Monthly Archives: June 2013

Draw a Line Now

Is it not strange that those who did not attend Sinn Fein’s conference entitled Belfast: A City of Equals in an Island of Equals at the Europa Hotel, have been able to label the event in so many ways? Those non-republicans who participated have been described as those having taken part in a ‘love in’ and of having being duped by Sinn Fein’s hypnotic abilities. As if Gerry Adam’s sat at the back slowly swinging his grandfather’s pocket watch and gently stating ‘look into my eyes!’ If anything the majority of those who spoke shared a common concern that Sinn Fein needed to adopt better listening skills and appreciate that there is more than their truth, history and victims. The event if anything provided for what were necessary but robust conversations. The brilliance of those conversations was not that they happened or that they were forceful but that they were mannerly. The possibility being provided to tell Sinn Fein how others see their approach and ideas as wrong or requiring much greater reflection.

One respondent reminded Sinn Fein that the Union Flag drapes the coffins of loved ones returning for war in Iraq and Afghanistan and wondered if they really understood the significance of that when voting for its removal from City Hall. Others embraced the idea of Unionist alienation not in itself a flaw in the Unionist character but in the action and discourse of republicanism. I presented quotes from people who questioned Sinn Fein’s motives, language and behaviour. If this was a ‘love in’ I would not have liked to have seen the fight.

One of the more forceful comments was made by Matt Baggott who explained that “At the moment we are spending huge resources because we are required by law to relentlessly go back into the 70s, 80s and 90s whether that is through inquests or inquiries.” One could sense the frustration of trying to roll out civilian policing but being made to constantly go back to Pol Pot’s Year Zero. His contribution in itself gets to the nub of the question about the past. When oh when does it stop?
We have a dangerous system at present regarding the past which is based upon the flawed architecture of rearward actions. To put it simply republicans and nationalists have been able to put the state in the dock as it were due to legal obligations placed upon the state. HET may prosecute the odd former paramilitary, but that is not the same infrastructure to examine non-state ‘corporate’ responsibilities. This imbalance is infuriating to some Unionists who see delving into the past as one sided and wonder why Sinn Fein wants state personnel up before the courts and not others. I assume the DUP and UUP want the same outcome but the other way round. Either position is untenable, and merely repeats what conflict does which is to create the moral good and the moral bad. Corporate responsibility is nonsense if it only runs through demanding that the other opens its murky books. It is an act in reiterating societal divisions without any safety net when the ‘other’ side bites back.
The whole process is not only problematic because it is read as uneven but in that it simply indulges selective views of the past.  As Matt Baggott has indicated we are spending scarce resources in confirming what people already believed. What this mess actually does is make sharing the ‘narrow ground’ difficult as we daily underline the nature of the Groundhog Day in which we are compelled to live. A place in which we will never make history and hope rhyme as the former is over invested in while the latter in under-invested upon. I understand that we must consider the feelings of victims but what Professor John Brewer’s work at Queen’s University has shown is that victims are the people who most want to move into a future and not be dragged down by criminalising the past.
If we are going to move on we have to either have a proper truth process or draw a line under the past. At present approach will not make scales fall from eyes as the conflict was experienced in different ways. If anything it keeps them in place. At present in what was does dealing with the past present a future. We seriously need a political leadership that either draws a line or goes for a mechanism of truth recovery. If our political elite were to acknowledge that our present process is merely opening old wounds and drawing inspiration away from forward movement then we would be going somewhere. The old cliché that the past drags the future down is replete with accuracy.  The muddle we now have is just painful and I think re-traumatising.  I would personally opt for line drawing and do more for victims and their personal needs. Courts and inquires do not determine the complete truth nor reconcile victims. So why use them? Could we not go for conversation and exchange between those who survived? Cheaper than investigation with the added benefit of being more likely to affect reconciliation. Maybe start with the observation that all tears are the same. The people are capable of that whereas inquires and courts are not.
On a final point, we were reminded on Friday of David Ervine’s contention that ‘republicanism is not contagious’. I was the same person when I walked into the Europa on Friday and the same one who walked out. The only difference was I had my say.

Pete Shirlow

WHAT SHARED FUTURE?

“This society believed that it was looking towards a new future, and we consistently find ourselves being dragged backwards” words from the late David Ervine.

