Racism: The New Sectarianism?…Dr. John Coulter

John Coulter

Written By: John Coulter
Published: June 15, 2014 Last modified: June 11, 2014

Racism has become the new sectarianism in Ireland, judging by post-election fever. A furore was sparked when one of Northern Ireland’s most prominent Christian fundamentalist preachers, Pastor James McConnell of the Whitewell Metropolitan Tabernacle in Belfast, preached a sermon condemning Islam. His filmed comments were beamed around the world and the Irish media was dominated by the fallout, which even dragged First Minister Peter Robinson into the row.

The storm became a hurricane when Northern Ireland’s sole ethnic Assembly member, Anna Lo of Alliance, dropped a tearful bombshell that she was quitting politics, partly due to racist abuse.

But let’s put some brakes on the situation. Ireland is not about to be engulfed in a Crusade-style race war between Christianity and Islam. Racism has existed on the island for generations.

It was the sectarian conflict in the north between Unionist and Republican which covered over the racist cracks in Irish society. The Irish travelling community has suffered racist abuse for decades. Fascist groups such as the National Front, British National Party and even the Ku Klux Klan have tried unsuccessfully to take advantage of the sectarian strife and gain a foothold in Northern Ireland.

In the north’s recent super council elections, the BNP was wiped out and UKIP only managed three councillors – hardly a major breakthrough for the hard right as has been witnessed by UKIP in England, the Front National in France and Golden Dawn in Greece.

So why does it appear that the Muslim community in Ireland is fair game for Christian fundamentalists? The answer is alarmingly simple:  the race is on to see who can succeed former firebrand the Reverend Ian Paisley as the island’s leading hellfire evangelist.

Earlier this year, the former DUP leader and Stormont First Minister announced his formal retirement from preaching. As well as being one of Ireland’s leading Unionist political figures, Paisley senior – now Lord Bannside – rapidly climbed to the top of the Bible Belt’s hellfire evangelists. He even formed his own denomination in 1951, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, of which he was Moderator – or leader – for more than 50 years before a hardline loyalist clique in the denomination decided he had to quit following his decision to share power with Sinn Fein at Stormont.

With Paisley retired, fundamentalists across Ireland – and especially in Ulster – began flicking through their Bibles to find topics which would trigger instant media fame. It could have easily been topics such as divorce, gay marriage, abortion, drug abuse, child abuse and witchcraft. But McConnell hit the ground running with his controversial filmed sermon on Islam.

McConnell comes from the Pentecostal tradition of Christianity. He was quickly followed by a less hard-hitting but equally contentious statement on Islam from a Free Presbyterian cleric.  It’s only a matter of time before others firebrands from fundamentalist denominations, such as Elim, the Brethren and Baptists, get in on the act. Fundamentalism is on the hunt for its new Christian martyr.

But such preachers need to be careful they do not provide a springboard for the far right in Ireland.

The far right has always found it difficult to gain an organisational foothold because of the loyalist and republican paramilitary groups. The existence of the UVF, UDA, IRA and INLA meant it was impossible for mainland racist groups such as Combat 18 or Column 88 to organise in Ireland. But all it takes is one racist rant from someone senior – such as a cleric – and the dar right has got the recruiting card it so badly needs.

The big danger from the far right will come on Irish streets. Already in the north, the police are reporting a rise in the number of hate crimes. Hardly a week passes in that the media are not reporting on an attack on a migrant worker’s home.

While thousands recently attended a rally in Belfast city centre to protest against racist attacks, there could equally be many who would conclude that McConnell was stating in public what many believe in private about Islam.

One question remains unanswered: how racist is Ireland really?

 

This article first appeared in the Tribune Magazine June 2014.

Share

Hurdles on the Road to Irish Unity: Dr. John Coulter.

John Coulter

Written By: John Coulter
Published: June 1, 2014 Last modified: May 28, 2014

Former Sinn Fein leader Eamon de Valera must be spinning in his grave with laughter at the thought of his party laying the foundations for another 1918 election landslide. Yes, you read correct. I said 1918. World War One had just ended the previous month and the United Kingdom went from war footing to election mode.

