Sunday, March 09, 2008
Stormont ‘tit for tat’ will put off investors…
In the wake of the Mairead Farrell commemoration event at Stormont on Friday, which seems to have drawn all hands on deck (to the point of stretching the party’s full time staffers extremely thinly on Friday), there have been protests and counter protests. The Assembly imposed a ban on filming within Parliament buildings to prevent the proceedings there being filmed and have inadvertently banned BBC cameras from Monday’s Assembly plenary. Gerry Adams has is not impressed:
As we work during the next few months to persuade US investors and others to attend an investment conference in May, which is about creating jobs for people, picking sham fights will only serve to dissuade business people to come here”
Garrett FitzGerald had an interest and informed perspective on this angle in his Irish Times column this weekend. It was highly critical of Unionists too, but for entirely different reasons:
I can recall meetings with parties in the North at which I endeavoured to alert members of different parties to the catastrophic decline in that area’s share of our island economy - but evoked only blank looks from both sides. I had hoped that when the time came in the mid-1990s for these parties to sit down together to seek a settlement of their differences, they might at last consider addressing crucial economic issues.
Perhaps it was too much to hope that Sinn Féin/IRA, which had spent a quarter of a century seeking to destroy the Northern Ireland economy, would at that stage start to reflect on the extent to which their activities had succeeded in throwing up a huge new obstacle to progress towards Irish political unity. But, unhappily, in that negotiation unionists of both varieties appeared equally uninterested in serious economic issues.
It’s a familiar theme from FitzGerald. Last year he laid out in great detail just how badly the IRA’s war against economic targets debilitated the potential for political union with the Republic. Meantime, the ‘sham fight’ seems to be turning into a game of reactive aggression, with the first play being negative, and spiralling downwards.
Adams may be right in essence, but as FitzGerald notes there have been two players at this mutually self destructive game for some years.
Mick Fealty @ 08:29 PM
If the Sinn Fein PIRA leader is concerned about putting off investors, he should stop playing his own silly games. Wanting to celebrate a member of a Sinn Fein PIRA murder gang in Stormont is not very helpful - to put it mildly.
Posted by on Mar 09, 2008 @ 11:36 PMPeace and Justice,
Well said. Of course since SF want Northern Ireland to be a failed state damaging investment with these silly games is of course, from their analysis, entirely logical.
Posted by on Mar 09, 2008 @ 11:43 PMStormont is supposedly for all Our people and should be reflected as so, but, I can’t help thinking Mairead Farrell would be turning in her grave, given that she gave her life to rid Ireland of British rule rather than administer it on the Irish peole North of the British imposed boarder.
Posted by on Mar 09, 2008 @ 11:44 PMAh, Tat, the malnourished triplet ...
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 12:04 AMI wonder who picked this fight. Hard to tell, eh?
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 12:17 AMWhich US investors are coming here? Are they coming here for anything more than a visit to the Giant’s Causeway, and a few jars at the Crown?
I don’t think so…
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 12:33 AMRe Mairead Farrell, it could have been handled better if the DUP were to accept the concept of parity of esteem or were perhaps participants of the Belfast Agreement 10 years ago. They could have by now worked up or settled a Unionist concept of how to handle such fireballs.
The DUP should have by now worked out suitable recognition of cultural traditions, including perhaps cultural events, cultural symbols, and appropriate cultural emblems.
So when Sinn Fein pull stunts the DUP could well respond in confidence, along the lines of:
‘We understand the right to recognise culture and identity but as per Good Friday Agreement such recognition must be in a manner which promotes mutual respect and understanding’.
The DUP need to give on cultural grounds or they will lose out to these stunts. As when Sinn Fein throw a ‘political-cultural’ missile at the DUP it bounces back off them highly-charged that sets off the ethnic-nationalists who believe a great unjustice.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 12:42 AM‘Well said. Of course since SF want Northern Ireland to be a failed state’
P&J;- When you are competing against an opponent (say playing chess or poker or in a race) it is important that you understand them. If you do, then you can anticipate their actions and gain an upper hand.
Your analysis of SF and their desires for the NI state strike me as the least incisive analysis conceivable of a political party.
By choosing to consistently see the worst in any person or organisation you end up seeing only your own virtual creation and failing to understand how to deal with them. Negotiation is all about trying to achieve win-win results (i.e. both parties gain from an agreement). To negotiate effectively you need to understand the desires of the counterparty to the deal.
Look back at the catalyst that created the atmosphere for Sinn Fein and the IRA to be reborn from something consigned to history - i.e. the Civil Rights marches to protest against discrimination and the consequent police reaction to the marches.
Nationalist politicians were confined then to tame collaborators who had no chance of ever sharing power with anyone let alone ask if it might be possible for the police to stop beating up people.
