Adams could destablise the DUP?

This fascinating op-ed in the Belfast Telegraph sees most of the negotiating cards stacked with Gerry Adams. It argues that his internal position within the party and the wider movement is unassailable.

It further suggests the DUP has mismanaged its constituency’s expectations of a deal, that Adams might look in that area for further advantage over Unionism:

“…should Adams decide to play for high stakes, he would either come away with a deal or he would have revealed a great weakness in the DUP liberals – their inability to deliver the whole party and the more sceptical half of the unionist electorate. Both scenarios must have their attractions for Sinn Fein”.

But does it suit Adams’s purpose at this stage to expose DUP liberalism as a will-‘o-the-wisp? The likelihood is that he will be indulgent for a little while yet. If he reveals that there is no prospective DUP bride he closes off the possibility of the Lord changing that situation”.

There’s no byline on the internet version. Does anyone know who the annonymous analyst is?

  • peteb

    I saw that too, Mick, and I would be interested in who claimed authorship.

    It looks a fairly reasonable position but I did find Gerry Moriarty’s view in his Irish Times article, blogged below, a more convincing assessment of the relative positions of the two parties in question – “The DUP and Sinn F

  • DessertSpoon

    I hope he is wrong how dare any politician after everything that has happened in NI work for failure because it won’t hurt their vote. Perhaps I hope for too much in assuming those at the talks are there to do a deal for the future and not for their own selfish interests. It is unexcusable and unforgiveable to allow this to drift any further or any longer – 2005 because of an election or even 2006 because of an election – There are always elections if we wait and stop everytime we’ll get nothing done but maybe that’s what they want.

  • James

    When was it ever in Sinn Fein’s interest to stabilize Northern Ireland?

    Connect the dots . . . .