A bridge to the future
Gerry Adams outlines the need for fundamental changes to reach a democratic settlement in Ireland.
There are two main questions in the popular mind at this time. One is
whether an agreement can be arranged by May, the time set by the two
governments. The other is whether Sinn Féin will re-enter the talks.
To reassure those who may be vulnerable to the unionist driven proposition
that Sinn Féin is currently involved in an exit strategy let me make it
clear that we remain totally wedded to the search for a democratic peace
settlement. This includes a commitment by us to play a full and positive
role in representing our analysis and our electorate and upholding the
republican view in the peace process. Sinn Féin has no exit strategy.
The unionist parties are raising a row about our forthcoming meeting with
Tony Blair. They want the length of our exclusion from the talks process
extended. This is totally at odds with their other current allegation that
we are operating an exit strategy. In both instances they are shadow
boxing. This is little more than a sham fight. The real point is not
whether there will be an agreement by May. It is about what kind of
agreement is required to bring about a durable and lasting peace and
whether this is the type of agreement the two governments are trying to put
in place. I want to take this opportunity to explore the democratic needs
and nationalist requirements of such an agreement.
Where does Sinn Féin stand?
Sinn Féin see a 32 county republic, working through a new relationship with
our nearest neighbours, based upon our mutual independence, as the best way
to eradicate the range of political, social, economic and other
inequalities which effect the people of this island. Others have a
different view. British government policy and unionism is opposed to this
objective and no party other than Sinn Féin has at this time a strategy to
achieve it. So, this objective is unlikely to be achieved by May. Indeed
even if everyone was agreed on it, it is unlikely that we could achieve
this objective by that date.
Therefore the logic is that the struggle for this entirely legitimate,
democratic and desirable objective will continue beyond May. It is on that
basis that Sinn Féin will judge any outcome of this phase of the process.
We want to end the union. An Irish republic represents a model of society,
on which the people of the island can build a new future for ourselves.
There are other models. Which of these is to eventually replace the
current set-up is a matter for the people of the island to decide, free
from any outside interference or impediments. This is the democratic
position. It is one supported by Sinn Féin.
Therefore the broad democratic view of the type of political agreement that
will come out of the current talks process is that it must be based in an
explicit all-Ireland context. So that even while there is disagreement on
the shape of a new Ireland there should be agreement on the peace objective
of making the island a better place for all the people who live here. There
must be a commitment to the shared objective of removing the causes of
conflict. That is one of the stated objectives of this process and will be
a litmus test of any agreement.
In coming to terms with all of this and in seeking to establish where
popular nationalism stands, it would be a mistake to underestimate the
effects of recent events and the significant erosion of confidence in the
talks process among nationalists, and particularly within the republican
constituency. This has been caused by the accumulation of developments
which include unionism's continued refusal to engage, their tactical stance
within the talks, the refusal of some elements to accept a comprehensive
agenda and the particular difficulties which this caused before Christmas.
Added to that, the loyalist killing spree, the publication of the
Propositions Heads of Agreement document, emphasis on the promotion of a
Stormont Assembly, and most critically the expulsion of Sinn Féin, have
subverted the process. The appointments to the Parades Commission and the
Lee Clegg affair have accentuated that trend in recent days.
Central to all of the above is the system, the `permanent government' of
civil servants, securocrats and the judiciary which have governed the north
for almost 30 years. Their influence on and ability to set the agenda is a
matter of grave concern.
The vast majority of people want peace. Nationalists, despite their
reservations about the talks, process want to exhaust every possibility of
achieving peace and they wish to see their representatives concentrating
their efforts to bring about a just and lasting settlement.
The vast majority of this constituency support the objective of a United
Ireland and therefore would like to see a democratic agreement which
transcends partition, and which makes a difference to them in their daily
lives. They want an effective, peaceful, political strategy to give effect
to that objective as quickly as possible. They want to see an alliance of
Irish political parties and opinion, pursuing objectives which look to the
interests and well being of the Irish nation with the aim of normalising
relationships within the island of Ireland and between Ireland and the
people of Britain. They wish to see the Irish government playing a
leadership role in all of this with a common position worked out between
Dublin, the SDLP and Sinn Féin.
