A United Ulster
Is now the time for the North’s Unionists to embark on a redesign of the political relations between these islands?
I had a fascinating conversation the other day with a man of impeccable Unionist pedigree: Southern Unionist as it happens. His father and uncles had been actively involved in the struggle against Home Rule, active in the arms importation and training sense. What surprised me was his description of their deep and bitter anger at the decision by Edward Carson (a Dublin man, to his shame!) and others to so readily agree to the partition of Ireland. Leaving thousands of Southern Unionists to their fate.
But why were they angry? Hadn’t the thousands who signed Ulster’s Solemn League and Covenant less than ten years before partition at least saved (most of) Ulster for the Empire? That’s what annoyed them: since when had ‘Unionists’ become ‘Separatists’? The same Covenant began by stating that:
Being convinced in our consciences that Home Rule would be disastrous to the material well-being of Ulster as well as of the whole of Ireland… (my emphasis)
The essence of Unionism back then as surely meant the union of the British Isles as the Irish Republic declared in 1916 meant the whole of Ireland. Partition, of course, left neither Unionists nor Republicans with what they had originally wanted.
But my conversation got me thinking. The decimation of the Ulster Unionist party in the recent UK general election points to a sea-change in the political configuration of unionism in Northern Ireland. Many within the broader unionist community are engaged in re-imagining a future direction for unionism in light of these changes. It’s time for unionism to look outward, as it has been put recently.
So here’s my proposal. Why don’t unionists take the opportunity to begin negotiating a new, permanent political re-configuration for these islands, starting now? They have the double advantage of retaining a veto on any referendum on a United Ireland, and a conservative government – their natural ally – in power in Westminster (albeit in coalition). They could negotiate from a position of relative strength (i.e.: relative, say, to ten years time when they might comprise a minority of voters in Northern Ireland).
What would they negotiate? In no particular order, here are some suggestions:
- a United Ireland on their terms: including quotas for unionist TDs
- a separate Ulster Authority – comprising the nine counties perhaps, and thereby atoning for the ‘sin’ against so many unionists in Monaghan and Donegal
- with separate spending and taxation powers the re-entry of the Republic of Ireland into the Commonwealth
- a permanent inter-governmental secretariat between the new Irish (32 county) and British governments with guaranteed Unionist representation to co-ordinate relevant policy issues (especially vis-a-vis the European Union)
- Membership of NATO for the Republic of Ireland with closer cooperation between defence forces on these islands
- The recognition of unionist culture – including the Orange Order – for the purposes of equality legislation etc
- the rotation of the presidency of Ireland between former Republic of Ireland and former Northern Ireland representatives (though we sort of have that now, come to think of it…)
These are just my thoughts for starters – I’m sure I’ve left off a few key aspirations on the part of Unionists – but it’s an indication of the type of negotiated package I believe they could demand if they were of a mind to do so.
And who knows: it might even be feasible to have it all sorted by Friday, 28th September 2012 – the centenary of the Ulster Solemn League and Covenant. Queen Elizabeth might even pop over to give the new arrangement her blessings. Even Sir Edward would approve I’m sure.
Ah come on now Gerard… yes southern unionists still feel a wee bit pissed-off at the constitutional happenings of the 1910s/1920s – but sure so do many people.
To try and wangle the legitimate concerns of today’s Irish-British minority in the RoI into some kind of argument for northern Unionists to give up and merge into a supposedly ‘united’ Ireland is, to say the least, unconvincing.
Most southern unionists have the same views as most other people on the island of Ireland – an aspiration for a shared future built on mutual respect (and I suppose specifically for southern u’s one which at least acknowledges their own minority role as a small but ongoing 3-5% or so cultural minority in the RoI)
Rather than forcing the northern unionists anywhere it’s far better, as Taoiseach Brian Cowan alluded to, to build a future where both of the island’s traditions can respect each other and acknowledge each other’s (highly colourful) historical story. That’s the real shared future.
From unionism’s point of view, such a shared future means building a Northern Ireland within the UK where the nationalist tradition is fully respected.
