Why one US diplomat thinks Ireland has ‘fallen into a vat of Guinness'

Spectator

3 days ago

US diplomat Mike Huckabee was dead right to question whether Ireland had 'fallen into a vat of Guinness.' Huckabee, the United States ambassador to Israel, played into stereotypical tropes on the Irish and alcohol when he made that comment last week. But it is, he reckoned, the only possible explanation for Ireland's looming ban on Israeli settlement goods, despite ominous soundings from the US over the potentially ruinous consequences. This bill is so stupid it amounts to 'diplomatic intoxication', he concluded.
To answer his question, Ireland is not drunk. More's the pity. It is preparing to commit economic suicide while cold stone sober, just to tighten the screws on Israel.
Huckabee's remarks, which point to a deepening rift between Dublin and Washington, have certainly focused minds in the US. Twelve prominent US politicians and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations have now warned Ireland of the economic and diplomatic fallout of the Israeli Settlements (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill (PIGS). This row is gaining traction on Capitol Hill and ensuring Ireland is making global headlines – for all the wrong reasons.
International law expert Eugene Kontorovich explained in the Wall Street Journal how banning trade with Israeli settlements could force American companies operating in Ireland to violate US federal law on illegal Israeli boycotts. 'Dublin seeks to take the place of Damascus as the centre of Israeli boycotts. But Syria was an economic backwater. Ireland has a lot more to lose,' he said.
When it was first introduced in 2018, what was then the 'Occupied Territories Bill,' quickly sparked a backlash. Former US Ambassador to Ireland, Dan Mulhall, said he was deluged with calls asking, 'What is Ireland at?' Riddled with legal problems from the start, it was left to wither on the vine. That was until October 2023, when pro-Palestinian/anti-Israeli groups thought it the perfect time to resurrect it and ramp up the pressure. They were pushing against an open door with foreign affairs minister Simon Harris. Instead of sending them packing, he caved in and re-introduced the ban on trading with settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank under a new name.
It isn't clear that this is what Irish voters actually want. The general nervousness about the blowback from Ireland's largest export market, the US, was reflected in a recent national opinion poll in Ireland: 48 per cent want the bill dropped altogether or paused until the economic consequences are fully examined, with a further 17 per cent undecided.
Harris and Taoiseach Micheal Martin face a stark choice; drop the bill and be crucified by the hard left and hostile anti-Israeli NGOs. Or continue to push it and hope Ireland's economy doesn't sink if US multinationals quit, leaving 370,000 job losses in their wake.
Martin must know all too well that the Irish economy is artificially propped up by billions in revenue from US tech giants.
Last November, Martin said Ireland could lose €10 billion (£8.7 billion) in corporation tax if just three US multinationals were repatriated under a hostile Donald Trump administration.
The context then was Trump's tariffs, but it underlined the scale of Ireland's dependency on US multinationals. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council reported that foreign-owned multinationals – the majority US-owned – contributed 84 per cent of the total corporation tax revenue in 2023. This swelled Ireland's coffers by €20 billion (£17.36 billion), roughly equating to the combined spending on hospitals and schools in that year.
As one US senator put it: 'If Ireland wanted to end foreign direct investment into Ireland, it could not have chosen a better way to do it.'
Former justice minister Alan Shatter labelled the bill a 'Father Ted' measure reminiscent of the comedy set on a craggy island off Ireland's west coast – something Ireland's Taoiseach took great umbrage at.
The Taoiseach was asked directly if the government had sought legal opinion on the position of US multinationals if this bill is enacted. We are none the wiser. Irish business leaders are not so coy; they say the consequences for Ireland are real and significant. Ireland is not up against the might of Israel on this, but that of the US.
And that is before we get to the added risk of infringing EU law by imposing a unilateral trade ban, as UK international law expert Natasha Hausdorff told the Dail pre legislative hearings in painstaking detail earlier this month. The glazed eyes of the assembled politicians and the blustering, emotive, responses made for depressing viewing.
Whatever one thinks about the moral argument, this bill is a massive overreach that will not save a single life in Gaza. Yet the entire Irish political establishment is ideologically wedded to it. Junior foreign affairs minister Thomas Byrne let the cat out of the bag last week when asked by Ireland's national broadcaster, RTE, if he was concerned about the potential cost to Ireland. 'Of course,' he replied, but I am more concerned about the humanitarian situation in Gaza.'
Martin also offered some insight into the government's mindset by saying he wanted the bill passed while ensuring Ireland's economy did not suffer 'unduly.' Which presupposes there will be some suffering, it's just a question of degree.
Should the worst happen, and tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of Irish workers lose their jobs if US multinationals shut up shop, well, they can take comfort knowing Ireland 'did the right thing' as they make their way to the dole queue.
Unless, as Ambassador Huckabee suggests, Ireland 'sobers up' before it is too late.