Sinn Fein and the Rubicon
The reaction to the terrible murders of the last few days has been interesting. Some have seen it as a great coming together of our society and in that coming together have seen considerable cause for hope. Much as I welcome the clear fact that the majority of our citizens utterly reject this violence I am reminded that it takes very few people to sustain a campaign of murder. I am also reminded that as a small child I stood with my parents at a peace people rally: in those days as well practically everyone rejected the violence brought upon us; not that it did much good to stop it.
The political reaction has also been interesting. Many even amongst our seasoned politicians seem dismayed and surprised by what had occurred. Feeling dismay is entirely reasonable; it is something I too felt. Surprise, I would suggest, however, fails to understand the lessons of history. I have frequently suggested that violence might return and I am genuinely saddened by how accurate this blog was (I rarely ask people to read my previous blogs but I would recommend reading this one in light of current events). I really hope and pray that violence will not return any more to our streets than it has already done. I do predict, however, that we are in a situation where unless some action is taken more potent than warm words, we are standing before, at best, a “border campaign” type of violence.
Now having been conciliatory I feel it necessary to mention some home truths which will probably cause considerable anger.
Sinn Fein of all the political parties must have been the least surprised at what has happened. They are an organisation inextricably linked to the (now on ceasefire, I agree) Provisional IRA. That organisation lost a number of members some 10 years ago after its ceasefire and I have little doubt that senior members of the IRA, some of whom are also senior members of SF, know who these people are. In the murder of the two soldiers especially, it is notable that the terrorists, after first wounding their victims, walked over and shot them again. Those are not the actions of panicked young men on their first mission of murder: they are actions of seasoned killers who, I would have no doubt, have killed before. This is a topic I will return to.
Sinn Fein must have suspected that one of the dissident organisations would, sooner or later, manage to murder someone: they may be completely opposed to such a murder but the fact that it was likely must have been obvious to them. As such SF must have thought through a series of possible responses: hence, the long delay before the initial comments is interesting rather than surprising. The fact that SF took three goes to get out a proper condemnation looks more calculated than incompetent. I know this will raise hackles but I would submit that SF knew exactly what they were doing and the stuttering condemnation was because they did not really want to condemn the murder of British soldiers but knew they would have to. Surely some in the republican movement would have heard those comments and interpreted them as showing that SF were doing what they knew they had to and not really saying what they truly felt. Certainly this seemed to be the impression of a number of the local and GB media outlets.
The more rapid condemnation of the murder of PSNI officer Stephen Carroll was probably easier for the republican movement; explicable as it was as the murder of a member of the new police service and not the hated British army. However, the murder of Constable Carroll and the subsequent SF condemnation of it seemed to cause everyone to stop any criticism or even analysis of SF’s previous comments. Sinn Fein now seemed almost heroic in saying what every decent person unionist, nationalist or other has been saying for years. I am also profoundly worried that these dreadful murders will be used as the excuse for further “moving forwards.” Again I did a blog some time ago about the fallacy of seeing Northern Ireland as some sort of Flying Dutchman having to move politically forwards in perpetuity: the problem being that the destination of this movement is all too often seen as towards a pro SF agenda. Indeed I will predict now, that soon someone will tell us that if only policing and justice was devolved, SF would find it easier to persuade republicans to go to the police about the dissidents.
Clearly everyone feels the need to pull together and hence, minimise the risks of this dreadful violence becoming worse. However, I would submit that warm words are not enough and Sinn Fein especially need now to take more specific, concrete and for them uncomfortable steps. I have covered many of these suggestions in my last blog on the subject. I would suggest that Sinn Fein have done a small part of what I suggested but far too little. As well as the people like Adams, McGuinness and O’Dowd condemning the recent murders and calling for all to go to the police, we also need to see leading SF members from the areas known to have strong dissident elements call for the same. Conor Murphy and Michelle Gildernew must be on television and quoted on the Sinn Fein web site calling on their constituents to go to the police about dissident activity. Adams and co need to welcome the deployment of specialist soldiers, if that is what Hugh Orde feels is needed. This is something which I believe John O’Dowd specifically opposed when interviewed this week. The Provisional IRA must provide the police with a full list of the weapons which they had and exactly where and how they were destroyed. They must also tell the police which weapons were removed by the dissidents before the destruction of the stockpiles: this would allow the government and security forces to work out what weaponry the dissidents have and what else they might be endeavouring to acquire.
