Monday, September 17, 2007
Ahern confirms Fianna Fail to organise in NI…
BERTIE Ahern has confirmed that Fianna Fail will organise in Northern Ireland, following speculation. According to PA, the Taoiseach today told a party meeting in Co Wicklow: “I am announcing that Fianna Fail the Republican Party, will now move to develop a strategy for organising on a 32 county basis. This moves reflects the dramatic changes we have seen across the island.” Foreign Affairs Minister Dermot Ahern is leading the charge north, which seems to indicate FF is taking this seriously. While potential partners the SDLP appear nonchalant - with a spokesperson saying that “the SDLP will be ready for the challenge or opportunity of such a future adjustment when it ripens” - you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be some seriously concerned members of that party right now. The deputy leader, for example, is (or was) strongly opposed to partnership with FF.
Belfast Gonzo @ 02:53 PM
Rory (South Derr)
“Yes of course I am right” Just keep repeating this phrase three times a day for the next, say 50 years.
If you don’t you could end up just like those loyalist bigots you love so much.
Posted by on Sep 17, 2007 @ 10:42 PMThere are not a million protestants in the north, there are approximately 900,000. There are approximately 800,000 nationalists. The difference in the vote between nationalists and unionists is much less, around 40,000-50,000 and narrowing. N. Ireland is either stabilising or heading for civil war, depending on what way you look at it.
It’s interesting that unionists are prepared to consider allowing nationalists some limited exercise of power within the jurisdiction of westminster only when demographic parity approaches, as it is currently and only as part of a mechanism creating a precedent where minority support is required for the exercise of such power - this precedent is useful to unionists in the future - the near future indeed - when they become a minority and use it to justify exercising a level of power beyond their democratic numbers. Unionists have agreed to this only after exercising absolute rule for 80 years without any compromise and only at the last moment as their numbers decline to minority status in the coming years. As such the deal, while being presented as a wonderful resolution of a long-running conflict, is in fact a weak deal for nationalism. It relies as ever on the unionist assertion of threat as its final ‘banker’ in negotiations to secure a position greater than it has a democratic right to do so, just as with the creation of n. ireland in the first place. It would seem this aspect of our history is not going to go away anytime soon and all of ireland will remain subject to these forces.
Furthermore there is the question of what, when parity is insisted upon by unionism even when it is a minority, will be in it for the british. I mean vis a vis their continuing interest in retaining a foothold in ireland for strategic reasons, something hardly ever analysed or commented upon but which is the foundation of all that has occurred over the last century and the three centuries preceding it. It is good to remember what the fate of europe would have been in 1944 if ireland had been a strong, well populated and militarily formidable nation which was allied to germany or at least disinclined to be favourable to britain. The outcome would have been a starving and militarily under-resourced britain and no D-Day. As we know, the british began to take care of the possibility of this scenario from the 16th century and again in 1921 by retaining a bridgehead on the island and by ensuring the cohesion of the identity of their colony and colonists that would be of use to them in the decades to come.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 01:11 AM[cont’d]
So now we come to today, where many would have you believe that such considerations have miraculousy evaporated after 400 years, yet those same people are generally utterly bereft of anything that might be called a convincing or in-depth analysis of the nature of the strategies pursued previously or even today by NATO et al. Their constant refrain that britain no longer has any strategic interest in ireland appears to be based on little more than the old dictum that if you say something often enough people will start to believe it regardless of its actual truth or falsehood.
And so this brings us to Fianna Fáil moving into the north of ireland, allegedly. Firstly, show me the meat. I’d say it’ll be a long time coming. Secondly if it does come, galcially, it may well do so as part of a ‘council of the isles’ approach; i.e., Home Rule by the back door. This links in with what I said above about the use of unionism to extract political concessions from nationalism above and beyond any democratic rights it may have to do so, on the basis of the precedent created in the GFA that even minorities have equal rights with majorities to decide issues equally.
In other words the GFA, the British-Irish council and even Fianna Fáil moving north may be as much about bringing the whole of ireland closer to westminster than it has to do with uniting the island under the democratic mandate of nationalism. It may be as much about tying us back again in under the influence of britain - the entire island - as it is about regaining control of our country again after centuries of having our rights overruled by a self-serving nation and its planted colonists. It is interesting in this context to note that the GFA and the British-Irish council operate as bi-lateral international treaties - they do not fall under the aegis of the European Union even though we are constantly told that it is the evolution of the EU that is creating the post-nationalist environment for the resolution of this conflict.
