Withdrawal? What withdrawal?
By Father Des (for the Andersonstown News)
The British government’s change of military tactics in Ireland has been hailed - unfortunately - as a withdrawal.
It is not a withdrawal, the British garrisons are still there to try to hold the northeast of Ireland militarily and economically. And they have been given new extra oppressive powers to do it.
In 1969 extra troops flooded in not to protect Catholics or Protestants but to uphold the Stormont regime which was toppling - it could not co-exist with justice. As time went on the reason for their coming was explained in different ways. First it was to protect Catholics, then to protect Protestants against republicans, then to save Britain from terrorism, then as a bulwark against international terrorism. One explanation followed another, all to convince the world that flooding Ireland with British troops was a good thing. The final claim about international terrorism was directed to the American administration which was not interested in protecting Catholics or Protestants or British people but was interested in developing a doctrine of international terrorism.
London’s strategy was to turn a peaceful civil rights campaign into an armed conflict, because it believed it could win an armed conflict whereas it could not win against a united people’s demands for fair government. It had then to make a choice, either attack the unionist establishment and its supporters or attack the Catholics. It made a deliberate decision to attack the Catholics. Its agents said that if ever Catholics and Protestant were fighting them on two sides they would have to withdraw. John McKeague was one of their friends who passed on the message. To prevent this, they attacked one side and armed the other.
They believed that in an armed conflict the London army must win. This went against many examples in the history of the dissolution of the London empire, the Irish example included; but militarist governments do not accept lessons, even to their own advantage. They needed to control the economy in Ireland and military bases. If anyone thinks the London administration spent generous amounts of money on Ireland’s northeast, they should consider how much they would have to spend, and did spend, maintaining military bases in other parts of the world. London got a military bargain in Ireland. They still owe us a lot of money and life. And they took as much care of us as they would of any military base, no more and no less. Nearly everybody in the northeast suffered as a result of such primitive caretaking - and still suffers.
A new campaign of recruitment to the London army in Ireland has already begun. Can we hope that no Irish body will support it? That no school will admit recruiters to seduce yet another generation of children?
Remembering that London sends teenagers to fight its wars for it, not only in Ireland but in many parts of the world, one wonders at the irresponsibility of anyone who admits the gun-toters and armed aeroplane leapers into their classrooms - no contraceptives, please, only rifles, we’re Christians.
Elected representatives have things to do. One is to tell the truth about continuing military occupation and what it is costing us. Another is to make sure recruiting cannon-fodder is ended. Another is to take all oppressive powers off soldiers. And to get rid of those garrisons, in the interests of Irish unionists, nationalists and republicans, and of peaceful people all over the world who should be sick to life of the culture of death with which London has burdened us all.
Time to disarm and go. For good and all.