As 2012 nears an end we look to 2013, Gerry Adams has described the year ahead, in his New Year message, as quite possibly, maybe, being the year of reconciliation. He also describes the ‘peace process’ as ‘work in progress’.
These are all words of ‘peace’ and ‘reconciliation’ but are carefully guarded terms which have in fact a derogatory and divisive meaning in the current atmosphere. The ‘peace process’, a phrase coined during the talks leading up to the 1998 Good Friday/Belfast Agreement, describes the negotiations and ‘meeting of minds’ in the run up to and signing of that accord.
Sinn Fein continue to use the phrase, especially when attacking their opponents. whether Unionists or ‘internal’ Republican naysayers. For Gerry Adams – now long departed this part of the United Kingdom – and his co-conspirators, the ‘peace process’ is not about achieving peace or political stability in the eyes of many Unionists (yet another contradictory and ambiguous term that emerged out of the ‘peace process’), but code for delivering on the objectives of Sinn Fein – a united Ireland.
Yes, a united Ireland. Sinn Fein once believed that they could defeat and overthrow ‘Britain’ through the use of terrorism – bombings, shootings and so-forth. Recently they have referred to the period known as the ‘Troubles’ (or sectarian murder campaign) as being, not about overthrowing ‘Britain’, but about securing civil rights.
My mind is turned at this stage to George Orwell’s book 1984, or indeed to Animal Farm, where the rules and meaning(s) of which were constantly changed and revised for numerous purposes. Revisionism is nothing new, the IRA and Sinn Fein have been playing this game for some considerable period of time. Something that is stated in public is fiction until it becomes fact, or vice-versa; like, the fact that the IRA murdered innocent civilians (La Mon, Bloody Friday, Jean McConville, one could go on …). Such use of language, the constant changing of the rules and revision of history is not unique to Northern Ireland, as it usually forms part and parcel of the political process.
It is however vital that people in Northern Ireland stick to the facts, know their history and know the truth, otherwise we will see future generations believe such nonsense, including such things of the IRA’s war being ‘legitimate’, they only targeted other ‘soldiers’ or to use Sinn Fein/IRA speak, ‘Crown forces’, and that the ‘Brits’ were the perpetrators of violence and everything that was wrong and immoral. I do not argue that people should become bitterly engulfed or dominated by such truths, but that these things in the wider political world are seen in the context of the truth. They are indeed fact, not fiction.
Anyway, back to the main focus of this piece. Adam’s suggestion therefore that the ‘peace process’ is ‘work in progress’ could well be interpreted as ‘Ireland is still on the road to a United Ireland’ and that 2013 is as important a year as any other in the run-up to 2016, the one-hundredth anniversary of the small insurrection in Dublin in the middle of the then Great War (1914-18) where many thousands of Irishmen died along side their fellow British Servicemen for freedom and democracy.
However, the 2011 Census results would not have made good bed time reading for Gerry or Martin; 59% of people in Northern Ireland hold British passports and 48% of the population are from a Protestant background. This defeats Sinn Fein’s goal of a United Ireland by 2016. Their disappointment to the 2011 Census was reflected in a press statement from Conor Murphy, stating that the only way to resolve the issue of the border was a border poll (something they have been recently calling for, and which remains in the gift of the Secretary of State, or the Prime Minister, who is a Unionist). It was not a statement of triumphalism.
Sinn Fein’s constant drive and words regarding a United Ireland demonstrates just how the critics of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement saw it, and saw it correctly from the position of Sinn Fein/IRA. The Agreement was a means to a united Ireland, not a means to ending terrorism (which it ultimately did secure on a larger scale). This is how Sinn Fein and John Hume sold it to ‘their’ people and it is therefore not surprising how Sinn Fein continue to turn up the heat on the issue in order to remind ‘their’ voters what they are about and how they view the current settlement.
The level in which Sinn Fein have turned the heat up on this issue has done nothing to convince Unionists and Loyalists alike. Take the issue of the flag over Belfast City Hall: this was the ‘straw that broke the camels back. The current and ongoing protests are about the border above all else. This is the politics of identity and symbolism in operation, something Sinn Fein do understand and wish to play upon.