On the 13th October 1994 Loyalists from the CLMC ( Combined Loyalist Military Command ) issued a statement from Fernhill House West Belfast declaring  all operational hostilities as from 12 midnight on Thursday 13th October 1994 would cease . I had the privilege to be at that press conference as a realitive of mine was a senior PUP/UVF member and the words conveyed to the general public and the Republican movement through Gusty Spence were genuine and sincere. I can remember a certain sentence that will forever be held dear to my heart, it is a sentence that symbolizes the true spirit in which Loyalism went into the peace process, putting victims first . That sentence? “In all sincerity, we offer to the loved ones of all innocent victims over the past twenty years, abject and true remorse.” Putting victims first seems to be an agenda SF have let pass by, unless it’s a victim of state violence or Loyalist gunmen. They’ve went from ceasefire to government very quickly and should know fine well that in doing so in such a short time that they would cause anger , resentment and unimagined grievance to their thousands of victims and their families. They’ve swept the issue of their murderous past under the carpet very quickly and have now tried to portray themselves as the victims! We’ve had to endure the rise of SF, we’ve taken it very well and respected it, we want to live in a democratic society and because SF have a mandate we’ve no other choice but to respect the voting choice of Nationalists, however, that doesn’t mean we should roll over and let them off the hook unchallenged, nor does it mean we should not be challenging them daily regarding their statements and policies as to why we’re on a fast-track to a United Ireland! Sinn Fein talk about shared futures, but with who? Not with Unionists by their  actions, those actions may I suggest are not recent either, is it a coincidence that SF have used a tactic from the past by creating a flash point out of nothing regarding St Patricks Church in Donegall Street ? By doing so they have opened a new angle from which to attack loyal orders, Ardoyne has now been taken over by dissidents and the annual 12th day stand off has been hijacked by groups like RNU, 32CSM and dissident terrorists. We’ve seen concession after concession handed out to SF, unchallenged by a weak DUP who are led by a man with his own agenda and ego. SF have been coming at us from all angles with their cultural war these last 2 or 3 years, is this a ploy given they know they’ve no chance of securing a United Ireland which they sold and promised to deliver inside of 20 years from their original ceasefire and to keep battle hardened republicans onside ? Take the Union Jack issue regarding City Hall , does anyone think that happened overnight or planned by SF strategists a very long time ago ? We’ve also had the “Belfast-A city of equals” slogan adopted by SF, further proof that SF are playing a game of “we’re the oppressed” to anyone who’ll listen. In the closing paragraph of the CLMC ceasefire statement they set out their vision for the future “Let us firmly resolve to respect our differing views of freedom, culture and aspiration and never again permit our political circumstances to degenerate into bloody warfare. We are on the threshold of a new and exciting beginning with our battles in future being political battles, fought on the side of honest, decency and democracy against the negativity of mistrust, misunderstanding and malevolence, so that, together, we can bring forth a wholesome society in which our children, and their children, will know the meaning of true peace.” It states quite clearly that we must resolve our differing views on freedom, culture and aspiration, yet SF are trying endlessly to strip away our culture, they’re aspiration for a United Ireland grows stronger through the media, even though it will never happen, furthermore the statement says about political battles being fought on the side of honesty, decency etc, how can we have a shared future with those we have to share with when they are filled with mistrust, they oppose anything from a Unionist perspective and the DUP play there part in facilitating the endless concessions that seem to go their way !!! If they keep up this attack on the Unionist/loyalist people how long will it be before enough is enough ?

