ANALYSIS:It would be a pity to withdraw from our responsibilities as a neutral State on the basis of emotional but groundless fears around conscription, writes TOM CLONAN
W HEN THE Irish public express a fear of conscription, it is most likely predicated on a folk memory of the threat of conscription during the first World War - almost 100 years ago. While such fears are therefore understandable in the Irish context, international military trends show conscription to be an anachronistic and outmoded practice that the US, Nato and even Russia are anxious to leave in the past.
In the developed world, armies have been moving towards all-volunteer structures - highly professionalised militaries - for almost two decades now. Aside from international trends, Ireland's neutral status ensures that Irish men and women cannot be conscripted for military service in Europe, by the EU or any other external organisation such as Nato, now or at any point in the future.
There is no political or legal mechanism in existence by which such a process of mobilisation or conscription could take place.
The Lisbon Treaty - had it been endorsed by the Irish electorate - would have further protected Ireland's sovereignty in this regard and would have enshrined in international law her ability to veto any EU military initiative or development that might have signalled a return to conscription, not just in Ireland, but in any other part of the EU.
If the Government was to opt out of evolving European security and defence policy, it would represent a major setback, not just for the Defence Forces, but the nation as a whole, as it would, in my view, seriously damage Ireland's international status, both militarily and politically.
In operational military terms it would cause the immediate end to Ireland's participation in UN-mandated EU peacekeeping and peace enforcement missions such as the Irish-led EUfor mission to Chad and our involvement in the EU's military mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina. At present, the Defence Forces have almost 500 soldiers deployed to these mission areas.
On a more strategic level, if the Government were to opt out of the EU's military structures, the Defence Forces would also have to withdraw, with immediate effect, from the EU's battlegroup structures.
The Defence Forces have just completed a six-month tour of duty with the Nordic battlegroup - on standby for crisis and humanitarian interventions from January to June 2008. The Irish are now in negotiations to participate with the German-led EU battlegroup in 2011, along with the Nordic battlegroup in 2012, for similar UN-mandated, EU-led crisis interventions.
Consistent with the United Nation's Brahimi report of 2000, future UN-mandated peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations are to be carried out by precisely such multilateral regional organisations as the EU's battlegroups.
If the Government opts out of such EU military structures, it would likely signal the end of 50 years of UN peacekeeping and peace enforcement duties for Ireland. Precluded from participation in the EU's battlegroup system, the Defence Forces would be practically excluded from participating in any future UN-mandated European peacekeeping or peace enforcement mission.
This would also signal an end to Ireland's direct involvement in the political and military planning phases of such future UN-mandated EU missions worldwide.
For example, senior Army officers recently participated in key roles in the planning phase of the German-led UN mission to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2006. In this way, the Irish were able to bring their considerable peacekeeping experience to the conduct of the EU mission, while also allowing for direct Irish political influence to be brought to bear on the posture of the German-led EU mission to Africa.
Were we to opt out of such EU military planning structures - in which we are already embedded as neutrals at the highest levels - we would forfeit our ability to bring our unique perspective to future EU operations and would be unable to temper the deployment strategies of our more hawkish EU partners in such endeavours.
At the military and political strategic level, any Irish government decision to opt out of the EU's military structures would mean the end of Ireland's meaningful participation at the EU military staff (EUMS) headquarters in Brussels. The EUMS is effectively the military headquarters of the EU's collective crisis intervention capability.
This EU planning cell ultimately decides the manner in which the EU battlegroups and other rapid reaction forces are to be deployed in any future UN- or EU-mandated mission. Senior Irish military personnel have traditionally been represented at the highest levels at EUMS and are much sought after given their extensive overseas service as peacekeepers and peace enforcers.
Currently, there are seven senior Irish officers - including a general, Brig Gen Michael Finn - serving at the EUMS. Their roles include the planning, logistics, operations and intelligence support for all EU military operations.
If we were to opt out of the EU's security and defence structures, Ireland would, overnight, lose her ability to militarily and politically influence our EU partners at the genesis of future EU military operations.
Under current conditions, Ireland, despite being a neutral EU state, exerts a great deal of direct military influence at the EUMS. Militarily, the Lisbon Treaty would have copperfastened this situation. Politically, the military aspects of the treaty guarantee Ireland the power of veto over any EU military initiative or decision at the level of the Council of Ministers.
If the Government simply opts out of the security and defence structures of the EU, it will lose the ability to veto any inappropriate EU military development or initiative at the Council of Ministers.
Participation in EU military structures has allowed Ireland to continue its tradition of UN service under an EU flag. Such participation has also provided Ireland with unique leadership opportunities, such as our lead role in the EU's mission to Chad. In parallel, due to the requirement that EU military structures be able to co-ordinate with one another, the downsized Defence Forces have been operationally and technologically transformed, thus greatly enhancing their emergency response capability.
Most importantly, however, participation in Europe has allowed us to exert our influence. Through our moderating influence and leadership, military participation in the EU has given meaningful expression to our neutrality - perhaps for the first time since the foundation of the State. Opting out from such participation would render our neutrality meaningless.
It would be a pity to opt out of our responsibilities as a neutral state on the basis of emotionally charged but groundless fears around conscription.
• Dr Tom Clonan is security analyst for The Irish Times.