Gearóid Ó Loingsigh ☭ writing in Substack on 27-May-2026.


The conflict in Cauca between the Nasa and Misak indigenous peoples for land has left a toll of seven dead. All of the dead are indigenous, not one bourgeois, not one landlord, and neither are there any high ranking government officials, police or military i.e. nobody who influences or decides upon land policy. I am not asking for them to kill anyone, just pointing out that in the land war they killed each other, whilst others sipped coffee at home. However, the indigenous are not the only dead. Various governmental and non-governmental discourses on agrarian reform also died, discourses on indigenous organisations, in particular the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC) and the perspective on who are the agents for change in Colombia.

The dispute is centred around an 800 hectare plot of land and a resolution on its fate acknowledging a colonial deed in favour of the Nasa. They are not fighting to take over a 2000 hectare farm belonging to one of the racist oligarchs in Cauca. No, not that. That would require a fight against the state and the rich. The Department of Cauca is one of the most unequal in terms of land distribution. The majority of peasant farms are no more than 1.5 hectares.

Since the founding of the INCORA (Colombian Institute for Agrarian Reform in the 1960s the state’s policy on agrarian reform has been one of market led agrarian reform. The peace accord signed by the FARC does not used the term, agrarian reform but rather rural reform (which are far from being the same thing), but what it proposes is for the state to buy lands and share them out amongst some, though not all peasants. This model does not break with the power structure in the countryside, in fact it strengthens it. State policy is to promote a type of agrarian reform where the peasant is obliged to grow cash crops, industries which are dominated by the large landlords and oligarchs in Colombia.

This model places peasants, indigenous and blacks in a fight amongst themselves for crumbs. This is not the first episode of this nature though the death toll is noteworthy. Once upon a time the Colombian left used to denounce a market led agrarian reform. They stated bluntly that there will a land market or there will be an agrarian reform but both of these proposals cannot coexist.

The land dispute between the Misak and Nasa will not be resolved in a piecemeal fashion. That much is clear. What is required is the regularisation and expansion of the indigenous reserves along with an agrarian reform for the peasants. To do it bit by bit is to invite the indigenous, peasant and black communities to fight amongst themselves for each portion.

Another discourse that died is in relation to indigenous organisations. There are sectors of the left, particularly those close to the now demobilised FARC who denigrate the indigenous peoples and their organisations whilst other sectors idealise them and concede a protagonism to them and their organisations that they often do not deserve. Sometimes they came to Bogotá to protest the situation in Cauca and put forward their demands. Other times they came to support national mobilisations. But in reality they arrived to usurp the moment and try to impose their agenda, as if the future of the country was settled in Cauca. In the large social explosion of 2021 the CRIC joined the strike a few days later and said they were going to Cali. They saw in the strike another opportunity to present themselves as the salvation of the country and in passing lambasted the urban youth fighting in the streets of Cali and Bogotá, vilifying them as vandals:

We are really going to begin the strike. Because now we see how the city of Cali and the department of Valle de Cauca are being militarised in order to continue repressing the Colombian citizens demands for their rights. We also call upon the vandals to not tarnish the process of the Minga and the national strike.[1]

They tried to reduce the national strike to just another episode in their Minga and the strike as an ancillary activity, and claim the strike began in earnest because they joined it a few days later. In fact in their communiques they always talked about the Minga and the national strike, and in that order. It was a brazen attempt to impose their agenda on a national agenda. But they did not last long in Cali and by May 11th they withdrew, not just because it went badly for them, as it is not the same to fight in the territory that they know than an urban city, but also due to political questions.[2]

Nonetheless, the CRIC is accepted as a permanent reference point, unlike other indigenous organisations, when it doesn’t always deserve to be so. The indigenous peoples are like any other community. There are left wingers and there are also right-wing sectors, amongst them the ex-governor of Cauca Floro Tunubala, who following his term of office went to work with the Coca-Cola Foundation, which is not exactly renowned for its defence of Mother Earth. There are others still that aim to do deals with mining companies in exchange for money. 

