The wartime agenda
By Laurence McKeown
It is said that a good gauge of society is how it treats its
prisoners. In the Six Counties prisons and the issue of
imprisonment has always been prominent, whether it be the issue
of internment, the hunger strikes, strip searches, daring
escapes, transfers, compassionate parole or the release of
prisoners. How the British government, rather than Irish society,
has dealt with those issues has often shown their attitude
towards Ireland and the Irish people, not just in this phase of
the liberation struggle but down through the centuries.
It is interesting to note developments regarding imprisonment in
recent years. By the late 1980s into the early 1990s attempts to
implement the failed policy of criminalisation had been more or
less abandoned.
This development did not come about due to any `road to Damascus'
enlightenment on the part of the prison authorities or the NIO.
It was as the result of two factors; their inability to enforce
such a regime in the prisons and the refusal of the wider
population to regard the imprisoned members of their community as
anything other than political. Once that change in policy came
about though, regardless of the motivation for change, the
prisons became a much more peaceful place for republicans (even
if a new breed of loyalist prisoners began to wreck havoc). The
prison authorities began to deal with the republican command
structures in a more sensible manner and through dialogue the
resolution of most problems that arose was achieved.
In speaking to someone who was on the camp staff in recent years
he remarked that they were taken by surprise when this process of
dialogue, negotiation and compromise suddenly ground to a halt
immediately following the IRA cessation of all military actions
in August 1994. Improvements and changes to the system governing
compassionate parole, for instance, were put on hold and when
they were implemented many months later they were greatly reduced
in their content from what had been expected.
What was happening of course was that responsibility for all
decision-making affecting the prisons had been taken over at the
highest level by the security/intelligence/military establishment
of the British government. The views of those on the ground who
had responsibility for the day-to-day implementation of policy
were disregarded. Whilst the impact of this new direction was not
felt so strongly in the prisons in the Six Counties - in the
sense that what had already been fought and won could not be
taken off the prisoners - the impact upon our imprisoned comrades
in England was much more keenly felt. Many of them were held in
the SSUs, Paddy Kelly was dying because his cancer was not
treated and transfers were halted.
It is interesting to note therefore that when the IRA resumed its
military actions reforms that had been pending in relation to
prisons and prisoners also resumed. Even following the discovery
of a well-crafted tunnel leading from H Block 7 in March of this
year disruption within the prison was short lived and those in
the POA and prison authorities who were screaming for the
introduction of draconian measures were ignored. Life returned to
more or less what it had been but for the implementation of a few
minor security procedures.
Those whose thought processes are more directed towards a
militaristic line of thinking could take from the above that the
only way to achieve reforms or change is by military actions.
That would appear at first glance to be the logic. However it
would be to miss the point. The changes to the prison regimes
were being brought about through dialogue and discussion between
both sides who had a responsibility for policy and actions on the
ground. There was no hidden agenda. When they were left to get on
with the job compromise, resolution and agreement was achieved
despite the diametrically opposed ideologies and objectives of
the participants. It was when others entered the field with an
entirely new agenda that the process was halted.
It would appear that a similar situation is presently developing,
not within the prisons but in the wider political process with
military fortifications being strengthened and harassment on the
ground increasing. One doesn't have to ponder long on what agenda
is being pursued and who is in the ascendancy at the level of
policy-making.
The weeks ahead will show whether or not those responsible for
political development will confront that element within their
ranks who wish to live in the comfortable security of wartime, or
acquiesce to their demands.
For many of us, our last experience of Labour in government is of
the construction of the H Blocks and the utterances of Roy Mason
about squeezing the IRA like a toothpaste tube. (A mighty big
tube by the look of things.) Let's hope they have learned some
lessons since then and are as vociferous in pursuing a political
process as they were in attempting to implement a policy of
criminalisation.
![[An Phoblacht]](http://republican-news.org/graphics/title_gifs/aprn.gif)