Tuesday, March 18, 2008
The carrot has been dangled…
PAT Doherty‘s interview in the Guardian is being interpreted as an offer to the DUP - permit the devolution of policing and justice, and in exchange the IRA army council will be disbanded. “I have no doubt, given all of the issues that we have resolved from the very beginning, all of the issues that you may have thought were insurmountable, … on the British side … the unionist side and the republican side, if we are serious about moving this whole process forward … then we can deal with any issue,” Doherty who was named as a member of the IRA leadership in 2002, said. “If you look at any of what were perceived as insurmountable issues some time back, all of them were resolved. I have no doubt that issues can be resolved if there is dialogue.”
Belfast Gonzo @ 05:38 AM
The DUP cant agree to policing and justice being devolved at the moment as they have argued there is not any confidence they would look extremely bad if they did. However that is not to say they could not agree it four years down the line if the condidtions are right and the IRA army Council has gone and been proven to have gone, the parades issue resolved for good and a better financial package from Brown and the complete stop to Water Charges would be helpful. It may be worth doing a referendum put it to the people take it away from the politicians?
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 09:46 AMGood to see that the IRA Council cnn be disbanded. The devolution of policing powers in return for its disbandment seems desirable and good to see it being brought up by Sinn Féin as it previously was only brought up by the DUP.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 09:55 AMCan someone explain to me how you can tell the Army Council has been disbanded and what, in any practical sense this means? Will MMG and Gerry Adams be no longer allowed to talk to each other, or something?
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 10:20 AMkensei: Can someone explain to me how you can tell the Army Council has been disbanded and what, in any practical sense this means?
It means that they *say* they have been disbanded. Forms of words, and claims of handed-down authority, matter a great deal to Republicans. Thats why even the dissidents claim to be ‘Real’, or ‘Continuity’.
That the Provos are even contemplating such a statement says a great deal about a change of mindset.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 10:26 AMIt seems any time any proposal has come up in the past few months the SF answer has been we will agree if P&J;is devolved.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 10:33 AM“The DUP cant agree to policing and justice being devolved” T&J;Am I living in a parallel universe - of course they can, and they will. if this secures Robo’s tenure as head honcho of course they will devolve it.
T&J;you seem to still believe that the DUP are operating to some sort of principled agenda, the only agend they current work to is that agenda that secures power, money and jobs for the boys.
So p&j;for the standing down of the illegal - invisible - unverifiable Army Council - No problem. where do i sign?
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 10:51 AMIt seems any time any proposal has come up in the past few months the DUP answer has been we will think about it if the Army Council is dissolved.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 10:55 AMTruth and Justice:
The DUP cant agree to policing and justice being devolved at the moment as they have argued there is not any confidence they would look extremely bad if they did.
That would change, apparently, if the IRA army council has disbanded, and DUP politicians cite the ongoing existence of the council as the sticking point.
Of course, this is a very easy concession for the republicans to grant. The IRA army council is nothing other than a policy-making body within the IRA. It doesn’t control what goes on within the IRA at a regional level.
However that is not to say they could not agree it four years down the line if the condidtions are right and the IRA army Council has gone and been proven to have gone,
Four years, my hole. Do you think it is in the interests of unionists to have someone in London controlling the police and setting policy in the courts ? We need this power devolved quickly. The recent issues with remission are an example of why this is so urgent. We should be able to fix these problems ourselves, not run to Westminster to beg someone to do it for us.
the parades issue resolved for good
Why are we poking that particular sleeping dog ?
and a better financial package from Brown and the complete stop to Water Charges would be helpful.
Who is going to pay for all this ? Why should we be allowed to continue our wasteful level of public spending ? Why should other people be required to bankroll the incompetence of the politicians we choose to elect ?
It may be worth doing a referendum put it to the people take it away from the politicians?
Why ? What are politicians for ? How would a referendum enable tough decisions to be made - what question would you put ?
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 12:05 PMThe DUP have already agreed to the devolution of P&J;. Otherwise they wouldn’t be arguing about the timing.