The british, who remain outside the euro and who may not necessarily join it, are militarily, culturally and economically allied to the americans. The americans run NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Ireland controls flight access to britain and northern europe from the atlantic and north america. Ireland flanks britain. Whoever controls ireland controls access to britain and whoever controls britain controls atlantic access to northern europe. Ireland is not strategically unimportant.
Therefore why are we allowing unionism to dictate a political structure that favours them above their numbers and which is based ultimately, as ever, on their threat of force? Why have we agreed to such structures as bi-lateral international agreements outside the terms of the european union? What will occur if Ahern really does take his party up north and involve the whole of the island in such structures balanced in favour of a minority against the democratic rights of a majority and carried out within the jurisdiction of westminster and subject to its authority?
‘Friendly’ latterday Home Rule structures compromising our independence due to the threats of a small minority and carried on outside of the umbrella of the european union that’s what, all wrapped up in such a way as to make us, the Irish, think it’s a great thing altogether and sure why wouldn’t we be happy about it?
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 01:13 AM“In other words the GFA, the British-Irish council and even Fianna Fáil moving north may be as much about bringing the whole of ireland closer to westminster than it has to do with uniting the island under the democratic mandate of nationalism. It may be as much about tying us back again in under the influence of britain - the entire island - as it is about regaining control of our country again after centuries of having our rights overruled by a self-serving nation and its planted colonists.” - Harry
Sightly off-topic, but excellent post, Harry. Perfidious Albion, alas. I’m deeply suspicious about an ulterior agenda to compromise Irish sovereignty or allow another state any influence within Ireland that could lurk under the guise of pacifying Unionists within a United Ireland. Those who dismiss such concerns as paranoia lack an understanding of how long term strategic aims influence events, and seem to lack knowledge of the intelligence agencies further such agendas. It concerns me that Irish people could be, for example, bounced into the Commonwealth or British monarchy unwittingly, as such a move could be easily sold to them by an agenda-laden media as ‘post-nationalism, pluralism, demonstration of parity of esteem, progressive thinking, etc’ when in reality it is simply manipulation of one countries national interests to the advantage of another. On the other hand, there is a real danger of civil war if any such attempt was made to diminish Irish sovereignty or national interests by the Irish state acting on behalf of the treacherous interests of another state, so it’s unlikely, I suspect, that such would pass the people by referendum even if a media that is subservient to the hidden agenda proffered it forcefully, or, as it does with other agendas, proffer them with subtle propaganda. Irish national interests and sovereignty must not be compromised, and British interests must not be brought into Ireland via the backdoor.Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 06:48 AMWriting as a unionist , i.e. someone who thinks membership of the UK is in the best economic interests of the people of Northern Ireland, I think that the current situation with the DUP, UUP and Conservatives all seeking the same unionist votes is not in the best interests of unionists. If Labour and the Lib Dems were to organise properly in Northern Ireland and stand for election I think we could safely do without the UUP and the DUP as their members could split into their natural parties as they do in GB. The introduction of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail would also remove Sinn Fein and the SDLP.
I would have thought those 5 parties would find natural partners amongst each other to form fairly strong coalitions to run the affairs of Northern Ireland. This would then give all of us the position of being British while at the same time being Irish as both governments would have elected members in Northern Ireland.
I have no cultural reasons for looking towards the UK, I feel as happy in Dublin (apart from the prices) as I do in London, New York, Paris or any other capital city of the world, I am not a monarchist, I am not an Orangeman, I am also an atheist. Some of those facts may set me apart from the average unionist but I think there are many who believe as I do and that what will achieve the best outcome for our children and grandchildren is all that really matters to most people in the end.So I will work to see the end of the local parties and the expansion of the other parties in the belief that having both Governments represented here by the choice of the people is the best way forward and is one that everyone will be able to live with and will offer the best outcome for future generations.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 06:54 AMDiluted Orange
Former terrorists being involved in Government makes a welcome change from despotic sectarian anti-democrats running an apartheid like regime for 50 years.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 06:55 AM“I hope Enda is watching this and is preparing FG for a trek up north too.”
There’s always been differences between FF & FG on the national question - one is how realistic a united Ireland is. People keep mentioning Austin Currie as a FG leaning SDLPer - when was he last active in the North. John Cushnahan is a better example of the FG mindset - the Alliance Party
My prediction is that FG and Alliance will remain restricted to the South & North respectively and that some ardent Redmondite SDLPers will defect to Alliance. A couple of SDLP MLAs will defect to Labour. Fianna Fail will absorb the vast majority of the SDLP and even more of their votes.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 06:59 AMOILibhear Chromaill
“apartheid like regime”? Get real NI pre-1969 was no South Africa not matter how much Gerry and Martin try to convince you otherwise- just so they can put some sort of credible slant on their role in 35 years of death and destruction.
