A-Infos (en) Irish 'Peace Process' : Look who's talking now

[News from Workers Solidarity Movement <wsm_news@geocities.com>]

________________________________________________
     A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
           http://www.ainfos.ca/
________________________________________________

The result of the Irish 'Peace talks' will almost 
certainly be to make sectarianism official and 
institutionalise it. We will see Unionist and 
Nationalist politicians going into competition 
for investment from the multinationals and the 
E.U. for "their" areas

Look Who's Talking Now

A SCORPION is a creature which stings first and 
asks questions later. When a boy and a girl 
scorpion meet and wish to "pursue a wider agenda" 
they first have to go through a long and 
elaborate ritual dance until they can establish 
each others' bona fides. One might think that 
something similar is happening in the present 
multi-party talks in Belfast. According to the 
Irish Times "the talks must be shifted into 
higher gear if the process is to retain 
credibility". An Irish government source was 
quoted by the Sunday Tribune (16/11/97) as saying 
"there is a feeling that more boldness is 
required".

Most of the discussion so far seems to resolve 
around who is in the same room with whom, are 
they allowed look at each other, are they allowed 
shake hands and so forth. Rumour has it that at 
Mary McAleese's Presidential inauguration 
ceremony in Dublin Castle, Mo Mowlam went up to 
Gerry Adams and John Alderdice (of the unionist-
leaning Alliance party) and asked if they'd like 
her to sit between them.

Old Wine in New Bottles

So as the talks drag on what exactly is being 
talked about? Well of course they're being held 
in secret but the framework document around which 
discussions are based seems to offer us a clue. 
This does not rule out unity by consent in the 
long run. But in the short term what is being 
talked about is an internal settlement. Getting 
rid of partition is not even on the agenda. This 
means that the arbitrary line drawn through the 
country will remain.

An accommodation for the six counties is sought 
with some sort of power sharing arrangement and 
increased cross border links with the Celtic 
Tiger. Such a deal might be quite acceptable to 
moderate unionists and would certainly delight 
the expanding Catholic middle class in Northern 
Ireland.

So much for the agenda, what about the parties 
around the table? At first, there seems to be 
grounds for optimism as no less than six out of 
eight of them claim to be socialist, these being 
the Labour group, the Women's Coalition, the 
SDLP, Sinn Fein, the Progressive Unionist Party 
and the Ulster Democratic Party. Does this mean 
that they are committed to some sort of far 
reaching change - hardly.

The Labour group wants to represent trade unions 
in Northern Ireland, whose leaders have always 
accepted partition and believe that any mention 
of it is automatically sectarian. The Women's 
Coalition welcomes members of the Conservative 
Party into their ranks! The SDLP have always 
represented the Catholic middle class, 
conservatives on both economic and social issues. 
Sinn Fein's socialism has never been about 
mobilising all workers to attack partition in 
their own class interests.

Gerry Adams' position in his book 'The Politics 
of Irish Freedom' calls for the development of 
"an Irish-Ireland Movement" and a "campaign of 
national regeneration". These ideas are hardly 
calculated to win Protestant workers from 
Unionism to socialism! Recently even the lefty 
rhetoric which served so well in the eighties has 
been dropped. Last spring, as reported in our 
previous issue, Sinn Fein held talks with the 
Confederation of British Industry. The head of 
this bosses club, Bill Tosh, claimed that "they 
(Sinn Fein) had a constructive role to play in 
economic regeneration".

What about the PUP and the UDP? Both of these 
parties have sprung to prominence since the 
loyalist cease-fire. But it shouldn't be 
forgotten that they have been around for a lot 
longer as mouth pieces for the sectarian butchers 
of the UVF and UDA. Secondly a socialism which 
accepts Loyalism is always constrained by this 
and will always defend sectarianism in the final 
analysis. David Ervine and the PUP claim to stand 
in the tradition of the Northern Ireland Labour 
Party. Facing into the general election of 1949 
that party declared:

"The Northern Ireland Labour Party, being a 
democratic party, accepts the constitutional 
position of Northern Ireland and the close 
association with Britain and the commonwealth, 
furthermore we are not seeking any mandate to 
change it".