From nationalism’s point of view, such a shared future means, as An Taoiseach (and President MacAleese and others…) truly respecting unionism – certainly in terms of recognising the ongoing southern unionist tradition in the south and also in continuing to build on the already positive relationships with the DUP in the north.
Before partition we were all Irish, that is everyone on this island. After partition we were all Irish, that is everyone on this island. What is the difference between southern and northern Korean people, they are all Korean, just as we are all Irish. It is just that some would like to be foreigners from Britain.
You need to get out of the 6 counties more oftenffs,I left Ireland 30 years ago to live in Canada , a country where the population is made up of people from every part of the globe, practicing a myriad of beliefs and customs that add to the fabric of a totally harmonious and wonderful society,Canada works because of respect for other peoples’ rights and an absence of xenophobia.It’s ridiculous to hear that someone from the northern 6 counties could actually consider someone who lives a couple of miles away albeit over the invisible land border to be a foreigner that they couldn’t identify with.I think some reflection and honesty is required to find out what it really is about “southerners” that really repels you,methinks it’s just the usual laager unionist mentality of “we are the people” snydrome.The same mentality that lets you have more in common with the South African Boer or Israeli than a harmless average chap from Monaghan or Donegal.
Black mail the Republic into the Commonwealth. The day that happens is a day when Ireland runs red again, no one would stand for that and it’s a sham demand.
You had me interested until Portrush!! God thats a horrible place!
“Catholic tribe” – lol, sure smells like bigotry in here.
45 years ago I was first told ‘they’re going to breed us out’.
It’s a myth. Both communities have roughly kept pace with the other and both have lost large numbers to emigration. Plus ROI is no West Germany!
But the other flaws in the argument are:
1. ROI can’t afford two public sectors.
2. There will be huge redundancies
3. Turkeys don’t vote for Xmas
It’s a bit like the Aussies and removing the monarchy. They all claim they are republicans but when it comes to the vote…
That extra 1 is a long way off UNLESS there is a genuine seachange in what constitutes being Irish. The current SF vision has few takers up the Shankill whatever GA says.
the north has never been further from unravelling. All sides have a vested interest in maintaining the current progress.
No its not. You also assume that all Catholics are nationalists. In past polls and referenda they aren’t but there seems a higher correlation between protestants and the union.
50% +1 isn’t impossible but its highly unlikely. Even more so in current economic circumstances.
What is Unionist Culture or Irish culture? There’s a lot of simplistic stereotyping going on here
Who is talking blackmail? Just because you don’t want it doesn’t mean the majority might not.
“the prejudices of the Protestant and Unionist minority”
Pejorative? Moi?
“Before partition we were all Irish”
dear Battle
Saying it don’t make it so. You are deluding yourself
Ok….. you hang around waiting for it ….but bring a flask
I am going to stop posting on this one. This is just too easy and unedifying. Like poking caged rats with a stick.
Must be the weather
Agreed
Dear Cynic
On a previous tread you said that a third of all republicans were agents of the terrorist MI5. I asked you the question, does that mean that one in three republican bombings or shootings were carried out by the British state?
Saying it don’t make it so. You are deluding yourself!
I am going to stop posting on this one. This is just too easy and unedifying. Like poking caged rats with a stick.
Must be the weather!
Dear Battle
I will make an exception for you. Look on it as missionary work.
On the post you refer to, another republican poster had said that all of SF were Touts. I jokingly said no, only about a third of them. Yes…it was a joke. Humour. Look it up.
In truth is was probably nearer 10%. And yes, that may mean that there was collusion between the state and republican killers. It also means that by the end of the campaign, outside perhaps South Armagh, PIRA were effectively neutered. If their attacks were stopped they were avoided or they spent that much time internally hunting for touts that they became dysfunctional
Of course now we are in a new era. I am sure that many of those who were working for the Brits have been decommissioned or passed on. There are probably far fewer informers in the modern Republican Movement.
Honest.
I mean it.
