Unionism under the DUP: Firmer, bolder but still much too short sighted…
First of all, one of the things the DUP have miscalculated is that being right about something is never going to be enough. Especially not in a society in which a warm smile and the stale whiff of cordite goes much further than all the earnest work in the world. As we counselled unionism in general back in May 2003:
Ultimately, this is a battle for people and not for land. 1066 and All That tells us that the English Civil War was ‘an extremely memorable struggle between the Cavaliers (Wrong but Romantic) and the Roundheads (Right but Repulsive).’ In future struggles, unionists need to be both right and attractive. For that, a firmer, bolder, more far-sighted unionism will be needed.
By no imaginable measure is the DUP an attractive project to anyone but its core support. For all the protests from within that party, it is still held to be repulsive even by fellow unionis. Putting the blame on some of the liberal biases we’ve seen the media indulge themselves in over the last few weeks misses the point.
Some of those biases have been pretty horrendous. Take, for instance, last week when Gerry Adams gently chided reporter Conor McAuley for not investigating or even reporting in outline a rape victim’s accusations of cover up against two IRA , whose denials (of the unreported allegations) were nevertheless carried by the BBC two days previously.
I’ve heard some plausible reasons why the victim’s side of the story was not covered by the theoretically impartial BBC: sheer cock up is the most credible of them. It sits uncomfortably with the Corporation’s tally ho chase of the First Minister and his wife across the fields of scandal and controversy only the week before.
As Pete outlined in his piece for Belfast Telegraph yesterday, Sinn Fein’s part in this issue of policing and justice has been questionable from the start. The DUP will be given no credit for their firm standing on the murder of Paul Quinn so early on. Nor for the fact that that generous financial deal that Robinson got for Unionism has been continuously discounted too.
Within the Peace Process™ plausible deniability is a concept reserved entirely for dissembling Cavaliers who have a ton real life skeletons (some of them still very much alive) in their cupboards: and not for antsy Roundheads with tendency to tell like it is. You need charm to lie in public and get away with it. Whilst the DUP may have many strong assets, charm is not one of them. Neither are they terribly convincing liars.
Which brings me back to the underlying problem political unionism finds itself returning to. The St Andrews Agreement was supposed to be about the triumph of politics. Ian Paisley’s last great closing move was to force Sinn Fein (along with the decisive backing of Bush’s State Department) to recognise the PSNI. Many in the party may feel the long coda of whether to approve devolution of policing and justice was a card worth playing. But like Sinn Fein’s IRA arms it has become more of a burden the longer they’ve carried it on.
The challenge for any unionist leader remains what it was seven years ago. Do they have the determination to lead? The DUP may have been firmer and bolder than any of their predecessors. But hardly any more far-sighted. When this mess clears, there will be another series of engagements. For all the pious talk of the dangers of going back to war (and the killings), there is little appetite for it in the streets.
Instead, Stormont Castle and Parliament Buildings either await a return of incumbents, or a new dispensation that allows a nationalist party and a unionist party to actually achieve something for their voters instead of constantly looking over their shoulders at whomever is lined up to stab them in the back. As I argued a few weeks ago on the Guardian site, the DUP is checkmated on P&J and will sooner or later have to roll over and concede.
Political unionism as a whole (the UUs and Tories as well as the DUP) has been taught some pretty tough lessons in the last few weeks. It will need to draw the right conclusions and find plausible ways to consolidate under single interest. But it cannot be under the old inward looking Protestant only terms. They need to cultivate friends and influence more than they need to piss off even more of those nice liberal ladies and gentlemen of the press.
And next time they find themselves in the right, maybe someone somewhere (other than the odd disreputable blog) will actually believe that they mean what they say for once.
MU
the other problem with the baker(loo.. ed) line, and why it always ends up in the proverbial lavatory is that it doesn’t factor in the seismic shifts that key events in irish history remind us of.
Whenever a treaty is made between republicans and unionists it only lasts as long as the next upheaval;
The equality-driven agenda of SF/SDLP is one supported by the Britsh/Irish and American Gov’ts.
Like tectonic plates rubbing against each other something has to give, and nothing, as you point out, ever written in stone or paper survives.
A new testament is continually taking shape out of an old testament,
in fact the O/T is periodically torn asunder to promulagate the new dialectic.
The inexorable logic and process of this is to firmly underpin equal rights as the determining factor;
Furthermore I wouldn’t be suprised if the final treaty/testament is a united ireland signed up to by all,
The tectonic plates keep shifting and rumbling in order to bring this about.
The Baker/Fealty line can never pin down this process, as the chains keep breaking.
So it would be better to analyse ireland from the point of view of how close she is to freedom, at least there one can adopt a consistent line that factors in the seismic upheavals we’ve seen in the last 2 weeks.
did I just read Slugger call out the BBC on biased reporting?
I’m sure the agenda setters in at Ormeau Avenue choked on their lemon juice.
“firmly underpin equal rights”
That’s just a SF propaganda tag, percy. The PRM’s approach to rights is well know and has been well catalogued.
percy, that’s why we have the comment zone…
“In future struggles, unionists need to be both right and attractive” thread pdf link
Unionists will never be right or attractive to Nationalists. It is about land; it’s about towns too, street by street and house by house, whether the attrition is high level or low.
indeed mick, and its great to be here
Nevin,
sometimes the actions of SF are not matched by their words;
but that doesn’t dismiss the sound basis of equality-driven agendas.
civil rights and a rights-based culture is firmly rooted in western pluralist societies.
norn iron is playing catch-up
If Robinson miscalculated, it was in failing to grasp the importance that the security services place in getting as many of the Shinners’ supporters onside as possible in the endorsement of the police force, thereby more effectively isolating those within the ‘republican’ community that are militantly opposed to British rule. It is classic ‘divide and conquer’ stuff. The Shinners are very useful to the security services in that regard, so HMG was not going to let that endorsement be postponed indefinitely in the interests of one local political party. The Shinners have been handled very skilfully and have duly handled their own supporters skilfully, since they now see it as a ‘victory’ to be allowed to assist in the internal administration of British policing when it is a clear defeat of their previous “Her Majesty’s forces of occupation” position.