Adam’s ends his statement, arguing: ““The current qualified and conditional claim by Britain on the North will change when a majority of citizens vote to end to the Union. Sinn Féin wants to see a border poll held in the upcoming period. That means building support for a poll and for a vote to end Partition.”
This is clearly a man and a party that does not seek to make Northern Ireland work, but to see it wiped from existence. Reconciliation is therefore not about uniting and breaking down barriers of sectarianism in the confines of Northern Ireland or the United Kingdom, but within a 32-county Republic. Such a policy will not lead to progress, but violence, hardship and increased division – all of the things that clearly worked out for Sinn Fein and their little war between 1969 and 1996.
Sinn Féin
Share on Facebook
26 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
Sammy McNally
January 4, 2013 at 10:52 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “Reconciliation is therefore not about uniting and breaking down barriers of sectarianism in the confines of Northern Ireland or the United Kingdom, but within a 32-county Republic. Such a policy will not lead to progress, but violence, hardship and increased division – all of the things that clearly worked out for Sinn Fein and their little war between 1969 and 1996.”
It is entirely legitimate and indeed expected by Nats that their elected representatives should work peacefully towards a United Ireland (hence the ‘Nationalist’ tag for such parties) – to suggest that this will be met with violence and without explicitly codemning such violence could give the impression that somehow you feel that the unlawful and unjustified violence is somehow a reasonable response to the lawful and legitimate politics of seeking a United Ireland.
adcharles
January 4, 2013 at 4:15 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Entirely legitimate but demonstrates ambigious nature of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
Furthermore, how does Sinn Fein/Nationalism expect N.I. to work if they continually toe that divisive/historical line. This is as good as it gets for Nationalism.
Sammy McNally
January 4, 2013 at 6:37 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “ambigious nature of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement”
This agreement is Ulster’s de facto constitution and gives the Irish goverment a say in the running of Ulster’s affairs (a mandatory elelement of the Stormo arrangements) and obliges the British government to consult with the Irish government.
Within this variegated constitutional framework, unique to Ulster, Nationalists are entitled to work for Irish Unity, just as Unionists are entitled to work to maintain the Union – thats not being ‘divisive’ – thats Nats and Unionists simply playing by the rules of the game.
In your article you criticised Nats for playing within these rules but had no criticism for Unionists for playing outside them – perhaps just an unfortunate oversight you might like to correct?
… and might be an idea for you to check what the (so far excellent) British SOS has to say on the issue of flags.
Tom Hughes
January 4, 2013 at 3:05 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
I am continually surprised by the rejoicing of the pro-Union community with the results of the Census National Identitiy results. Any way you slice the numbers the “Britsh Only” or “British included” is a minority indentifcation. The majority indentify more with their Irishness/Northern Irishness than with being British. If that is not the fulfillment of Wolfe Tone’s desire for the replacing sectarian labels with the common name of Irishman, I don’t know what is. The people in Northern Ireland are well on their way to indentifing with the rest of their brethen in Ireland.
adcharles
January 4, 2013 at 4:18 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Nonsense. 59% of people in N.I. hold a British passport. The border question is not relevant. Sinn Fein expected the 2011 Census results to be better. Their constant peddling of ‘it’s only a matter of time’ brings into question their commitment to a shared society.
Tom Hughes
January 4, 2013 at 10:24 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
I think the 59% British passport issue is a red herring. I know “Irish only” respondents who carry a British passport because it is more convenient for work purposes.
I am not lookiig to stir the Orange and Green pot with my observation. I am hearten by the “Irishness” of the reponses. I think the tradiotns that share this island have more in common than is generally talked about or appreciated. I think it also obiviously negates the “Ulster is as British as Finchley” myth.
“Their constant peddling of ‘it’s only a matter of time’ brings into question their commitment to a shared society.”
I don’t think that believing that demographics/time will ultimately lead to a united Ireland is incompatible with desiring a “shared society”. That society will necessarily be less overtly “British” as that will reflect the will of the majority. Take the flags issue for instance. If City Hall is not the definition of a “shared space” , then what is ? And as such it is not the sole dominian of one traditon or the other. The very reasonable compromise to fly the flag on designated days is a harrbinger of things to come. Those who live in the “zero sum” game bubble on the extremes of both traditons will be the ones left behind.
Time is on our side, but not necessarily for an Ulster run by Dublin, but for the common Irish bond to be more manifest in this Province.
