This a slightly updated version of Alex Kane’s column in Saturday’s Newsletter. In it he senses a renewed bullishness in the Trimble camp. And he goes on to take Jeffrey Donaldson to task for precipitating the current crisis, but notes irony in the stern action it has given rise to.
By Alex Kane
Let us be quite clear on one matter: the UUP is embroiled in a civil war because Mr. Donaldson has chosen to take it down that path. He opposes party policy and has opposed it for five years. He opposes the decisions of the UUC and has opposed them for five years. He states that a division of 56%-44% is narrow enough to justify his rebellion. But his rebellion began in mid-1998, shortly after the UUC had endorsed the Agreement by 72%-28%. Would there have been any Trimble victory big enough for Jeffrey to accept as convincing?
Mr. Donaldson was responsible for the calling of the last meeting. He described it as the �defining moment� for unionism. He claimed that he would have to �consider his future within the party,� if the vote went against him. Well, the vote did go against him. The Council was asked to consider his analysis of events and his veiled threat to leave the party. They considered. They voted. They rejected his analysis, and in so doing, let it be known that, while they weren�t telling him to go, they could survive without him.
Anyone else would have got the message. But not Jeffrey. He could have taken the political and personal high ground and resigned from the party. He could have resigned his vice-Presidency of the UUC and maintained a dignified and statesman-like silence while observing events. He could even have acknowledged his disappointment at the result and then stated that he would abide by the collective will and wisdom of his UUC colleagues.
He didn�t take any of these options. He chose, instead, to ignore the Council, defy the policy, challenge the leadership all over again and indulge in the most disruptive and destructive tactic imaginable—one that threatens to destroy his party and give comfort to its enemies in both unionist and republican circles.
Unionism is not well served by division. It needs to realign and consolidate. But please, forget the pipe-dream of unionist unity. It ain�t going to happen. It would serve no purpose. Unionism cannot return to the so-called glory days. David Burnside�s plea for the resurrection of the UUUC is an indication of the dinosaur vision which seems likely to be the benchmark of what their joint statement described as, �..a realignment of Unionism into a cohesive and dynamic political force that will be capable of delivering political stability..�
Cohesive? Dynamic? Delivering? What did the leadership of Jim Molyneaux—Mr. Donaldson�s mentor and a key mover behind the latest rebellion—deliver for either the Ulster Unionists or the Union? The Inter-Governmental Conference of 1981; The Anglo-Irish Agreement; The Downing Street Declaration; the Framework Documents. And let�s not forget the internal battle over integration versus devolution, or the debacle over North Down Association in 1987. You had forgotten, hadn�t you? Strange, then, than Mr. Donaldson can talk of Stalinist tactics regarding three members, when he takes advice from a man who threatened to throw hundreds out of the party!
What has the DUP done to promote and protect the Union? Absolutely nothing. Thirty years of wind and waffle. Thirty years of undermining the Ulster Unionist Party and promoting an appalling image of Northern Ireland to the outside world. Thirty years of stunts, photo-opportunities, self-serving rhetoric and political smears. Thirty years of false promise and shattered pledges.
So there we have it—a realigned coalition based on failure and a non-existent positive political legacy. What can this 2003 coalition deliver that the 1974 and 1985 coalitions failed to deliver? The one coalition that might have worked, would have been in 1997, if the DUP and UKUP had remained in the Talks process.
It is worth asking, too, what role Mr. Donaldson sees for those who support the leader and who have accepted that the Belfast Agreement, or something very much like it, is the only way forward in Northern Ireland. He tells us that only 30% of unionists support the Agreement. But add to that, the 150,000 members of the pro-Union community who endorsed the Agreement in 1998—but who have been unwilling to vote for a party that takes a fork-tongued approach to it—and you have somewhere in the region of 200,000 people who are broadly supportive of the Trimble strategy.
So, let�s have a re-alignment, but let it be based on real choices and available alternatives. Let�s have a realignment which opens the door to everyone within the pro-Union family and provides a vehicle for their beliefs and aspirations. A unionist coalition which circles the wagons around an indefensible position, and shuts out those with the same core belief—that NI should remain in the UK—is a dangerous and self-deluding unionism.
In essence, the differences between the two wings of unionism boil down to strategy and analysis. There is room for both wings of unionism and both need to be encouraged if we are to maximize the overall pro-Union vote. And yes, there will be occasions when we can pool our resources in joint efforts; but let us stop kidding ourselves that one unionist party, or a cobbled-together coalition, can hope to address all our concerns or promote all our needs.
Mr. Donaldson and his federation of farceurs seem to have decided that the destruction of the UUP in its present form is an acceptable price to pay for the destruction of David Trimble. Yet, in kick-starting this final showdown, they have played into Mr. Trimble�s hands. He has acted and sounded more like a leader than at any time since he replaced Lord Molyneaux. The electorate is seeing a much more resolute and determined David Trimble. When Jeffrey and his multi-agenda cabal start bitching and biting about the best way forward, it will be David Trimble who will emerge with a united, stronger, growing and electorally vibrant party. It may be ironic; it may even be paradoxical; but the modernizing, pluralist wing of unionism could yet have reason to be grateful to Jeffrey Donaldson.
Mick is founding editor of Slugger. He has written papers on the impacts of the Internet on politics and the wider media and is a regular guest and speaking events across Ireland, the UK and Europe. Twitter: @MickFealty
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