So where does Robinson go from here? He basically has two choices: sacrifice himself for his party or sacrifice his party for himself. If he cuts a deal on P&J under duress then he will split his party and incur the wrath of its voters, effectively ending his political career. If he doesn’t cut a deal then the State will declare that he breached the Ministerial Code and will likely pull a few others skeletonised rabbits out of a 40-year-old hat, effectively ending his political career.
Mick,
To suggest that repeating the same line that backs one party’s view and doesn’t put the issue in it’s full context will not be reasonably interpeted as partisan is a touch disingenuous. I dont think a majority of Slugger reader’s would share your view.
Cross dressing perhaps, faulty memory no.
It would make for an interesting thread – a tell us how we did on this issue, a Slugger Police and Justice SWOT?
Scaramoosh,
the mentioning of my non-denominational cattle (who like most of the sensible people of Ulster are totaly oblivious to the see-sawing above in Stormont) who today opportunistically took to the Queen’s highway was simply a reflection of my rustic Ulster converstaional writing style.
non-denominational cattle moderate unionist! que?
nonsense says Paisley.
“Our people may be British, but our cows are Irish”
Right after a few weeks as posing as a ‘moderate unionist’, we have an admission, of sorts. Claiming to be one and actually being quite another. Which class of disingenuity would to put that in?
And to coin a phrase: “f*ck the line”. All parties get roasted on this site, ask around! But we do not do it gratuitously.
Only for the crap they really get up to. If a politician/party is telling untruths about something, then it is best to point out the obvious.
If they keep doing it, it is likely to get repeated ad nauseum. I really wish they would not do it. And really wish SF would not do in particular.
Why SF in particular Mick?
“rights-based culture is firmly rooted in western pluralist societies”
Disregarding the crimes against the plain English campaign, what is a pluralist society exactly?
The only clear suggestion that immediately springs to mind is artificial power-sharing, and how many other Western governments have that?
You’re right in a sense though – Norn Iron is playing catch up – and to prevent further falling behind we require an alternative to this brain dead form of ‘government’
Mick,
I’m not so sure that SF has lied about St.Andrews; They went into power-sharing in good faith, thinking that by supporting the PSNI, they could expect reciprocal good faith from the DUP for the timing of devolution of P&J.
yes they were wrong-footed
yes perhaps naive in trusting your opponent vis-a-vis the game theory in a long peace
But they had “right” on their side, in the spirit of the agreement, which is a view the 2 Gov’ts share.
and if I understand you correctly about over-playing one’s hand, the DUP by holding “tight” have been out-manouvred.
st.etienne: pluralism: tolerant and diverse?
Mallie says the deal is done.
Unanimous support according to PR
Mick,
“Which class of disingenuity would to put that in?”
You admit to yours and I’ll admit to mine.
I’m off to the hen house as there appears to be some sort of ruckus out in the yard.
DUP MLAs back deal with Sinn Fein
Percy, Norn Iron isn’t playing catch up; it continues to play tug-of-war on the border question.
“The DUP have said they have reached a basis for deal” BBC
Do they now take it to their membership for endorsement or not?
agreed Nevin, but only on the basis of “equality” can the border question be addressed.
Nationalists have been playing catch-up for 80 years, just to be heard,recognised and responded to.
Unionism has finally agreed to move forward on an equal basis.
So although for the time being the Union is safe,
it can now be challenged openly and debated properly as mutual respect is now enshrined.
If anyone has a spare sofa to put me up pls email me
Percy, Nationalists aren’t interested in equality; they want a United Ireland and have done so for much more than 80 years. Meanwhile the blether about rights and equality will continue ….
Nevin, I dispute that assertion that nationalists are not interested in equality.
But no matter as “equality” is the only means of achieving a united ireland.
Nevin, Mr. Robinson said they will be signing papers in the morning, so I suppose Gregory’s promise regarding selling it to the community takes place after they commit to it.
st e,
Because they more often find themselves on the wrong end of the sh**ty stick than any of the party because of what I would class as poor leadership decisions. Let’s not forget that they lucked out here with the Robinson affair.
They’ve ridden their luck well in NI (in the teeth of real shananigans from the ‘securocrats’ as well as the made up stuff), but in conventional political space like the Republic, such poor decisions have not served them well.
Kevsterino. You just beat me to that one. I expect Gregory will now feel the urgent need to come back to Nolan for more humiliating ‘contextualising’ and explaining how you sign up for a deal, then trying to consult with your voters so they don’t desert you.
‘Real’ and ‘securocrats’ largely do not belong in the same sentence.
The comparison with RoI is correct insofar as there is a marked difference, but SF has been reliant, like the DUP, on a mixture of a core vote compliant enough to believe whatever nonsensical ills they speak of about the other side and a thoroughly misplaced doublethink that believes the only way for ‘pluralist’ (read – segregated) agreement is for a settlement based around polarised grandstanding. The media is guilty of wetting thirst for the later just as much as the electorate is for resigning themselves to it.
‘lucked out with the Robinson affair’ – I’ve often wondered these past few weeks how something like that can remain untouched for a decade or so and only outs itself while everyone’s home for Xmas, and with Irisgate days down the road…