Sir, – Nato has ruled out implementing the “no-fly” zone over Ukraine requested by its legitimate government, apparently on the grounds that Ukraine not being a member of Nato rules out this defensive move. However, on March 19th, 2011, a multi-state Nato-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, and began a very effective no-fly zone against the then government of Libya led by Muammar Gadafy.
Of course, there can be no United Nations Security Council resolution authorising intervention in Ukraine as Russia, the invading country, has a veto. Nonetheless Nato’s action in Libya shows it is prepared to implemented no-fly zones in non-member countries to prevent slaughter there and it has been authorised to do so by the legitimate government of Ukraine. Putin has invited Syrian mercenaries to join his invading forces in Ukraine yet Nato has ignored a plea for defensive military intervention by the legitimate government there.
Ireland, like Ukraine, is a neutral country and not a member of Nato. How would we feel if no European country intervened on our behalf if we faced a direct military threat?
Nato may fear Russian retaliation if it does intervene. However, it is very unlikely that Russia would undertake aggressive action against Nato over a limited defensive action in another country (Ukraine) especially as its military would be no match for the Nato alliance. There is also the threat of nuclear war. This would result in massive mutual destruction so is a very unlikely choice for Russia when its own heartland is not under attack. In any event the West cannot allow Putin free rein to attack neutral countries out of fear of this threat. If Putin, after conquering Ukraine, attacks the Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which were part of the Soviet Union from 1944 to 1991), will the western powers fail to honour their Nato guarantee out of fear of nuclear war?
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
The call for diplomatic action, not intervention, by the Irish Anti-War Movement and Irish MEP Clare Daly is entirely futile. Strenuous diplomatic attempts to avoid war were made in the months before the invasion and failed. Relying on this course now just condemns the Ukrainian people to conquest by Russia. – Yours, etc,
DONAL McGRATH,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – There is a debate to be had on the possibility of Ireland joining Nato (or, in the unlikely event of such a thing materialising, an independent European defence arrangement). But it has been surprising to see how, overnight, so many Irish commentators seem to assume the debate is already over, before it has really got under way.
You recently gave space to two of the three Irish MEPs opposed to the European Parliament resolution of March 1st on the current war (a fourth, a Sinn Féin MEP, has apparently explained his vote as a procedural mix-up and has declared his support for the resolution).
But you surely also owe it to your readers to offer the same facility to Irish MEPs who support the resolution. In particular, those MEPs might care to explain the implications for Ireland of statements in the resolution of March 1st that the European Parliament: “encourages the strengthening of Nato’s enhanced forward presence in the Member States geographically closest to the Russian aggressor and to the conflict”; “calls for common military exercises to be launched”; “stresses that this attack requires the EU and Nato to prepare for all possibilities; welcomes, in that regard, the activation of Nato’s defence plans as well as the activation of the Nato response forces and their partial deployment, in addition to troop deployments from Nato allies including the UK, the US and Canada, in order to strengthen the eastern flank and deter any further Russian aggression”; “reiterates its call for the Member States to increase defence spending and ensure more effective capabilities and to make full use of the joint defence efforts within the European framework, notably the Permanent Structured Cooperation (Pesco) and the European Defence Fund, in order to strengthen the European pillar within Nato, which will increase the security of Nato countries and Member States alike”.– Yours, etc,
MARTIN McGARRY,
Brussels.
Sir, – No doubt the people of Ukraine appreciate us wearing their national colours as a gesture of support. They might appreciate us even more if we wore an extra jumper and used less Russian oil and gas to heat our houses. – Yours, etc,
GERRY MORRISSEY,
Mount Merrion,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – Jennifer O'Connell may be justified in criticising the British government's treatment of Ukrainian refugees ("Britain's response to Ukraine is a stain that won't wash out", Opinion & Analysis, ,March 12th) but her claim that the UK has done nothing for that country ignores contributions of defensive weapons both before and during the war and the presence there until earlier this year of army training personnel. She ignores too the contribution of British troops to the Nato forces in other countries on Russia's borders. Perhaps she would like to tell us about Ireland's military contribution to the defence of eastern Europe against Putin. – Yours, etc,
CDC ARMSTRONG,
Belfast.