Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Army Council: Sacred cow or Bargaining Chip?
The Army Council of the IRA appears to be at the pinnacle of that organisation. It has acquired a strange almost mythical status for all sides in Northern Ireland, whatever one’s views of it. Stripping away the mythology, however, the actual status and importance of the Army Council is difficult for outsiders to judge. It could be now irrelevant and a relic from the days of “armed struggle”. Alternatively it could still be the “Only legitimate Government of Ireland”; or, most likely, somewhere in between. As such when unionists demand the disbandment of the army council they may (and only may) actually be imbuing it with greater importance than it now has.
It might be that disbanding the army council would make violence more difficult to return to. The end of the organisation which ordered the “volunteers” to halt their campaign might make it more difficult to order a return to violence. Some IRA members might genuinely see a difference between their political leaders when at Stormont and when sitting (with a few others) in someone’s house (or wherever they actually sit) to discuss the direction of the republican movement. It might be that some IRA members would feel that once the organisation had been disbanded the former army council members could not simply set themselves up again at a later date.
Personally I suspect this is relatively unlikely: It is pushing the whole idea of the IRA being an army to a level beyond that which it ever attained. The “volunteers” may have had some significant form of loyalty to the army council but I am unconvinced that all or even most of them endowed it with the almost mystical qualities and mythological status which it has now acquired. I strongly suspect that most “volunteers” justified their actions to themselves without recourse to some strange notion of the government of Ireland. Most probably justified it as “We hate Prods” possibly with a bit of pseudo politics thrown in. Hence, I suspect disbanding the army council would be a symbolic event but would not represent a once and for all act which could not be reversed: for those of a biblical bent I do not see this as a law of the Medes and Persians which cannot be revoked. Humpty Dumpty might be relatively easy to put back together again.
Moving a little away from republicans; if the army council was in some way dissolved I have no doubt the SF would expect significant concessions and the British government would attempt to insist on such from the DUP. If the DUP continue to demand the ending of the Army Council before the devolution of policing and justice; I have little doubt that SF will try to make this concession out to be more significant than it is. The DUP and indeed all unionists need to be careful. They feel they know that SF do not want to get rid of the army council but it is difficult to know how much pain that would involve for republicans. As such what should be accepted in return for an end to the army council is also difficult to judge. These are of course the problems which one encounters once on enters into quid pro quo negotiations. An additional problem is that the army council might go away or be suspended without the use of the wording demanded by the DUP. Finally of course it would also be difficult to tell how true any disbandment, indefinite suspension or renewable rolling suspension was.
I am not advocating that the DUP stop demanding an end to the army council. They must, however, be very careful that they are not strung along on the army council issue in the way Trimble was with decommissioning, the war being over or any of those other issues. SF were able to use decommissioning as an extremely effective bargaining chip with Trimble. The DUP need to be careful to ensure that SF do not use the army council in a similar fashion with them.
The army council should go because it is an illegal organisation both in the UK and RoI. Its members are, by dint of this membership, criminals. In addition the DUP must realise that the Army Council is not actually a group of military strategists. It is a group of grubby sectarian criminals and it disbanding itself will be as believable as any other group of criminals promising to go straight. It may be true but a wise man waits for some time before accepting the word of such people.
Turgon @ 08:59 PM
the army council of a defunct army… they are no more that bunch of self important posers that feign relevance once a year with bland “statements”, yesterdays men. *yawn*
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 09:18 PM‘The Army Council of the IRA appears to be at the pinnacle of that organisation’
really Turgon, next you’ll be telling us that the tip of an iceberg is at the top.
As regards the mythical, mystical quality of the Army council....utter drivel and nonsense. Just because they don’t parade around in lecoqsportif tracksuits and gold chains and appear in the sunday life/world each week, reveling in their parochical celebrity, does not mean they can charm snakes.Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 09:23 PMTurgon: “It might be that disbanding the army council would make violence more difficult to return to.”
The skeletal structure of a command, sans soldiers, is referred to as “cadre” and is the frame around which newly trained soldiers are fitted. Eliminating said cadre would indeed make it more difficult to reconstitute the full body of the organization.
That said, as a secret organization, would you deign to believe the heralds who report their dissolution, should it come, I wonder… I mean, the word of the dog in the street is good enough for the IMC, but there are those who would want proof.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 09:32 PMThere is only one legitimate Government in Ireland and it’s in Leinster House . The NI devolved Assembly is still in experimental mode. As a forced ‘coalition’ of opposites without an opposition the jury is still out on whether this Assembly will have any longer term permanence .
As for the Army Council - Old soldiers never die they merely fade away . Resurrecting them too often for reburial will only give the impression that the dead are alive when in fact they are in an advanced state of decomposition.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 09:52 PMIsn’t the Army Convention higher than the council? And presumably it can still meet?
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 09:57 PMFor some Republicans the Proclamation is the supreme authority. I’d like to see how Unionism tries to decommission a piece of paper and an ideal even if/when it gets SF to support putting the PIRA AC out of it’s misery.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:20 PMGiven that Jim Allister used the existence of the Army Council as one of his main reasons for opposing St Andrews, surely it is he who might be “bigging” them up beyond any importance they might have?
