there is of a return to widespread violence".

This assessment supports the continued arguments for a reduction in the defence structure. With around 0.8 per cent of the gross domestic product spent on defence, this State already has about half the average European expenditure on defence, as a percentage of GDP. The proposals in the Paper suggest this level of expenditure will further reduce.

The Paper confirms the current trends that the Air Corps and Naval Service will, effectively, no longer pretend to have military roles. The Naval Service will be limited to fishery protection and occasional drugs interdiction service. Nor will the Air Corps have any medium or long-range troop-lifting capacity or fighter aircraft.

The constrictions on the Army are seen as almost certain to lead to further barrack closures, something that the senior military are generally not opposed to. However, there is no hard line on barrack closures in the White Paper. Military sources say it is believed the issue of barrack closures is not firmly addressed because of the local political implications.

The view within the Defence Forces is that the reduction of numbers from 11,500 to 10,500 will mainly affect the Army, and that the intention is to reduce the military structure further from its existing three-brigade form to a two-brigade Army. This is in keeping with the proposals outlined in the mid-1990s in another leaked report on the Defence Forces. That report, by consultants Price Waterhouse, foresaw a one-brigade structure with around 8,300 members, a target that the military still believe exists.

Senior military figures agree that the days of a large standing professional Defence Forces are gone. Their concern is that the State, while taking on more foreign peacekeeping missions - Kosovo and East Timor in the past year - is reducing the ability of the Defence Forces to train and prepare for such foreign service.

One source pointed out that the existing three-brigade structure provides for only three transport units. And one of these is now being sent out on a six-month rotation to serve with the UN force, Kfor, in Kosovo. The first unit has nearly completed its six-month mission, which has been arduous, with all of the 100 soldiers working for long hours in difficult conditions.

If the State decides to maintain the Irish presence in Kosovo, it means transport unit personnel could be spending six months in Kosovo, a year at home, then going back to Kosovo again. Few soldiers are likely to savour such a career prospect, particularly when there are plenty of good jobs available in civilian life.

From the Government's point of view, the aim of this reductive process has been primarily to cut the size and age profile of the Defence Forces and cut the number of barracks and posts. A major objective has also been to improve the capital spending on arms and equipment ratio to pay. Until recently, about 80 per cent of the approximate £500 million budget has been spent on pay and pensions. The auditors' aim has been to reduce this, preferably to a situation where pay and capital expenditure are in balance.

The military take a slightly more jaundiced view. One source pointed out that a process of "setting up the Army for assassination" has been going on for the past two years through exaggeration of the amounts of money due over military hearing compensation cases.

They point to the fact that on November 27th, 1998, the Public Accounts Committee was told that the total cost to the Exchequer for hearing compensation would be "up to £2 billion". This, as the White Paper confirms, was a major over-estimation. The Paper concludes that the total cost will be in the region of £300 million.

However, until this huge sum is settled, there seems little prospect of any Government reversing its policy of belt-tightening on Defence.