I took part in an event in the UAIIN (The Indigenous Autonomous Intercultural University where I explained the social, ecological and cultural damage that gold mining would bring and following my presentations a leader warned those in attendance that whilst my interventions were interesting, Colombia needed the gold i.e. to allow the entry of mining companies. Other leaders, however, invited me to hike through their reserves carrying out a series of workshops with the indigenous communities. The indigenous peoples and their organisations are like those of the peasants and urban sectors. There are all sorts. But some sectors of the Left treat them as icons that cannot be criticised. They have even gone as far as the ridiculous point of trying to replicate indigenous rites and ceremonies in events. The Colombian Left has a problem with religious mysticism and superstition and not just in the case of the indigenous. More than once I have had to momentarily withdraw from a secular event, where I was a speaker, whilst a priest or religious person (generally Catholic) blessed the event. It is shameful but common amongst an incoherent Left.

According to some sectors of the Left, the indigenous have an ancestral millennial knowledge. All cultures in the world come from times past. In some cases we can talk of centuries and even millennia, but all those cultures have changed. The idea of a static millennial culture is just as racist as the colonial vision of indigenous cultures. But now that those peoples with their ancestral knowledge and unique wisdom have murdered each other in a fight for land and against an administrative decision of the National Land Agency, where is that unique wisdom? It doesn’t exist because it has never existed.

Their organisations are like the rest of Colombia, with a particular vision that competes with the rest. In the case of the CRIC it is worth highlighting that it is an indigenous organisation, an NGO and a company that tenders for state contracts and manages a significant chunk of the state budget. So far, under the current government it has signed contracts for 405 billion pesos (roughly 100 million US dollars).[3] Some of them are health related matters and ethno-education, legitimate and necessary things. Though when they hire indigenous teachers for ethno-education they don’t always get good contracts but rather short term contracts etc.. There is a worsening in working conditions compared to the whites they replaced. This is called capitalism and job insecurity a la CRIC. It is worth pointing out that this is not something new under Petro’s government but rather also a reality under the governments of Duque and Santos.

So let the idea of indigenous organisations as the vanguard of social struggles die! There is nothing special about them. They represent a variety of positions, some progressive others openly reactionary. They are simply one political current more in the country and deserve the same respect as other organisations. They are social organisations with wide support base and have played an important role in various struggles at various times. But no more than that. We should no idealise them just like we don’t idealise trade unions that nowadays are a source of corruption and sometimes act as brake on the struggles of their members. We should also remember that the CRIC is just one indigenous organisation. There are many more.

The response to the massacre of indigenous in Cauca has been very poor. And it was a massacre, a massacre being the murder of four or more people in the same space and time. For example, the Congress of the Peoples asked both groups to engage in dialogue and harmony.[4] It was very soft. I cannot conceive of a situation where workers in two different unions in a company murdered each other and all is asked of them is dialogue and harmony.

The market led agrarian reform is buried in the tombs of the dead whose blood spilled on the fields of Cauca in a fight between the poor and not against landlords or the state. The market led agrarian reform is individual, not collective, and always puts some poor in a fight against others, though in the majority of cases the fight is bureaucratic and administrative and does not result in violence, though it is always ideological. It is never against the state and the oligarchy. And all the ancestral wisdom did not give the Nasa or the Misak greater knowledge about their real enemy.

References

[1] RNC (30/04/2021) Para Nacional: el CRIC anuncia que se unirá a las manifestaciones. 

[2] CRIC (13/05/2021) El Paro Nacional y el CRIC: La lucha continua. https://www.cric-

[3] El Tiempo (03/07/2025) Los detalles del nuevo millonario contrato entre el Cric y el gobierno: sería el quinto en lo que va del 2025. 

[4] See Communiqué (22/05/2026) Mensaje de armonización y lucha. 

