The end of the triple lock should not come as a surprise. Its demise has been signalled for well over two years by government.
In 2023, a four-day Consultative Forum on International Security Policy was held to discuss Ireland’s position on this critical issue in the face of rapidly changing global politics.
Critics railed that the forum was intended as a vehicle to erode Irish neutrality.
If there was anything in its crosshairs, it was the triple lock: the mechanism that must be used before Irish troops can be deployed on overseas peacekeeping missions. It guarantees that no more than 12 Irish soldiers can be sent into battle zones without the permission of the government, Dáil Éireann and the United Nations.
Official documents are quietly disappearing from departmental websites. Why?
I cleared six figures’ worth of debt in Ireland. These are the low-risk ways to invest
Air India Flight 171: Two pilots had almost no time to recover as passenger jet went down
Israel-Iran latest: Trump says he wants ‘real end’ to nuclear stand-off with Iran
Several months later, then minister for foreign affairs Micheál Martin confirmed the government intended to amend it.
The triple lock came into being in 2001, after the defeat of the Nice referendum. The post-hoc examination of the loss identified public concern that the treaty (to expand the EU) would erode Irish neutrality and lead to compulsory participation in a future European army.
At that summer’s European summit in Seville the other 14 EU States accepted an Ireland declaration that Irish participation in any EU military operation would require three authorisations: the Security Council or the General Assembly of the UN, the government and the Dáil.
As a reassurance, it was sufficiently robust to pave the way for the second Nice referendum to be passed.
There are five permanent members on the Security Council: the US, China, Russia, the United Kingdom and France. Each can veto any decision to mandate a mission.
Successive governments have become frustrated by the triple lock’s limitations, particularly the blockages at UN Security Council level. The fact that Russia is a member of the Big Five is viewed as particularly problematic, especially in the light of all that has happened in the past three years.
[ Proposals to change triple lock potentially ‘very dangerous’ – Sinn FéinOpens in new window ]
“There is no point in pretending that there is not a power play going on with the permanent five [members of the Security Council],” said Micheál Martin at the time of the forum. “Russia is increasingly using the veto. At a minimum, it deserves debate.”
Indeed, there has been inertia in approving overseas missions. The last such mission approved was 11 years ago in 2014. Russia has used its veto to prevent peacekeeping missions being deployed in Macedonia (2002) and Georgia (2009).
What is now proposed by the Government is approval by the Cabinet and by the Dáil and a necessity that any mission involving the Defence Forces is organised by a regional organisation, such as the EU, that is in compliance with chapter 8 of the UN Charter.
In other words, while the mission might not formally have the approval of the UN, it will be done in accordance with the aims and spirit of the UN Charter.
There is another mechanism available within the UN to sanction such overseas missions, which can bypass the Security Council veto. However, the bar is high. A proposal by this means requires a two-thirds majority of the UN General Assembly in addition to a majority of the 15-member Security Council. It is very rarely used; indeed you have to go back more than 40 years since it was last used.
Most Opposition parties in the Dáil have criticised the change. While all accept the UN is not perfect, they contend it is better to argue for reform from within rather than abandon it. That argument was supported in the forum by Prof Ray Murphy, head of the Irish Centre for Human Rights at the University of Galway, and a former army officer.
He accepted that it was difficult to work within the framework of the UN but said that hard cases make bad law. He said Ireland moving outside the UN would be counterproductive and could cause reputational damage.
“I don’t think we should ever support something outside the framework of the UN,” he said.
It’s also clear most Opposition parties suspect the Government has a bigger agenda, including eroding neutrality and nudging the State towards Nato. The Government denies this.