Sammy McNally
January 4, 2013 at 5:17 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Tom,
As someone from the anti-union stable I’m afraid I dont share your positivity regarding the results of the census – this is reflected on in the Post below.
http://www.openunionism.com/a-plague-on-both-our-houses/
Tom Hughes
January 4, 2013 at 10:45 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Bleak reading Sammy!! The flip side of the coin is that the NO SURRENDER / OUT OUT OUT/ NEVER crowd is definately in the minority and shrinking. How the new majority ultimately decides to indentifiy themselves will take time and things like the economy in the South will certianly have an impact.
oneill
January 4, 2013 at 8:03 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
“I am continually surprised by the rejoicing of the pro-Union community with the results of the Census National Identitiy results”
Well, I think it is infinitely more positive concentrating on the national identity aspect than the sectarian demographics which has fuelled the discussion historically.
As someone who is Unionist and sees themselves as a mosaac of a British/Irish/N.Irish identity, the low *mixed* (eg British/Irish, N.Irish/Irish) % surprised and disappointed me.
However…. if I were someone who believed in the concept of Irish Unity I would see the Irish element of my identity as instrinsic, I can’t imagine why I wouldn’t include it either as a sole identity or as a combined one with N.Irish. But that didn’t happen in this results.
Those of us pontificating on the blogosphere, FB and Twitter live in somewhat of an exclusive bubble where everything is necessarily viewed through unique Orange or Green rather than greyish specs. 45% of the electorate no longer vote. Most of my acquaintances, friends, family members (and I am lucky enough to have ones originating from differing *community* and social backgrounds) are happy enough with the present state of affairs and are more preoccupied with the more macro issues bothering their peers in the rest of western Europe.
To take one example, student politics now in Queens is a (secular) teddy bears’ picnic pontificating on women’s reproductive rights, gay marriage and Israel compared to the sectarian cesspit it was in the 80s and early 90s when the murder of the professor Edgar Graham and the sinking of the HMS Sheffield was reason enough for a substantial number in the Students Union bar to burst into cheers.In 1989 NI supporters were threatened, spat at, verbally abused and even glassed in the SU bar whilst watching their team playing the ROI- in 2012 the Queens NI supporters club is one of the biggest non-academic groups in the SU. It’s a changed place, where people deal with real politics (by and large) and what happens in Queens will be happening in the real political world 5, 10 years down the line.
Changed place means the old certainties are no longer there- Unionism at some stage will need to up its game but while Irish nationalism remains represented by the *old warriors*, incapable of moving outisde the communalist bunker and with the blood of so many innocents on their hands, then in all truth the Union (if not necessarily the Unionist parties) will remain as strong as if it ever has.
Tom Hughes
January 4, 2013 at 10:38 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Thanks for the response O’Neill.
As someone who views Irish unity an aspirational goal, my solace in the numbers is that the sectarian headcount is no longer the only indication of national identity. The 50%+1 formula is never going to bring about Irish unity. Irishmen(woman) thinking of themselves as Irish and hopefully, wishing to have Irish affairs determined by Irish people, is the only way for unification to work.
I know that fly’s in the face globalization/EU/cultural hegemony etc. But on this small island, can’t we trust that the interests of all our countrymen can be best met amoungst ourselves without the leave of our English neighbors ?
Sammy McNally
January 4, 2013 at 10:30 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “Well, I think it is infinitely more positive concentrating on the national identity aspect than the sectarian demographics which has fuelled the discussion historically.”
I think this is a fairly disingenuous remark, “sectarian demographics” were used a proxy for the real thing i.e. national identity (which I’m sure you well know) and had nothing to with counting the number of people who believed Mary was a Virgin(or whatever it is that divides Prods and Taigs) and the leading demographic headcounter of Prods and Fenians Horseman was a Prod who looked forward(before his own death) to Ulster being Doomed.
re. “Unionism at some stage will need to up its game ”
As understatements go that is a scorcher, the two leading Unionist parties have encouraged the protests outside the Alliance party offices, which have, given the track record of those who turn up for such protests inevitably spiralled out of control.
