The
END
of
NEUTRALITY
For EU countries that aren’t in NATO,
the war in Ukraine is causing them to rethink their
position.
BY SUZANNE
LYNCH AND JACOPO BARIGAZZI
March 24,
2022 4:04 am
DUBLIN — In
the elegant Georgian foreign ministry on the south side of St. Stephen’s Green
in central Dublin, Ireland’s diplomatic corps is engaged in what has suddenly
become an urgent debate: whether to reconsider the country’s traditional stance
of military neutrality.
It’s a
conversation taking place in national capitals across Europe, as Russian bombs
falling on Ukrainian cities thrust concerns about security to heights not seen
since the end of the Cold War. For European Union countries that are not members
of NATO, the suddenly no-longer-unimaginable possibility of a confrontation
between Moscow and the West is raising questions about whether military
neutrality is desirable — or even possible.
Even in
Ireland, one of the European countries furthest from the fighting, policymakers
are starting to revisit a strategic position rooted in the country’s
post-colonial history and repeatedly reaffirmed in the century since.
“At last,
it feels that you can actually broach the subject,” said Cathal Berry, an
independent member of the Irish parliament who advocates for a more robust
defense policy. “In the past, if you even mentioned concerns about Ireland’s
position on neutrality you were accused of warmongering.”
The overlap
between EU and NATO membership is extensive but not complete. Not only is the
military alliance far broader — including countries such as the United States,
Canada and Turkey — there are six EU countries that, for strategic, geographic
or historical reasons, have not joined NATO.
For Ireland,
the reason lies primarily in its history as a colonized nation and its troubled
relationship with Britain, which occupied the island to various extents for
centuries. The country’s hard-fought fight for independence in the early 1920s
and the subsequent civil war left its new leaders with little appetite for
joining a military alliance alongside the United Kingdom.
Ireland
joined the League of Nations in 1923 but controversially remained neutral in
World War II. A similar argument won the day on the question of NATO membership
in the 1960s.
Though the
concept of neutrality is not codified in Ireland’s constitution, the idea has
been repeatedly reaffirmed during the country’s integration into the EU.
Already
picked a side
A landmark
1987 Supreme Court ruling found that proposed changes to the EU treaty
necessitated an amendment to the Irish constitution via a referendum — paving
the way for regular votes whenever a change to the EU treaty is proposed by
Brussels.
As a
result, concerns about EU integration — particularly in the field of security
and defense — were regularly thrashed out as Ireland adopted the bloc’s various
treaties, with Ireland winning clarification from Brussels that EU proposals on
defense did not impact its own position after it rejected the Lisbon Treaty the
first time around.
The war in
Ukraine has put a fresh focus on the country’s defense posture.
Some, like
Berry, the independent MP, argue that Dublin has already picked a side. Ireland
for example permits U.S. troops to land at Shannon Airport on its Atlantic
coast, a policy that continued even during the Iraq War when Switzerland
refused Washington access to its airspace. Dublin has also signed up to EU
security initiatives such as PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation) and CSDP
(Common Security and Defence Policy) training missions.
What Dublin
hasn’t done, argue critics of its stance on neutrality, is invest enough in its
own defense. “Ireland spends the least on defense as a proportion of GDP of all
the 27 EU member states,” said Mark Mellett, a former chief of staff of the
Irish Defence Forces.
In
particular, the country lacks the ability to identify all aircraft passing
through its airspace, or to carry out sub-surface monitoring of the almost 1
million square kilometers of seabed that surround the country. A report last
month by the Commission pointed to huge challenges for the country’s defense
forces, which effectively lean heavily on Britain and the U.S. for help.
There are
concerns about its own preparedness for any possible aggression, including
hybrid attacks. Last year’s cyberattack on the country’s health system by
Russian criminals and a planned exercise by the Russian navy just off the Irish
coast just weeks before the Ukraine invasion have highlighted Ireland’s
vulnerability as a non-aligned EU country separated geographically from the
rest of the Continent.
