[ad_1]
Ireland has one Department of Defense official for every 23 soldiers, more than seven times the number of officials as Sweden and ten times that of Finland.
This, according to a new report, reflects the “integral” role of the Irish Department of Defense in the functioning of the Defense Forces, in stark contrast to the structure of other neutral or non-aligned countries in Europe.
An article in the new edition of, released today, said that if Ireland does not change the command structure of the Defense Forces it will enter an uncertain global security environment with a “widely criticized” governance system that is “far outside” standard international practice.
The analysis, written by Lt. Brian Clarke, said that the comparison with Sweden and Finland, both neutral and non-aligned, highlights a different military setup than Ireland.
He said that the Finnish Defense Department has 130 members on its staff, 20 of whom have military backgrounds, and that the Finnish Defense Forces have 33,000 full-time members. He said this gives an employment rate of one official for every 254 full-time soldiers.
Sweden has around 140 civil servants in its Department of Defense and 22,700 full-time military personnel, which gives a ratio of one civil servant for every 162 soldiers.
By comparison, he said that Ireland has 354 officials in the Department of Defense compared to the established figure of 9,500 professional soldiers, giving a ratio of one official for 26 soldiers.
But he said the most recent figures on personnel levels show that there are only 8,434 soldiers, giving a current ratio of one official for every 23 soldiers.
The review was edited by Lieutenant Commander Paul Hegarty and produced in academic collaboration with the Dublin City University School of Law and Government.
Lt. Clarke said that the civilian command of the Defense Forces arises from the uncertainty during the first days of independence and that the Department of Defense has developed “an even more involved role in military affairs” in recent decades.
“The governance structure in Ireland is restrictive for the military,” he said, noting that no Defense Forces officer had command over the entire organization, not even on behalf of the Defense Minister or the government.
He said the department has an “integral role” over the entire organization and that the department’s secretary general, “an unelected official, can now sometimes have de facto command” of the Defense Forces.
Lt. Clarke said aspects of this “civilian-heavy” approach have come under some criticism from retired members of the General Staff, associations of military representatives, academia and politicians.
He said the retired generals had alleged that the department acted against the best advice of military and international experts and demonstrated the inflexibility and “obsessive rigidity” of the Civil Service.
Citing reports in the He said that the working relationship between senior officials and public officials has been described as “toxic.”
He said the Association of Representatives of Commissioned Officers (RACO) described the relationship between the officers and the department as “divisive and derogatory.”
He said a University of Limerick Defense Forces Work Climate Survey found “micromanagement” and increased department involvement in operational decisions that was a “growing concern” for all ranks.
Lt. Clarke said there were some “notable differences and similarities” in other defense forces that identify themselves as neutral or non-aligned militarily.
He said that, generally speaking, the international norm seems to center command around the entire army vested in one military officer or officers, who are directly under the command of the government.
“This is very different from the Irish command model that passes directly from the Defense Minister to the military formations, bypassing the Defense Forces staff in the process,” he said.
He examined four countries:
- Austria: The Federal Ministry of Defense is a mixed entity with officials in all branches. Defense in general is under civil command through the Minister and three sections under the control of the General Staff, which also has command over the army itself;
- Finland: direct operational command of all Finnish Defense Forces is vested in the Chief of Staff and administrative matters are under the department;
- Sweden: The Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces is a military officer, whose deputy is an official
- Malta: Military command is vested directly in an army officer In conclusion, Lieutenant Clarke said that comparable countries maintained very important civilian command of the armed forces, with command delegated from a minister directly to a single military commander.
But he said the changes in Ireland would require multiple amendments to the law.
“The alternative is to continue in an uncertain global security environment with a widely criticized governance paradigm that is far outside of standard international practice,” he said.
[ad_2]