Left – tactic or principle for Sinn Féin in Europe?
Via politics.ie a blog by Adam Price (Plaid Cymru MP) reveals Sean Oliver, Sinn Féin’s Director of European Affairs, confirmed at the Compass Conference they have received an approach by the European Free Alliance to join their European political group:
‘confirmed that an approach has already been made by EFA and that Sinn Fein are considering their options.’
The EFA is in an arrangement with the Green grouping in Europe as the Greens/EFA. As noted on the politics.ie thread rumours exist that in 2004 SF tried to join this group and were rebuffed and one could speculate that may have been through historical antagonism particularly with the SNP, a situation much changed post-IRA disarmament and their essential disbandment.
This would entail SF leaving the GUE/NGL group that stood shoulder to shoulder with them as they faced very difficult times in Europe over allegations of IRA involvement in the murder of Robert McCartney and the Northern Bank robbery. Joining may also be interpreted as a snub to Batasuna as the constitutional Basque Nationalist Party would become a sister party of sorts.
Now that SF’s most articulate advocate of a left wing position, Eoin O’Broin, is long gone as the party’s Director in Europe maybe a space is opening to review their current arrangements and take a pretty significant step towards the political centre in Europe?
This is all solely based on the recounting of one Welsh elected rep and may come to nothing but is worth watching.
Thanks for that Tom. I’ll try to get a look at it.
Pith,
I doubt the GUE/NGL wants PSF out. Why weaken their group unnecessarily?
Garibaldy,
It may not be a weakening. If Joe Higgins joins the group he will give them a language and a nationality. Bairbre de Brún can add a nationality to that so it is really up to the group whether they want a nationality top up. The real question would be whether Higgins is willing to have SF in the group. Of course it could work the other way around but one can’t help feeling in an either/or situation, Higgins might come out on top.
Not really sure what language Higgins brings that de Brún doesn’t pith. Can you elaborate?
Higgins has not given any indication as to which group he might want to join, and it is far from a foregone conclusion the GUE/NGL would want him. I can’t see them swapping one for the other, especially as De Brún is a known quantity.
Think you miss the political orietntation of GUE/NGL, they do not originate from Trotskyism, and their politics are far from Higgin’s, which are rather mickeymouse, particularly on the national question. They have more in common with the realpolitik of Sinn Fein than they would ever have with the Socialist Party. I can’t see Higgin’s joining GUE/NGL on political/sectarian grounds.
Babeuf,
I suspect that the Socialist Party is in a dilemma here. You can see some of them say the GUE/NGL would be the closest thing to home, but others reluctant to say that. I doubt he’ll end up in the group.
Your comment that Higgins’ politics are far from theirs is accurate, although I’m not sure if your remark about the national question is a suggestion that the GUE/NGL supports the PSF position because of its membership. That’s not the case, but I don’t think you’re suggesting that.
My guess is that Danny Cohn-Bendit will have sent signals to the Nordic Green Left (the sub-group to which SF is attached within the GUE.NGL group) that they should join the Greens/EFA.
My guess is that the EFA will have sent signals (or approaches if you like) to SF about joining EFA.
(This would all fit in very well with the Cohn-Bendit political empire building project in the European Parliament).
My guess is that neither would be actual proposals (possibly for fear of rejection).
My guess is that in the absence of any actual proposals neither will be considered in any way seriously ‘or at all) by either SF or the Nordic Green Left.
My guess is that in the eventuality of actual proposals they would be politely and respectfully rejected.
My guess is that SF will be consulted about whether or not Joe Higgins would be acceptable as a member of the GUE/NGL group.
My guess is that SF will say yes, and that they would welcome his membership.
My guess is that Joe Higgins/Socialist Party will be approached to join the GUE.NGL group.
My guess is that he/they will say yes.
My guess is that many GUE/NGL members will be puzzled about why (with 11.2% of the vote in the 26 counties) there is no SF MEP from that jurisdiction.
My guess is that SF will continue to have good relations with EFA members.
My guess is that EFA members will continue to attend the SF Ard Fheis and will continue to be welcomed there.
My guess is that GUE.NGL members will continue to attend the SF Ard Fheis and will continue to be welcomed there.
My guess that this will not be of the slightest concern to Batasuna one way or t’other, and that they will continue to attend the SF Ard Fheis while also having friends in both GUE/NGL and Greens/EFA.
But I am almost certain that there will continue to be an amount of ill-informed speculation and mischievous comment about such issues on sites such as sluggers
The SNP is a deeply sectarian anti-catholic party that would find real problems convincing its base that any relationship with SF (or any party seemingly linked with Catholicism) is acceptable.
This seems to be a view held among certain Republicans but it’s totally incorrect. The SNP can hardly be said to discriminate against any member of society and indeed the party’s Eileanan Siar/Western Isles MP, Angus Mac Neill, is from the Catholic isle of Barra.
Sinn Féin joining the EFA would be a positive move for the party.
ROCKRIDGE
Spot on about PNV not being part of the EFA in the EU. As you say, their old break away group, Eusko Alkartasuna, who now have little support, are.
Garibaldy,
You are right of course in that they both bring English to the group just as they would each bring one nationality. I would be curious to know whether Irish would count as another language in this context. What I am really interested to know though is whether it is Higgins (a safe bet for GUE apparently) and SF or just one of them.
There are other countries with more than one member organisation. It wouldn’t be a problem. The roots of this group are in the old Communist bloc (where De Rossa sat before 1992) but there is no level of ideological coherence in it at this point and time. Membership is about guaranteeing a left voice and the individual parties a voice as well.