Sinn Fein was only 13 years old and the Irish Volunteers had really messed up the Rising of two years previous. Founded in 1905, Sinn Fein had been one of the main organisations along with the Volunteers and the Irish Citizens Army which instigated the militarily doomed Easter Rising of 1916.

The republicans were really naive if they thought they could sneak a united Ireland in by the military back door while Britain was at war in Europe. Ireland was one nation under the British Empire and had 105 seats in Westminster.

De Valera had survived the executions and arrests of British general “Bloody” Maxwell, who crushed the Rising with alarming force.

It was those executions which propelled many of the Rising organisers into republican martyrdom status instead of being written off as “those silly Irish”.

Initially, as the Volunteers were marched into captivity to await sentencing, they were even spat upon by Dublin working-class Catholics.  Those arrests also catapulted Sinn Fein from the butt of this Dublin Catholic venom in 1916 to the largest political movement in Ireland two years later. That 1918 election saw Sinn Fein capture a massive 47 per cent of the entire vote across the island, giving it 73 of those 105 seats.

Until then, Irish nationalism was represented for decades by the moderate Irish Parliamentary Party, but 1918 saw it all but wiped out by the Sinn Fein bandwagon, winning only six seats.

The British and Irish governments have created another de Valera with the arrest, questioning and release of Sinn Fein president and Louth TD Gerry Adams.

When Sinn Fein entered the Stormont power-sharing Executive with Ian Paisley’s DUP in 2007, it must have realised the Northern Assembly would be a very unstable institution.

A united Ireland will not be achieved through victory at Stormont; it will be brought about by being part of a Dail government.

Look at the Scottish lesson. Scottish nationalists did not gain their referendum on independence by winning seats in London. Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond’s SNP is one step away from quitting the Union by winning seats – and becoming the majority party – in the Scottish devolved government in Edinburgh.

Likewise, Martin McGuinness becoming First Minister at Stormont in 2016 with Sinn Fein as the largest Assembly party will not guarantee Irish unity.

Sinn Fein must win Dail seats. The Adams arrest debacle could well position the party to at least becoming a minority government partner in the next Dail.  That could never happen, you sneer. Leinster House currently has a right-wing Fine Gael coalition with a left-wing Labour partner.

In Britain, the Tories share power with the Liberal Democrats, so why not a Fianna Fail-Sinn Fein coalition as the next Dail, with Adams as Tanaiste (Deputy Prime Minister)?

But the scars of the Irish Civil War in the 1920s run deep. There are many nationalists across Ireland who never want the Shinners to be in power again, especially in the south. For this brand of southern nationalism, it’s all very well Sinn Fein winning Stormont and Westminster seats. This makes Sinn Fein an English problem. But when the TDs start stacking up in Leinster House, the alarm bells begin ringings. If the Irish and British grey suits thought attacking Adams would derail the Shinners, they badly miscalculated.

If Salmond can lead the SNP from the political fringes to government at Holyrood, Adams can take Sinn Fein to becoming the majority partner in a Dail coalition.

In the meantime, McGuinness must become Stormont First Minister and the Shinners need to take their Westminster seats.What will block Irish unity is the Tories and UKIP merging with Nigel Farage as Prime Minister.

Don’t laugh – politics is now the art of the totally weird.

Share

50 Questions For Big House Unionists: William Ennis

William Ennis is a 34 year old Progressive Unionist Party activist–part time student living in East Belfast.

Fifty questions for big-house unionists.

 

