The Green Party, Fianna Fáil and the European Defence Agency. I predict a compromise. March 6, 2009
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics.trackback
Perhaps I’m being unduly cynical, but the current discussions and meetings about the European Defence Agency between Brian Cowen and John Gormley seem to me to be utterly contrived.
For as reported in the Irish Times.
TAOISEACH Brian Cowen and Green Party leader John Gormley are to meet in an effort to reach a compromise on the junior Coalition party’s demand that Ireland quit the European Defence Agency (EDA).
For those fortunate few who are unaware of the EDA its remit is to:
…help EU states to co-operate on research and development of military equipment, to combine together to cut costs on military purchases, and to ensure that EU forces increasingly use common equipment.
Now, one can view this as a logical rationalisation of diverse, expensive and incompatible national militaries or… one can view it as the ante-chamber to an integrated European military force. Me, I’m sanguine on such matters given the hardly stunning track record of moves towards such integration previously, but, hey, what do I know?
Anyhow, John Gormley wants us out… Brian Cowen wants us in. Or to put it another way:
“The reality is that we can veto things if we stay at the table, and we can’t if we are not there,” one senior source told The Irish Times.
Although there seems to be some confusion about the importance of it…
A decision to quit the EDA – it would not remove Ireland from efforts to improve EU common foreign policy and defence issues – would raise questions about Ireland’s intentions
Intentions? What intentions… and surely as a neutral, in word if not deed, a counter-argument could be that membership while not necessarily incompatible with neutrality might be so irrelevant as to be unnecessary.
Apparently:
…during yesterday’s Cabinet’s European Affairs Sub-committee meeting it is understood Mr Cowen expressed sensitivity about the Greens’ objections to the EDA, particularly before the party’s weekend conference in Wexford.
Ah… that party conference (or Convention as it is called if one wishes to be pedantic and… er… accurate – take note Paper of Record). Hmmm… what impeccable timing for this issue to suddenly surface. The really interesting sentence in all this is the following…
Mr Cowen is keen to avoid a dispute on the issue. “The reality is that it is an allergic issue for them, and that is understood. The Taoiseach is very sensitive to their needs on this one,” the source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said.
Very sensitive – eh? How sensitive he finds himself able to be will be most educative.
But let’s get real just a moment. In the current climate the efficacy of the EDA is about the last thing on the Government’s mind, and the putative ego boost through participation is minimal in the context of the current fiscal crises (plural). No doubt the thought is that since there is no money to be spent it doesn’t much matter if we don’t engage with EDA. And I can’t say I disagree with that either.
And Cowen may well be savvy enough to be keen to cover all bases coming up to Lisbon II, particularly if he has to go to the EU seeking some sort of relief package should our indigenous efforts fail and badly over the next six months or so. Best, in that context, to take the heat on the EDA from a not entirely happy EU in order to deliver them the much greater prize of Ireland removing the Lisbon road block. Not that in doing so this won’t be painless for the government or the EU. The Danish style opt-outs, the retention of the Commissioner and withdrawal from the EDA are all tangible achievements that can be pointed at by the government and regarded as irksome by the EU.
But who will care once that magic figure of 50% plus plus whatever referendum votes brings us home to the heart of Europe (opt-outs excluded). As it happens, for what its worth, while I supported Lisbon last time around, I won’t shed any tears if those opt-outs are necessary to carry the day (if only because this situation does require something tangible to make it more than a simple re-run). And I think they will be. And that they will.
Anyhow, back to the fun this weekend.
Who would bet against an happy compromise to this particular battle of wills? Maybe even by the weekend. Maybe just in time for the Convention. Hurrah!
Martin let the cat out a while ago. Thy are committed. As for a veto. I would trust Sarkozy before I would trust the embeciles we have in charge. Selling it on the basis our Boorgeoisie would veto Imperial adventures, that would take a lot of faith.
Much as I dislike the Sudanese regime I think we have been enticed into a mess in Darfur. The Chad gov. is jus as bad as the Sudanses.
Too many of our officer corps see themselves as part of a Western alliance.
Now, one can view this as a logical rationalisation of diverse, expensive and incompatible national militaries or… one can view it as the ante-chamber to an integrated European military force.
I’m of two minds in this regard.
(i) it is quite likely that a lot of stuff which undermines our military independence may be successfully smuggled in via such an innocuous-sounding agency (we’ve been here before)
(ii) On the other hand, this may lead to an end of the GUBU helicopter-purchasing activities of the Irish State, as covered in suspiciously-detailed articles in Phoenix over the years (clearly, Goldhawk has at least one senior whistleblower in the Air Corps).
While I’m not suggesting that the door falling off Martin Cullen’s helicopter [1] was a result of this, it surely did occur to aviation buffs watching the news to wonder what we’re doing buying a helicopter model which has seen almost no military sales elsewhere in the world (never mind the EU). Surely the EU taking over our military procurement can only lead to improvements, I suspect.
[Gotta love those IT headlines, which cut to the important details: "Minister escapes injury as helicopter loses door mid-air". Has Royston Brady's old PR handler found new employment?]
Much as I dislike the Sudanese regime I think we have been enticed into a mess in Darfur. The Chad gov. is jus as bad as the Sudanses.
Too many of our officer corps see themselves as part of a Western alliance.
I hav to entirely agree with this sentiment. Especially as our commissioned officers appear to have forgotten whatever lessons were learned from the disastrous entanglement in the Congo in the ’60s.
