Leo Varadkar served as Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Ireland from 2017 to 2020 and again from 2022 to 2024. He previously held senior cabinet roles in Health, Social Protection, Enterprise, and Transport over a 13-year ministerial career. A qualified medical doctor and graduate of Trinity College Dublin, he is also a member of Ireland’s Council of State. Varadkar was the first openly gay Taoiseach and one of Ireland’s youngest leaders. In Spring 2025, he was named a Hauser Leader at the Harvard Kennedy School Center for Public Leadership.
Your time as Taoiseach was marked by a series of decisive foreign policy moments: closely supporting Ukraine, criticizing Israel’s War in Gaza, and also Ireland gaining a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council. What principles and experiences ground these foreign policy moments? And how do you currently envision Ireland’s place in the world?
Above all, Ireland is a small country. [It has] only a population of just over 5 million in a world of 8 billion. Our objective has always been to use our voice to punch above our weight, [while] recognizing that [there are] limitations that exist for a small country. We gained our independence 100 years ago from the British Empire, at a time when people were denying even the existence of Ireland as a nation state. We were considered to be British people, like English, Welsh, or Scottish people. That naturally gives us sympathy for people who are trying to defend their right to self-determination and a state of their own, which includes Ukrainians and Palestinians.
It was crucial for us to find our own place in the world, which meant having a very good relationship with the United Kingdom, our closest neighbor, particularly given the shared responsibility that we have in Northern Ireland under the Good Friday Agreement. Being at the heart of the European Union in many ways gave us our real economic sovereignty because even for the first few decades of independence, we traded exclusively with the UK and pegged our currency to the pound sterling. Being part of the European Union allowed us to have a seat at the table where decisions were made rather than just following the lead of London. Again, multilateralism works better if the big countries decide what happens, [and] then small countries generally lose out.
You led Ireland through a particularly tense period during Brexit negotiations. What did that experience teach you about the challenges, but also the potential for a more united and peaceful Ireland?
The main thing I learned from the Brexit period was the extent of solidarity that we experienced from the other 27 member states [of the European Union], which surprised me. I didn't think [the response] would be as strong as it was, and it was, in part, solidarity for another member of the club. I think other European countries were afraid that if Brexit was successful, then that might inspire movements [to leave the European Union] in their own countries. That was very much part of the picture, also.
For us, the relationship with the [United Kingdom] is crucial, particularly because we have the Good Friday Agreement, which decides how Northern Ireland is governed and how power is shared between the different communities there. That’s [a] relationship that was very damaged by Brexit, but now is in a much better place. Now, we have a UK Government that has no interest in rejoining the European Union, but does want a close relationship with the EU again.
In this context, what do you see as the future of the Good Friday Agreement? Where should it continue to be pushed forward in the near future?
We’re almost 30 years into the Good Friday Agreement. The best thing it has given us is peace. I grew up in a country where I turned on the radio every day, watched the news, [and] heard about somebody being killed in Northern Ireland: that doesn't happen anymore. The real gift is peace. There's power sharing in Northern Ireland, North-South bodies that allow [Northern Ireland and Ireland] to cooperate better, and East-West bodies that allow Britain and Ireland to cooperate better. They don't always function. What we have in Northern Ireland is a compulsory coalition, where all the major parties have to form a government together. That doesn't always work. Fortunately, it is working at the moment.
But, there is a provision in the Good Friday Agreement that allows for [the] unification of North and South to take place. That can only take place when there’s a simple majority vote North and South for [unification]. There isn't at the moment, but I believe that’s something that we should work towards. There’s different views on that in the Republic of Ireland. In particular, some people would prefer not to rock the boat: [they] think it will just happen by osmosis. I don't take that view—I think it’s something we have to work towards.
In 2023, Ireland saw greenhouse gas emissions drop to a 30-year low. These developments were due by and large to legally-binding targets, the ban on new fossil fuel exploration licenses, increased investment in renewables, and a ring-fenced carbon tax. Where do you see Ireland’s environmental leadership heading in the years ahead?
We have made some good progress from a bad base. Our emissions per capita are very high in large part because of our very big beef and dairy agriculture industry. We have managed to bring down emissions a lot. When you consider how much our economy has grown and how much our population has grown, emissions have come down very considerably, and we've managed to decouple economic growth from emissions. That was an important thing to prove: that countries can grow, their economies can become wealthier [and] more equal, and still take climate action. Other people argued that there's a conflict between prosperity and climate action. We’ve proven, as have a lot of other countries, that this is not the case. In terms of what we can bring to the table. The main thing we did when I was Prime Minister, which is being continued by the current government, is focus on climate finance to help developing countries make the leap to adopting new technologies, not the dirty interim ones.
