Paul Davis

We have a defense force of about 7,500 people.

So the chances are we've got a very limited capability to be able to support that going forward.

So we'll have this fantastic system, but we won't necessarily have the capability to be able to support it over the life of that system.

And what's even worse is that we won't even be able to maintain it ourselves.

We'll rely on an external person.

And that external person won't have the ability to support it from an Irish perspective should the geopolitical circumstances change.

Okay, so here's your catch.

We live in a geopolitical world and France has a different outlook in terms of its ability to how it sees itself.

It doesn't see itself as a neutral country.

We see ourselves as neutral.

So we probably wouldn't take a side if there was a conflict.

France may take a side.

If France took a side, therefore its support mechanisms will be in support of where France sits, not where we sit.

If we need to maintain our sovereignty, and this is where the neutrality and sovereignty debate differs, if we need to retain our capacity to be able to do things, then we have to think of that sovereign debate.

It's probably a very good phrase.

And given where we're at at the moment, we don't and we've never thought of ourselves as being a sovereign nation.

We use this word neutral to sort of avoid that conversation.

But let's change the word again.

Sovereign to resilient.

Should there be a crisis?