…and whilst we are waiting for ‘Unionism to up its game’ Belfast becomes further Balkanised with Unionist sectrarianism now not just confined to a few mad months during the summer months.
oneill
January 5, 2013 at 10:18 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
“I think this is a fairly disingenuous remark, “sectarian demographics” were used a proxy for the real thing i.e. national identity (which I’m sure you well know) and had nothing to with counting the number of people who believed Mary was a Virgin(or whatever it is that divides Prods and Taigs) and the leading demographic headcounter of Prods and Fenians Horseman was a Prod who looked forward(before his own death) to Ulster being Doomed.”
Sectarian demographics is not a proxy for “national identity” but it is for communal identity and that is not the same thing- true, a screwed up version of “Britishness” and “Irishness” is sometimes co-opted into that communalist venn diagram but those versions have as much relationship to the genuine form of national identity as does the throwing of stones across the “Peace Lines” have to the debate on the topic of transubstantiation.
With regards to Horseman’s religion, I am not sure what its relevance to the argument is? I am not aware of his material but if its focus was sectarian then its focus was sectarian regardless of where he may have practised his religion. Put in another context, simply being born a Jew does not logically mean that you are not capable of holding anti-semitic views.
“re. “Unionism at some stage will need to up its game ”
As understatements go that is a scorcher, the two leading Unionist parties have encouraged the protests outside the Alliance party offices, which have, given the track record of those who turn up for such protests inevitably spiralled out of control. “
Unionism is merely the belief in the Union, nothing more, nothing less and it has no more responsibility as a political concept for what is presently developing on the streets of Belfast than the concept of Irish Unity has for the countless no warning bombs and massacres carried out in its name by Republicans.
You mention the two leading Unionist parties, they are quite a different thing to “Unionism” they contain politicians whose job is to manage everyday life and they *do* have a responsibility to do their best to bring order back. But that responsibility has nothing to do with the Union.
When I say Unionism needs to up its game I mean in the wider UK context and primarily the concept of identity and what it means to be British needs to become more inclusive.
I think Robinson does gets that but he is quite possibly in a minority of a very few amongst other Unionist politicians in NI.
….
Sammy McNally
January 5, 2013 at 12:41 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “With regards to Horseman’s religion, I am not sure what its relevance to the argument is? I am not aware of his material but if its focus was sectarian then its focus was sectarian regardless of where he may have practised his religion. Put in another context, simply being born a Jew does not logically mean that you are not capable of holding anti-semitic views.”
Horseman, (see link below) who was a Protestant and Nationalist and wanted to see a United Ireland brought about peacefully and monitored the likelyhood of that by looking at the growth in the Nationalist share of the vote in elections and working out what that share was likely to be by using the census stats which were collected on the basis of religion (based on the close correlation between religion and voting for Nationalist/Unionist parties).
Your disingenuous assertion that counting Catholics and Protestants can not be a proxy for working out trends in the support for differnet constitutional positions is clearly not helped by the fact Horseman, the leading Fenian demographer, was actually a Prod.
http://ulstersdoomed.blogspot.co.uk/
re. Unionism and Unionists.
I take your point.
I would simply add that, elusive Garden Centre Prods aside, Unionist politicans generally reflect Unionist opinion and ideology and whenever a Unionist politican attempts to behave as his conterparts on the mainland might do and to be more ‘inclusive’ (e.g the boy Basil) he has a big Unionist boot applied to his jacksie.
alison o'loan
January 5, 2013 at 5:32 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
What basil forgot was opportunism: to have led the UUP he needed to appeal to membershop (not voters) by adopt a more hardline position than his real one. Not massively so but just a bit so.
Membership of UUP is more conservative than its voters.
Sammy McNally
January 6, 2013 at 12:22 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Alison,
re. “Membership of UUP is more conservative than its voters”
I tend to agree – and some of those voters must surely have moved or will move across to the Alliance Party.
…there must be a few really embarassed UUP voters in the leafier parts of Belfast wondering how they can defend the stirring up of mob violence against the fellow Unionist Alliance party.
OU Editors
January 6, 2013 at 1:31 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Are the APNI “Unionist”?
Sammy McNally
January 6, 2013 at 8:17 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “Are the APNI “Unionist”?”
Yes, I think even though they sit on the fence a bit, I am going to, rather magnaminously, call them Unionists ,thereby giving them to you guys.
