Ireland should encourage US to change tack on foreign affairs, McEntee tells conference

Helen McEntee said Ireland and the EU should encourage the United States to change some of the approaches it has taken in foreign affairs. She also stressed that this should happen through close cooperation, not by abandoning the relationship. The issue matters because the EU and US often influence international responses to conflicts and global institutions.

Her remarks came as she defended support for the International Criminal Court and continued EU action for Gaza. She said the international community should act despite uncertainty over future governments in Iran, Israel or the United States. She also condemned the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and settlement expansion in the West Bank.

The article does not list a complete set of specific US policies that Ireland wants changed. It shows, however, that McEntee wants stronger action on Gaza, protection for international justice and collective defence of the two-state solution, while preserving EU-US security cooperation.

Ireland considers the United States its most important security partner because McEntee explicitly described it that way while discussing EU-US relations. The article does not provide a fuller explanation, such as specific military capabilities, agreements or intelligence arrangements. Its central point is the importance of maintaining cooperation even when Ireland disagrees with some US policies.

McEntee said EU policies should be developed while working closely with American colleagues. She also said Ireland and the EU should encourage changes to some US approaches. That balance combines partnership with diplomatic pressure rather than treating disagreement as a reason to end cooperation.

The relationship remains relevant across the article’s main crises. These include Gaza, the ICC, Russia’s war in Ukraine and Lebanon’s security. The immediate implication is that Ireland intends to keep the United States central to security discussions while advocating different positions where it believes change is needed.

The International Criminal Court, or ICC, is an international court that investigates and prosecutes individuals accused of grave crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The source article does not define the court or list its powers, so this explanation uses established general knowledge. Ireland and the EU’s support matters because the court represents a shared commitment to accountability through international law.

The article says the ICC has been targeted with sanctions under Donald Trump’s second administration. Sanctions can restrict an institution’s dealings, resources or access to people and organisations, depending on their design. That can make the court’s work more difficult and create tension between the United States and countries that support it.

McEntee emphasised Ireland and the EU’s support for the ICC during the EU defence and security conference. The issue therefore forms part of Ireland’s wider effort to defend international rules while still treating the United States as its most important security partner.

McEntee described destruction across the southern Lebanese area she visited as almost total. She said that, as far as the eye could see, not a single building was left standing. Her account highlights the scale of damage and the difficult conditions facing people in an area occupied by the Israel Defense Forces.

The humanitarian problem is not only physical destruction. McEntee asked who would monitor events after uniformed UNIFIL troops pull out. Without observers, it could become harder to document developments, reassure civilians or draw attention to further harm. The article presents monitoring as a central concern during the transition.

UNIFIL’s mission is approaching its conclusion, while Ireland and the EU are considering new support for Lebanon. McEntee welcomed an EU mission, but said it would not be a successor to UNIFIL. The continuing need is security and stability, alongside visibility about what happens on the ground.

The new EU support mission is a planned European effort to advance security and stability in Lebanon. McEntee welcomed agreement on establishing it during her conference address. Its importance comes from the approaching conclusion of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, and concerns about what will happen afterward.

The key distinction is that the EU mission will not be a successor to UNIFIL. The article does not provide its full mandate, troop numbers or operating structure. It says only that the mission will provide important supports. This means the source describes a complementary EU role, not a direct continuation of the UN peacekeeping deployment.

The change comes as Ireland debates participation by its Defence Forces. Cabinet approval to remove the military triple lock would allow Irish personnel to join the new EU mission. Opposition TDs criticised the plan, while ministers rejected claims that it would necessarily expose Irish soldiers to clashes involving Israel and Hizbullah.

The military triple lock is a legal and political requirement governing certain overseas deployments. The article does not explain its full rules, so this answer uses the specific change described in the source. Cabinet approval to remove it would make it possible for Irish Defence Forces members to participate in the new EU mission in Lebanon.

The immediate mechanism is therefore a change in the conditions for deployment. Ireland could send personnel as part of the EU support mission without the previous triple-lock requirement. McEntee and her colleagues have defended the plan, while Opposition TDs have strongly criticised it.

The decision also raises questions about risk. Ministers rejected claims that the mission could result in Irish soldiers coming under threat from clashes between the Israel Defense Forces and Hizbullah. McEntee still questioned who would monitor events after UNIFIL withdraws, making the proposed Irish role part of a wider debate about Lebanon’s security.

International law provides rules and institutions for responding to war, civilian harm and alleged crimes. The ICC represents accountability, while diplomacy allows states to press for changes and coordinate action. Peacekeeping missions add an on-the-ground presence that can monitor situations and support stability. These tools matter because no single government can manage a conflict alone.

The article shows the mechanism through several examples. Ireland and the EU support the ICC and call for action in Gaza. They condemn Russia’s war in Ukraine while helping Ukraine and supporting its EU membership bid. In Lebanon, UNIFIL’s departure creates concern about who will monitor events, while a new EU mission could provide support.

These approaches do not guarantee peace or prevent every violation. Their future impact depends on political cooperation, credible monitoring and practical support. McEntee’s position is to combine international law, EU action and partnerships with the United States, while encouraging Washington to change some approaches.