Sir, – The recent intrusion of several advanced drones into a no-fly zone during Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s visit – followed by their loitering around an Irish Naval Service vessel – should alarm every citizen of this State.
It exposed, in real time, a truth long known but rarely confronted: Ireland cannot monitor, enforce or defend its own airspace or territorial waters.
We have no primary radar, no meaningful counter-drone capability, and deeply limited maritime surveillance. We do not know who operated those drones, where they were launched, or what their intent was. That level of blindness is not neutrality; it is vulnerability.
Across Europe, hybrid attacks on airports, energy grids and subsea cables are now a routine feature of modern conflict. Ireland – geographically exposed and critical to Europe’s digital and aviation infrastructure – remains decades behind where a wealthy EU member state should be. Hope is not a defence strategy, and pretending that neutrality makes us invisible is a dangerous illusion.
RM Block
The drone incident was not a curiosity. It was a warning. A sovereign State that cannot see what enters its skies or waters cannot claim to be secure – or prepared.
It is time we faced this reality honestly. Our national security capabilities are no longer merely inadequate; they are unacceptable. –Yours, etc,
NEIL McGONIGLE,
Cabinteely,
Dublin 18.
Sir, – Pat Leahy has hit the nail on the head (“Fretting about the triple lock seems ridiculous now,” December 6th).
It is one thing to be neutral and have capacity to defend yourself, it is quite another to rely on others to do it for you.
All this, while lecturing others about peace and being on the right side of history, etc.
It is high time we grew up and actually discussed the future of our stance on neutrality and what it actually means in these ever darkening times. – Yours, etc,
ANTAINE O’DUIBHIR,
Ranelagh,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – The recent fiasco of our inability to deal with hostile drone activity highlights our complete failure to take responsibility for our own national security.
No one should be taken in by plans to update our defence capability, whether from politicians or military leaders.
There is only one fact that matters. Ireland has the ambition to increase defence spending to 0.3 per cent of GNP. The rest of Europe is aiming for, or has already reached, 3 per cent. – Yours, etc,
WILLIAM DONNELLY,
Clybaun,
Galway.
RTÉ’s boycott of Eurovision
Sir, – Criticising RTÉ’s decision not to participate in the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest, Aidan Roddy attempts to draw a distinction between “the Israeli government” and the industrial quantities of energy and funding that Israeli policymakers pour in the competition every year (Letters, December 6th).
Far from prioritising “healing” and “open hearts and minds” as Mr Roddy claims, the Israeli state’s explicit strategy is to exploit cultural and sporting events to posture as a progressive, normal state, meanwhile grinding an indigenous people into the dirt.
Some years ago, Israeli foreign ministry executive Arye Mekel declared: “We will send well-known novelists and writers overseas, theatre companies, exhibits. This way you show Israel’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”
Palestinian activist Omar Barghouti has explained that the “Brand Israel” campaign is “designed explicitly to hide Israel’s violations of human rights and international law under a guise of artistic and scientific glamour”.
With a conservative estimate of 70,000 Palestinians killed in the ongoing Israeli military campaign, and a man-made famine continuing with the intermittent blocking of aid convoys, our national broadcaster must be praised for refusing to be complicit in a cultural event that the Israeli government was always going to exploit to distract global attention from apartheid and genocide. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN Ó ÉIGEARTAIGH,
Donnybrook,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – The president of Israel, Isaac Herzog, branded the decision of the four European broadcasters to withdraw from next year’s Eurovision Song Contest as “those who seek to silence Israel and spread hate”.
In reality, all fair-minded people remember with sorrow the atrocities perpetrated on the people of Jewish faith by Nazi Germany during the second World War and the monstrous attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians on October 7th, 2023.
The same fair-minded people are sickened by the rage of the Israeli government and the Israel Defence Forces against the Palestinian race, medical workers and journalists, slaughtering and maiming more than 70,000 innocent men, women and children, not to mention the destruction of homes, hospitals, schools and vital infrastructure in Gaza and preventing necessary humanitarian aid.