Nationalists are concerned that there should be no internal six county
settlement - no partitionist settlement. Many are worried about exactly how
this will be interpreted by the different parties. They understand the need
for an agreement to be forged with unionism but insist that it has to be
based upon equality. They are extremely worried that the situation could
slip back into all-out conflict. They realise that those who engage in
armed actions have a responsibility for those actions and their
consequences. But more than ever before they see nationalist parties, the
Irish government and establishment, and the British government and others
as having a huge responsibility for averting this by building,
consolidating and pro-actively promoting an effective peace process.
They are increasingly confident and assertive that a peace agreement must
produce justice. They know that the prisoners must be released. The RUC
disbanded. They want fundamental political and constitutional change in the
British jurisdiction and they are nervous about any change in the Irish
constitution. They expect an Irish government to uphold the constitutional
imperative of pursuing Irish unity. They are adamant that no one has the
right to negotiate away Irish nationality or Irish nationhood. They know
that after May, even if an agreement is cobbled together, that if the RUC
or the British Army are still patrolling the streets, or if triumphalist
marches go where they are not wanted, or if the equality agenda is still
only a `wish list', then there has been no real agreement.
They know that equal treatment for symbolic political expression is
politically important in itself but are not prepared to substitute
symbolism for substance.
They want deeds not words.
Most nationalists see the cause of the conflict in Ireland as a result of
British policy and the unionist veto. They want to live in peace with their
unionist neighbours and many, though not all, understand the difficulties
faced by unionists. They resent deeply the denial of nationalist rights and
the influence exerted by the political leaderships of unionism.
They would also feel that partition and the development of two different
political realities on the island has compounded their difficulties. But
they also have a sense that if nationalists in the north are united on
political fundamentals and common demands that the Irish government will
support this, whatever the party composition of the government. In my view,
as we approach the next phase of this process, this is what nationalist
popular opinion wants throughout the island and internationally. This
presents a huge challenge for the leadership of the SDLP and Sinn Féin and
for the Irish government.
Ten years ago in 1988 the SDLP agreed with Sinn Féin that the Irish people
as a whole have a right to national self-determination. There was also firm
agreement that an internal six county settlement is not a solution and that
the real question is how do we end British jurisdiction in Ireland in a
manner which results in a stable and peaceful Ireland. We also agreed that
every effort must be made to get the agreement of northern protestants and
unionists in the constitutional, financial and political arrangements
needed to replace partition; and that the civil and religious liberties of
northern protestants must be guaranteed and protected.
There were differences between the two parties. These centred around:
- the role of the British government;
- the unionist veto;
- improvements of conditions for nationalists in the six counties.
Despite other discussions since then it has not been possible so far to
resolve these differences or to get the type of common approach which in my
view is not only possible, but necessary, to make advances for the broad
democratic position. Electoral and other rivalries have so far stunted this
potential. It remains Sinn Féin's intention to overcome these difficulties.
Strengthening the nationalist position demands this.
All experience to date shows that a shared understanding and common
positions between nationalists on the most advanced positions possible is
needed to further the democratic demand.
The aim should be to get the British government to change its policy
towards Ireland from one of upholding the union to one of ending the union.
Nationalist popular opinion knows the limits to the talks process but
expects change in a whole range of areas and sees this as a rolling
process.
Nationalist popular opinion is in favour of a united Ireland and has set
its own markers by which it will judge the strategies of its political
parties. It wants to see its representatives doing their best to advance
the best possible agreement and it wants equality now.
The Sinn Féin view of all of this, as I make clear above and as our
strategy clearly shows, is that common positions are essential. All
experience to date also shows that the absence of such common positions is
detrimental to the democratic demand. It undermines the peace process.
Experience also shows that any alliance between sections of Irish
nationalism and the British government in the governance of Ireland can
only culminate in an unequal partnership which serves the broad British
government interest.
So what needs to be done? Even within the current flawed process of talks
it is essential that the British government faces up to its historical and
contemporary responsibilities. Britain is not a neutral, benign overseer of
our affairs. The London government is a player with its own political
interests. These and expediency determine its policies. Mr Blair's
government is, of course, especially well placed to bring about fundamental
change if he has the will and the mind to do so. The new government has
brought a new approach in style though so far the substance of its position
in relation to an agreement remains the same as the last government.
Of course, it has done positive things and I have publicly commended Mr
Blair's decision on Bloody Sunday and other progressive developments. Mr
Blair has said that the status quo has to be changed. The question he says
is how much change? Even before dealing with this question it is
fundamental, to any talks process, that all the parties should talk to each
other on their own terms. How much longer therefore will the British Prime
Minister allow the situation to continue that the UUP will not talk to Sinn
Féin?
