Government to begin process of changing 'triple lock' neutrality

Currently, the triple-lock mechanism only allows deployment where there is a UN mandate (either from the Security Council or General Assembly), Government approval, and a Dáil resolution.

The Coalition has argued that the UN mandate restricts Ireland because permanent members such as Russia and China have vetoes.

Under the UN charter, the Security Council may establish a UN peace mission, or authorise action by a group of States or regional organisation, such as the EU or the African Union. However, no new peacekeeping mission has been approved by the UN Security Council in a decade.

Government sources say that the bill would recognise a "growing need to be able to dispatch our troops quickly with the flexibility to urgently respond to any crisis where, for example, Irish citizens require assistance abroad".

The Department of Defence has already commenced a full review of existing laws that govern overseas deployments of the Defence Forces and has sought the advice of the Attorney General.

Government sources argue that changes to the law are necessary due to an increasing demand to assist with evacuation operations as part of an Emergency Civil Assistance Team (ECAT) such as those used in Afghanistan in 2021 and Sudan in 2023.

The new legislation will look at specific reference to these type of deployments and will also look to simplify authorisation for Ireland to participate in international live military exercises, such as around the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy.

It is envisaged that the law would still see the need for Government and Dáil approval.

In Brussels earlier this month, Taoiseach Simon Harris said that he expects changes to the triple-lock system for deploying Irish troops to be made in the lifetime of this Government, but rejected the idea that this would be a de facto scrapping of neutrality.

"This is not a move away from military neutrality in any way," he said.

However, the scrapping of the triple lock will not be universally supported, with opposition parties already laying out their arguments against such a move. 

Writing in the Irish Examiner in November, Labour leader Ivana Bacik said that nobody within the Government has put forward a "compelling" argument for doing so.

"There is no clear rationale for the sudden suggestion that we should now remove the statutory requirement for UN approval for Irish participation in peacekeeping missions," she wrote. 

"Indeed, it is unclear why this suggestion is being made now — it is not based on any recommendation from the recent Consultative Forum, nor was any particularly compelling reason provided by anyone in Government.

"The UN was founded as a global peacemaking and peacekeeping body, emerging out of the carnage of World War II. We may wish to see its processes reformed, and I am no fan of the Russian regime nor indeed the concept of a Security Council veto; but nobody, including the Tánaiste himself, has offered any practical or realistic alternative."

Mr Martin in November told the Dáil he had instructed officials in the Department of Defence to prepare legislative proposals "without delay" that would govern the future overseas deployments of our Defence Forces.

Sinn Féin's Matt Carthy said in the Dáil that the move is a "fundamental shift" in Irish foreign policy that it would undermine our neutrality.