During its campaign for an Irish seat on the United Nations Security Council, the Department of Foreign Affairs produced a glossy 18-page brochure, in an attractive UN blue, extolling the merits of Ireland's candidacy.
Delegates from the 189 member-states were told: "We will work tirelessly to ensure that the Security Council remains the ultimate embodiment of international co-operation in the cause of peace and advancing the rights and dignity of all the peoples of our planet."
The brochure spoke of how "Ireland has had experience of colonialism, intolerance, famine and underdevelopment . . . Ireland's history gives it an affinity for the struggles of the developing world . . . Conscious of their past and of how they have overcome the obstacles to building a new future, the Irish people care deeply about fighting poverty, injustice and inequality wherever they occur".
Stirring stuff, it all helped to ensure a comfortable victory in the election. But six months into a two-year term of office, how is Ireland doing? Is it living up to the fine words and phrases of the campaign?
After any election, there is a point where rhetoric meets reality. The reality of the Security Council is that the big powers - Britain, China, France, Russia and the US - have veto powers as well as a permanent seat on the council. The remaining 10 members, with no veto and a two-year term limit, are at an immediate disadvantage.
But even within these constraints, a small member-state can still make a modest but not insignificant impact.
Given its economic position between the advanced and the developing world and its political and geographical location, Ireland is strategically placed to have a degree of influence with frequently competing and occasionally hostile camps.
It is too early to make a definitive assessment of Ireland's performance.
The real test will probably be the Irish presidency of the Security Council in October, although a lot will depend on what issues are current at that time.
International diplomacy can at times be more shadow than substance, but it is possible to identify certain issues where Ireland made an impact, modest or otherwise, in the past six months.
In the first week of Irish membership in January, the US sought to have the council lift an embargo on the sale of arms to Ethiopia and Eritrea, in recognition of the fact that these two countries were coming to the end of a long and bitter conflict.
Ireland took the view that, since there was still tension in the region, it would be premature to lift an embargo which was due to expire in any case within six months. This view was adopted by the council, and the arms embargo remained.
The intervention at least showed that Ireland was not an unquestioning client-state of the US, as some critics of Irish foreign policy have charged over the years. At the same time, it was not vitally important to the US either, so it was arguably a safe enough exercise for Ireland.
A much more sensitive subject, both for the US and the international community, is the Middle East. Efforts at reducing tension and healing divisions in this area are not always appreciated by the different sides.
The apparent collapse of the Oslo peace process and a deteriorating security situation focused attention on the Security Council as one possible vehicle for constructive intervention.
A resolution from countries associated with the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) urged the council to set up an international force to protect Palestinian civilians.
Ireland joined the other European council members - Britain, France and Norway - on a draft resolution which sought to put an unarmed observer mission in place, with Israeli consent, to monitor the treatment of civilians.
Given that the US acts much of the time as Israel's guardian, the Irish view was that any stronger resolution was bound to come up against a US veto which would be divisive and achieve nothing.
This was what happened when the NAM resolution came to a vote. There was some criticism of the Irish stance, especially from the Palestinians, but the European text, which was not voted on, remains available should the council wish to return to it.
On the related and equally controversial issue of Iraqi sanctions, Ireland has broadly supported the UK-US approach. This seeks to adjust the current restrictions to alleviate the suffering of the Iraqi people, while ensuring that Saddam Hussein cannot import materials which could be used to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Ireland has pushed for the maximum liberalisation in Iraq's trade consistent with maintaining security in the region.
However, at the time of writing, Russia is holding out against the "smart sanctions" approach, and it looks as if the existing set of restrictions will continue. .
East Timor is an issue Ireland has taken to its heart, and successive governments have played a vigilant and supportive role as that country moves towards setting up its own state, independent of Indonesia.
Ireland has resisted efforts on the Security Council to scale down the military end of the UN operation in East Timor, arguing that it must first be established beyond doubt that there is no serious security threat to the new state.
The case of Western Sahara, where the Polisario guerrilla movement has been resisting Morocco's claim to the region, came before the council last week.
The UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, and his personal envoy on this issue, the former US secretary of state, James Baker, have proposed a type of home rule for the Western Sahara, with a referendum on its future status within five years.
Irish policy has consistently supported a referendum at the earliest opportunity, although this aim has been frustrated because of disagreements between the Moroccans and the Polisario Front over the composition of the electorate.
There was concern that a resolution to extend the mandate of the UN mission to the region would exclusively endorse an interim internal settlement but, in the end, the Irish delegation was satisfied that the principle of self-determination for the Western Sahara was upheld in the final text.
There are other issues such as the Balkans, the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the sanctions against Jonas Savimbi's UNITA faction in Angola, where Ireland takes a close interest.
A lot of the work is detailed, unglamorous, unexciting, but undeniably important for the countries concerned and ultimately for international peace and stability.
There is a distaste in government and diplomatic circles for grandstanding, on the basis that it is generally counterproductive. They argue that working quietly but constructively behind the scenes achieves more that loudly assuming the high moral ground.
It doesn't mollify the critics but, in foreign policy, the Celtic Tiger tends to prowl rather than growl.
Deaglan de Breadun is Foreign Affairs Correspondent of The Irish Times