  1. Is it still okay to ask constituents to pay for £300.00 pens via expense claims?
  2. Why aren’t the UUP and DUP one party?  They are politically identical!
  3. Why do you want an economic United Ireland with your desire for a 10% corporate tax rate?
  4. Why do you want a United Ireland on the grounds of equal marriage?
  5. Why did you distribute 40,000 leaflets concerning the Belfast City Hall flag and then abandon those who wanted to protest regarding the same issue?
  6. Why don’t you make your position clear on the NHS?  Do you want it sold off or saved?
  7. Why do you discriminate against homosexual Northern Irish men by denying them the right to give blood when those who live in England, Scotland and Wales can?
  8. Why do you support a system of academic selection at the age of eleven which so obviously fails the working class children of Northern Ireland (particularly ones of Protestant background)?
  9. Do you think it is okay for a business in administration to be given public sector contracts whilst others are keen for such work?
  10. Do you think those responsible for historic discrimination against Catholics in terms of housing and jobs should point out more often that it was not the fault of working class Protestants?
  11. Why the assumption that every Unionist is a right-wing Christian?
  12. Why the eagerness to rubber stamp welfare cuts at the assembly knowing it will induce poverty amongst a great many Northern Irish people?
  13. Why attempt to score political points over other Unionist parties on the grounds of their communication with paramilitary prisoners when both the UUP and DUP have fielded such people as candidates?
  14. Why don’t you support the Loyalist protest movement unless there it involves platform and cameras?
  15. Why don’t you speak out against racism more often?
  16. Why don’t you speak out against homophobia more often?
  17. Why don’t you speak out against the tax avoidance of multi-national companies?
  18. Do you support the Trident missile system?  If you don’t, why not say so?  If you do, justify it?
  19. Why, following big-house unionisms mass rally’s of the conflict era when young Protestant men and boys where fired up toward paramilitarism and ended up in prison, didn’t you support them and their families?
  20. Why do big house unionists tend to be anti-devolution right up to the point were the biggest office might be theirs?
  21. Why the assumption that every Unionist is heterosexual?
  22. Why the assumption that every Unionist is to the right of the political spectrum?
  23. How many of your positions are yours, as opposed to merely Sinn Fein’s in converse?
  24. Nationalists seem to score many political victories.  To what degree is this the fault of elected Unionists?
  25. Why is it that only when only a Loyalist gains media popularity are you happy to refer to him/her as a “Unionist”?
  26. Why do DUP politicians scold other Unionist parties for “splitting the unionist vote” when the DUP invented the practice?
  27. Why so quiet on the issue of low incomes?
  28. Why so quiet on the issue of brown-field eyesore sights?  Are you friends with their neglectful corporate owners?
  29. Do you support super-grass trials?  If so, why, given their capacity for corruption?  If not, why weren’t you more vocal when it was Catholics they were used to target?
  30. How does one go about acquiring a ransom strip of land for a fiver?
  31.  Why do you place emphasis upon who is First Minister and who is Deputy First minister when the two roles are functionally and legally identical?  Is it to cling on to a cheap protestant supremacist vote by implying a unionist being FM is some sort of victory?  Wouldn’t it make more sense to address both offices as Co-First minister?
  32. Why have big house unionists not fought for full implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant with the same determination they had in sending young men and women to war in the first place?
  33. Do you think it is okay to say “the party comes first”?
  34. Why do you complain that there should be an opposition at Stormont when no-one is preventing your party/parties from simply withdrawing from government and forming one?
  35. Why do you want the number of Stormont MLA’s reduced on grounds of cost yet support an 11% pay rise for them?
  36. Why the reluctance to accept that the resolution to the conflict by sharing government was first explored in a document by Loyalist prisoners as far back as the 1970’s (it was called shared responsibility)?
  37. Why the default objection to the Irish language when the Queen herself clearly enjoys using it?
  38. When parties which claim to be “other” or “non-tribal” score political capital by mocking, belittling or scapegoating the Loyalist protest movement, why don’t you challenge them?
  39. If they oppose the Parades Commission on the grounds of its unaccountability due to it’s not being elected why do big house unionists accept peerages?
  40. How many factories have you brought to your area?
  41. Would you support a rise in the minimum wage?
  42.  If you are Euro-sceptic why take a seat in the European parliament?  Wouldn’t it make more of a statement to abstain and distribute the large salary among charity and community projects in your area?
  43. Why did you not support one man one vote in the 60’s?
  44. If a party which condemned paramilitarism used a paramilitary group to put up its election posters, would you consider this hypocritical?
  45. Why does big-house unionist MP’s often claim so many expenses?  Even by Westminster standards…
  46. Why do you not encourage working class unionists to join trades unions?
  47. Name one industry you have saved?
  48. Do you think it should take a full protest movement to convince a big-house unionist party that the unionist people did not want the proposed development at the Maze?
  49. Why have there been so few social housing projects?
  50. Why are only Irish Nationalist parties in the assembly batting for the poor?

