WELL, IT’S BEEN six days since the presidential debate. It was not an especially memorable affair, and you’d be forgiven for having forgotten most of it by now. But at least there won’t be any more of—

Sorry, hang on. Just have someone in my ear, here. No, that can’t possibly be right. They want to do five more? And that’s just RTÉ? Jesus Christ, did they not see the first one? 

It is quite likely that Fianna Fáil’s parliamentary party members watched Jim Gavin’s Monday night debate performance through their fingers. Watching something through your fingers is just one of many ways you can use your hands to express a feeling, something which should perhaps be mentioned to Jim Gavin ahead of the next five debates. Five! 

While Gavin did spend the debate struggling to articulate himself or speak coherently on any topic for an extended period, or even really relate any of it to why he was running for president, most of the focus ended up on his right hand, which he continually extended as he spoke, holding his thumb flat against his index finger. 

Like so.

This is a body language tactic popular with many politicians, though Gavin just sort of looked like he was surrendering in a thumb war. Which is perhaps poignant, considering the circumstances. 

It was not an especially edifying debate, but some moments felt revelatory. Heather Humphreys, who we should really recall was a cabinet minister as recently as this year, asking whether passing the Occupied Territories Bill would even make any difference, was one such moment. 

It felt like, after years and years of digging, the shovel finally struck the vein and we got an honest articulation of why Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have so resolutely refused to make moves on a matter that has such sizeable support among the electorate at large.  The OTB can has been kicked down the road so many times it’s hard to remember all of the excuses that have been made not to pass it.

There’s been the wording of the bill, there’s been attorney general advice, there have been supposed constraints coming from Brussels. But maybe the simplest explanation is the one that Heather Humphreys gave — maybe they just don’t think it’s worth doing.

It was a statement that should redirect attention towards the government. You remember them, the government. They’re the elected officials who continue to actually set the country’s course, while we have five (five) more debates for a position that is, and let’s be totally honest with ourselves here, almost entirely ceremonial. And I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have ample opportunities to learn about these candidates, I’m just saying that based on Monday’s showing… There might not be all that much to learn, at least not in that format.

Catherine Connolly has not had an easy week of it either, now under pressure for her attempt to hire someone who had previously been convicted of a weapons offence. Connolly has stood over the decision, but there can be little doubt that this is not where her campaign would like the focus to be — and the focus has shifted. Guns make for a more eye-catching ‘October surprise’ than Jim Gavin’s campaign using a drone without a licence. And I don’t just mean his debate performance! Eh, eh? But seriously, folks.

Even if Connolly’s polling numbers take a hit, right now it doesn’t seem likely her erstwhile supporters will be flocking straight to Jim Gavin. It’s bad news for Micheál Martin, who led the charge to nominate Gavin within Fianna Fáil. 

And it comes at a time when the Taoiseach has been standing quite firmly behind the ideas of a different president.

“Anyone who wishes peace for Israel, Gaza and the wider Middle East, must welcome the peace proposal announced in the White House yesterday,” Martin tweeted this week, after Trump announced a ‘peace plan’ which would effectively colonise Gaza. 

The 20-point plan can be found here, and it seems contextually important to point out that Trump has said the alternative to his plan is: “HELL.” Hamas have since agreed to release all remaining hostages in Gaza, and has sought to negotiate the remaining terms of the plan.

Think about the way that Martin’s tweet is formulated. Anyone who wishes for peace must welcome this plan. If you don’t welcome this plan — if you find fault with it, if you point out that it does nothing to address the barbarism to which the Palestinian people have been subjected, if you just plain don’t trust the motives of Donald Trump — then you must not want peace.

Suppose you believe that Tony Blair, a man whose legacy in the Middle East is already stained with blood, has no business being installed as a de facto governor general of this undemocratic annexe. In that case, you must not be serious about peace.

If you think that Donald Trump, a man whose only constant is his own naked self-interest, doesn’t actually care about peace, then I have bad news for you, my friend. It’s actually you who is not serious about peace. Donald Trump is the good guy, actually. Can’t you tell?

What is the sense in approaching it this way? To tell your own citizens that either they accept every detail of a plan that promises no justice for Palestine, or they’re an enemy of peace? 

In the same vein, Martin last week said he had “no issue” with the idea of Trump addressing the Dáil. Okay, so before we lose the thread here, that’s: no issue. Like, zero issue. Trump is a man who speaks at the UN General Assembly and tells European countries they’re going to hell unless they dance to his tune, who gets in front of his own generals to tell them to prepare to carry out attacks on their own citizens, who baselessly tells the world that taking paracetamol during pregnancy causes autism. What you, Micheál Martin, are telling us is that you can’t think of a single reason why letting this man address the Dáil might be ill-advised?

And I’m not putting words in his mouth! “No issue” is what he chose to say! He could have chosen to say “Now isn’t really the right time” or “What reason would there be for Trump to address Dáil Éireann?” But he didn’t. 

Micheál Martin himself told the UN last week that named ministers in the Israeli government have ‘clearly had genocidal intent since day one’. Leaving to one side that Martin visited Israel on day 40… If members of the Israeli government have so clearly had genocidal intent for so long, then what does that make the US, which funds Israel’s campaign and defends it from all critics? What does that make Joe Biden and Donald Trump, and the US politicians who fly to Israel to sign the bombs that tear Palestinian children apart? What is this version of the world where somehow nothing is connected to anything else? Are we all supposed to pretend we’re as stupid as they wish we were?

Martin’s role as an Irish leader, as Minister for Foreign Affairs and Tánaiste, and then Taoiseach, deserves real, clear-eyed scrutiny. One suspects, given the spontaneous protest that brought traffic to a standstill at Dublin Port on Thursday evening, that dissatisfaction is mounting in some corners with our government’s apparent willingness to watch this most harrowing chapter of human history play out without any tangible intervention. 

As our attention is diverted over the next few weeks to considering who should be our head of state, with wide-ranging discussions about Irish values and a vision for our shared future, it seems only right that we should also be thinking about the values we want to see actualised by those who truly call the shots.

Who knows? Maybe after the fifth presidential debate, we can find some time to talk about that.