I think that the whole conversion of the mainstream republican movement has both a mixture of the symbolic and the practical to it.
We all know the practical elements.... stop killing people, stop recruiting etc.., stop sanctioning criminality These all took varying levels of time to achieve, and we can leave the timing debate to another day.
Guns and policing were a mixture of the symbolic and practical. We all knew the IRA could get more guns if it wanted to but we also knew that the symbolism that major decommissioning would send to the world and republican grassroots meant that it was never likely that they would try again.
Some people say policing was irrelevant, or inevitable but again it was a mixture of practical and symbolic. Co-operation on the ground was practical but participating on the current non-devolved arrangements was highly symbolic as, for the first time, mainstream republicans had signed up to something that was still in essence under mainland control.Given all of the above, the Army Council is now symbolic… but it is the last ritual of the conversion of the republican movement from terrorism to “normal” politics. It might not be doing anything anymore but its existence is still a symbolic statement of republican intent and ethos. Disbanding it would be like the signal they sent over decommissioning but many times stronger.
And if anyone is worried that the republican movement could milk such a move, then they seem to have forgotten that they are dealing with different creatures in Robinson and Dodds… It is also a fair point to say that the previous rounds of milking have sucked pretty much all of the symbolic concessions out of the political system and all that is left for HMG to throw at the provos are measures that are nonsense not just to the unionist politicos but to civic society in general. Measures like letting people with serious convictions join the police etc.. Measures which are a world away from changing a name or a cap badge or restructuring the odd regiment or two but things cross the line between symbolic, therefore expedable, and the totally insane.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:24 PMWell yes, Garibaldy, of course it is but mining that simple fact from readily available sources might be a task too far for those who prefer to speak in the language of a “strange almost mythical status”.
Wittgenstein once said, “Whereof you do not know thereof do not speak”, a piece of advice Turgon should take to heart. Perhaps he should stick to biblical interpretation and perhaps the history of the TUV. The latter is short and one can spout any old nonsense on the former and yet will always find someone willing to give them credence.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:32 PMAs far as the volunteers who fought the war against the British were concerned, the IRA Army Council was the only legitimately-constitued government of Ireland.
Was the entire ethos of the struggle flawed? Did volunteers die for nothing? It appears so.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:42 PMTurgon
The Army Council is a group of grubby sectarian criminals and it disbanding itself will be as believable as any other group of criminals promising to go straight.
Not so. This is an extremely evil group of deluded men who have justified their campaign of violence on the basis that they are allowed to respond with evil to evil. In other words, an eye for an eye is the correct choice, which sets aside 2,000 years of Christian teaching and
renders the tactical use of human suffering a valid response in any conflict.This is so dangerous a philosophy, one that has developed into a sphere of its own in the twentieth century, that it puts the whole future of mankind at risk.
But this campaign was evil in its own right in that it was the first time that people actually used the taking of human life and the countless injuries as a means of keeping a near-dead conflict in the news. It was the media driven slaughter of the innocents and it deserves to be condemned.
The IRA are therefore perhaps the most evil organisation in the history of mankind.
Didn’t the Antichrist have seven heads too?
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:52 PMI don’t see how the Provos could disband the Army Council without liquidating its vast assets and, presumably, distributing the money to its shareholders… who are, presumably, its members? Remember, this is an international criminal empire that has assets valued in the high hundreds of millions. What are they going to do with all that money? At, say, 150 members, that’s about 5 million each. There will be a lot of brickies, electricians, local councillors and MLAs driving around in new BMWs if that happens. The problem they have is that they have accumulated far too much wealth to ever distribute it to its members without giving the game away.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:53 PM“There is only one legitimate Government in Ireland and it’s in Leinster House . The NI devolved Assembly is still in experimental mode. “
Greenflag is correct, Leinster House is the only legititmate government in Ireland, as for Northern Ireland the Assembly is the governing power and above that is the British House of Commons.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 10:55 PMWho cares if the army council stays or goes?
Sinn Fein are administering British rule, if letting them keep their little pretend army keeps them quiet while they’re doing it, then so what?Face it, they’re down on the ground, let’s be magannimous in victory, and stop kicking.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 11:02 PMMark,
“For some Republicans the Proclamation is the supreme authority.”As they take their authority from the second Dáil, would it not be the 1919 Declaration?
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 11:05 PMTAFKABO: “Sinn Fein are administering British rule, if letting them keep their little pretend army keeps them quiet while they’re doing it, then so what?”
Because stupid is like pollen—it comes back every so often and gives people headaches.
Better to get the damn thing done and over with before someone has a case of nostalgia.