Garibaldy,
I really can’t comprehend why they are saying that, without examing the substance of the GUE/NGL and their own organisation and ideology. I think I give away my lack of warmth for the Socialist Party! No, I wouldn’t suggest the national question is high on the GUE/NGL agenda, but I wouldn’t suggest they don’t take a republican line, it was a bad example. I would obviously welcome Higgin’s in the GUE/NGL grouping, in the hope it might broaden the politics of the Socialist Party and encourage understanding and exchange between ex-cp and cps and that of SF – but unfortunately I can’t see it. I actually despair at Higgin’s in Europe, while admit that he as an admirable TD. Hopefully he will prove me wrong.
With regard SF in GUE/NGL, I know their are rumblings from the less reformist organisations in the GUE/NGL of ‘disappointment’ with SF. And, I would think there is probably quite a lot in common between EFA and the more reformist wing of the GUE/NGL anyway?
Anyway, I would be very disappointed if SF were to leave the grouping, and I think now would be a most inopportune moment for them. I would, however, naturally welcome greater co-operation with SF and the other Nationalist parties, I see no contradiction there, I doubt most of us on the left would.
Oh, and another thing…
My guess is that GUE/NGL will continue to support Irish reunification.
babeuf
“With regard SF in GUE/NGL, I know their are rumblings from the less reformist organisations in the GUE/NGL of ‘disappointment’ with SF”
Which “less reformist organisations”?
And “disappointment” in what way?
Or is this just ill-informed speculation and/or mischievous comment?
Babeuf,
Their sister organisation in Germany is in Die Linke (I’m not sure if their Greek equivalent is involved in the other Greek group) so there are some links there already. I see the grouping as very much a pragmatic alliance, and I think that is how most of the organisations involved see it as well. Higgins was part of a technical group in the Dáil, so I suspect he might ultimately like to join this, but while making clear he has no truck with stalinism etc. It will certainly be harder for him to make anything like the impression he did in the Dáil.
There is a lot of common ground as far as I know between the GUE/NGL and others who are broadly progressive, but I am open to correction. Certainly groups like the Left Party in Sweden have more in common with them now than they do with their former Communist alllies.
I’m sure that Bairbre de Brún will continue to be nice to everybody and form links with as many people as posssible.
On whether people are disappointed with how her party has behaved, Mark has given an insider’s view. I would have some sense of how some of the CPs view them, and that is as people they can certainly work with, but never mistaking them for sharing their politics.
I have been watching the development of this thread as it has moved along with a great deal of interest.
The way the initials of the various, (and to the majority of the public totally unknown fractional and marginal political groupings), were being used suggests that there are some subscribers who live in a world divorced from the reality of most of us share.
A sort of political Pharisee class that gets its rocks off on initials.
But the problem with one of the initial groupings is that few on the other side of the water from Scotland realise how a VERY large amount of SNP support is grounded on the basis that it is not the Labour Party.
The anti-Tory vote in Scotland as it has migrated from the massive blocks of unionised heavy industry and working class supporters of the Labour party has had few options as to where it might settle.
The SNP provided a very active area for the vote to move into.
It had all the benefit of being a prty that was not going to deliver on what it said on its tin m- there was not going to be Scottish independence and the public knew, and still knows exactly that, so a patriotic vote for something different was going to be OK especially if the result was that the chauvinistic Scots could shout ‘Look World we’re not English’ and settle back down to being complaining but complient UK citizens
Just look at the successive SNP slogans about when they would deliver Freedom tacked on to a specific year and ask what has happened to the cry for a referendum to settle the constitutional future in 2010.
Few could predict a better time to raise the electoral Saltaire and summon the vote when the Labour Government is on its knees and waiting for an election to do away with its enduring pain of office.
And where is the impatient demands from the SNP Government in Edinburgh being shouted loudest?
Yeah, we can’t hear it in Scotland either, because the SNP has no notion what it would do if it got it’s wish and actually won the referendum so is not pushing the open door to get one.
Salmond and crew may be the political pirate ship and crew but they are not stupid pirates and will join no grouping or associate with no ideas that could put the calm progress of the good ship SNP in Scottish Parliament at risk.
Greyhound,
I think it’s fair to say that most people who post here take an above average interest in political technicalities than does the average person. That that is as true of you as it is of us is clear from the fact you are posting here in the first place. Not a lot of people could tell you the name of the minister for health. But it’s an important job, and people with an interest in politics outght to know it. Why chide them for doing so? Especially when then derailing the thread with a discussion of the SNP’s support base.
My guess is that Gauche Republicaine is on the money (thanks for coming, btw!). My understanding is that there is sympathy towards SF in the EFA amongst its Spanish members, the European Greens would almost certainly veto it.
in the EFA amongst its Spanish members
I don’t think our Basque, Galician or Catalan friends in the EFA will be too happy with that description Mick!
“The SNP is a deeply sectarian anti-catholic party that would find real problems convincing its base that any relationship with SF (or any party seemingly linked with Catholicism) is acceptable”
I agree with RG.
That view is horseshit. My experience with Scotland is the opposite.
There are many that join SF and find it too left, especially in the south. There is a large grouping in SF that is dogmatically socialist and anyone that is not likewise is viewed with distrust. There are many voters in the South that vote for SF but espouse views that are at opposites to SF policies. Do party members every wonder why there is such difficulties getting members from working class areas. The party is turning in to a grouping of college kid radicals, and that does not make me confident of success in the future.
Gael gan Nire
That is a truism about the left being splintered, esp. in the Republican movement from the Republican Congress to the Sticks, and to a lesser degree Éirigi. For some people Socialism has replaced religion,and as we know there can be no deviation from the truth in religion.