⏩ Gearóid Ó Loingsigh is a political and human rights activist with extensive experience in Latin America.

Land Conflict in Cauca, Colombia 🪶And The Massacre Of Indigenous People

Merrion Press 🔖 has just published a new book by Ailín Kennedy & Mike McGrath-Bryan.



Have I Got Your Attention?
A Guide To Adult ADHD In Ireland

Ailín Kennedy & Mike McGrath-Bryan


‘Living with ADHD isn’t about fixing yourself – it’s about understanding yourself and embracing the person you already are.’
Ken Kilbride, CEO ADHD Ireland

Have I Got Your Attention? is a practical and deeply relatable guide to Adult ADHD in Ireland, especially for those who received their diagnosis later in life. Presented in an ADHD-friendly design, with a foreword by Ken Kilbride, it’s packed with information, useful resources and simple tips. This guide provides clear and comprehensive personal insights, including interviews with artists, medics, writers, inventors and more, each offering a candid glimpse into life as an ADHDer in Ireland.

Providing strategies for navigating your emotions, it’s a toolkit for self-understanding and self-advocacy – empowering adult ADHDers to build lives that work for them. Have I Got Your Attention? celebrates all the positives that come with ADHD, while acknowledging the hurdles too.

Paperback • €18.99|£17.99 • 264pages • 215mm x 135mm • 9781785375859

About The Authors

Ailín Kennedy is an ADHD coach from Cork. She was diagnosed with ADHD at thirty-two and now works with ADHDers, helping them to navigate their neurodiversity. Before this, she was a musician, gigging in various bands before leaving for Wales to study science. She has now swapped a musician’s life of parties and all-nighters for marathon running.


Mike McGrath-Bryan is a writer and journalist from Cork. He has nearly twenty years’ experience in Irish and international media including The Irish Examiner and RTÉ; as well as specialist culture publications like Bandcamp Daily and Nialler9. Diagnosed as ADHD and autistic, he has contributed to Wired Our Own Way: An Anthology of Irish Autistic Voices (New Island, 2025).

 
📚 Keep Up With Merrion Press 📚 

Out Now 📚 Ailín Kennedy & Mike McGrath-Bryan

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Nine Hundred And Eighty Six

 

A Morning Thought @ 3160

Frankie Quinn with a poem from his expansive body of work. 

Hunger

Hunger Small precious gift beneath rubble’s volume 
Hidden within crusty darkness longing for light 
It grows with intense penetrating pureness
Curled protected small foot dissolved with security
Of solid foundation anchored forever wanting home. 
♞♜♝
Hunger burns within Sands’ crystallised fusion 
Creates wondrous stone viewed by none who 
Dare open wounds entwined in the belly of 
An ocean of pain swallowed saltwater lives fall on 
A May Day hovering above still-living Gaza strip. 
♞♜♝
Ever so patiently open to reveal the precious
Poet who died to free the immortal soul 
Sought after by all who proclaim righteousness
Inside the Zionist tomb where sleep becomes 
An oystercatcher’s nightmare locked in a H Block hell.

⏩ Frankie Quinn is a former republican prisoner who is now a community activist. He is the author of Open Gates, a book of poetry.   

Hunger

Maryam Namazie Sun 31 May 2026, 7.45pm.

Meet the finalists for this £15,000 fiction prize for writers from refugee and migrant backgrounds who shine a light on today’s most pertinent topics.


More details forPurcell Room

Tickets from £5 + £4 booking feeView more time and price information

Run time 1 hour and 15 minutes (approx)

Dates & tickets

This event brings together some of the shortlisted authors of the prize, ahead of the announcement of the overall prize winner in June. During the event, chaired by author Colin Grant, the writers reflect on themes of displacement, belonging, courage and creativity, both in the selected works and beyond.