 

I only intended to write ten!

Share

Unionist Columnist Pens New Republican Ideology

DR JOHN COULTER, an author and journalist from a Unionist background, has just published a new e-book on a non-violent, pro-Christian Irish Republican ideology.

Entitled ‘An Saise Glas (The Green Sash): The Road to National Republicanism, the launch of the e-book has been timed to coincide with traditional Republican commemorations of the Easter Rising.

Dr Coulter openly styles himself as “an unrepentant Radical Right-wing Unionist” and while he has been in journalism since 1978, he has latterly been best known as a controversial columnist with the Irish Daily Star.

Dr Coulter, 54, is the son of the Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE. His father – an Irish Presbyterian Minister and leading Orange chaplain – was an Ulster Unionist MLA for North Antrim for 13 years.

Dr Coulter said: “During the Troubles, I reported on the deaths of numerous people murdered by republican terrorists. But it was the murder of my friend Constable Steve Carroll in March 2009 which prompted me to write a new non-violent ideology for Republicanism.

“An Saise Glas has been a four-year journey and I am openly writing this e-book as an outsider looking in. I hope my e-book will prompt discussion among Republicans as to how they take their ideology forward, and also among Unionists as to how they inter-act with Republicans.

“I also seek to guide Republicanism away from the Godless Marxism which seems to have steadily gripped the ideology since the days of James Connolly and the 1916 Rising.

“The recent scandals involving convicted paedophile priests have driven a wedge between the Catholic Church hierarchy and Republicanism. My new ideology of National Republicanism seeks to re-introduce the Biblical teachings of Jesus Christ, especially the Beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mount, into Republican thinking.

“The e-book also examines Republicanism’s relations with the European Union, the Unionist community, coping with its violent past, and international relations,” said Dr Coulter.

Dr Coulter began his journalism career with his local weekly papers in his home town of Ballymena. After graduation from Coleraine University, he became a freelance journalist with the BBC before joining the staff of the News Letter where he became Education and Religious Affairs Correspondent.

He has also worked as a deputy editor and editor of local weekly titles and as a public relations director, and latterly in journalist training. He is married with two sons, and is a member of Maghaberry Elim Church in Co Antrim.

Here’s the link to Amazon Kindle:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/An-Saise-Glas-National-Republicanism-ebook/dp/B00JRVIQ5Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1397813806&sr=8-1&keywords=dr+john+coulter

 

Share

The Aftermath of McGuinness’s Free Dinner: Dr. John Coulter

John Coulter

Written By: John Coulter
Published: April 20, 2014 Last modified: April 16, 2014

Stand by for fresh concessions to Sinn Fein after Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness had a free dinner with the Queen Elizabeth at Windsor,

Dissident republicans will seek to spin McGuiness’ royal soirée as further evidence that the peace-loving wing of his party is getting too cosy with the British.

There is enduring bitterness about the negotiations that spawned the Anglo-Irish Treaty in 1921, a move which partitioned Ireland and sparked the bloody Irish Civil War in which republican butchered republican.

In Irish history, there is nothing so brutal as a republican feud. During the Irish Civil War, pro and anti-Treaty republicans carried out more atrocities against each other than the Black and Tans did in the War of Independence.

However, McGuinness did not become a senior Derry IRA commander for nothing. As he supped with the Queen, he out-manoeuvred both Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Irish President Michael D Higgins.

McGuinness sought to show the British and Irish establishments that Sinn Fein is worthy of being a minority coalition partner after the next Dail poll. Sinn Fein must prove that it has truly shifted from being the apologist for a well-oiled murder machine to a modern, democratic political party with which either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael could do business.

The message is simple: if the Queen goes to Croke Park (scene of the notorious massacre by British troops in 1920), and McGuinness entered Windsor, then Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams can become Tanaiste – Deputy Prime Minister – in Leinster House.

The “normalisation” and “democratisation” of Sinn Fein is underway.  In fact, Sinn Fein is reaching out so many hands to Unionism, the joke is that “PSF” should stand for Protestant Sinn Fein rather than Provisional Sinn Fein.