OU Editors
January 6, 2013 at 8:27 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Shucks Sammy, and we didn’t get you anything for Christmas.
oneill
January 6, 2013 at 10:54 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Your disingenuous assertion that counting Catholics and Protestants can not be a proxy for working out trends in the support for differnet constitutional positions is clearly not helped by the fact Horseman, the leading Fenian demographer, was actually a Prod.
On a technical point, an assertion cannot be disingenuous as it is only expressing my opinion and not trying to pass opinion off as fact. My opinion on obsessing on sectarian demographics is that such an approach is a bit, well, sectarian and the fact that a hun actually does it as well doesn’t change that opinion one little bit as huns are quite as capable of being sectarian as fenians. But I guess we will have to differ on that.
I would simply add that, elusive Garden Centre Prods aside, Unionist politicans generally reflect Unionist opinion and ideology and whenever a Unionist politican attempts to behave as his conterparts on the mainland might do and to be more ‘inclusive’ (e.g the boy Basil) he has a big Unionist boot applied to his jacksie.
It depends on what your definition of a Unionist is.
Only 57% voted at the last election and of that 57%, less than half voted for pro-Union parties, so the DUP, UUP, TUV represent between 25-30% of the electorate.
I think that is far, far behind the number whom would vote to continue the Union at this stage, I would define anyone who wants to continue the Union as a unionist (small “u”).
The problem is that the non-voting percentage is much less vocal than those who, for example, are presently demonstrAting about the flag. They have also withdrawn from the politicial system and so even if they are thinking along the same lines as McCrea (which we simply don’t know) they are unlikely to be bothered enough to get actively behind him.
Sammy McNally
January 6, 2013 at 1:16 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
‘Techinical’ disingenousness aside, I dont really disagree with any of that.
In terms of voter turnout I dont think any proper analysis has been done on the differential turnout between the 2 communities – clealry a suitable area for a University politcs department to be getting on with?
I think in 2001 Nationalist trunout was pretty high and has fallen of since then and the gap in turnout between the 2 communities has narrowed – mainly becuase of of Nat decrease rather than Unionist increase. I suspect that is why the demogrpahic Nat background increase is not relfected as much as expected (by me and other Nats) in the polls in the 10 years since.
Alison O'Loan
January 6, 2013 at 10:26 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Hi Sammy you could be partly right but I believe the unionist turnout has fallen over the same period though.
Sammy McNally
January 7, 2013 at 11:23 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Alison,
I had a feeling Unionist turnout had stablised and if it had fallen then not by as much as in Nat areas thereby reducing the gap?
Alison O'Loan
January 7, 2013 at 4:38 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Just to pick a few unionist constituencies at random to show what’s happened over the last decade Sammy:
The firist figure is the 1998 Assembly election turnout; the second figure is the 2011 Assembly election turnout.
North Antrim 69% 54.6%
Strangford 61.6% 48.5%
East Antrim 61% 47.8%
I believe these are typical.
Sammy McNally
January 8, 2013 at 12:13 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Alison,
I think it is very unfair of you to put those figures out there – and undermine my pet theory…
In defence of my theory when you compare East and West Belfast between 2003 and 2011(Assembly) the gap between the higher turnout in the Nat area and the lower turnout in Unionist area went down from 5.2% to 4.3%.
Nat turnout (WB) down to 57.9 (2011) from 65.9(2003)
Unionist turnout (EB) down to 53.6 (2011) from 60.7(2003)
I think the biggest fall off (9.2%) in a one-sided consituencecy(between 2003 and 2011) was in Nat. West Tyrone(the evenly split North Belfas has a bigger % fall) where the % vote went from 73.2 to 64 (although that does not take into account a potential fall of in Unionist vote within that constituency.)
St Etienne
January 12, 2013 at 3:53 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
“With regards to Horseman’s religion, I am not sure what its relevance to the argument is?”
I agree entirely.
It’s especially laughable when the continued nationalist success fantasy now relies not on the sectarian headcount of the population, which has been shown by the census to be flawed, but on a sectarian headcount of the headcounters.
In fact, it’s so absurd that you get the definite impression said poster is commenting just for the sake of seeing his name under the post.
Perhaps there is a headcount of that underway too?
Sammy McNally
January 12, 2013 at 7:58 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
re. “but on a sectarian headcount of the headcounters.”
Mumbo jumbo.