The winner is selected by a judging panel composed of acclaimed writer Dina Nayeri; Waterstones’ Head of Books, Bea Carvalho; Waterstones Debut Fiction Prize-shortlisted and Observer Best New Novelist, Gurnaik Johal; Footnote Press Commissioning Editor, Serena Arthur; and director and co-founder of Counterpoints Arts, Almir Koldzic.

The shortlisted works include:

Eleanor Chan’s When I Bleed It  Is Like a Squashed Raspberry, a meditation on amnesia, re-remembering and the healing power of storytelling.

Jose Hall’s What The Trees Remember, which follows a neurodivergent woman of Jamaican and Cornish heritage uncovering fractured histories of migration, otherness and silence.

Erica Li’s A Thousand Rivers of Time, a family saga chronicling the lives of three generations of women from a Hakka-Chinese family from 1945 to the present.

Joel Mordi’s Backward Into the Future: ‘Her Past Was His Future’ an Afro-folkloric novel in which a trans griot who guards ancestral memory and a gay Nigerian asylum seeker become bound across time.

Ahmed Najar’s The Weight of Staying which follows a Palestinian-British narrator reckoning with exile, where surviving the loss of place draws him into ghosthood.

Maryam Namazie’s Bird of Dawn which charts an encounter between a pregnant Iranian refugee cast into the Aegean Sea and an ancient folkloric witness.

Presented in association with Counterpoints Arts and Footnote.

Colin Grant is an author whose books include Bageye at the Wheel, shortlisted for the Pen Ackerley Prize; Homecoming: Voices of the Windrush Generation; I’m Black So You Don’t Have to Be; and his forthcoming book What We Leave We Carry.

Maryam Namazie is a  is a British-Iranian secularist,
communist and human rights activist, commentator, and broadcaster.

Counterpoints X Footnote Prize Readings at Southbank

Declassified Australia Written by Alison Broinowski. Recommended by Steven Are. 

Australian media ignore the evidence as they regurgitate the official
narrative that manufactures consent for US-led wars.

Most of the Western media refuse to join the dots and explain Israel’s decades-long obsession with defanging Tehran.

The war in Iran is what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has planned for four decades. He’s always wanted Israel to extend from Egypt to the Euphrates and in the process have the United States overthrow seven neighbouring countries, the last and latest being Iran. That was also America’s plot, hatched by the neo-conservative authors at the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in 2000. The list of targeted countries, confirmed by US General Wesley Clark in 2007, was based on a proposal published in Israel in 1982.

Ambitious as they were, these long-held intentions have now culminated in the US/Israel war on Iran, which seems sudden but was carefully planned, a former British Ambassador claims. US President Donald Trump was not ‘bounced into it’ by Israel: it had been in gestation for months, says Craig Murray, Britain’s ambassador to Uzbekistan between 2002 and 2004. 

The Questions Never Asked Behind The Us-Israel War On Iran

Caoimhin O’Muraile  ☭ International Law -  Is There Such A Thing?

In simple terms the answer to this question is categorically No! But as usual these matters and questions cannot be answered in words of one syllable, it is not a pub quiz. What we are never told is ‘international law’ is not, even accepting the vagaries of the concept, law as we would know it. The misleadingly termed ‘international law’ is in fact a system of rules and principles which are intended to govern relations, conduct, and interactions between sovereign states, as well as international organisations and certain individuals. The aims of these collective rules and principles are to promote global order, peace, and cooperation, and operate largely through international consensus. 

There is no police force to uphold this so-called ‘international law’ and in recent years more and more countries have broken these unenforceable rules and principles. These countries include the USA, Israel, The United Kingdom, Russia, China and arguably in recent weeks Ukraine by bombing Russian civilian targets. The Ukrainians could be given a certain amount of latitude for their actions given the fact Russia has been blasting the fuck out of their cities over the last four years! The country who afford less consideration by the day for these principles is Israel. They may be following the lead given by Trump in the US who has made it clear he “cares nothing” for ‘international law’ meaning, as far as Tel Aviv are concerned, they too can do what the fuck they please in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank.

