Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 7 Feb
AS THE IRISH Government considers whether, when and how to proceed with the Occupied Territories Bill, with the aim of preventing imports from illegally occupied Palestinian land, two opposing points of view are being asserted.
On the one hand, many argue, based on Irish values, that the Government has no alternative to proceeding immediately with the Bill. On the other hand, others insist, based on Irish interests, that the idea should be kicked into the long grass. The truth is that each of these arguments is both valid and important.
We live in a world in which politicians increasingly promise simple solutions to complex questions with a view to appealing, often successfully, to public opinion. In an extreme form, populist leaders, have boiled entire political philosophies down to meaningless short slogans, such as “Make America Great Again”, that are so simplistic as to do immense damage.
Fortunately, in Ireland, populism is still very much a minority sport. Both sides of the argument on the Occupied Territories Bill put their cases reasonably and with a degree of sophistication. Nevertheless, it is essential to remind ourselves from time to time that complex questions need to be addressed in a way that recognizes that complexity. As Robert Bolt wrote, God “made animals for innocence, and plants for their simplicity, but men and women he made to serve him wittily in the tangle of their minds”.
For our country to ignore its values would be to render all political endeavour transactional and to impoverish our public discourse. To dismiss any concern for our interests would be an eccentric form of political sleepwalking that could have a negative impact on ordinary citizens.
We elect our Government to tease out the balance between values and interests, on this and on other domestic and international issues, not as a theoretical philosophical exercise but because, in broad terms, we want them to reflect our priorities and aspirations.
As regards values, there is no doubt that the case for the Occupied Territories Bill is not only strong but incontrovertible. Israel, supported by the US Government and opposed essentially by the rest of the world, continues relentlessly and systematically to annex Palestinian land over which it has no rights whatsoever — legally, morally, historically or biblically. It has been doing this for many years, including by military action and by tolerating Israeli settler violence. The case for rejecting imports from the Occupied Territories, insofar as they can be distinguished from Israeli exports, is clear.
President Trump’s recent proposal, as preposterous as it is monstrous, that the US should seize Gaza and expel the Palestinians, demonstrates that he has zero understanding of international law, world opinion, human motivation or basic decency. It is a reminder of why the world should stand with the Palestinians and that Ireland’s decision to recognise Palestine was timely. Americans have as much right to expel Palestinians and take over their land, as Mexican migrants have to annex California and incorporate it into Mexico.
Trump has suggested that Gaza is a great piece of “real estate” that could become the Riviera of the Middle East. Far from Rivieras, his infantile approach is more likely to ensure Rivers of Blood for many more generations to come.
Those who advocate prioritising Ireland’s values in relation to the Bill can also point out that some Irish interests could also be advanced by its adoption. In a world in which international law is under increasing threat, including from Moscow and Washington, there is a pragmatic case for supporting international law in this instance. Ireland’s standing in parts of the world would also be enhanced.
However, having said all that, the Government also needs to take account of several significant Irish interests. It needs to bear in mind how the Trump administration, however unjustifiably and capriciously, would react and what damage that could do to Irish economic and trade interests.
It will be aware that the Netanyahu Government will continue to stoke up the narrative of alleged Irish “antisemitism” essentially because it resents an Irish approach based on the conviction that all innocent lives are of equal value.
The Government has a moral as well as political responsibility to factor in the possible impact on Irish jobs. It will be aware that those who now most vociferously call for the Bill’s adoption would, as is normal in democratic politics, be the first to criticise the Government if our economy takes a hit. The responsibilities of Government are quite different from those of opposition.
The Government should also bear in mind the risks of Ireland acting alone. It should take account of EU law, of how our partners would react, and how we can best influence them – as we did in nudging them gradually towards calling for a Gaza ceasefire.
One of the characters in Evelyn Waugh’s novel Scoop, when he doesn’t agree with his boss, instead of saying “no”, always replies “Up to a point, Lord Copper”. As Chris Patten has argued, it a useful political philosophy that rejects simple assertions in favour recognising that, on complex questions, there is always another point of view.
As the Government is reflecting on the Occupied Territories Bill, it will take into account complexities that are not in the public domain, including the Attorney General’s advice and what international partners are saying privately. In responding to the reasonable arguments from both sides, it could usefully say to each “Up to a point, Lord Copper”.
Bobby McDonagh is a former Irish Ambassador to the EU, UK and Italy. He is an executive coach and commentator on subjects around EU and Brexit.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say