Voters are more open to Irish military involvement abroad and a common EU defence than many defenders of neutrality, reports Mark Brennock, Chief Political Correspondent.
Whatever "neutrality" actually is, opinion polls show it is an inadequate description of Ireland's military and defence policy. For while polls consistently show strong support for "neutrality", they also show support for positions apparently inconsistent with it.
For example, a 1996 Irish Times/MRBI poll showed seven out of 10 voters wanted to retain the policy of neutrality. However, it also showed six out of 10 voters believed Ireland should go to the defence of a fellow EU member if attacked, and almost eight out of 10 supported involvement in the NATO-sponsored Partnership for Peace programme. A quarter of those who wanted to retain neutrality also wanted Ireland to agree a common foreign and security policy with our EU colleagues.
None of these positions would be acceptable to political campaigners who seek to defend what has become known as "our traditional policy of military neutrality".
This latest poll reveals other attitudes which would be strongly opposed by such campaigners. Some 58 per cent of voters believe Ireland should consider joining a future EU common defence while retaining the right to opt into or out of military action on a case-by-case basis. Some 10 per cent would go further, saying Ireland should participate fully in any military actions by an EU alliance. Just 19 per cent believe Ireland should refuse under any circumstances to join a future EU common defence.
Most of those who fly the neutrality flag when campaigning against every EU treaty and against Government facilitation at Shannon of US troops involved in the war on Iraq would disagree. They strongly oppose the direction being taken by the EU, fearing it will become a supranational entity with a military capability. The development of an EU common defence is their worst nightmare.
However, the poll shows that by and large voters have little problem with it. But they draw the line at any element of compulsion arising from such participation. So while 68 per cent say Ireland should consider joining a future EU common defence, just 10 per cent say we should participate fully in any military actions undertaken by it. The remainder say we should be able to adopt an à la carte approach: opting into or out of military actions as we see fit.
The same attitude underlies the answers to a broader question about future Irish participation in military conflicts. Some 31 per cent take the pure anti-militarist position that Ireland should stay out of all military alliances and never participate in war. The majority - 51 per cent - believes Ireland should stay out of military alliances but consider participating in wars on a case-by-case basis so long as they have a UN mandate. Just 8 per cent were willing to contemplate Irish participation in wars that did not have a UN mandate, with 10 per cent having no opinion.
So if they were asked again, a majority of voters would almost certainly say they want to retain the policy of military neutrality. What this poll indicates they mean, however, is that they want Ireland to be able to choose to opt into or out of conflicts on a case- by-case basis, they would accept Irish involvement in such conflicts only if supported by a UN mandate, and they are open to joining a common EU defence so long as the right to opt out of specific actions is retained.
The dramatic reversal of the public view on the Government decision to allow the US military to use Shannon Airport as a transit point for troops and their personal weapons during the war on Iraq is also a sign that opinion on these matters is fluid and open to influence.
The shift from overwhelming opposition to the use of Shannon in February to clear support for it now is likely to be down to two factors: That the wilder predictions of carnage from the anti-war campaigners did not come to pass, and that the Government's reasons for allowing Shannon to be used have swayed some people.
On the first point, the war may have left Iraq a mess with many dead, great destruction and an uncertain future. But the more alarmist predictions of hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in a long drawn-out conflict did not come to pass. The war was won comparatively quickly with comparatively few casualties.
On the second point, the Government waited until the last possible moment to announce that it would allow the US to continue to use Shannon with or without a UN mandate for war. The Taoiseach and his Ministers, therefore, only began to try to win public support for this position on the eve of the war. It is reasonable to speculate that its pragmatic message - that allowing the US military to use Shannon will keep Ireland on-side with the US political and business establishment - has won over some opponents since the beginning of the conflict.
They have done the best job in convincing their own supporters of the merits of the decision, with 6 per cent of Fianna Fáil supporters approving, 2 per cent disapproving and 5 per cent having no opinion. Some 55 per cent of PD voters approve, 42 per cent disapprove and 3 per cent have no opinion.
The male/female division on military matters is clear in this poll as it has been in previous ones. Women still disapprove of allowing the US military to use Shannon while voters as a whole approve. They are evenly divided on whether this changed Ireland's neutral status while men believe it did not by a two-to-one margin. They are less enthusiastic than men about Irish participation in foreign conflict or a common EU defence.
The same applies to those aged 18-24 who oppose the Shannon decision. They are concerned that it undermines neutrality, and are less supportive than older voters of Irish participation in foreign conflicts or a common EU defence.