On 7th October 2023 Hamas attacked Israel under strange circumstances. Where were the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) when these incursions over the border happened? Conspicuous by their absence that is for sure but absent where? The attacks by Hamas should be condemned by all because it was civilians and civilians only who were targeted resulting in 1,195 Israeli and foreign nationals losing their lives and 251 being kidnapped. Not one military institution or economic centre was reportedly hit which if the attack was an act of war, Guerrilla War, then the prime targets should have been military, economic, political, and financial institutions. Because none of the targets included such institutions the attacks must be condemned. 

An Israeli response was expected and given the level of intelligence and the capabilities of Israeli special forces such a response could have been carried out with minimal Palestinian civilian casualties. The Israeli government in the Knesset decided against such a logical step which, if done clinically, could have taken out the Hamas leadership easily. The government of Benjamin Netanyahu decided to flatten the entire Gaza Strip, murdering up to now 72,000 + Palestinians. To carry out these acts of genocide the IDF used ordnance supplied by the USA and the UK. 

The hypocrites in Westminster condemned the Israeli attacks on civilians while at the same time allowing arms manufacturers to make a fortune through the sale of weapons to Israel. Should anybody question the British government they immediately fall behind the wall of ‘Israels right to defend herself’ which is the same line the Parliamentary opposition pedal. If pushed a little further by having it pointed out that Israeli actions are far greater than anything needed in self-defence they quickly run for their next line of cover, the 7th October Hamas attacks. 

However wrong the Hamas attacks may have been the Israeli actions in response have been, at best, well over the top and at worst an act of genocide in the same league, but perhaps for now a lower division, to the genocide enacted on Jewish people by the Nazis. Having turned Gaza into something akin to the Warsaw Ghetto all that is missing are the Death Camps and Netanyahu can be spoke of in the same breath as Himmler. The Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu is slowly turning global sympathies for the Jews over the Holocaust into anti-Semitic hate. I really hope that does not happen - the global neo-Nazis launching a hate campaign against Jewish people under the guise of supporting the Palestinians, support which should not be welcomed.

Aid has been denied the beleaguered Palestinians by the Israelis and any group who attempts to get assistance to the beleaguered people, food, medical supplies including baby formula, are physically prevented from doing so. On 19th May the Global Sumud Flotilla of unarmed civilian craft on its way to deliver aid to Gaza was intercepted and boarded by the IDF in international waters. This was a clear act of piracy - Bluebeard could not have given a more impressive performance and he was a Cutthroat Pirate - and against ‘international law’ and the ‘law of the sea’, equally unenforceable. 

The activists from the flotilla who were taken to a port in Israel have suffered similar treatment to that suffered by Jewish people before the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. Footage was posted on social media of captured activists being mistreated by Israeli soldiers. In one clip of the social media post shared on X, owned by Elon Musk, a masked soldier grabs a woman’s hair and pushes her violently towards the ground. The 37 second video was shared on X by Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Givr, who shouts: “Welcome to Israel! We are in charge here! We are the landlords and that is right” (Irish Daily Mirror 21st May). 

The actions of the National Security Minister caused Taoiseach, Micheal Martin, to express his disgust; to state he was “appalled at this shocking behaviour of Minister Ben-Givr towards illegally held members of the flotilla” (ibid). Of the 420 activists from the Flotilla 15 are Irish and it is believed the woman having her hair pulled and forced to the ground is Irish. Ben-Givr went on to say of the activists; “they came here full of pride like big heroes. Look at them now”. The Minister of National Security also intimated he wanted the activists given to him for the “terrorist prison”! Even the crook in charge in Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, was uneasy with Ben-Givr’s behaviour and what it might do to Israel's image. He was not concerned with the wellbeing of the activist’s held hostage by Ben-Givr only the damage to Israels image! There have been reports of sexual assaults on women and various acts of violence by the IDF soldiers on activists. Some of the activists have since been flown to Istanbul in Turkey and relative safety.

