It would be a mistake for Unionists to seek terms for Irish unity now. There’s a bigger future to discuss

The time, therefore, has finally come for unionists, particularly those in Northern Ireland, to consider the terms on which they could tolerate, if not accept, a united Ireland… On the eve of Northern Ireland’s centenary next May, Unionism needs to form an assembly of its own to answer that question.

So what should unionism demand in exchange for its tolerance of unification? First, let’s acknowledge that unionism holds a pretty decent hand should it care to play it: the knowledge that, in the event of a ‘yes’ on unification, the British and Irish governments would concede quite a lot if they had confidence it would minimize problems resulting from unionist discontent. 

So writes Shane Greer, this time in the Daily Telegraph. This is the wrong question for today because it begs the essential one. It requires conceding the principle of unity however hypothetically and strongly implies that unionists are prepared to discuss terms. The stance is at best premature.  At this point I doubt it would be welcomed even by the Irish government.

There is a great deal to examine outwards before Unionists rush into a fearful huddle to wrestle yet again with the politics of their identity. The starting point should be economic delivery and wellbeing. This would be a novel departure. Traditionally in Ireland, economics were always subordinate to identity politics. Today unionists fear a trap and are seriously torn between the single market status being the slippery slope to unity or the best of both economic worlds.  Rather than duck this issue they must confront it.

So they will ask :  Is  the new grand coalition’s “shared island” strategy just another Trojan horse that opens the gates to unity in  a kinder gentler form than an aggressive  campaign  for a border poll? It’s an open question. For Michéal Martin and his coalition partners, the problem of unity based on the carrot of reconciliation without the stick of a border poll built in  is that it perpetuates the unionist veto. The problem for unionists is the slippery slope.  These are issues that can be put to the test.

Unionists should call on the Irish government specifically to decouple constitutional change from economic development. They should be willing also abandon any idea of voting to leave the single market, unless the costs of the sea border turn out to be prohibitive.

Northern Ireland’s special status with regard to the single market hands the Irish government a significant opportunity to promote economic integration.  Martin should be challenged to offer clear commitments to flesh out the vague aspirations of the coalition’s programme for government.  In turn unionists should embrace shared and integrated economic development as far as it will go for the benefit of all. There is a huge agenda to discuss here. Will it transform or disappoint?

To stay off the slope, unionists – and I would argue everyone  – need to stand  a stable platform. Fortunately one is oven ready:  the institutions east west and north south of the GFA. Unionists should become their champion and match the new Irish government’s commitment to revive and develop them. For them the GFA is the settlement not an accommodation, while recognising the ultimate legitimacy of referendums on unity.   The two governments and the Assembly parties should work together to create a transparent and accountable network of cooperation out of the tangle of Protocol  committees and GFA  institutions.

What of the British government?  NI’s is future is too often discussed purely in terms of two  parts of Ireland coming together more or less peacefully.  The almost forgotten essential corollary is cutting the British link. This would be traumatic even without violence. Either way the character and strength of the British dimension is too easily dismissed, no doubt encouraged by the complacent and wayward behaviour of successive governments since at least 2010 who too readily assumed that the book on Ireland had been closed. Unionists have always resented Westminster’s neutrality over their Union compared to even the amended Irish constitutional position on unity.  The doyen of political scientists on NI, Brendan O’Leary has   plausibly described their position.  “The future is in the hands of the English, but they care more about Scotland than NI. The Conservatives are torn between faux unionism and ruthless down-sizing”

The perversity of the Johnson government over final terms for EU withdrawal is perplexing everyone including many of their own supporters. Unionists can be forgiven for keeping their heads down until something, anything clarifies. They have even suppressed their cries of betrayal mindful that they were in part the authors of their own misfortune.  Faced with the evidence they simply ignore Johnson’s claims of frictionless east west trade in either direction. Johnson is  also in denial over the evident threats to the Union from Scotland and Ireland.  Unionists have to do their best to get clarification of the UK government’s intentions over the coming months in  the looming debate on the future of the Union as a whole. Would the Conservatives campaign for the Union or happily cut NI adrift? Would Labour and the nationalist parties remain neutral or become persuaders for Irish unity?  This is not a matter of trying to avoid a border poll at all costs. It is about the politics before we get there. Northern Ireland is at the nodal point of  these debates. It is a position to exploit. Unionists ought to feel more comfortable in the wider context  that is about shaping a bigger future.  It embraces the Union, the GFA and relations with the EU rather than limited to the old obsession on Northern Ireland alone.

Before  Stormont was restored I drafted a paper on  positioning and identity for civic unionists  embarking on dialogue with the Irish government. ( I would have done the equivalent  for the SDLP or any other party had I been asked). I think it still holds up. From the intro.  

Our identity is Northern Irish, Irish and British in any order of priority. We call all parts of these islands home. Our Britishness is not a false consciousness and we deride the idea of Irishness as foreign.  Our passport like our nationality is a matter of choice. The Belfast Agreement is our ideal settlement, not our temporary accommodation.  From experience we know this is entirely compatible with moderate nationalism and are convinced it is the right position for unionism to adopt for our own and the common good.  But we need help to develop our case from many quarters including Dublin and London…

Together at our own initiative and suggested by others, we would develop an agenda both of immediate and long term issues. Our outcomes we hope, will be all the more robust.   

.

Brian Walker

Former BBC journalist and manager in Belfast, Manchester and London, Editor Spolight; Political Editor BBC NI; Current Affairs Commissioning editor BBC Radio 4; Editor Political and Parliamentary Programmes, BBC Westminster; former London Editor Belfast Telegraph. Hon Senior Research Fellow, The Constitution Unit, Univ Coll. London