Posted by on Apr 23, 2008 @ 11:41 PMSure, do it now… but it will only be cosmetic in relation to the Provos, having the effect of promoting new organised crime entities. Do you really think that the Provos are going to be able to dispose of its extensive property portfolio without CAB in the Republic picking them off? There are circa 20 pubs, and a plethora of office blocks, warehouses, private houses, private businesses, etc, in Dublin alone that the Provo are suspected as being the beneficial owners of. The front men may be able to sell them but they will find it impossible to account to the authorities for the disposal of the proceeds. The important function of the Army Council is to manage those who manage the assets of Provos and who manage its ongoing rackets and investments. They simply cannot liquidate those assets and distribute the money to their members as a ‘retirement’ package. All that could happen is that the godfathers give a fraction of the wealth to the members, claiming that the fraction is the full sum, and keep the rest for themselves. That way - and providing they don’t shoot each other in squabbles over who gets to keep the prime properties, shares, and investments, ect - the Army Council can be disbanded and be replaced with individual crime cartels to continue the lucrative rackets, etc.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 12:29 AM“It has acquired a strange almost mythical status for” Turgon the elf.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 06:59 AMAnd in next weeks edition of Tilting at Windmills, Turgon is joined by a wide range of Unionist Opinion in demanding the British Government extract decommissioning from Loyalists.
Ho ho, I almost had you all there…
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 07:36 AMTurgon
Its members are, by dint of this membership, criminals. In addition the DUP must realise that the Army Council is not actually a group of military strategists. It is a group of grubby sectarian criminals and it disbanding itself will be as believable as any other group of criminals promising to go straight. It may be true but a wise man waits for some time before accepting the word of such people.
1. “Criminal” and “Military Strategist” are not mutually exclusive terms. From a purely objective standpoint, the IRA certainly had a military strategy it followed and a few tactical innovations some of which are now employed in Iraq. I presume you would take the same view of the Independence era IRA: it is equally true of that organisation too. This says nothing about the morality of either organisation, nor do you have to consider it admirable in any sense. But I find it hard to sustain the argument that the IRA had no strategy, and that the IRA leadership didn’t direct (and occasionally change) it.
2. How do you prove an illegal organisation has been “disbanded”?
3. Given that I’m sure you believe there is a big overlap of the SF leadership and the IRA Army council, do you suppose that Adams and McGuinness should be barred from talking face to face, or something?
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 07:57 AMThis is all a bit of a red herring. The disbandment of the IRA army council will have next to no practical effect on the ground. And given that the organization is both illegal and secret, I don’t know what rule there is that dictates that the IRA’s property portfolio must be sold off. If such property is not currently the subject of a criminal investigation, I don’t see why it would be after any disbandment move.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 08:19 AMI sincerely hope this is not a sign that TUVers will start looking for other reasons to stay unhappy if the AC gets dealt with. When JA left this and testing was the big issue he emphasised.
“Sacred cow or Bargaining Chip?”
Pretty much all the other sacred cows have become bargaining chips.
I would just add this general warning that there is a fundamental difference between strategy and counter-strategy.
Unionism has overly focused on counter-strategy in the past focusing on the others may or may not do. The distinct problem with this is you don’t focus what you want or how you get it. Instead you risk being made to make so many twist and turns that you end up befuddled. It is a significant waste of time and energy try to predict the actions and motivations of others, focus on your own aims and actions.
Politics will always leave the ideologues at least disappointed if not disillusioned because it will always involve some bargaining. Better to remember that there is always tomorrow.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 09:01 AMIt most certainly is “Better to remember that there is always tomorrow” but that is advice that is a very difficult message to relay to those who only ever yearn for yesterday as so much of the unionist body politic tends to do. It is as though they somehow believe that the past 40 years had never been, that it was all a bad dream and soon they will awaken and all will be restored and Unionism will remain inviolate and triumphant, uncriticised and unopposed. And the taigs will, of course, be safely back in their box. It is somewhat akin to the ante bellum yearnings of Dixiecrats without the Mint Julep.
If only they could learn to accept the political realities of today then there might be some hope of a better tomorrow.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 09:21 AM“Given that Jim Allister used the existence of the Army Council as one of his main reasons for opposing St Andrews, surely it is he who might be “bigging” them up beyond any importance they might have?”
Correct. If the Army Council disappeared what excuse would Jim have then? The truth is that most of the personalities in TUV simply do not want to share power under any corcumstances.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 09:30 AMOne reason why the Army Council of the IRA can be bargained away is that while it is at “the pinnacle of that organisation”, it may not be the pre-eminent body within republicanism. The IRA is the army of a movement which also has a public political face (Sinn Féin) - other branches of republicanism have their own versions of both military and political - but behind both, and entirely out of sight, may be the real leadership, the IRB.
I have long suspected its continued existence, and Gerry Adams claim that he was not in the IRA reinforced that belief. He may have been telling the truth - he may have been in the IRB, and not the IRA.
As several posters have mentioned, it is hard to prove that a secret body has disbanded. But if the IRA AC says it has disbanded it may well be correct. The IRB will, however, continue to exist, but deep under cover.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 09:48 AMBut if the IRA AC says it has disbanded it may well be correct. The IRB will, however, continue to exist, but deep under cover.
We’re not the People’s Front of Judaea, we’re the Judean People’s Front.
Like I said, if it keeps them quiet, let them be.Posted by on Apr 24, 2008 @ 09:56 AM