Look at the situation now. SF ministers; North South bodies etc. etc. Can’t you see why the IRA were so willing to decommission and SF to become a part of British Government and accept the Police Force. The socio-political situation is diametrically different to the pre-Troubles one. Try getting away with the old ‘Wouldn’t have one about the place’ attitude now and see how well you succeed.
SF would do almost anything to keep and build upon the current political compromise. The idea that they want to see a ‘failed state’ and the return to a war of attrition is plain foolish.Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 01:01 AMSorry P&J;. I should have directed that diatribe at Turgon.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 01:09 AMWell if said diatribe was against me, I guess I should make some attempt at answering.
We are not playing chess or poker; we are opposing those who murdered our friends and relatives. Hence, maybe the tendency to see the worst in them, since they have contrived to show us their worst.
“Negotiation is to achieve a win-win”
Since I see this as essentially a zero sum game my position is logical from my world view.I do not think the IRA were that keen on decomissioning; it was indeed an achievement of the DUP’s to make them do so.
In terms of them wishing to return to a war; I have said before and will say again. At some point in the next twenty years I expect violence to start again. I hope to be wrong, maybe (God willing) I will be. Why am I sceptical, well because civil rights achieved almost everything they had wanted by the early 1970s; that did not stop the IRA’s murder campaign. I guess that and the number of bodies in the grave yards and memorials in the churches of where my in laws are from.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 01:26 AMI’ll say this, there’s some brass neck on that guy. Gerry and mates pick a fight and then chastise unionists for standing up to their bullying. You couldn’t make that shite up.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 01:31 AMYou guys are so ruff and tumble! No where is there ever such a potential for a hybrid-political approach to be place whereby Stormont can access the experience of Westminster and Dublin to form approaches to life here in Northern Ireland.
Talk about the opportunities of being able to talk about and develop policy against existing experiences of European life through Ireland’s role coupled with deep British political experiences got across the world, all of which we can participate in!
And Turgon wants us to go back to war!
Fuck sake, we have never had it so good. If you two have a minute, you should come and talk and I’ll try and explain something that could be end of everything here, a place that we all could know as extremely better than that horrible past.
Lighten up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please :-)
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 02:01 AM“And Turgon wants us to go back to war!”
What? Of course I do not want to have violence back. I have always opposed violence and said that I abhor death and destruction. i would be grateful if you would withdraw that remark.
What I do is observe that we have had violence extremely frequently. 1641, 1688-91, 1798, 1916, 1918-21, the Border Campaign, the recent troubles. To think that the fundamental differences here are simply going to go away and that future generations (or even this one) will not contain people willing to go back to murdering people is naive to the point of stupidity.
Lightening up implies that this is some sort of a game. I can take you to a lot of people who will very definately confirm it was not, is not and will never be a game.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 02:09 AMA game implies a start Turgon, where do you want to start, is it really that far back? Can you not see the opportunities to be had from Stormont, protected by deep human rights and equality legislation, which means that our children and we ourselves have so many open channels to push past the old nonsense of narrow political politics and express ourselves without particularly a fear of death. Never would I express a wish for that. Politics is the key now Turgon, let’s work it. You got a particular stance to progress?
There are problems, but they are being mismanaged by political parties. That can be dealt with.
It’s a new start, the extremes are captured in democratic politics.
Go back to warring-to-post war Europe, those afflicted would only be so glad to be a part of what we have now and be able to share in.
Listen, Sinn Fein are loaded with problems, they belong in the past.
If you cant see that I’m more than happy to meet up and talk about the future and set out how its so much better than any past that Northern Ireland ever had.
Those that died didn’t do it in vain or to anyone’s disadvantage, quality of life is the measure and return to war is totally incomprehensible at this stage and forever in Ireland, I hope.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 02:25 AMBy all means bring out the Hume esque post nationslist / post unionist clap trap. It changes and will change nothing. It may make you feel warm and fuzzy but look at Stormont; I do not see warm fuzziness I see unrepentant terrorists sitting in government. I see a DUP so wedded to power that they sold out everything they believed in and all the dead just to get their power, influence and money.
You think this is the best future Northern Ireland has ever had: tell that to the parents of Paul Quinn, Lisa Dorrian, Thomas Devlin.
Ever wondered why I do not give out my name and blog under this foolish name? Because my wife will not let me. She is worried that one day, not today, not tommorrow, not even next year but one day people who are involved in politics will be high up the list of legimate targets. Not that not being high up that list did my father in law’s friend Douglas Deering much good, nor my wife school mate Marie Wilson.
So spare me the psycho babble, the wish to meet me and tell me how rosy your future is. I stopped believing in Fairy stories a long time ago.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 02:57 AMYou’re still stuck in pre-98 and Jim Allister can’t deliver you past that, but I respect you because of your convictions and if you can get backing political backing for them then you have made progress.