President Herzog need not be concerned about Israel being silenced. His government’s actions speak louder than words.
Hatred is in the eye of the beholder. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN D’ARCY,
Ballinteer,
Dublin 16.
Traffic and the M50
Sir, – Prof Brian Caulfield’s interesting Opinion (“Can anything be done to get the M50 moving,” December 8th) brings pause for thought but omits the one measure that would cut congestion, improve safety, and deliver large and immediate climate benefits: reducing and enforcing speed limits for heavy goods vehicles (HGVs).
Most continental European countries already require HGVs to travel at 80km per hour on motorways, and they enforce this rigorously using tachograph data.
The result is smoother traffic flow, dramatically lower fuel burn and fewer collisions.
Ireland, by contrast, nominally limits HGVs to 90km per hour on motorways, but even this is rarely enforced.
Anyone who uses the M50 will know that many trucks operate at 100-105km per hour, well above the legal limit.
Slowing a 40-tonne truck from 100km an hour to 80km an hour cuts fuel use by 10-12 per cent. That alone would reduce Ireland’s national emissions by about 350,000 tonnes a year, a non-trivial figure in the context of the European Commission’s projected compliance bill of up to ¤26 billion for our missed climate targets.
There is a persistent misconception that lower truck speeds worsen congestion; the experience in Germany, France and the Netherlands, and basic traffic engineering show the opposite. A stream of HGVs travelling steadily at 80km per hour creates fewer stop-start waves, fewer erratic lane changes and far fewer rolling bottlenecks. Traffic becomes more predictable and safer for everyone.
The worst congestion effects are produced not by steady slower traffic but by the speed differentials and sudden decelerations caused when fast-moving trucks catch up on slower ones or must brake heavily approaching busy junctions.
Enforced uniformity reduces this instability.
Crucially, this is one of the easiest measures in the State to enforce, because every HGV already carries a digital tachograph that records its speed every second. The Garda or RSA do not need a single extra camera or patrol car. They simply download the tachograph record, exactly as is done in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, and any operator exceeding the limit faces penalties.
In practice, haulage companies respond by setting their engine limiters to the legal maximum, and compliance becomes automatic.
In a political system that endlessly promises climate action yet struggles to deliver it, this is one measure that stands out for being cheap, proven, immediate, enforceable and effective.
It would simultaneously reduce emissions, improve safety and relieve congestion on the M50 far more reliably than the other suggested options.
The Minister for Transport and Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment, Daragh O’Brien, who uniquely holds both portfolios, is therefore the person who cannot credibly deflect responsibility.
If the Government does not intend to adopt or even trial an EU standard 80km per hour enforced speed limit for HGVs, the public is entitled to a clear explanation as to why not.
Is this a case of political timidity, industry lobbying or simply an unwillingness to confront an easy climate win because it might be unpopular with a small number of haulage operators?
A government that repeatedly warns of multi-billion climate penalties coming our way cannot credibly ignore a policy that would shave hundreds of millions off that bill while making the M50 safer and less congested for all.
If Mr O’Brien does not intend to act, he should explain why not.
If he does intend to act, he should start tomorrow. – Yours, etc,
PAUL O’SHEA,
Planet Before Profit CLG,
Shankill,
Dublin 18.
Sir, – In other countries, they often have a fence or hedge down the middle of motorways preventing drivers from seeing what’s happening on the opposite side.
This greatly reduces the incidence of drivers slowing down to see what’s happening whenever an incident occurs in the opposite lanes.
On the M50 at the moment even a minor incident on one side often leads to a buildup of traffic on the other side.
The installation of a similar fence or hedge along the M50 seems to me to be a quick and relatively inexpensive way to alleviate at least some of the traffic buildup during the week. – Yours, etc,
PATRICK BYRNE,
Co Dublin.
