A former government minister says Sabina Higgins is entitled to her opinion, and shouldn't have to be defended by the President.

Shane Ross was speaking after Mrs Higgins suggested now is the time for peace talks between Ukraine and Russia.

In a letter to The Irish Times, said she was "disappointed" a recent editorial "did not encourage any ceasefire negotiations that might lead towards a peace settlement between the Russians, the Ukrainian forces and the separatists.

"Until the world persuades President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire and negotiations, the long haul of terrible war will go on. How can there be any winner?", she wrote.

A link to the letter was published on, and subsequently removed from, the Áras an Uachtaráin website.

Mr Ross told Newstalk Breakfast her right to say it is not in dispute.

"I'd agree with those who criticise the content of the statement - I don't agree with the statement itself at all.

"It is necessary to say - absolutely, categorically - that we are on the side the Ukrainians.

"But my view is different on the issue of what Sabina Higgins' right is to come into this particular controversy.

"Sabina Higgins has got a very, very fine record of being an anti-war activist.

"She spoke out against the Iraq War, she visited Margaretta D'Arcy in Limerick Prison.

"And now she's saying something about the war, which we could all agree with, except some of us would think it's complete.

"The idea that the President should now come in and defend his wife's position is to me somewhat ridiculous.

"She's entitled to, and does, express her opinion on these views - and if they happen to differ from his, and I don't know whether they do or not, I don't think everytime they do differ he's going to come in and say 'I do differ on this, that and the other'".

'This is very important'

However he says the letter should not have appeared on the President's official website.

"It shouldn't have gone up, that's a mistake - of course that was a mistake, and it shouldn't have gone up there.

"And it was withdrawn and I think that's important to recognise: it shouldn't have gone up there.

"But her right to say this is very important."

He adds: "We're confusing two issues here: one is it shouldn't have gone on the [President's] website, that was wrong.

"But the second is to say that he's responsible for - the implication here - for what she says, and that she's some sort of robot the moment he becomes elected for the Presidency is wrong as well".