But don’t wax lyrical about deaths and imitidation unless you want to meet me and I will explain my own particular set of local circumstances.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 03:07 AM*Intimidation*, for the pedants amongst us.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 03:10 AM“By all means bring out the Hume esque post nationslist / post unionist clap trap.”
And don’t insult me thanks. Tell me a bit your potential workable politics, or just remain in the narrowness of the past saved for failures.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 03:51 AMI think you are totally wrong about future violence, Turgon.
You have missed a key point; for the first time ever, the main republican party of the day have accepted the legitimacy of the state. Not only the leaders but the vast bulk of the “volunteers”. You know that I am no supporter of the IRA but I have been impressed by their discipline and willingness to accept the final decision of their leaders after, apparently, wide discussion among themselves.Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 07:22 AMDC,
You ask me not to insult you by making a comment like Hume esque clap trap yet you said “Turgon want’s us to go back to war”. How about apologising for your genuinely offensive insult?joeCanuck,
I see your point and as you know I am not impervious to reasoned argument. However, I am unconvinced that SF has accepted the legitimacy of the state. Indeed I do not fundamentally insist they do, in that they can believe in whatever they want as long as they accept the rule of law and not killing people; although I accept that rejecting the state and violence could be seen as two sided to the same coin. I can see circumstances where one could reject the state yet oppose violence; although I would disagree with that, it would be an honourable position.I am just not yet convinced that they will not go back to violence as and when it suits them. They have had some discipline I grant you but not that much and I do believe violence could be turned on again.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 10:24 AMTurgon
I do not think the IRA were that keen on decomissioning; it was indeed an achievement of the DUP’s to make them do so.
SF were using decommissioning as a bargaining chip and would hold on to it as long it was useful. The DUP had very little to do with it, to my mind: the British and US Governments ran out of patience, and that was far more important. The bargaining chip became useless. And probably just as important, we got to a point were the grass roots would swallow it.
Moreover, there is a great big hole of your understanding of SF. It is an All Ireland party, with ambitions in the South. To that end it was both happy to dump the arms and happy to support the police.
In terms of them wishing to return to a war; I have said before and will say again. At some point in the next twenty years I expect violence to start again. I hope to be wrong, maybe (God willing) I will be. Why am I sceptical, well because civil rights achieved almost everything they had wanted by the early 1970s; that did not stop the IRA’s murder campaign. I guess that and the number of bodies in the grave yards and memorials in the churches of where my in laws are from.
If you follow the US elections, you’ll hear a lot about the Big Mo. In the early 70’s, violence had the Big Mo, pushed along by Bloody Sunday and internment. That is absent.
I can certain scenarios were we wind back up in violence but they are not that likely at the moment; I also think it is highly unlikely it will be the PIRA, and suspect you run through the Unionist fallacy that all IRAs are really the same organisation.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 10:55 AMTurgon,
the funny think about Northern Ireland is that the unionists think it’s the nationalists who are most likely to return to “violence” while it’s the nationalists who think the unionists will be the first to do it.Both sides seem to be convinced of their correctness on this matter.
They are so obsessed with what the other side is up to, they, like Fitzgerald points out, are letting the economic world pass them by. Again.
They were hoping for 60 at the big May investment conference when Paisley was to wave goodbye. They will be lucky to get 30.
And when they are there, they will tell the investors that no, Northern Ireland can’t be trusted as being stable enough to devolve policing powers but yes, it’s a safe place to plough in your millions.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 11:00 AMNorthern Ireland can’t be trusted as being stable enough to devolve policing powers but yes, it’s a safe place to plough in your millions.
I hadn’t linked those two, George. But you’re right, That’s a huge flashing amber if not outright red light.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 11:42 AMTurgon - Those who don’t learn from the past are condemned to repeat it. Many many people have suffered enormously as a result of the Troubles, but at some point we must look to the future and try to ensure that it never happens again (it doesn’t make the pain any less or the hurt less justified, but it does help to prevent it’s recurrence).
If the Jewish people can have an embassy in Berlin and friendly relations with Germany then surely anything is possible and one flavour of Irish (or Northern Irish if preferred) people can live with and be friendly with another.
Perhaps I have misjudged you in seeing you as overly negative and bent on seeing the worst in the other side. Prove that I have and provide a constructive answer to this:- How do you recommend that we go forward politically in a fair and equitable manner in NI?
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 11:47 AMThe Raven’s about right on this one. If Stormont was serious about attracting investment, which they don’t have a chance of doing to any significant level inside the next decade, they’d be devoting their energies to being out there doing whatever it took to bring in the business.
It seems they’d rather squabble over symbolic arguments that only serve to confirm the view of the rest of the world that nothing has really changed in this parochial and regressive joke statelet.
Posted by on Mar 10, 2008 @ 11:48 AM