I really do
Tribalism is what you have when you don’t have a cohesive nation within a state. NI actually belongs in the East, with its constituent unit being the tribe, and not in the West, which is has the nation as its constituent unit.
Not that the organisational unit of the tribe is uncivilised – just primitive, visceral and ancient, having being replaced in the West by the modernity of nations and their states. Tribes and their fiefdoms are given a special place in NI within the GFA, with the constituent unit of the nation being formally replaced with two separate nations/tribes who must compete/cooperate with each other within a state/territory, with the hope being that the two tribes might merge into one cohesive constituent unit if the elders of each tribe manage to share the tent wherein they jointly administrate the shared tribal territories.
The religion of each tribe becomes more important to it within this context because it serves to delineate it from the other tribe, assuring it that is isn’t losing an essential part of itself by the confusing cooperation between the tribe’s elders that as replaced the previous feuds. Hence you see the tribe’s elders offering their “allegiance” to the idols of the tribe rather than to the Big Tent. Much like Islam has become more important in the East as the territories of the tribes were violated by foreign states. Islam becomes a constant that plays into the tribal mind-set perfectly, delivering in the post-tribal world the security and certainty that the tribe is used to.
poke poke
Poke Poke Poke
The problem with all these ideas is that they are liable to please neither one side nor the other.
From a Unionist point of view, it is about as attractive as an offer that, if you agree to being shot, you will be wrapped in the Union Jack and buried with full military honours, in a British adminstered cemetery.
Turgon says it all with the words Unionists want to remain part of the UK because they are British
This is of course exactly what they are not, and what they do not want. If you felt you were British, would you not yearn for Britain? What British people mean mean when they say they are British is, get me out of this bloody bog and carry me home to dear old Blighty, well away from these eternally bickering Paddies and their stupid parades. What Unionists mean is, we want to be in charge. In Ireland. Offering them all the facilties that would satisfy genuinely British people will not succeed.
From a Nationalist point of view, it is equally obnoxious. Protestants are well on the way to becoming a less significant minority than Poles: why should they need special treatment? And the Commonwealth functions as a giant begging bowl for the third world. Why would Ireland want to assume colonialist guilt and have Rwandans turning up on the doorstep expecting to be educated and accommodated? And if you have a British Commonwealth of Nations, what about an Irish Commonwealth, with countries like the US and Canada, to which Ireland has genuine ties formed by migration?
Paddy we will have to sort this out between us, There is no other option, a united ulster it has to be.
long term option i mean to say
Go Back PaddyReilly, to Ballyjamesduff, maybe they will listen to the crap you spout down there.
Drumlin Rock
Me thinks you spew some crap yourself. Engage!
Does that include Ballyjamesduff?
A united 9 county Ulster?
Disbelieving in the prevailing political lie is, I suppose, likely to attract abuse.
A foreigner, according to the dictionary, is a person of a different language and culture.
It’s fairly obvious when someone is a foreigner, like French or something. They talk differently, they cook differently, they have a completely different mindset.
Are you telling me that the residents of the southern side of the Pettigoe road, Pettigoe, County Fermanagh, are so completely different to those on the northern side that you can tell them apart immediately?
It’s a bit like the word Roman. There are (at least) two meanings to this word. One, the correct one, is an inhabitant of the City of Rome. Another, more doubtful, one is a member of the Catholic Church.
Now I may genuflect in the same way that an inhabitant of the City of Rome does if I enter a church, but am I the same thing? No, obviously I am nothing like a true Roman, you can tell by my appalling accent and deficient vocabulary when I (attempt to) speak Italian, my dietary habits, and no end of ways.
If I were to declare that my true countrymen were the citizens of Rome, and the people who lived on the same island as me were foreigners unless they genuflected like me, I would be instantly identified as a basket-weaver. Substitute the two kinds of British and you will fall into the same absurdity, but you will have the strength of numbers to fall back on.
Ulster Protestants of the Unionist persuasion are not a nation, not a tribe, but at best a faction.
A minority, as they have always been, fact!
“And if you have a British Commonwealth of Nations, what about an Irish Commonwealth, with countries like the US and Canada, to which Ireland has genuine ties formed by migration?”