If you think that it’s so much better in NI under a SF-DUP coalition then maybe you should look around to see if the symptoms of ‘apartheid’ have disappeared or are likely too? i.e. Kids going to different shcools according to their religion, communities living in different areas according to their religion or just the overwhelming air of mistrust between Prods and Catholics that still persists almost 10 years after the GFA was signed.
If only for the fact that FF might bring a fresh perspective to the problems in NI and potentially remove one part of the ugly, tribal DUP-SF equation in the running of our affairs I welcome their decision to expand. All we need now is for some other party to take over the DUP’s mantle and we might be half way to ‘real’ peace.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 07:15 AMIf FF come north it will be good for the brown envelope industry. Buy shares while you can, you are bound to make a killing. The property developers in must be licking their lips!
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 07:36 AMWill FF be having a tent at Down Royal?
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 07:44 AMDubliner and Harray, you are paranoid. The British have been trying to get out of Ireland since the 1870’s. The location of the recently announced spy facilities in the North hint at a real geo-poltical strategy. Who on earth would place a spy facility there?? Unless of course they thought that it would someday be lying outside of their national territory - rules for spying on your own citizens do not exist for facilities based outside of your national borders.
Jobs for Northern Ireland my ass. Its a treaty port for days to come.
Frustrated Democrat, Lab/LibDem/Con running in the North? Not going to happen. They want out, not in. Its unfortunate, and I’m sorry to say it, but you’re being hung-out to dry.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 07:56 AMSlug,
‘So in your response ‘2’ are you arguing that FF’s financial corruption WAS an important contributor to Ireland’s economic growth? If not, then how are the Irish electorate ‘sophisticated’ for reasoning so?’
Not just Ireland, but every successful economy - corruption was an element that greased the wheels.
I can’t make sense of your second question. I can only conclude you don’t understand what I meant by being sophisticated.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:03 AM‘And every jeer you throw at Unionists delays that day.’
Quite right, Paid, and one would have to wonder if that was the purpose of stating his “beliefs”. TR*cough*OLL
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:08 AM“Not just Ireland, but every successful economy - corruption was an element that greased the wheels.”
smcgiff, what comic books do you read your political economics from?
Compare Switzerland to Italy. The politics you’re talking are Nigerian - and even they know to cut it out! Just correlate the onset of the boom with the drive for tribunials. The tribunials are to Ireland what the truth commission is to South Africa.
Curruption greases no wheels. It undermines the stability of business and warps good governance to the bad. Really, you’re talking rubbish, just give up.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:16 AMHarry,
can’t disagree with virtuality anything you wrote above. But look at it from their point of view for a moment.Of course Britain has a strategic interest in Ireland, it would be a dereliction of its duty to its people if it didn’t try and ensure it had a strong degree of control over its western flank.
This interest isn’t going to wane in the future and the Irish people are also going to have to be a little more honest about what we think of the whole thing.
We are quite content to sit between Britain and the US and use the stability of this geographic location to grow our economy while not paying a red cent towards the defence of our nation.
Ireland is essentially defenceless and has singularly failed to make the hard call on how were are going to address this issue.
Why? Because we know that Britain or the US would never allow Ireland to become a “security threat”.
The simple truth is that any coherent and meaningful defence policy for Ireland going forward will have to involve either Britain or the US and most likely both.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:21 AMI’m not sure where some of this is coming from, but I think it would be wise hold fire on the futuring until we see the colour of Bertie’s money (pun not particularly intended).
Some of you seem intent on building creatively on Reg’s ‘hand grenade’ metaphor, but surely this move will only work if FF can move to decisively into the SDLP space? To do that it will need to display the kind of ruthless steel that thus far we’ve only seen from SF and DUP in Northern Ireland.
The SDLP, as we’ve known it, is finished: primarily because the Hume project is now complete. There is now a huge vacuum awaiting a new occupant.
SF can still make marginal gains, but I suspect the rump of the remaining SDLP votes (and a large number who have simply stopped voting) will never go across to SF, in precisely the same way that some UUP hardline anti Belfast Agreement voters would never have voted DUP under any circumstances.