Returning to the issue of the murderers themselves, McGuinness stated that he did not know who committed these murders. I suspect this is probably true. However, it is also somewhat disingenuous. As I said above these murders were probably seasoned killers, I doubt they would be younger than 35. McGuinness must know who left the IRA at the time of the ceasefires and I would suggest could make a passable stab at the names of the people who committed this foul crime. McGuinness must himself provide or get his former friends in the Provisional IRA to provide the police with a list of the people they think set up the Real and Continuity IRA. He must then tell us all that he has done so. I do not want the names made public just the fact that he has named names.
On the topic of honesty I would suggest that many, not only those in the unionist community, would take the utterances of leading members of SF a great deal more seriously if McGuinness would admit to having been a senior figure in the IRA much more recently than the early 1970s and if Adams would admit to his own IRA membership.
Some have suggested that Sinn Fein has crossed a Rubicon over this issue. I would suggest that there is an opportunity for SF to make such a step but for the moment it is actually making a big splash in the river to distract people from the fact that it is firmly ensconced on the wrong side.
John Maxwell- Jim Allister wants to send in the SAS. If that’s not harking back to the past and looking to kick it all off again then what is it? As for blackening their names and associating them with violence- you’re doing it all by yourselves, you don’t need my help;-)
Not uncomfortable truths,how do you know Sinn Fein hasn’t passed on info to police? you’re making an assumption based on your particular prejudices like the rest of us do. Nothing is ever going to be good enough for the TUV, they simply want a return to majority protestant rule, imho, and that’s not going to happen. Neither is a United Ireland btw.
Jim Allister’s inflammatory statements are nothing short of a call for violence, now go away and let the rest of us who see a future get on with building it.
Imagine a public transfer of information on former members of Sinn Féin to the police. Turgon, do you seriously believe that this would solve any of the problems we are facing at the moment? Rather, it would cause more fracturing of the Republican movement, inevitably leading to more bloodshed. Yet this is what you demand. Sinn Féin may well give information privately, but this is just another “photo’s of decommissioning’ manoeuver. Lets face it, all you want is ash and sackcloth*, and nothing will do you until you see Martin marching down the Garvaghy Road whistling the sash. You’ve clearly no interest in peace between Unionists and Nationalists, just peace for Unionists.
*or should that be sash and sackcloth?
deirdre nelson,
How is calling for the SAS to be sent in a call for violence? Do you associate them with violence? He called for the SAS, not the UDA.
Secondly, I note you choose to ignore Adam’s uncomfortable statements and, indeed, the comments of a Sinn Fein councillor who said that the murder of the police officer was different from the murder of the soldiers. What is that supposed to mean?
” now go away and let the rest of us who see a future get on with building it.”
What a tolerant attitude! It will be some future with gunmen allowed to parade as men of peace and any attempt to expose their equivocation attacked.
Turgon when your opponents resort to redicule you know you’ve scored a point.
What seems to be being said is “understand Sinn Fein’s context and history and realise that they cannot say more”. Ok then so fence-sitting is acceptable when there is murder on the streets?
Additionally what is implied is “we don’t care about unionists’ interpretation of the situation”.
It seems unimportant that unionists may ask themselves ” do these people (Sinn Fein and the murderers) not share the same antecdents, are we wrong to think that SF may have some special knowledge about them?”
Is condemnation, saying it’s “wrong”, “counter-productive”, as good as it’s going to get? At the same time as a Dublin SF representative is saying that military bases should be closed and troops returned to Britain, is that not the murderers goal as well? This view comes very close to saying it was the soldiers’ fault for being killed.