(Belfast Telegraph, January 31st 1949)

This "not seeking any mandate to change it" 
brings us neatly back to the present talks. 
Firstly, what we are dealing with is a pre-set 
agenda, neither partition nor anything remotely 
resembling real socialism are on this agenda as 
laid out by the framework documents.

Secondly, as we have just seen, none of the 
parties (we didn't mention the Alliance or the 
Unionist parties but they would hardly be hotly 
tipped as the vanguard of a new order up north!) 
is committed to any real change in the status 
quo. Unfortunately we must conclude that these 
preconditions seem to limit the possible results 
making them almost a foregone conclusion.

What we are seeing in Northern Ireland is an 
acceptance of territorial divisions and a 
withdrawal of both sides into their own 
"territories". There is an emerging consensus, on 
both nationalist (including Sinn Fein) and 
unionist sides, that a settlement must be based 
on orange and green cultures, that are not only 
separate but opposed.

The result of the talks will almost certainly be 
to make sectarianism official and 
institutionalise it. We will see Unionist and 
Nationalist politicians going into competition 
for investment from the multinationals and the 
E.U. for "their" areas. This process, like the 
cantonisation that occurred in Yugoslavia, will 
result in the gap between workers being 
reinforced making the job of socialists even 
harder. The "carnival of reaction" which James 
Connolly predicted will deepen.

There is another fundamental problem with these 
talks for anarchists. Even if the negotiations 
were for British withdrawal or to set up a united 
socialist Ireland, what about the people doing 
the talking? Alderdice, Trimble, Hume, Adams, et 
al; none of these guys have any real mandate from 
the community. Of all the parties only Sinn Fein 
made some pretence of consulting "their 
community" after the last cease-fire. Even then 
it was no more than the leadership trying to sell 
a previously worked out deal to the voters.

We favour direct not representative democracy. 
This means that mass meetings are held in 
workplaces, schools and communities and 
negotiators are elected on the basis of the 
mandate of these meetings. If they don't obey 
these mandates they are booted out. Genuine 
community delegates should be doing the talking.

This is a far cry from Northern Ireland. The 
IRA's struggle against the British state has 
always involved a small group "sorting things 
out" on behalf of the nationalist community. 
People are called out by both nationalists and 
unionists for riots and demonstrations but they 
are reduced to the role of stage armies magically 
evoked and carefully controlled by their leaders. 
They have no say in how they are "represented".

We don't ask for much !! Instead of a peace 
process, we want a united struggle to end 
partition and build socialism. This won't be 
easy, we have to build real workers' unity and 
this means winning Protestant workers away from 
loyalism and unionism. Although Protestant 
workers are marginally better off on average, all 
workers in Northern Ireland lose out with the 
lowest wages and highest unemployment in Britain.

The recent strike in the Montupet car components 
factory where 280 workers of both religions held 
together for nine weeks, against attempts by the 
bosses to stir up sectarianism, shows that around 
economic issues unity can be built. The trick is 
to move beyond this to anti-imperialist unity. 
Otherwise all we are looking at is more of the 
same.

Conor McLoughlin
-- 
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
           Workers Solidarity Movement

http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/wsm.html
EMAIL: wsm_ireland@geocities.com

If you putting any of this material on a web page or reprinting it
elsewhere _please_ include the URL above

The latest Workers Solidarity is on the web at
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws98.html

     ****** A-Infos News Service *****
  News about and of interest to anarchists

Subscribe -> email MAJORDOMO@TAO.CA
             with the message SUBSCRIBE A-INFOS
Info      -> http://www.ainfos.ca/
Reproduce -> please include this section