On board one of the ships boarded was Dr Margaret Connolly, the sister of Twenty-Six-County President, Catherine Connolly. A GP, she was acting as a medic for the flotilla. When an SOS was sent to Greece from the flotilla the Greeks did fuck all to come to their assistance so afraid they must have been of the Israelis, backed by Trump. There was, rightly so, outrage in the Dail as Tanaiste, Simon Harris, continuously referenced ‘international law’ and Israel's breach of it. Dr Connolly’s husband, Declan, also on TV referred to this “clear breach of international law by Israel”. 

It is true but the Dail, both government and opposition, know ‘international law’ is a figment of the imagination, it cannot be enforced. Perhaps the only country who could police this labyrinth of principles and agreements between states is the United States and they, like Israel, are the biggest criminals when it comes the breaking this illusive ‘international law’. 

All the parties in the Dail are crying about Israel's breach of these laws including the laws of the sea but what exactly are they going to do about it? The twenty-six-county administration do not want to upset the US, Israel's mates, because the government claim if they upset Trump, it will cost jobs. Of course this is bollocks because the US giants who base themselves in the Twenty-Six-Counties do so because profits are high, corporation tax low, and trade unionism virtually non-existent in the private sector. They are not interested who is in the White House or whether Dail Eireann is hitting back at Israel, providing the profits keep rolling in.

So, international law cannot be enforced because, among many reasons like whether it exists, those who may police such law are guilty themselves of breaking said law. The government in the Dail should stop harping on about ‘international law’ because they are starting to look foolish, fucking stupid in fact. They might as well talk of the laws of Narnia,wasting hours of Dail time speaking how to enforce this law in a land which does not exist! 

The Twenty-Six-County government could, if they wanted to, do something which has nothing to do with fairyland international law. They could, and should, enact the Occupied Territories Bill in its entirety and do it now. Not the diluted version which only includes banning trade in goods with illegal Israeli settlements. The Bill does not include trade in services and unless it does when it becomes an Act it will be far less effective in hitting Israel. Most trade with these settlements involves services which account for nearly ‘70% of trade volume’ and this 70% will not be included in the OTB. Trading in goods, leaving aside services, with Israeli occupied territories constitutes a minor fraction of the overall economic relationship amounting to around €685,000 annually. The excuses policymakers come up with for not including services in the OTB is the ‘complexity of monitoring and enforcing bans on digital service’s’. How difficult and complex can such a ban on services, digital or otherwise, be? On an average modern mobile phone, nothing too complicated, an unwanted text can be blocked so surely, with all the technology at their disposal, banning trade in services with Israeli occupied territories cannot be that difficult for those good and true people of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael! Or could the real reason be that profits in trading in services requires little labour and carry huge profits. Better to blame Israel's breach of ‘international law’ and hope nobody asks awkward questions, outside the Dail, about banning trade in services as part of the OTB which is toothless without these inclusions.

Israel must surely be brought to task over their actions in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. Will they be tried for war crimes as were Goering and his gang at Nuremburg after the Second World War, and rightly so, for Nazi genocide against the Jewish people? The allies after the war allowed many leading Nazis after those at Nuremburg were tried and sentenced, to escape. In some cases the USA even gave them highly paid employment, wrote off their murderous past, and even made them heroes. Wernher von Braun was such an activist, scientist, and former Nazi party member who, despite his past, would be of use to the USA. Clause barbie, the Butcher of Lyon, was another brutal former SS man who escaped French justice for years courtesy of the USA. Given the track record of the US and UK in this department it would not be unreasonable to expect Netanyahu and his modern butchers to also walk free. It would be unwise to hold your breath waiting a different outcome, you may die of asphyxiation!!
     
Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist.
I

International Law

Ten links to a diverse range of opinion that might be of interest to TPQ readers. They are selected not to invite agreement but curiosity. Readers can submit links to pieces they find thought provoking.


