The chief theory behind the latest slapstick collapse of what is still called the Irish Peace process, despite being sponsored by Bush and Blair, the butchers of Falluja, is what is called the 'if only ..? theory.
According to this theory, the prescriptions of British imperialism and Irish capitalism - the continuation of partition and the relaunching of a local assembly based on the sectarian designation of its members - are the best possible basis for justice, peace and security in Ireland.
The process continuously collapses, not because it is inherently unstable, but because of minor untoreseen glitch that can be put right and allow the inhabitants of the North of Ireland to enter the promised land.
The 'if only..' aspect is usually some oversight by the IRA - if only, after ten years decommissioning, saying they surrender, recognising the northern colony and agreeing to support the state forces - if only they could convince they meant it!
This theory has its minor counterpart in a republican plaint - 'if only the unionists ...?. The latest version holds that Ian Paisley did not mean to do a deal now because he would find himself going into an election linked to the Provos. But its supporters believe with equal fervency that Paisley will step forward after the British general election to finally resolve outstanding problems.
Both versions of this theory are wrong. No-one could read the documents released by the London and Dublin governments and seriously believe that the Provos had held back in surrendering.
No-one could read the
documents released
by the London and
Dublin governments
and seriously believe
that the Provos had
held back in surrendering.
In a statement clearly worded by the British government, albeit with consultation, they promise to destroy their weaponry and essentially disband their organisation.
They commit themselves to support the Northern state and changes to the Good Friday Agreement that tilt it strongly in the direction of majority rule by the Paisleyites.
They support a police force that retains an RUC reserve as a Protestant militia and thespecial branch deeply implicated in sectarian murder and the use of plastic bullets.
The Provos had agreed to photographs of the destruction of weapons. Even after the collapse of the deal, the IRA statement is about 'humiliating' photographs -hinting that, if they could cool down their more emotional supporters, some nonhumiliating photographs could be arranged.
Throughout the Good Friday process the Adams leadership has presented their surrender to British imperialism to their base as a series of victories forced from imperialism.
To hold to this story, Adams had to present the final decommissioning of arms alongside a triumphant return to government in the North.
Months of pressure from London and Dublin led to a retreat. The republican leadership agreed to split the difference.
The IRA armoury would be destroyed in December but photographic evidence held back until February and released on the day before the reconvening of the local Stormont executive and their return to ministerial positions.
The Paisleyite understanding was quite different. They envisaged unconditional surrender by the republicans who would throw themselves upon the mercy of their enemies and agree any terms offered them.
From this perspective, the collapse of the deal was not a temporary glitch, but a fundamental difference on the process that was taking place.
The whole episode has been a disaster for the Provos. By publishing the terms of the agreement, the London and Dublin governments have banked their latest concessions and will use it force further surrender.
The view that Paisley didn't mean to deal now but will deal in the future, is correct in the former part of the thesis but not in the latter. Paisley told the world that his aim was to humiliate the Provos.
Shouting from the rooftops that they must wear sackcloth and ashes was clearly meant to obstruct a deal, but obscures the fact that DUP programme for a settlement extends much further - to the old Stormont of Protestant rule, red in tooth and claw.
The falsity of claims that the DUP were anxious to clinch a deal and enter a power-sharing government were shown after the collapse of the talks. Paisley and his supporters showed complete unconcern, in contrast to the barely concealed panic of the republicans.
Paisley upped the ante, saying that he wanted much more detailed photographic evidence and more unionist witnesses. He broke off relations with Dublin, presented Blair with an ultimatum, and The view that Paisley didn't mean to deal now but will deal in the future, is correct in the former part of the thesis but not in the warned of 'dire consequences' if the IRA tried to surrender without his permission!
This demand for unconditional surrender establishes as part of the political discourse that the original colonial Protestant statelet in the North of Ireland was legitimate and the long campaign to overthrow it illegitimate.
It follows as night follows day that 'democracy' - le majority rule in a Protestant statelet - is the only stable solution and that attempts to impose a forced coalition of Unionist and Nationalist the central plank of the old
UP OCRATIC TONISTS Paisley has spent his entire life attacking Unionism
from the right Good Friday Agreement -should be abandoned for good.
It from this perspective that talk of a deal to restore devolved government involving the Democratic Unionist Party should be understood. They do genuinely want to rule in a Stormont parliament. They do forsee a settlement that includes Catholics. But the Catholic role is a subordinate one.
Paisley has spent his entire life attacking Unionism from the right for being soft in defending Protestant sectarian privileges. Now he has finally defeated Trimble he wasn't going to concede a settlement based on equal shares for two sectarian groups. Paisley not only had to humiliate the Provos to sign a deal but humiliate them at every turn in order to keep his own base at bay.
Only the absolute commitment of the Irish and British media to an imperialist settlement has blinded them to this reality -that, and the fact that the proposed deal had actually broken completely with the nostrums of the GFA, and conceded to unionism major elements of majority rule.
This is the significance of the December collapse. It is not another routine collapse of the old ramshackle structures of Good Friday. This is a new deal - which has at its core elements of the majority rule on which the original Stormont regime was based.
The last stable (temporary) solution for British rule in Ireland was the old Stormont; a Protestant parliament and SLaLC ruling a (majority) Protestant people, using a mixture of sectarian discrimination, state repression and extra-legal death squads to maintain partitior and
repress the Catholic popula tion and the small radical socialist tradition amongst both Protestant and Catholic workers.
Over two decades of armed conflict led to a common agreement between London and Dublin (the Hillsborough agreement). Dublin formally recognised the partitioned state and looked for reforms that would recognise some Catholic rights within that state. The Provos climbed on board under the tutelage of Irish capital and the Good Friday agreement was born.
At its centre was the need to win the support of its unionist base and continue to justify British military occupation. But the agreement could not deliver equity of sectarian privilege. One section must be dominant, otherwise there would be little point to sectarlanism. Unionist pressure forced a series of crises until the agreement fell to the right.
That is the significance of the latest collapse. The "Daughter of Good Friday" had been modified to emphasise the totality of republican surrender; unconditional support for the partitionist colony and its state institutions.
This would have given Paisley what Trimble had been unable to win; institutional recognition of Protestant majority rule. The fact that this deal collapsed, and collapsed to the right amid Paisleyite objections, is of tremendous significance.
Just how successful the Paisleyite strategy has been, and how much further to the right they will be able to force the process, is evidenced by the storm of condemnation of the Provos after the collapse. London and Dublin demanded immediate capitulation as the only way to conciliate Paisley, ignoring the fact that the DUP simply make more extreme demands as one set are satisfied.
The British recognised the loyalist UDA "ceasefire' in two weeks before the deal deadline, despite the fact that the British monitoring comopposition, the resilience of the Muslim community and the militancy of the Iraqi resistance. They began worrying that the debacle would leave them holding the baby.
page 11 of the scan
They hoped that someone else would do the job for them. But all they got was useless Short, meek Cook and loyal Brown. So the judges broke ranks.
Though welcome at any time, a decisive judgement at an earlier stage might have seriously undermined Blair's credibility in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.
Another question is what now? Despite the temptation to regard this as a minor tiff