Being part of the new political dispensation in Northern Ireland must mean walking-the-walk as well as talking-the-talk. Not to be seen to do so will erode confidence.
Unionist sensibilities matter every bit as much as Republicans’.
Sammy Eile,
not really sure what you were saying there – your clarity on earlier posts seems to have evaporated when it came to Alliance policy – no suprise there. This is what Wee Davey had to say as quoted on Slugger. This is a “NO” however you want to dress it up in confused Alliance party speak.
““The reality is the executive in place has failed to tackle a range of problems from education to rural planning to the Irish language and the proposed Maze stadium.” “And the thought that they need us to take on a department they can`t deal with, on top of all the others they`ve been unable to deal with properly, is just bonkers.”
6 county prod ,
‘Impressive off-the-top-of-the-head stuff! ‘
Naw more like a stream of consciousness which is the proper antidote to the turgonic reactive TUV stream of ‘unconciousness’ which shows all the adaptive qualities of a rabbit stuck in headlights
I mean in reference to the latest atrocities .
It’s been noted that when some people see a fish tank they notice only the fish and never see the water . Without water the fish can’t live . You can try to kill the fish by catching them one by one by hand . It saves a lot of time however if you open the water valve and leave said fish high and dry .
Sending in the SAS at this stage is to revert to the handgrab of fish approach . The last time this was attempted it took 35 years to restore the bowl to a semblance of ‘normality’ such as is possible in an abnormal State as NI. The Robinson /McGuinness approach seems to me to be better suited to the new Northern Ireland than the TUV fixation or ‘turgonic ‘view of events
What seems to be being said is “understand Sinn Fein’s context and history and realise that they cannot say more”. Ok then so fence-sitting is acceptable when there is murder on the streets?
Henry,
“Because these people, they are traitors to the island of Ireland.”
If that is considered fence sitting, most people must have fence poles sticking out of their arses. No matter what SF do, some unionists (and republicans for that matter) won’t be happy.
The question of whether SF should pass intelligence to MI5 is moot – it is already happening, as confirmed by the IMC:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4693038.ece
I seem to remember SF confirming this after dissident activity in North Belfast, but I can’t find any record quickly enough.
The reason they are not announcing this from the rooftops is presumably to maintain republican unity. Let’s not forget that is what we all want. Let the passing of intelligence continue, but it would be infinitely better to have enough oversight to know that it was being acted upon in the public interest, a point underlined by the response to the recent Panorama on Omagh intelligence.
Regarding local figures, I think this is a case of damned if you do etc. The best message management is through a minimum of senior figures. Were there any opposition, you can be sure it would have been picked up, and that’s not been the case. It’s safe to presume that the entire Assembly group is on the same page.
Btw, Turgon,
I think they mistake your modest self-deprecation for a lack of argument. Time to assume the mantle of commentator perhaps?
Sammy etc,
I don’t think so :
““The reality is the executive in place has failed to tackle a range of problems from education to rural planning to the Irish language and the proposed Maze stadium.”
Translation : the executive is crap.
“And the thought that they need us to take on a department they can`t deal with, on top of all the others they`ve been unable to deal with properly, is just bonkers.”
Translation : the executive is so weak that it cannot agree that any of it’s constituent political parties should take on a politically sensitive job.
I don’t see a “no” there.
Surely you’re not dancing on a pinhead ?
Comrade,
are you serious?
If you give a list of reasons why you dont want to do something – then that means you are against it – ie you are saying NO.
I put it to you that in fact you are the said dancer with pins you great twit.
To be honest, I am not an expert on NI, but there are three aspects that catch my imagination – why there is always the bitterest fight around extremely small pieces of land; how it was possible for the Irish retain strong sense of self-Id despite centuries of British rule. Speaking about the other parts of Europe or the world, it looks as if alongside globalization there’s the rise of what might be called ‘tribal thinking’ – take the recent impasse in Belgium.