Unity

From Unity, 14 October 2006

Will they . . . won’t they?

As expected, the report of the Independent International Monitoring Commission last week confirmed that the IRA has been transformed from a “sophisticated and potentially the most dangerous of the [paramilitary] groups” and is now committed to “a political strategy, eschewing terrorism and other forms of crime.” This prompted the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to declare that “the IRA’s campaign is over” and that there “is now a consensus across all main players in the politics of Northern Ireland, that change can only come through persuasion and not through violence of any sort.”
     The Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, also welcomed the report as offering convincing evidence of the IRA’s commitment to the political path. “These positive and clear-cut findings are of the utmost importance and significance.”
     Both the British and Irish governments saw the report as teeing up this week’s talks in Scotland aimed at restoring devolution. “The IRA has done what we asked it to do . . . The door is now open to a final settlement,” said Blair. Ahern asserted it to be “unconscionable for this opportunity to be missed . . . It is time to make decisions and for Northern Ireland to look to the future.”
     It is clear that the return of the Assembly, for all its faults, is crucial to moving forward the struggle for democracy in the North. But will this week see Blair and Ahern finding themselves a place in history as heading the governments that saw in the final settlement in the peace process—despite both their governments looking more concerned at present with inner power struggles than with the national interest of either country?
     The Northern Ireland Secretary of State, Peter Hain, described himself as feeling “cautiously optimistic.” Caution may serve him better than optimism. Finding agreement on new voting or ministerial arrangements, never mind the thorny issues of policing, the on-the-runs, and the return of those “exiled” by paramilitaries, cannot be achieved by the narrow promotion of sectarian interests. Progress does not lie through the intransigence at the root of DUP politics, so clearly displayed by Paisley: “The days of pushover unionists are gone . . . Our unyielding approach, forged by the strong mandate given to us in successive elections, has brought about the progress that the IMC reports.”
     The British government has fuelled a politics of division through trying to work deals with the DUP and Sinn Féin at the expense of a more open, inclusive politics. It has ignored the lesson of the Belfast Agreement, that smaller, non-sectarian parties, such as the Women’s Coalition, have a key role to play—not least in expressing and encouraging public opinion to demand that their political representatives find a way forward.
     As the wriggling and wrangling of the politicians of the sectarian blocks continues, as it most certainly will beyond this week’s three days in St Andrews, it is the “other” politics that hold the real key to the future. Building active trade union organisation in the work-place, campaigning to keep water an affordable public utility, supporting those faced with racism, and showing solidarity with those countries being trampled in the new world order of American imperialism—that is where the future lies, not behind closed establishment doors in Scotland or anywhere else.
[JP]

Home page > Publications > Unity > 2006 > Will they . . . won’t they?

Baile > Foilseacháin > Unity > 2006 > Will they . . . won’t they?