Before We Conform, Or Condemn, Let Us At Least Be Curious


One recognizes one's course by discovering the paths that stray from it - Albert Camus♞ 

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Nine Hundred And Eighty Five

 

A Morning Thought @ 3159

Jim Duffy The silence of almost all the devoted pro-neutrality activists, on the issue of Aughinish Alumina actively aiding Russia's military in its war in Ukraine, is striking.

Other than Senator Tom Clonan, who repeatedly condemns it, the silence is deafening - despite it being an unambiguous breach of Irish neutrality.

Not a word from Sinn Féin. Not a word from People Before Profit. Not a word from the Peace and Neutrality Alliance. Not a word from Catherine Connolly or Michael D Higgins. Their press releases draw a complete blank.

Yet the same people are always out giving interviews about non-existent plots to get Ireland into NATO - something that has no chance of occurring.

So why then the total silence on a Real live breach of Irish neutrality by an Irish company enabling Russia's illegal war, a war that breaches the UN charter and international law? Could it be that many of the Irish neutrality devotees are simply motivated by their end hate of The West, of NATO and everything else, but couldn't care less if neutrality breaches help Russia, and anti-Western countries?

Getting them to ever criticise Russia, or the USSR, or the Warsaw Pact, is like plucking hens' teeth. They will always bend over backwards to make excuses for Putin, or Stalin.

Some even justify the USSR's illegal occupation and annexation of the independent sovereign Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in 1940 - an annexation that flowed from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between the USSR and Nazi Germany. They then say that "to secure peace" the three states should be handed back to Russian control, irrespective of the wishes of the peoples there.

The same people justify the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968, just as they will justify the Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014 and 2022 - always of course twisting the facts to inevitably blame The West and NATO. Even when citizens stage revolutions, some Irish neutrality devotees invariably blame The West for engineering a supposed coup - as if citizens have no right to control their own destiny.

Those same Irish neutrality devotees proclaim themselves "anti-imperialists" while cheering on and excusing the most imperialist state in Europe-Asia: Russia. It is a country that has spent attacking its neighbours repeatedly. There is hardly a single one of its neighbours it has not at some stage invaded.

Finland finally declared its independent from Russia in 1917 after the fall of the Tsar - after decades of brutal Russianisation policies under Tsars Alexander III and Nicholas II. It has been recognised internationally as independent since 1918. Russia invaded it twice: in the Winter War and Continuation War. In 1948 it was forced to agree to a policy later named "Finlandization" (the process by which one powerful country makes a smaller neighbouring country refrain from opposing the former's foreign policy rules, while allowing it to keep its nominal independence and its own political system.)

Under it, the Soviet Union took effective control of its foreign and security policy - a period known in Finland as the 'period of national shame' or the 'period of national humiliation.' It finally regained its sovereignty in foreign and security policy in 1991 - and warns countries internationally never ever to repeat the mistake they made.

And yet, one hears some Irish neutrality advocates say that Russia has a "right" to enforce that again on Finland. I wonder would they say Britain has the right to take control of Irish foreign and security policy, or the US has a right to take control of Mexican and Cuban foreign and security policy, or is it only their beloved imperialist Russia that has that right?

When Putin after a century of independence asserted that Finland no right to be independent of Russia, I heard a number of Irish neutrality devotees actually justify his stance and say that the Finns had no right to their own sovereignty!!!

I have come to be cynical of so-called Irish neutrality, as so many of its most fanatical adherents are really just anti-wWestern pro-Russian apologists. I don't have a problem with real genuine neutrality, of the sort believed in by Senator Clonan - though some of the arguments he has made on the triple lock are factually wrong. He at least has a real concept of objective neutrality, not simply a neutrality that is anti-Western and pro-Russian.

That said, factually, the concept of being neutral as a means to stay out of war doesn't work. As neutrals all over found to their cost, if someone wants to attack you they will. Belgium discovered that twice, as did Luxembourg. So did the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in World War II. Sweden only avoided Nazi invasion by effectively collaborating with the Nazis and supplying them with critical minerals and a right to use its territory.