The news for SF may therefore be both good and bad:
- Good in that with a trenchant, well organised 32 county partner, there is a greater chance of maximising nationalist votes (the biggest hole in the demographic theory is growing middle class Nationalist apathy) in any future border referendum.
- Bad, because these guys are every bit as ruthless and as well funded as they are themselves. Not to mention that if FF effect critical mass of the SDLP vote (and others) in NI, their 32 county credentials will far outweigh that of their erstwhile Northern Irish rivals.
Whither then?
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:26 AMSmcgiff, my second question was “if not”, i.e. if you didn’t think that corruption was important in ROI’s economic success. Since you do claim that FF corruption was important in ROI economic success, you didn’t need to answer that part.
Thus, although you say corruption is “not ok” you hold the view that (i) corruption is an important contributor to economic growth in advanced economies, (ii) that FF’s corruption is important explanatory factor in the ROI’s growth, and (iii) that the ROI electorate’s backing of FF is because they have internalised (ii) and are voting positively for corruption because it stimulates economic growth.
To close my contribution on this let me say what I think. I do not agree with (i) or indeed (ii). Given this (iii) could not follow.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:26 AMIt is now clear, if you want a united Ireland (truly united, in the way John Hume stated), you must vote FF. There is no longer any point in republicans voting for SF or anyone else. They cannot deliver unity of any type. Ever.
To those unionists who have been thinking of voting tactically to keep SF out, vote FF in your preferences, a party you may disagree with, but which you can trust.
Vote for a united Ireland, vote for tolerance and respect, vote for cross-border prosperity, vote for the Government of Ireland, vote Fianna Fail.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:27 AMBriso
Can we avoid party political broadcasts?
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:33 AMGeorge, we pay red cents and have been paying red cents for 67 years.
In fairness, this is a rent-free situation for all sides. Britain-US get all they need from the Ireland’s geographical location - all England/Britain was ever really interested in - while off-loading resonsibility for the governance of Ireland to the Irish. So long as a friendly (or at least acquiescent) government exists in Dublin when its comes to sharing Ireland geo-strategic location, which has been demonstrated to always be the case since WW2, then Ireland get a bullet proof defence system at marginal (if any) extra cost the the US-Britain.
Win-win. And I’ve little or no qualms about it.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:35 AMBriso
Can we avoid party political broadcasts?
Posted by slug on Sep 18, 2007 @ 10:33 AM
Sorry Slug, wasn’t meant to be one. I just thought it was simple logic.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:40 AMGeorge, ignore first link - I thought it was a story leading on from “the acquiescence of people from this area to US military aircraft using the airport in its unjust war in Iraq” re: Shannon. *blush*
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:40 AMDiluted and Frustrated
“If only for the fact that FF might bring a fresh perspective to the problems in NI and potentially remove one part of the ugly, tribal DUP-SF equation in the running of our affairs I welcome their decision to expand”
and
“that what will achieve the best outcome for our children and grandchildren is all that really matters to most people in the end.”Interesting posts and a welcome realignment from the hoopla of earlier posts on this thread.From an FF point of view, this seems to me to be engineered to “put manners” on SF in terms of their engagement with Dublin, and shore up SDLP in Foyle, and South Down, and perhaps take West Tyrone at the next Westminster elections. If that happens it will stall SF in NI (as well as south).
In Stormont (given some mid-term success- a 2+ seat swing to FF/SDLP) it also takes out any propect of SF becoming first minister. THis therefore potentially gives the room for the reasoned engagement between true republicans (FF not SF), and unionists. We will get to see if the SF machine can effectively defend seats
as opposed to take them from a position of opposition.For unionism, it may open a most interesting space. It could completely take out the argument of Jim Allister (given the modest success above), and in therefore take out the threat of the right wing in DUP/fringes.
Post Paisley, and after this FF move, and with the UUP not being led anywhere, and Jim Allister Rejectionists isolated - unionism (seems to me) will need a completely and a new strategy for maintaining the union. It will be fascinating to watch, and how cathartic it is, as unionism develops that strategy. I think what is the upside of this move, is that debate within unionism can happen, outside of a sectarian head count/wolves at the door mentality unimaginable three yrs ago. Berie has just moves that debate forward by a generation.
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:43 AMIt seems that the SDLP accept that its future is not as a Labour-type party. This will boost the prospects of there being a Labour option for voters in NI elections.
Briso
Apology accepted. Your points are probably better received if you don’t finish them off with voting advice :)
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:50 AMBretagne, hear hear!
Posted by on Sep 18, 2007 @ 08:53 AM