The Mad Monk

I agree with a lot of points Connal Parr has made , especially regarding the aspect that SF know a united Ireland is as far away as us uniting with China !!  I suspect by the end of the 1980′s SF/IRA knew that they couldn’t budge the British , militarily speaking , furthermore the jailing of many IRA men didn’t help their cause either : many from the next generation refused to follow thousands to go to jail from W/C Catholic areas and the volume of attacks carried out by the IRA became less frequent .  They tried to cover it up by saying words like spectacular etc: , the truth was though , they lacked the manpower they previously used to have by the bucket load !! Furthermore , Loyalism and especially the UVF played a major part in creating uneasy tensions for the IRA within their own communities by attacking that community in retaliation for attacks on our Crown forces and our way of life in general .  Yes they did change tactics , but only after their surrender/ceasefire was declared and dissent started to rise throughout the ranks of the PIRA.  Hardliners wasted no time in showing their disdain towards the Adams inspired ceasefire (Canary Wharf and Manchester vouch for that) .
Once they saw an opportunity to engage in violence they used that , as seen with the shootings of Dougan and another Loyalist in Dunmurry and the DAAD operations . It is evident that Adams and his supporters won the battle for hearts and minds and peace swept through the Republican movement eventually , culminating with a well fought victory over the SDLP at the election polls with McGuinness put in place for Deputy First minister of a country he viewed as the enemy not that very long before.  Changing to the cultural strategy it is without doubt something SF have been working on since around the ceasefires , the policies and agendas they took interest in didn’t happen overnight : parading for example were residents groups to oppose parading are headed up by hardline IRA men or redundant IRA men –whatever way you want to look at it . This alone set the trend for the years ahead , lets challenge Unionism/Loyalism at the very heart , and so they did !
I can list many things they’ve attacked from the RUC , Army , right down to the flying of the Union Jack over our capital city , all of which was done to massage their inferiority complex as they talk about being equals etc: but will try and strip away anything with a Crown or indeed anything that represents unionism.  They talk about  the symbols inside the City Hall being all Unionist and what’s the problem with the removal of Union Jack ?–Yet the Union Jack symbolizes the national identity to anyone visiting our great city . Tourists must wonder where they are when they see no flag flying , are they in the UK or not ?  The answer is— absolutely !!  SF think and try and bluff voters with false promises —Belfast is green etc: , yet they forget 75% of East Belfast is in Castlereagh Borough Council and that when it comes to Westminster , Unionism outvotes Nationalism by around 10% of the electorate in Belfast alone.  These facts are all hidden from any Sinn Fein election pamphlet .  I expect to see many more challenges to the Crown , to Unionism/Loyalism and our right to remain part of the UK in the next decade , but it will all be fruitless given SF know very well that they’ve misled their voters and the IRA men they promised a united Ireland to almost 20 years ago .  The 20th anniversary of the IRA ceasefire is approaching yet there is still no sign of a united Ireland , not by a long shot ( excuse the pun ) .  We must challenge their strategists and create the same environment for SF as they have for us —the cultural war is upon us  and it is time we stepped up to the mantle and took the bull by the horns before the DUP cave in entirely to SF and give away concession after concession . As for the IRA trying to paint their cause as just and only their cause , we’ve far too many atrocities carried out against our community to let that happen . It is time for loyalism and Unionism to wake up and fight back .  I suggest starting the fight with the Maze shrine —that would be an almighty spanner to throw into their works —lets cut their culture off at the head before it has even developed !!!

The Mad Monk

The Good Friday Agreement diminished the violence but not the conflict.
The leadership of the Republican movement realized – though it will never be admitted – that they were unable to achieve their objectives militarily and gradually surrendered.

But very quickly culture itself was seen as a new sphere to continue the struggle, promoting nationalist views while traducing those of their opponents. In the writing of history too, through the changing justification for deadly action and whitewash of past atrocities, the war shifted from bombs and bullets to literature and books.

Recent gestures – of removing cherished symbols and naming children’s playgrounds after murderous hunger strikers – are only the beginning. Unionists must brace themselves for further provocation, of primary schools named after Provisional IRA bombers and whole streets called after the victims of one community alone. One of the reasons Republicans are resorting to such a campaign is, with the union secure, it is quite simply all they can do.

It was always naïve for Unionists to think their culture would be respected post 1998 –whatever inconsistent rhetoric Gerry Adams feeds the conference faithful – and they should not be surprised that Sinn Féin wants to demean their sensibilities. They’ve been doing it for just over a century now. Yet there is a viciousness in today’s cultural taunting which is calculated to inflict maximum offence.

In perhaps the hardest dilemma for Unionism, Irish nationalists are lawfully entitled to fight such a battle. It is infinitely preferable to the killing and sectarian bloodshed definitive of their yesteryear. Therefore Unionists must find another outlet for their fury outside of aggressive street protest; a way of engaging in cultural resistance themselves.

This is intrinsically related to depicting their stories and narratives. Long ago Republicans understood that the arts offer an ideal stage to present their case. It does not make for good art because you know the way each poem, play or film is going to end: with the dream of Irish unity as the only way forward. But in perhaps their most spectacular propaganda victory, Republicans convinced not just their base but a great number of Protestants themselves that the arts represent a distinctly nationalist forum and are not for them.

On the political front it is essential – as some have already recognized – to get people registered to vote, elected, and back into influence at Council and Assembly level. Culturally it entails advancing a programme and vision through books and the arts. The recent exhibition of prisoner painting in the Crumlin Road Gaol highlights how Loyalists are movingly capable of creative effervescence. Another channel is the theatre group Etcetera, which aims to stage plays directly highlighting the Protestant working-class experience.

This dynamic need not be the preserve of one group. Something which reaches back to the essence of Protestantism itself is the force of the individual conscience – inspired dissent – which contrasts with the uniform identity cloak of Irish nationalism.