Not a bad idea actually. However, the history of the ad hoc organisations that have tried to capitalise on the Irish diaspora is that they have been heavily infiltrated by agents the British state in order to ensure that they didn’t have any overt political agenda that might promote the offending concept of a united sovereign Irish nation – with the offence being that such promotion would require the removal of British sovereignty. Hence the leadership of Sein Fein sent one of their British agents, Denis Donaldson, to America to ensure that the power of the diaspora to challenge British national interests was neutralised with such political support being confined to groups that supported the constitutional status of Northern Ireland while pretending to oppose it, rather than directed at demands for a withdrawal of the British state. Other groups have been similarly neutralised, confining their roles to economic or cultural or, where political, in support of the formal rejection of the former right to national self-determination by the non-sovereign Irish nation in the now legitimised and no longer constitutionally disputed sovereign British territory of Northern Ireland.
The Commonwealth is now meaningless. It was an attempt by the UK to retain some of the financial advantages originally obtained from colonial exploitation. It has been surpassed by other trading blocs.
Long live Republics.
I prefer the monarchy myself,… but how to reconcile that with being primarily “Irish” and maybe just a little bit British?
Oh to have a simple and uncomplicated national identity!! Woe is me.
The funny thing about what Gerard is arguing is that it is, effectively, a mirror image of what nationalism has already obtained within the UK. Sinn Fein has dropped most of it’s traditional beliefs in exchange for (over)generous provision in the area of culture/language and involvement in government and administration. In fact, the party enjoys a level of access and attention in London that it would likely not obtain from Dublin, especially not from an Irish government it would compete with directly in elections. It is able to apply pressure on the British through the Americans in a way that would not be possible under reunification.
So if the present “Northern Ireland with lots of baubles to keep nationalists happy” scenario is not a satisfactory permanent solution to nationalist, why would a nationalist really believe that “Republic of Ireland with lots of baubles to keep unionists happy” would be any more satisfactory to a unionist ?
Given all the progress that has been made in NI in recent years I’m a bit lost to understand what the case is for reunification these days. I can see benefits to reunification alright, especially with economic cohesion, but there are also obvious downers – an obvious one would be the abolition of the Northern Ireland NHS which would not be sustainable alongside the healthcare model presently operated in the RoI.
It’s referenda I think. As I recall from Latin class:
bellum bellum bellum, belli belli bello, bella bella bella, bellarum bellis bellis
Sorry, no.
“Bellum” is a noun and declines as you say, but “referendum” is a gerund, so plural: “referendums”.
United Ireland yes within time, but A Unionist Inspired United Ireland
i feel Sick, i would rater stay in the United Kingdom
than have a Unionist Inspired United Ireland or an independence 6 Counties whereas the Current Assembly and Executive are keeped the Way they Are, with a Written Constitution, and the Assembly Members Would Act Collectfully as the Head of State like Switzerland, then no Body Gets what they asked for but nobody Losses either, the Unionist aint ruled from Dublin and the Republicans aint ruled from London,
There is such a thing as a British republican, it’s not an overly controversial position, and I’m guessing that more than a few people would be in favour of the idea.
In 2008 the monarchy in Nepal was abolished in a remarkably civilised and non-sensationalist way, perhaps Britain could learn a thing or two from them.
Gerard,
I admire your cahonas for suggesting just a thing but I think there would remain a few problems, despite your eliquent arguements. Fair play anyway.
Perhaps in the future someone might consider making a case for the Republic coming back into the Union
Would that solve the problem? no that’s right it wouldn’t…
VH
Something similar was discussed on Vance’s ATW a while back and someone pointed out that were this the case then in all probability devolved administration would move to Dublin (Dublin rule by the back door!) and it was likely that there would be more than a few people in NI that wouldn’t be too happy about that!
Orangefest?
An irish man is irish.
An english man is English.
A scottish man is Scottish.
A welsh man is welsh.
A Northern Ireland man from a unionist background is? Northern Irish/ British/ Ulster Scottish / confused.