Containing urban sprawl
Sir, – We really ought to knock this idea on the head that building high reduces sprawl. While intuitively appealing, the simplistic “build up, not out” catch-cry ignores the complexity of urban land dynamics.
The consistent international evidence shows that high-rise does not automatically equal high-density. Indeed, cities that build taller have not curbed regional sprawl and may have indirectly reinforced it.
This is because high-rise is incredibly expensive to build and the “hope value” of achieving greater number of units on individual plots drives up the price of all urban land, making the city unaffordable for most and driving a flight to the suburbs.
The most sustainable, liveable, affordable and dense cities grow through mid-rise gentle densities and this should be precisely the ambition for Dublin. – Yours, etc,
DR GAVIN DALY,
Dublin 1.
Home truths
Sir, – Your collection of the most expensive homes sold in 2025 made for interesting reading (Residential Property Supplement, December 4th). Might one assume that the least expensive will appear this week? – Yours, etc,
FRANK J BYRNE,
Dublin 9.
Supporting Ukraine
Sir, – Paul Gillespie weaves his own narrative in relation to any future outcome to Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine (“Messy compromises are needed as war in Ukraine nears its endgame,” December 6th).
It doesn’t require sophisticated geopolitical analysis to see that what is at stake is the survival of a western-oriented sovereign nation holding the line for the rest of European liberal democracy against one man’s ambition to recreate the Soviet empire established by conquest in 1945.
A failure to adequately support Ukraine with all the resources we can muster in this time of crisis in the name of a “peace” settlement prescribed by Moscow will amount to a betrayal every bit as shameful and self-defeating as that perpetrated on Czechoslovakia in 1938. – Yours, etc,
RAY McCARTHY,
Glasnevin,
Dublin 9.
Sir, – Ireland has too many crises to keep track of – cost-of-living, patient/trollies, 5,274 homeless children to name but a few. Yet last week, Taoiseach Micheál Martin announced an additional €125 million in financial support to Ukraine on top of €340 million already committed.
Rather than giving hundreds of millions of our taxpayers’ money that can help alleviate, not solve, so many of our own problems, why don’t our TDs and Senators demonstrate exemplary leadership by housing Ukrainian families in their own homes until the war ends and it is safe for these families to return home?
I believe that this act of kindness would show genuine solidarity with Ukraine that our politicians keep pontificating about rather than giving vasts amounts of our money without any finer details on what all this money is actually being spent on.
Finally, there is no doubt that the war in Ukraine is horrific, but rather than donating nearly ¤500 million, can our Government donate Irish goods and services instead so that both Ireland and Ukraine can benefit? – Yours, etc,
JASON POWER,
Salthill,
Galway.
Handbagged
Sir, – While, out walking yesterday I was approached by someone who asked me if I would accept advice about the insecure way I was carrying my handbag, leaving myself open to having it snatched.
He showed me a much better way. He told me he had served 30 years as an officer in the military police.
I was heartened that citizens still look out for the safety for the not so young. – Yours, etc,
MARGARET BUTLER,
Booterstown,
Co Dublin.
What’s the story?
Sir, – Taxi drivers are having a dispute with a private company (Uber) over booking rates which they have the right not to accept, therefore taxi drivers feel entitled to ground the city to a halt.
Can someone please explain why this is anything to do with the rest of us commuters? – Yours, etc,
RORY J WHELAN,
Drogheda,
Co Louth.
Ron McPartland
Sir, – It was with great interest I read Frank McNally’s Irishman’s Diary (December 2nd) on the brave Ron McPartland who was the first man to eject from an aircraft in Ireland.
He was brought to the nearby Mullagh Garda station where my father was a Garda sergeant and where we lived. My mother took great care of him as he was in a distressed state.
I’m glad he went on to have a happy life in the Air Corps. – Yours, etc,
CARMEL KENNEDY,
Co Tipperary.