‘Declaration
of war’
Dublin
isn’t the only national capital engaged in a national conversation about
security and neutrality; even militarily neutral EU countries have joined the
rest of the bloc in slapping Russia with economic sanctions that Vladimir Putin
has denounced as “akin to a declaration of war.”
In March,
shortly after Russia’s invasion, Denmark, a NATO member, announced it would
hold a referendum on June 1 on the opt-out from EU defense policy it negotiated
after the Maastricht treaty. “Historic times call for historic decisions,” said
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. A Yes vote would allow the country to
participate in the EU’s CSDP missions.
Austria is
also facing questions about the official neutrality it has espoused since World
War II, a stance that helped it attract institutions like the United Nations
and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Austria’s
Defense Minister Klaudia Tanner said there are no plans to change Austria’s
policy of neutrality. “For me and for the entire government it’s very clear
that we will not touch Austria’s military neutrality, which is also enshrined
in our constitution,” she told POLITICO.
Like
Ireland, however, while Austria is not a member of NATO, it does participate in
EU defense efforts. Tanner said that the country will “actively contribute to
the further development of EU common defense and security policy” in order to
meet the bloc’s security challenges. For example, Vienna has said it plans to
participate in the EU’s plan to create a Rapid Deployment Capacity of up to
5,000 troops, as codified in the Strategic Compass proposal agreed by ministers
this week.
Some
countries don’t have much room to maneuver. Cyprus’ status as a divided island
and its troubled relationship with Turkey continues to complicate the prospect
of the country joining NATO, and for this reason, it remains the only EU
country not part of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) initiative, even as it
continues to host large British bases on the island.
Others
simply aren’t interested. In Malta, where neutrality is also written into the
constitution, a survey published shortly before the war showed that 63 percent
of the Maltese population is in favor of the island keeping that stance.
Neutrality has not become an issue in the campaign ahead of the parliamentary
election Malta is holding this weekend.
The meaning
of neutrality
Where the
debate is most pertinent is in the EU’s northern reaches. In a sign of the
changing times, the ministers of Sweden and Finland, which share a
1,300-kilometer border with Russia, attended an extraordinary NATO ministerial
meeting in Brussels earlier this month, despite not being members of the
alliance.
“Finland
will be in NATO sooner rather than later … I’m absolutely sure about this,”
said Alexander Stubb, a former Finnish prime minister who has advocated joining
the alliance. “The train left the station on the 24th of February when Putin
attacked Ukraine.”
Stubb
pointed to a recent poll showing 62 percent of the population in favor of NATO
membership, and 16 percent against.
“An
application coming from Finland is not a question of ‘if,’ it’s a question of
‘when.’ And if you ask me the question ‘when,’ I say it is not going to be
days, it is not going to be weeks, but it will be within a few months.”
In Sweden,
support for joining NATO outstripped opposition to the alliance for the first
time this month, according to a poll. Sweden’s center-left Prime Minister
Magdalena Andersson has ruled out joining the alliance, but the country’s EU
commissioner Ylva Johansson told a POLITICO event this week that in the event
that Sweden did decide to join, it would be in partnership with Finland.
Stubb
agreed. “I think it would be beneficial for both Sweden and Finland, that we
joined together rather than separately,” he said. “But what I also tell my
Swedish friends … is that they must understand that Finland has taken the lead
in this process, and we will go into NATO whether or not Sweden goes.”
It will be
lost to few that the other country engaged in conversation about neutrality
these days is Ukraine. Moscow has said it considers the country’s desire to
join NATO to be a security threat. Citing Austria as an example, it has
suggested that peace could be struck if Ukraine agrees, among other things, to
declare “neutrality.”
What
exactly this would mean in practice remains unclear. Membership of NATO would
be out, but would Ukraine have to give up its aspiration to join the EU, whose
treaties include a mutual defense clause? Kyiv has insisted it would want
security guarantees were it to sign up for such an arrangement. Many in the
country will also take heart in the definition of non-alignment espoused by
Finland and Sweden — that true neutrality can only be had if a country has the
ability to fend for itself.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário