Months before his assassination, President John F. Kennedy told the Oireachtas that Ireland would not be neutral if it was faced with a choice between liberty and tyranny. If only it were so simple, writes Mark Hennessy.
Bertie Ahern must now be quietly praying that the US will manage to win UN sanction for any eventual attack on Iraq, and not proceed with Britain's backing only.
If there is war, it will be a morally complex affair. Yes, Saddam is a brute. Yes, he is a threat to peace. Yes, he was partly created by the US itself in the 1980s. Yes, it will be about oil. On the latter point, a little more honesty from the US would help.
According to a recent US report, "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century", the industrialised world's safety energy margin has not been so tight for decades. Back in 1985, when oil prices collapsed, OPEC had 15 million barrels a day to spare. Even during the Gulf War, there was still a spare capacity of 5 million to 5.5 million barrels. Today, there is just 2 per cent to spare.
Meanwhile, the US is consuming, and importing more than ever. Liberalisation has meant that energy investment has fallen. California-style power cuts could soon be the norm there. Gas-guzzling sports utility vehicles (SUVs), beloved by US drivers, are but one explanation for the energy orgy. If the SUVs' consumption even matched that of ordinary cars in the US, 225,000 barrels a day would be saved. Currently, the Gulf produces 25 per cent of the world's oil. Many analysts project it could increase to more than 30-40 per cent over the coming decade. "If political factors were to block the development of new oil fields, the ramifications could be quite severe unless measures are taken immediately to diversify to other energy fuels," the report warned.
So far, politicians of all hues, and others in Ireland, have been fighting a side issue over the use of Shannon Airport by American military forces bound for the Gulf. This is hardly new. Shannon has made a fortune for years - with everybody's knowledge - supplying fuel, Irish coffees and duty-free Jameson to US soldiers, and even to the Soviets during the Cuban crisis.
Clearly, however, the US has taken the Irish for granted: it did not apply, as it was required to do, for permission for its soldiers to carry unloaded small arms on board Shannon-routed aircraft. And a 1954 rule forbidding foreign soldiers from wearing their uniforms, except with written official permission, was equally ignored until January 13th when the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, tightened up the rules.
So far, the Government has been bullish in its acceptance of the US view that Iraq has defied UN resolutions, and that it has sought to "thwart" the UN weapons inspectors at every turn.
"There should be no doubt that possession alone, regardless of whether there is a proven intent to use these arms, is a real and intolerable threat, as well as being banned by international treaties," Mr Cowen said. However, the Government strongly hints that its position regarding Shannon's future use could change if the Bush administration decides to go it alone without UN cover.
BUT there are contradictory signals around. In Prague this week, Mr Ahern seemed miffed that he had not been asked to add his signature to a gung-ho letter on Iraq from eight EU and EU applicant countries. The letter, which followed some US diplomatic badgering, is a disaster for those who want the EU to speak with one voice on the international stage - a voice that could be influenced by the EU's unheeded, smaller states. For now, Ireland is one of those small bit players. But we do have an airport. And the US is very happy to use it, even if they can raise justifiable questions this week about security.
Listening to the remarks of TDs Joe Higgins and Finian McGrath, one might, however, have been left under the erroneous impression that Shannon is an irreplaceable staging post for the US. It is not.
For weeks, civilian airports throughout Europe, such as Frankfurt in Germany, have seen a sharp increase in American military traffic. And the US, if it had to, could easily refuel at US military bases in the UK.
What would a Shannon ban achieve? Would it stop the US build-up in the Gulf? No, it would not. Would it annoy the Americans? Damn right it would. Would Ireland pay a price? Undoubtedly.
And why should the US not build up its Gulf forces? Opponents argue that they are wrong to do so. However, the orders of Hans Blix and other weapons inspectors have little credibility unless backed up by military might, whether it is used or not in the end.
Despite the widespread doubts held by many in the Republic about George Bush's abilities, anti-Americanism is another thing entirely. As ever, we will be conscious of the hand that feeds. Regardless of nagging doubts, it is doubtful that teeming masses will turn up on Shannon's runway to protest about US military traffic - as long as any war, however disliked, ends.
In the Dáil, Mr Cowen said: "There has yet to be a satisfactory response from the Iraqi leadership to the entirely justified demands of the international community."
Here, Green TD Mr John Gormley interjected: "They are unjustified." Few, Mr Gormley, will agree.