Dorcha Lee’s recent article in the Irish Examiner, advocating for increased Irish military expenditure and closer alignment with EU militarisation and NATO, fundamentally misrepresents both the nature of Ireland’s geopolitical situation as well as the broader context of global conflict in 2025.
This argument is presented as a pragmatic and experienced analysis – from a retired Defence Forces colonel no less – which advocates for a legitimate capability for defence of national sovereignty. But this is a smokescreen for what is instead an ideological justification for Ireland’s deeper entanglement into Western imperialist structures.
Lee claims that Ireland’s neutrality is a dangerous relic of the past, leaving the nation vulnerable to foreign invasion. However, this argument rests on a fundamental mischaracterisation of Ireland’s historical position, and the nature of modern warfare.
Ireland’s neutrality is not a sign of weakness or ambivalence as the article seems to suggest but is instead an assertion of independence from imperialist and colonialist conflicts which have torn much of the world apart for the better part of the last century. This push to abandon our neutrality is in fact an effort to align the Irish state with the military industrial complex of the EU and NATO.
The portrayal of neutrality as an outdated or naïve policy conveniently ignores the role of both of the aforementioned organisations in destabilising regions particularly in the middle east and in the global south. NATO expansionism has fuelled tensions with Russia, while a European military force (driven by powers such as France and Germany) seeks to consolidate a European military force in order to serve monopoly capitalist interests independently of the United States.
One of the most glaring omissions in the article in the Examiner is an honest discussion of EU militarisation and its consequences. The EU’s Permanent Structured Co-Operation (PESCO) program is designed to increase European military capabilities, which would directly undermine Irish neutrality.
The involvement of the Irish state in PESCO represents a fundamental shift away from a policy of non-alignment, toward active participation in EU-led military interventions. The increasing militarisation of the EU is not about defending member states or deterring foreign invasions but is instead intended to secure European economic and geopolitical interest abroad.
The deployment of forces from EU states in Africa under the guise of ‘peacekeeping’ has served to maintain European control over former colonies, suppressing resistance movements and securing access to valuable resources. Ireland’s deeper integration into this system doesn’t serve its people but would rather bind it into a militarised European project that prioritises corporate and imperial interests over genuine national defence.
The claim that Ireland must dramatically increase its military spending to deter an invasion is a fear-mongering tactic designed to justify the redirection of public funds toward the defence industry. The most credible threat to Ireland when it comes to national security comes from the NATO member which is currently occupying a quarter of this island. Aside from this ongoing act of colonialism, there are no credible threats of military invasion against the 26 county state nor is there any historical precedent for such an event.
The real threats facing Ireland – economic instability, housing emergency, climate change – are entirely unrelated to military spending. Furthermore, the article’s argument that countries must prepare for inevitable war follows the same logic used by imperialist states to justify endless military expansion. The assertion that a ‘Third World War’ has already begun is a deliberate attempt to manufacture consent for increased military spending and deeper integration into the EU’s war apparatus. This serves the interests of arms manufacturers and imperialist states, not the working class on this island.
Lee lumps together cyberattacks, ‘uncontrolled migration’, and ‘invasion’ as part of a vague set of threats requiring increased militarisation. This framing deliberately conflates vastly different issues in order to stoke fear and justify authoritarian measures. The notion that immigration poses a security threat is a reactionary, right wing talking point which is rooted in nothing more than xenophobia and ignores the fact that much of global migration is driven by wars and economic crises cause by imperialist interventions, including those led by NATO and the EU.
While one can argue that cybersecurity is indeed a pressing concern as show by the states woeful response to multiple cyberattacks over the last few years, militarisation is not the solution. You cannot shoot a piece of malware or invade a botnet. The inclusion of this specific threat as a reason for militarisation is ludicrous, the solution to cyberwarfare, is investing in independent technological infrastructure and funding cybersecurity measures without relying on NATO or EU military structures.
This push for increased military spending obviously comes from a very comfortable upper middle-class position as it completely ignores the economic reality: that such a move would come at the direct expense of already underfunded and neglected social services. The claims that Ireland is already coping ‘better than most EU member states’ is so far removed from reality that it is laughable, and demonstrably false.
Military spending does not contribute to national prosperity – it diverts resources away from essential public services into the hands of defence contractors and military bureaucracies. The idea that military deterrence is necessary to protect Ireland’s resources also ignores the fact that the greatest threats to state sovereignty faced by the Irish state, have come from the EU in the form of economic coercion rather than military force. The EU has in the past imposed neoliberal austerity measures on the state, forcing cuts to public services while demanding compliance with trade and taxation measures at the expense of the working class.
Rather than embracing NATO and EU militarisation, and aspiring to have the newest and shiniest weapons that money can buy, Ireland should reaffirm and expand our commitment to an anti-imperialist, socialist model of neutrality. This does not just mean avoiding military antanglements, but actively opposing imperialist interventions abroad. Ireland should withdraw from PESCO and reject any efforts to be integrated into the EU military structure. A truly independent defence policy would focus on self-reliance rather than alignment with imperialist powers. This could include a defensive strategy based on non-militarised national resilience, investing in cybersecurity and energy independence, and infrastructure protection without becoming a pawn of NATO/EU military planning.
Additionally, Ireland should play an active role in promoting diplomatic and economic cooperation with non-aligned and socialist nations, rather than reinforcing the military dominance of Western powers. A commitment to international solidarity with nations resisting imperialism – whether in Latin America, Africa, or the Middle East – would reflect a genuine defence of sovereignty and peace.
The narrative that Ireland must abandon neutrality and invest in militarisation is not based on genuine security concerns, but on the interests the capitalist class and the military-industrial complex. The real threat to Ireland is not a hypothetical foreign invasion, but the economic and political subjugation of the working class under imperialist rule. By rejecting EU and NATO militarisation and NATO-aligned fearmongering, Ireland can uphold its independence and pursue a socialist, anti-imperialist path that prioritises the wellbeing of its people over the quarterly revenue of war-profiteers. Neutrality should not mean passivity – rather it should be a proactive stance against imperialist aggression, in defence of global justice and working-class internationalism.