This is, in the end, as vital as Unionism’s collective resistance in the North’s ongoing cultural warfare.

Connal Parr is completing a PhD at Queen’s University Belfast on Protestant working-class politics and culture, and serves on the board of the Etcetera theatre company.

This article first appeared online at www.newsletter.co.uk on Wednesday 12th June 2013.

Justice Again?

Alan Erwin run an article in the Belfast telegraph on 7.6.13 about Bobby Rodgers and his failure to be granted a pardon for the killing of Eileen Doherty.  This whole issue of dealing with the  past  continues to loom large in our society today. This case raises important issues. However even before the article begins I note the headline  which starts, “He shot this 19 year old girl..”   Actual coverage of Bobby’s trial and even the article (see paragraph 6) says that he did not shoot the girl but the court found that he was there. How can the headline say HE shot the girl when even a judge says he did not?  It reminds me a bit about the Nazi propagandist, Josef Goebbels and I paraphrase;  ‘if you are going to tell a lie, tell a big one’. It is a sad forerunner to the rest of article.

Mr Erwin says that it was a murder that shocked the community. No less shocking that the murder of James Larkin and Ivor Vennard. No more shocking than the previous 10 women killed in the Troubles prior to this. No less shocking than the all the children killed by the IRA, the loyalists and security forces up to this date. Any more shocking than the people left lifeless and mangled on the 21 st July 1972? If there is one thing about the article it is the complete and utter lack of context about those dark days.

I have said it before  but it is a shame and painful loss for all the lost lives in the troubles. The unseen damage and the unmeasured hurt.  The British system of justice has its balance of prosecution and defence so it was with interest and surprise that I read about the prosecuting Q.C. saying that it was his submission that Bobby not serving time for the killing was “unconscionable”. I am going to assume that this term is used in its legal sense which means that;

When a court uses the word unconscionable to describe

conduct,  it means that the conduct does not conform to

the dictates of conscience. In addition, when something

is judged unconscionable, a court will refuse to allow the

perpetrator of the conduct to benefit.

And also;

“The doctrine is applied only where it would be an

                           affront to the integrity of the judicial system..”

Seems fair enough but not so secure when one looks at various other aspects of the wider legal system. Is it unconscionable to consider a state agent being present when a man and woman are about to be shot in the head for alleged touting? It is unconscionable when a system gears up to put innocent people in jail of the best years of their lives? The Birmingham 6? How did the judicial system feel when after the Good Friday agreement men were released from prison, well before their release dates because it was part of the deal? What about the horse dealing behind closed doors that operates?

I accept Justice Treacys line that there is no amnesty. That’s a political reality, despite there being precedent in this country after previous terrorist campaigns. But what’s hard to live with is, people like Bobby, both loyalist and republican, that have served their time and made constructive and positive use of their lives after their release, will still be put in prison despite the political reality. I have of course not mentioned those involved in terrorist acts that are now politically untouchable i.e the 2 Gerrys. No matter what they have done there will be a political veto on their arrest or conviction.  I can hear the denials already.

What I want and what I have said already is a clear line in the sand. Anybody, including security forces, who were involved in the Troubles before the Good Friday agreement should not be prosecuted now. But if we are to deal with those acts then let us deal with them all. And just on that topic could we look at those people who helped create the conditions and environment for the mess that the young people of this country walked into? Bobby, myself, fellow prisoners did not benefit, earn big money or have a happy time through all the years of violence and then years of imprisonment.  Does anybody want to address this?

I understand that the British government are walking a tightrope. They are managing a political reality, balancing, quite properly, the rights and feelings of victims with the need to nurse ‘peace’ along.

Bobby will be welcomed home (again) by his family, friends and local community. Not because of what happened in 1973/74. He will be welcomed home because of the person he is today. The fact that he advocated non-violence with young loyalists who would be out on the streets creating mayhem. The fact that he was presenting a better way of resolving differences by talking and not using violence. The fact that he was using his experience to  teach young loyalists not to walk the way many of us did in horrible times.

I will finish with a Bob Dylan lyric that Bobby would recognise;

Couldn’t help but make me feel ashamed to live in a land

Where justice is a game.

Now all the criminals in their coats and their ties

Are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise.

P.S. James Larkin was shot dead 5 days before Eileen Doherty was killed. Mr Larkin was 34 and a father of 2.  Ivor Vennard was shot dead 3 days after Eileen Doherty. He was 33 married with 2 children.  263 people would die in 1973 due to the Troubles.

Gaudeamus Igitur