Defence spending takes center stage as aging gear highlights the gap
Whether deliberate or simply a lack of novelty, anyone paying close attention at this week’s Defence Forces spending plan launch in the Curragh would have noticed the backdrop: a fleet of visibly older vehicles.
An armoured personnel carrier bore an 04 D registration, while other military machines carried 03 D and 07 D tags. Three vehicles were clean and polished, yet noticeably older than many of the soldiers using them.
The army does possess some newer equipment, but this display of aging gear underscored the urgent need to modernise and upgrade Ireland’s military systems.
For many, these vehicles serve as a fitting metaphor for the Defence Forces, especially on a day when the government unveiled a detailed €1.7 billion spending plan led by Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence Helen McEntee.
The plan, with a horizon extending to 2030, represents a 55% overall increase and is designed to upgrade the Defence Forces across land, sea, air, and cyber domains (https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2025/1211/1548324-ireland-politics/).
"It’s essential that we continue to increase our funding, our spending, and our focus on the Defence Forces. We all know the changing environment and world that we live in. We know the type of changing threats that are emerging, and my focus and priority as Minister for Defence is to make sure the Defence Forces are growing, expanding, and we are enhancing capabilities," the minister stated.
In truth, much of the plan had already been anticipated. By 2028, military radar is slated to expand its reach, next-year’s EU presidency will see counter-drone capabilities deployed, and there will be new aircraft, updated army vehicles, towed sonar for the Naval Service, along with substantial investment in IT, infrastructure, and ordnance systems.
The increased expenditure aligns with the Government’s decision to adopt the 2022 Commission on the Defence Forces report and its “level of ambition 2” recommendation to push spending beyond €1.5 billion.
Watch: McEntee outlines €1.7bn defence spending plan to run to 2030
Of course, a lot has changed since 2022.
Geopolitical uncertainty has surged amid the war in Ukraine and perceived threats from Russia toward eastern Europe. U.S. trade and foreign policies have raised concerns globally, and Donald Trump’s stance toward the EU and European security has added to the unease (https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/1209/1548095-eu-us-politics).
In this tense climate, cyber and hybrid attacks have intensified across Europe, and Ireland has not been immune. Two weeks ago, unidentified drones flew 17km off Dublin’s coast around the time Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was due to land in the city (https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/1205/1547445-drones-ireland-security/). The drones are believed to have originated from a “dark” vessel operating without a transponder in the Irish Sea. The Government and EU have attributed the act to pro-Russian actors, though the Russian Embassy in Dublin denies involvement. The Naval Service’s inability to intercept the drones has raised concerns.
Over the past five years, Ireland has also faced cyber incidents, including the costly cyberattack on the HSE, and episodes where Russian military aircraft penetrated Irish airspace, prompting RAF intercepts since Ireland does not field its own fighter jets (https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0320/1123836-russian-military-aircraft-bombers-ireland/).
Since Zelenskiy’s visit, voices advocating stronger defence and security measures have grown louder, whether by chance or design. IBEC has recently argued that protecting Irish businesses requires robust national security, while Central Bank Governor Gabriel Makhlouf noted that security must be part of planning for economic resilience (https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2025/1210/1548162-ibec-business-defence/).
A recent Institute of Irish and European Affairs and Deloitte report also highlighted vulnerabilities in Ireland’s subsea interconnectors and data cables, as well as cybersecurity, port security, and the threat of espionage.
There is a common perception abroad that Ireland lags behind its neighbors in defence and security. Searching for terms like “Ireland, defence, weak link” returns numerous pieces from outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times, NGOs, and think tanks arguing that Ireland struggles to secure air, sea, and sovereignty.
Even international coverage reflects this view. ERR in Estonia featured a piece on Ireland’s recent defence developments (https://www.err.ee/1609883485/iirimaal-ei-ole-piisavalt-vahendeid-enda-kaitsmiseks).
Defense expert Dr. Eoin McNamara of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs notes that Ireland is often seen as a country without defence, which can puzzle observers given its democratic strength and EU engagement. He points out that security concerns are not unique to Ireland and that many other nations expect more robust defence commitments. He also reminds us that Ireland has long relied on the UK for security.
Dr. McNamara adds that the frustration from some quarters is not with neutrality itself, but with how defence is framed in Ireland—as a binary choice between NATO membership or non-membership.
The neutrality debate is likely to intensify in the months ahead.
Meanwhile, the Government plans to amend the triple lock to remove the UN mandate requirement for deploying Irish troops abroad, a move slated for the New Year as European leaders visit Dublin during Ireland’s EU presidency.
During a visit to Dublin, European Council President Charles Michel voiced confidence in Ireland’s ability to safeguard EU leaders. Whether Ireland can manage this alone or will require support from neighboring states or EU partners remains to be seen.
Ultimately, much hinges on whether the promised €19 million modern counter-drone system will arrive on schedule, a commitment McEntee delivered beside those ageing vehicles in the Curragh.
Audience takeaway: the push for defence spending reflects a broader global shift toward stronger security postures. But the question remains: how should a neutral country balance credible defence with a commitment to pacifism and non-alignment? Would you support a more assertive defence posture, or should neutrality be preserved at all costs? Share your view in the comments.
