Undiplomatic ?

 

Recently the government in Dublin decided to expel one Russian Diplomat. Mr Varadkar the Taoiseach authorised the expulsion. This, like the expulsion of Russian diplomats from other countries was in solidarity with other members of the European Union and the USA following the attack on  two people in an English city.  It was a show of solidarity rarely seen in international affairs, done with speed and confidence. Not however with sufficient evidence that it should have been done.

It might have been expected that a government in Dublin would have demanded sufficient evidence of Russian involvement in the attack , evidence it could present publicly to the Dáil and to the people.  Now the injured people have been taken away to some place where security and secrecy are assured.

Those of us with long memories recall how on some historic occasions government in Dublin was not so cooperative to requests which were really demands. When Mr De Valera was creating a new Constitution for the state he came under pressure from interests in Continental Europe to grant in the  Constitution a special position for the R. Catholic Church as the approved church in the state. He refused. Instead he gave the Church a rather grudging place in it as the religion of the majority of the population. It was a bit like saying Irish people had a special position in Ireland because most of the inhabitants were Irish.

Later  in 1944   Mr de Valera came under severe pressure from the USA and Britain to expel German and Japanese diplomats . He refused.

He came under severe pressure also  to give up control of ports which London had kept after conceding limited independence to Ireland.  He  refused.

There are arguments for and against what he did and why he did it. But there can be little argument about the determination and assuredness with which he did it. He believed that, having achieved some independence, that independence had to be maintained in face of pressures from outside. It was different however in 1932 when, in response to pressure from within, Mr de Valera's  party  succeeded in expelling - illegally - an Irishman Jim Gralton, inflicting on him the  added  inconvenience of Jim having to pay his own fare out of the country. What would have happened had Mr De Valera given in to the demands for expulsion of German and Japanese diplomats? Or to demands to make the R. Catholic  Church a state church?  Or if his party had not given in to internal pressure to expel Jim Gralton, whose offence against Ireland was real - he had built a community hall for independent education after all?

Or what would happen if Mr. Varadkar said No to people who insisted on solidarity with them , rather than evidence from everybody else ?

There has always been a fear that the  European Union may  become a United States Of Europe, highly centralised decision making, including ethical decisions, highly centralised military, highly centralised standards of behaviour - solidarity with accusers rather than demands for evidence  against  presumed offenders. That need not be allowed to happen - membership of a community means not just obeying  other members , it means also shaping the way we are going, so at times firm refusals are required. The European Union seems to be stumbling along towards the theory that the only way to get peace is to wage war and that war can be prepared for only by creating a  highly visible enemy. The need for war overcomes the need for evidence that we have any enemies to war with.

Already the principle of " innocent unless and until proved guilty ( beyond reasonable doubt) " is being eroded in our ideas about  courts,crime and punishment.  Possibly  it is being eroded  in international affairs too.

Is Mr Varadkar's decision to expel Russian diplomats  then simply a gesture of  solidarity rather than a result of evidence?  Perhaps a bit more of Mr De Valera's  firmness (stubbornness, national self interest ?) might be useful at least until we are sure.