Opinion

Ireland expelling the Russian ambassador would be an unnecessary risk

Move would pose a threat to Irish Embassy and Moscow staff while stoking tensions

Russian ambassador to Ireland Yuriy Filatov's attempts to advance a cogent argument for the Ukraine invasion has met will little success. File photograph: The Irish Times

Alanna O'Malley
Mon Nov 21 2022 - 01:00

Should the Irish Government expel Russian ambassador Yuriy Filatov and risk the closure of Moscow’s embassy in Dublin? That’s the question being asked inside Iveagh House in recent days in response to the Russian government’s decision to sanction 52 Irish officials.

The announcement of sanctions against top Irish officials including Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Minister for Foreign Affairs Simon Coveney came amid mounting tensions between Dublin and Moscow.

Following the spat over Russian naval patrols in Ireland’s exclusive economic zone in February, the latest escalation comes as the Russian position in Ukraine is gradually being marginalised. In retaliation for increased Irish support for Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, particularly the commitment to train Ukrainian troops as part of an EU training mission, Moscow has stepped up international pressure through its diplomatic outposts in an attempt to squeeze European states further.

The Irish Government’s response has so far been to keep a cool head and retain open channels of communication with Moscow. This is broadly in line with the EU and Nato approach to the conflict, which has been strongly supportive of Ukraine, but also avoids provoking the Russians. If Ireland were to evict the Russian envoy, not only would this pose a threat to the Irish Embassy and its staff in Moscow, but it would exacerbate tensions even further.

READ MORE

Recent calls for Filatov’s expulsion and the other 29 officials in the Dublin embassy, rumoured to have nefarious purposes, also give credence to Filatov’s propaganda efforts. Arguments to evict him have pointed to his organisation of events and gatherings where there are attempts to garner support for Russia’s illegal war. However, overwhelming public support for Ukraine and Ireland’s embrace of Ukrainian refugees suggests that his propaganda efforts are falling on deaf ears.

This State has real commitments to European defence and at the same time has been criticised recently as the ‘weakest link’ in the European Union

Rather, the Government’s response seems to be in keeping with our policy of neutrality. Officials have noted the importance of protecting international law and upholding the principles of the UN charter, touting once more Ireland’s current position on the UN Security Council as essential to our internationalism. Yet, this State has real commitments to European defence and at the same time has been criticised recently as the ‘weakest link’ in the European Union. It seems an appropriate moment then to ask, what does Irish neutrality mean now and how should the country respond to the sanctioning of its top officials?

Under Article 42 of the Treaty on the European Union, Ireland is obliged to provide assistance when another member state is the victim of armed aggression. Similarly, under the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy Ireland has committed to collective self-defence missions with other EU members. From the national perspective, these agreements serve Ireland’s interests too. As the conflict has highlighted, Ireland’s strategic location on the edge of Europe, with essential underwater trans-Atlantic communication cables passing through our territorial waters, has been a focal point for Russian activities. From both sides then, it’s apparent that Ireland, even as a neutral State, is more invested in the Ukraine conflict than it may seem.

In this context, Irish neutrality is carefully calibrated between international commitments which are in fact in tension with each other. On the one hand, the eruption of the Ukrainian conflict has demonstrated the fragility of Europe’s peace and the importance of moderated multilateral responses to aggression.

With its neutral position, Ireland stands almost alone among European allies, now confronted with the reality of what previous agreements to EU defence mean

The calibrated and integrated response of the EU and Nato has rejuvenated outdated relationships and highlighted the effectiveness of multilateral action — where political promises have been backed up by public commitments. Ireland, among many other states, has also supported Ukraine’s right under Article 51 of the UN charter to defend itself against aggression. But with its neutral position, Ireland stands almost alone among European allies, now confronted with the reality of what previous agreements to EU defence mean, in the face of public support for Ukraine and growing tensions with Russia.

While Ireland has built its international reputation on preserving the norms of international diplomacy, the time has come to ask whether or not that means that in practice, we’re still a neutral state. Has neutrality become a shield for inaction or does the special Irish stance really offer the country unique room for manoeuvre in multilateral settings like the EU and UN? The current situation with the Russian ambassador is a chance for Ireland to substantiate the claims of the advantages of neutralism with more decisive diplomatic action. It’s high time to ask whether Irish neutrality is not really neutrality at all, but actually Irish exceptionalism.

  • Alanna O’Malley is Associate Professor of International History at Leiden University in the Netherlands.
LATEST STORIES