Joseph Xuereb (January 16) discussed his concerns on how Malta would defend itself in case of an attack, particularly as a result of the instability in Northern Africa. He raises several valid points, particularly that Malta would need outside assistance in if such an attack were to materialise.

Where I disagree with him is how such an attack would present itself. I do not believe that Malta should have any fears from nation state actors, such as Libya (despite the manner in which the country is now divided into rival governments) or Tunisia.

Rather, I would be somewhat concerned that other, non-State entities would pose more of a threat to Malta’s security, such as the Islamic State ‘outlet’, which has set up shop in Derna, Libya.

While that threat is real, one should also bear in mind their lack of naval capability and the fact that they have not yet expanded beyond Derna to date. Thus, the threat is a balanced one – not too real as yet but certainly not to be ignored either.

The government ought to reconsider the neutrality clause, which has been the cause of much debate in recent years.

Malta should strengthen its ties in the Partnership for Peace, at the very least, and perhaps consider Nato membership down the line.

Malta’s military agreements for aid are few (Italy being one) and EU membership may not guarantee instant security assistance. While Nato membership would come with its own problems (such as the recent tensions with Russia), it also provides a blanket security guarantee and ensures Malta’s security in the form of the US Sixth Fleet.

In this day and age, where security threats are more unconventional, it may be worth seriously considering the idea.