That makes sense. The helicopter door incident was played for laughs, but it wasn’t funny in any sense. Even with Cullen on board. Still, there ain’t no money as our betters keep telling us. I wouldn’t board that helicopter again if I was Martin…
[Gods, WBS. Please cut down on the defence-related posts, at least for the good of the blog-commenting habit I'm trying to quit!]
Still, there ain’t no money as our betters keep telling us.
Well, we have yet to exercise our options to purchase the last two AW139′s of the planned six-helicopter buy [1], due to take place last year. The chopper type itself is an improvement on the awful Dauphins and ancient Alouette III’s, but this would be true of any replacement. I see a lot of adverse comment online about problems:
In maintenance terms the AW-139 is also performing well, although Lt Col Kirke did admit that “Some components are wearing out a little more quickly than expected.” The support package purchased for both helicopter types means that the Air Corps does not hold large stocks of spare parts as it used to in the past – instead the manufacturer places small quantities of items that require regular replacement at Baldonnel, with major parts and long life items shipped in from the UK as required.
http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/hangar/2008/475iac/iac.htm
And some anonymous commentary here:
http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/showthread.php?p=209380
By the way, you can see the honest-to-God-really “VIP fit” of Cullen’s chopper, courtesy of the IT:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/2009/0303/1224242152024_1.html
The seating arrangements for actually carrying soldiers, on the other hand, is here:
http://www.worldwide-military.com/Military%20Heli's/Middel-grootte%20helikopters%20plaatjes/Groot/AW-139_002.JPG
I wonder if Cullen’s replacement helicopter, which had been on exercises in Cork (and, reasonable to guess, with the military seating arrangement), needed to be re-configured for the esteemed bums which were to sit on it going to Dublin?
(And if such time was taken to change seating around, then exactly how urgent and necessary was Cullen’s flight?)
[1] aircraft buys are typically in such low volumes that discounts pile up rapidly as you have modest increases in numbers – a good argument in favour of the EDA.
[2] it is mortifying to Google for a photograph of the helicopter and find that not one of the first five pages of results returns a shot of a military AW139 – outside of the Irish Defence Forces’, that is.
Even the manufacturer’s pages only have an “artist’s impression” of what the thing might look like in US Army colours – their perceived chances not worth the cost of a custom paint job…?
[Gods, WBS. Please cut down on the defence-related posts, at least for the good of the blog-commenting habit I'm trying to quit!]
Still, there ain’t no money as our betters keep telling us.
Well, we have yet to exercise our options to purchase the last two AW139′s of the planned six-helicopter buy [1], due to take place last year. The chopper type itself is an improvement on the awful Dauphins and ancient Alouette III’s, but this would be true of any replacement. I see a lot of adverse comment online about problems:
In maintenance terms the AW-139 is also performing well, although Lt Col Kirke did admit that “Some components are wearing out a little more quickly than expected.” The support package purchased for both helicopter types means that the Air Corps does not hold large stocks of spare parts as it used to in the past – instead the manufacturer places small quantities of items that require regular replacement at Baldonnel, with major parts and long life items shipped in from the UK as required.
http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/hangar/2008/475iac/iac.htm
And some anonymous commentary here:
http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/showthread.php?p=209380
By the way, you can see the honest-to-God-really “VIP fit” of Cullen’s chopper, courtesy of the IT:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/images/2009/0303/1224242152024_1.html
The seating arrangements for actually carrying soldiers, on the other hand, is here:
http://www.worldwide-military.com/Military%20Heli's/Middel-grootte%20helikopters%20plaatjes/Groot/AW-139_002.JPG
I wonder if Cullen’s replacement helicopter, which had been on exercises in Cork (and, reasonable to guess, with the military seating arrangement), needed to be re-configured for the esteemed bums which were to sit on it going to Dublin?
(And if such time was taken to change seating around, then exactly how urgent and necessary was Cullen’s flight?)
[1] aircraft buys are typically in such low volumes that discounts pile up rapidly as you have modest increases in numbers – a good argument in favour of the EDA.
[2] it is mortifying to Google for a photograph of the helicopter and find that not one of the first five pages of results returns a shot of a military AW139 – outside of the Irish Defence Forces’, that is.
Even the manufacturer’s pages only have an “artist’s impression” of what the thing might look like in US Army colours – their perceived chances not worth the cost of a custom paint job?
Wow, I had no idea it was so unpopular as a military aircraft (or should I say not used…). Great stuff… I take your point about the reconfiguration of the internal layout… I still wouldn’t board it if I were he… and in case the nonsense of using a military aircraft for this sort of thing… God knows…
Thanks for that, WBS. The link on the troop-carrying configuration photograph above is broken by WordPress, hopefully this one works.
That particular photo is well worth looking at in detail – the open window to the left appears to be a customisation added to the Air Corps machines (as a mounting point for the GPMG machine-gun) in order to qualify for the original competition. Kind of like adding wings on a Mini in order to get it into an F1 race, and I can only hope that the gun doesn’t follow the door in falling off…
So was that a factory modification? I’m presuming the Air Corps didn’t instate it…
So was that a factory modification? I’m presuming the Air Corps didn’t instate it…
Yes – but, of course, the original (civilian) airframe wouldn’t have been designed with such a use in mind. Interesting to see how long they stick with the idea of having it armed (Irish military procurement is littered with a long list of crippled equipment, where not abandoned altogether: cf. the Dauphins, or the Irish-built Timoney APCs).
So it ought to be interesting to see in years to come what deficiencies come up.
Ouch… the idea of messing with an airframe doesn’t sound to me like a really sound idea.