How much longer can it be said that there cannot be a United Ireland but
that there must be a united British Kingdom ? Is consent to be forever
interpreted as unionist consent, that is as a veto ? What of nationalist
consent ?
Nationalists and republicans have to take into account the position of
unionists, but it is for unionist leaders to put these forward. This isnot
to underestimate or to downgrade their importance. I do intend to return to
this.
At this point I am trying to give a nationalist perspective on an
agreement, within the present restrictions outlined by the two governments.
This is without prejudice to Sinn Féin's position, because even the full
implementation of the Framework Documents would present a huge challenge
for us since we accept it only as a basis for discussion. Our party wants
much greater change. We remain totally committed to our republican
objectives and we will view any agreement in this phase as being part of a
transitional process to Irish unity and independence.
However, in trying to establish the wider nationalist view it seems to me
that the first test of any position put forward by the two governments must
be that it ensures that there is no return to unionist domination. As I
have detailed above it must be a bridge into the future. Any kind of new
Stormont or any effort to underpin partition is unacceptable.
Therefore, from the broad nationalist view, transitional arrangements need
as a minimum to achieve:
(a) Powerful all-Ireland bodies;
- exercising significant and meaningful executive and harmonising powers
alongside consultative functions,
- with direct responsibility for policy decisions and the implementation of
policy,
- with the range of functions to be discharged or overseen initially
designated by the two governments.
- operating independently,
- immune from the veto of any proposed six county institutions,
- with no limit on the nature and extent of their functions,
- with the dynamic and ability to grow,
(b) Constitutional;
-
The least nationalists want to see is fundamental constitutional and
political change in British jurisdiction, while in any Irish
constitutional change:
- the definition of the Irish national territory should not be diluted,
- the constitutional imperative should remain,
- there must be no diminution of the rights of Irish citizens.
On the contrary citizens rights should be strengthened. Irish citizens in
the north should if they wish have the right to elect their representatives
to the Irish Parliament and should have voting rights in Irish Presidential
elections and referendums.
(c) Equality.
- The securing of equality, rights and justice needs to be visible and
immediately tangible.
- `equity' of treatment must be replaced by `equality' of treatment,
- this should not even be a matter of negotiation and all provisions must
be statutory, and must cover all aspects of life. For example, policing,
human rights, the legal system and the administration of justice should
come within the remit of north/south institutions,
- economic development, fair employment and an end to discrimination are
other important areas,
- cultural rights are central to any settlement,
- Equality needs to be accorded to the Irish language. Bi-lingualism needs
to be pro actively encouraged and statutory provision made,
- a human rights commission should be established on an all-Ireland basis
to ensure that the principle of equality applies in all areas of
government and social life.
- the establishment of a Bill of Rights and an all-Ireland constitutional
court responsible to a north/south council is essential, combined with
changes in the administration of justice.
(d) Demilitarisation
The six counties is a highly militarised zone. A complete demilitarisation
of the situation is required. Immediate transitional steps should include;
- The EPA and PTA and all other repressive legislation must be repealed.
- A proper policing service must be created to replace the RUC which must
be disbanded. It must have a minimum of 40% nationalists in its ranks.
- This should be achieved in an agreed time-table in the context of
specific affirmative action measures.
- Pending the disbandment of the RUC, British political and cultural
symbols and the paramilitary trappings of this force must be removed.
Interrogation centres must be closed.
- A screening process must be initiated to remove officers with a record of human rights abuse.
- The British Army must be withdrawn to barracks as a first step in overall
demilitarisation.
- The Royal Irish Regiment must be removed permanently from contact with
the civilian population pending the early disbandment of its locally
deployed units.
- All political prisoners must be released.
Opponents of the peace process or those who are intent on minimising change
will baulk at such measures. Yet they are some of the minimal requirements
if a level playing pitch is to be established. Sinn Féin is intent on
bringing about more fundamental changes and I offer the above therefore not
as a precis of Sinn Féin's position but in an effort to set a marker from
the broader nationalist and democratic perspective on current discussions
and to answer the first question posed in my opening paragraph.
![[An Phoblacht]](http://republican-news.org/graphics/title_gifs/aprn.gif)