You supported major social reforms, from marriage equality to abortion rights and child wellbeing, yet voters recently rejected the Referendums on Family and Care. How do you make sense of this contrast, and do you believe Ireland is still moving in a more progressive direction?
We are heading for a more progressive future. We've become more equal economically, as measured by GINI, which was a very important thing for me. Even though I'm very much a center-right, pro-enterprise, and low tax politician, I think you have to redistribute wealth. If you don't redistribute wealth, you get a very unfair and divided society. Everyone loses out in that scenario, not just the people who are disadvantaged.
We have managed to achieve greater equality before the law for people, regardless of their sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, social class, or background. But, there is some way to go. If you look at our government and our parliament, [we have] only 25 percent female participation, which is not great. Quite frankly, it's not good at all. There's still a significant gender pay gap. [There is] still a lot that has to be done [in terms of gender equality] and to integrate new migrant communities.
What was there for a lot of these referendums [was] the public duty to be convinced. We lost the two [referendums] on family and care, [and] I don't think that was part of a right-wing backlash. To be very frank, it was a failure on our behalf, the government at the time, to convince people that the change was actually necessary and that [it] would mean [something] practical in their lives. If you are putting a proposal to the people, we have to be able to demonstrate that it is necessary and that [people] gained something from it. We saw it as cleaning up some old-fashioned language in our Constitution, but the public didn't see it that way.
Along with some of these challenges, how did your approach or principles change between your first and second term?
[The first and second administration] were very different governments. The first government was a minority government. I did not have a majority in parliament, and it was just my party and some independents, which meant we never knew whether we had enough votes to get [legislation] through. The second government was a coalition with a majority, and we knew we could get things through Parliament. Though we won all the votes, before we could put anything before the Parliament, all three parties [in the coalition] had to agree, and any one of the three parties could hold something up. The pace of change was sometimes slow, and at times that was very frustrating.
Most of the time politics is governed by events. The first government was very much dominated by Brexit and trying to make sure that we got an agreement that [would] protect our economy, protect our place in the European Union, and stop a hard border between North and South. The second government was born out of the pandemic and [was] trying to get everything back to normal once [the pandemic] was over.
Many have described your decision to step down as Prime Minister as a surprise. Now, what is your vision for Ireland and the rest of the European Union? What do you believe are the defining issues facing Ireland at the moment?
The big challenge at the moment is whether we continue on the path of reform. The people decided to re-elect the current government, absent the Green Party this time, so it is a slightly more conservative government than we had previously. Part of the challenge is going to be whether the commitment is there to continue the reforms, particularly [with] the pace of climate action that is required. Then, [there is] also dealing with any external threats to our economy, given changes here in the [United] States and its tariffs. Our economy is very close to the US economy, so that will affect [us] too.
The biggest issue that affects people in their daily lives is the housing shortage, and it has been hard to make progress on that. That is not [just] about houses and housing affordability. [The shortage] has created a limit to future growth, and intergenerational injustice, where younger people in their 20s and 30s, who, in previous generations, had a realistic expectation to own their own home, do not, at the moment. Fixing that intergenerational [injustice] component is really important.
Similarly, what do you think are the biggest barriers to youth engagement in Irish politics, and how can leaders better involve the next generation in shaping the country’s future?
It is important that we engage people in politics generally: not just young people [but also] women and people from all different backgrounds. A functioning democracy is about more than having elections. Lots of countries have elections. They are not full democracies. You must [have] a free press and the rule of law. You must have minority rights, because if democracy is just majority rule, that is not a real democracy. Minorities must have rights and protections. You also must have participation.
We have tried many different mechanisms. We have a youth parliament that brings young people together to discuss different issues. We have citizens' assemblies and national conventions, where we take a representative sample of the population, bring them together for a few weekends in a row, show them all the evidence [and] ask them for their advice [about governance]. Those participatory mechanisms can work very well. One thing we do not have, and we should have, is much stronger local government. Compared to the US, where you have really strong directly elected mayors, you have strong local budgets and tax raising powers. We don't have that. [Our government is] centralized.
Finally, the Harvard International Review prides itself on covering underappreciated topics in international affairs. What areas of Irish politics, both domestically and abroad, do you believe deserve more attention in coverage of its politics?
That is a good question. I'm not sure [that] Ireland is not getting enough coverage. Things that do strike me that are not getting enough coverage are, for example, the situation in Sudan, which is probably the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. At the moment, 6 to 12 million people [are] displaced. It is not that any one conflict is more important than the other, but it bothers me how little we hear about that, how little is reported on, [and] how little is discussed in politics. If there is any area that does not get enough coverage, it probably is things that are happening in the Global South. Myanmar would be similar. We heard about the earthquake recently, but how many people know there is a civil war going on there?
Varadkar spoke with Black on April 24, 2025. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
The views expressed in this piece are the interviewee’s own and are not reflective of the views of the HIR.