If Sinn Fein are in a position to offer the disbandment of the Army Council then it looks like a saleable deal. No Army Council, no army.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 12:19 PMIt means that they *say* they have been disbanded. Forms of words, and claims of handed-down authority, matter a great deal to Republicans. Thats why even the dissidents claim to be ‘Real’, or ‘Continuity’.
That the Provos are even contemplating such a statement says a great deal about a change of mindset.
So, to sum, then: it’s an absolutely meaningless precondition. I’m sure people will be all very happy the Army Council has disappeared and sleep sounder in their beds an’ all, but we we get right to the point it is literally meaningless.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 12:35 PMLeaving aside the difficulties of Adams and co dissolving the Army Council due to constitutional reasons, they must be just about the worst negotiators in the world. They negotiate a deal with the British to devolve policing by a certain date. In the process of doing this as is the way with all negotiation they concede certain issues that they would rather have not.
Yet when the British fail to keep their side of the bargain, what does Adams do, he attempts to re-negotiate the deal by giving even more away from the PRM bank.
It is thus hardly surprising that the DUP has got wind of Gerry’s lack of a bottom line below which he will not go, the Brit-Unionist side have correctly concluded there is nothing Adams will not concede to broker a deal on policing.
Paisley was not kidding when he said sack clothe and ashes, although it seems just for their own enjoyment the British have added a hair shirt.
The problem for Adam’s is that his cupboard is almost empty; and once he has disposed of the Army Council, [and its departments lets not forget] for poor old Gerry the game is up, as he will have nothing left to concede.
The Army Council will go, but the general staff of the British army will not, as to Gerry, he will have to learn to endure.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 12:47 PMLOL Baslamak
You don’t get it. If they dissolve the army council then they dissolve any responsibility for members, former members or associates of former members. The DUP by their insistence are giving the Sinn Fein a get out of gaol free card.
It all falls to the ruc/psni to control and take responsibility for not doing so.
Practically brilliant, brilliantly practical
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 01:08 PM“The problem for Adam’s is that his cupboard is almost empty; and once he has disposed of the Army Council, [and its departments lets not forget] for poor old Gerry the game is up, as he will have nothing left to concede.”
He could still ask for a few ‘Old Boys Clubs’ as a retirement plan for the ageing IRA members.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 01:29 PMThis deal has been signposted for some time but improvement in TUV votes might be a problem. Enlglezes must know that not nailing down what is vital from Republican perspective may lead to bit of unravelling so will be interesting if they have carrot or stick to move DUP along. They might threaten to introduce some measure that could be avoided in Non Iron if devolution of P and J is introduced.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 01:56 PM“He could still ask for a few ‘Old Boys Clubs’ as a retirement plan for the ageing IRA members.”
I thought that was all settled with the northern bank, only kidding Steve.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 02:21 PMSF may also be aware that the IMC report is due out soon, and they want to avoid a crisis over paul quinn’s murder.
True steve it will absolve SF of any more trouble by IRA members.
But also it’ll calm down unionist anxieties, leaving the TUV with nothing to crow about.Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 02:24 PMthe IRA army Council has gone and been proven to have gone,
If proof is necessary, then it can never happen.
It is not possible to prove a negative. Same with the arms. Not a few unionists moaned after decommissioning - “But how do we know they are all gone?”Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 02:42 PM“‘It was unnecessary for Tony Blair to meet the army council’”
Perhaps there was a quorum of the ‘Gang of Seven’ at that first meeting with Tony Blair when Pat Doherty was sitting across the table from the Prime Minister. Were the other members in Stormont in the lead-up to the signing of the 1998 Agreement?
Why did Watt feel the need to trot out several times this: “I know that as Vice-President of Sinn Fein you can’t talk for the IRA”.
As I understand it, the PRM AC manages all aspects of the movement: politics, shootings and bombings, organised crime and ‘civic justice’; it’s the ‘legitimate government’ of the island of Ireland. Why couldn’t a ‘minister’ of that Government express an opinion on its stance on any issues of importance to it?