Of the other three neutrals in Europe - two, Ireland and the Vatican, were scheduled for invasion by the Nazis, but weren't invaded for reasons unconnected to their neutrality. Switzerland was protected by its geography as it was exceptionally difficult to conquer. No country in Europe avoided invasion by being neutral.

The 1907 Second Hague Convention supposedly protected neutrals who were signatories from attack by signatories in Article 1, which states "The territory of neutral Powers is inviolable." In fact it quickly turned out not to be worth the paper it was written on, and was just an unenforceable gentleman's promise. The convention was negotiated from 1904, signed in 1907, and came into force in 1910. It was broken in 1914, when one signatory, the German Second Reich, invaded two neutral signatories: Luxembourg on 2nd August 1914, and Belgium on 4th August 1914. There was no come back, other than the complaint "but you promised you wouldn't do that!" It had no enforcement mechanism.

Its weakness can be seen that countries invading neutrals have never even bothered formally leaving the convention before breaking it. It is that meaningless.

I am not arguing that Ireland should join NATO, or that it shouldn't. I am not arguing that Ireland should or should not be neutral. However it is important to know what neutrality is and what it isn't. Firstly, many of the loudest proponents of neutrality are really just the proverbial "useful idiots" who are supremely anti-West and pro-Moscow. They are not the spokespeople, much less the guardians, of real neutrality.

Secondly, history shows that neutrality is no protection from attack, as almost neutral in Europe, bar three, were attacked. Those three weren't attacked for reasons unconnected with their neutrality. All those attacked joined NATO when it was created, most at the beginning, a few later on.

Thirdly, contrary to myth, being neutral does not give a country a special independent status that makes it a centre for peace talks and negotiations. One of the most popular place for such negotiations is Norway. Norway was a founding member of NATO in 1949.

One negative with neutrality is that it gives countries a delusion of safety - where they think "we are neutral. No-one will attack us." Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania all found that that is not the case. Ireland found out that it was potential target for invasion by the Nazis when it began intercepting Nazi communications in May 1940, and quickly made plans in Plan W for Britain to come to its aid if it was attacked. As soon as the Taoiseach requested aid, the British ambassador would send the code word 'pumpkins'. The Royal Navy and RAF would attack the Nazi troops landing between Wexford and Waterford by sea and air, while British troops would cross the border and travel south to attack Nazi troops on land, aiding Irish soldiers.

That delusion of safety may be why Ireland has a tiny spend on defence - despite defence being a core duty of every sovereign state. The average spend among neutrals in Europe on defence is 0.9% of GDP. Neutral Cyprus spends 1.8% of GDP. Austria aims to reach 1% of GDP by this year. Switzerland aims to reach 1% by 2030. Ireland spends a miniscule 0.2%. It isn't just the lowest among neutrals, and by far the lowest in Europe, its is third worst in the world. Only Mauritius and Haiti are lower.

Yes, GDP is an unhelpful measurement for Ireland. However, it is the standard one used internationally for defence comparisons. Even using others, Ireland is way off the minimum target it should be at, as a sovereign state.

And yes Ireland is a target. You cannot have critical underwater infrastructure that all of Europe depends on just off your coast and not be. You cannot have just three interconnectors, and face rolling nationwide power cuts if they are cut, and not be. And you cannot be a net contributor to the EU budget, where Putin has made clear the EU is a target, and you not be.

Whether it is neutral or in NATO is not the point (In reality there is no likelihood of Ireland, Austria or Switzerland joining NATO.) It is that if neutral, know what neutrality is and is not. It is not a protection from attack, as if a country wants to attack a neutral they always do. As a sovereign country you need to take your defence seriously, and you should be spending at least the average spend of neutrals on defence. Anything else is reckless.

⏩ Jim Duffy is a writer-historian.

Aughinish Alumina 🪶 Not A Word