Furthermore, what place is there in a serious work for persisting with the legal fiction that Sinn Fein and the IRA are two separate and totally unrelated bodies? Mo Mowlam, as British Secretary of State is quoted, but not critiqued, on her meeting with republican leaders: ‘We sat down with Sinn Fein. We sat at one end and they brought in some people who were obviously members of the army council’. Is the serious reading public expected to believe that Mowlam had ever in fact sat down with any body other than the army council? The Blanket
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 02:46 PMBut also it’ll calm down unionist anxieties, leaving the TUV with nothing to crow about.
Posted by perci on Mar 18, 2008 @ 01:24 PM
It might calm their anxieties but it would stoke mine. You will have a profesional criminal/thug class with absolutely no loyalty to any one but themselves and no one to exert even an ounce of control over them.
If anything this will likely increase the number of shed beatings because they will be acting alone with out fear of any one but the seriously incompetent psni.
If I was of a criminal mind it would seem to me to be a growth industry with loads of opportunity for advancement. Sounds almost like a jobs advert doesnt it
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:01 PM‘He (Blair)asked if Adams could go back and tell his people there was no possibility of a united Ireland. Adams said the question was rather how he could bring his people along. He had to show them there was an alternative way forward.’
What price the Army Council? Gerry’s last card and after that slow and inevitable decline.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:07 PMbut Steve, aren’t they already doing whatever they like. I hear you, and reckon that in distancing themselves from the PIRA, SF will circumvent any threats about Stormont collapsing.
That’s priority No.1Of course with the P&J;powers devolved SF are going to have to find ways of dealing with ex-members who are “running aroung like little hitlers” according to Jim McAllister.
Its a massive challenge. We await leadership.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:07 PMI never said they should or have to distance themselves from PIRA, it will appear to disapear absolving anyone in the republican movement from their crimes much the way unionist claim clean hands on the alphabet killers.
Its brilliant it takes the whine away from the TUV, DUP, UUP, SDLP and Alliance. SF can simply hold up their hands and say “not us, nothing to do with us, don’t call us we will call you”
PS. They wont go away you know this is a Pyric victory at bes lol
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:17 PMThe Provos know that the only way SF can get elected in the South is when they have “gone away you know”.
Quite clearly SF want a normal society as they think the North will be increasingly greened - the devolution of P and J allows them to argue with some justification that they are administering the Irish rule of law - not British - in Non Iron and continuing the greening ( with some Orange thrown in ) process.
It is undoubtedly very uncomforatable for many ( most? ) Unionists to accept that the Republican movement is a political, and not a criminal organisation, but unfortunately for them the British, Irish and American governments also accept this.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:32 PMkensei: So, to sum, then: it’s an absolutely meaningless precondition.
I disagree. Just because it’s not material doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. For instance, the first of the IRA’s ‘Acts of Decommissioning’ was described as ‘Significant’. As indeed it was, to the ‘Not a bullet, not an ounce’ faction. It wasn’t until third time round that the decommissioning acts became ‘Substantial’.
Half of the GFA was based on symbolism, and it is not surprising that the StAA and the end-game are following in the same path.
But if, from your perspective, the DUP are willing to allow devolution of P&J;in exchange for a meaningless gesture from the Provos, surely you have no complaint to make?
From my POV, as a long-term pro-agreement unionist, with a sceptical eye on Chuckie mythology; I am pleased at how it is going so far.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:33 PMReader
I disagree. Just because it’s not material doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. For instance, the first of the IRA’s ‘Acts of Decommissioning’ was described as ‘Significant’. As indeed it was, to the ‘Not a bullet, not an ounce’ faction. It wasn’t until third time round that the decommissioning acts became ‘Substantial’.
It isn’t just immaterial, it’s unverifiable and impossible to enforce.
Half of the GFA was based on symbolism, and it is not surprising that the StAA and the end-game are following in the same path.
But if, from your perspective, the DUP are willing to allow devolution of P&J;in exchange for a meaningless gesture from the Provos, surely you have no complaint to make?
I am merely reflecting that SF’s negotiating skills are perhaps better than I give them credit for, if this was really the deal in the background: something for nothing.
Posted by on Mar 18, 2008 @ 03:56 PM