The well-polished behaviour of many in 2014 SF is reminiscent of the 1970s democratic republican organisation run by the late Protestant councillor, John Turnley of the Irish Independence Party, who was murdered by the UDA

in 1980.

But two more hurdles still have to be cleared before the transformation is complete. First, like the Scottish and Welsh nationalists, Sinn Fein MPs need to take their Westminster seats. Second, Sinn Fein needs to find less provocative ways of commemorating dead IRA members.

The Queen Elizabeth may have laid a wreath commemorating Irish patriots who fought against Britain during the War of Independence, but if there is to be any royal presence at the centenary of the Easter Rising in two years’ time, Sinn Fein cannot afford a repeat of the Tyrone Volunteers debacle in Castlederg. That was little more than an “Up yours” to the Unionist community, following loyalism’s demand to march past the Ardoyne Shops in north Belfast.

Just as McGuinness will want something in return for meeting the Queen, so will the British want a favour from republicans if she is to lay a wreath in Dublin in 2016 in memory of James Connolly and company.

The immediate benefit for Sinn Fein could be to return up to four MEPs across Ireland in May’s European poll, as well as take the majority of Northern Ireland’s nationalist seats in the new super council elections.

But how does Sinn Fein please its hawks? Sinn Fein bosses have been relatively successful at maintaining a public image of a well-disciplined party. A dissident republican political alternative is a non-starter. Unlike the Unionist family, there will be no split republican vote. The worst-case scenario is a slight rise in nationalist voter apathy.

If McGuinness is really smart, he’ll appoint a few republican hard men to seemingly important posts thereby bluffing the hawks into thinking they have a future in Sinn Fein.

However, in this era of the normalisation of republican politics and the democratisation of Sinn Fein, does Gerry Adams really have the profile, personality and appropriate past to become Tanaiste?

Share

Letter of Protest – Bush House Separated

Recently, there has been a steady increase in Loyalist prisoners being refused access to Bush House Separated landings by the Northern Ireland Office – NIO.  We believe these Loyalist prisoners have a right to be located in Bush House either through being associated with or supporters of an organization or due to the fact they are incarcerated for political action in support of Loyalism. Read more »

Share

There Is Nothing Loyal About Racism: William Ennis

There is nothing Loyal about racism

The first letter I ever had published was in the Newsletter.  In it I questioned the need to burn the flags of other countries on our 11th night bonfire celebrations.  I questioned whether or not the time had come to phase out practices which where much more understandable during the violent conflict than in the more politicised current one.  In all honesty, I would still like to see that happen, but another development has alarmed me since.  One I consider to be much more serious.  Racist attacks against the immigrant community are by no means exclusive to Loyalist areas of Ulster, but they do happen here and there is no excuse for leaving them unchallenged.

The Loyalist protest movement, (which retains an impressive head of steam even yet) mobilised with gusto in the wake of the SF/APNI/SDLP attack on the Union flag of Belfast city hall.  Like most Loyalists I attended these protests.  What alarmed me was the flagrant political aggression of the far right.  In many ways, when leadership was not apparent, the BNP and like minded groups had no compunction about trying to claim this movement as its own, if only in a superficial way.

Fascism makes my skin crawl.  Racism does too, and it does so not despite my Loyalism, but because of it.

The degree to which Republicans leap gleefully into spinning this problem to its full propagandistic value is one of my buttons, but it is not the only reason I have decided to write this article.  I have decided to write this article because racism is as harmful a social cancer to my community as it would be to any other.

I would like to address the unfortunate (perceived) association between Ulster Loyalism and British Nationalism.  Put bluntly, I believe it to be misleading at best and outright absurd at worst. I think it happens due to the fact that the two movements share symbols such as the Union flag.  I don’t do Nationalism.  Not Irish, British, white, Scottish, Ulster or any other kind.  Nationalism to me is a tool for those who wish to divide.  I can’t bring myself to apportion value to a human being on the basis of which lump of rock they may or may not have been born upon.  I prefer citizenship, political union, tolerance, equality, and the resolve to help others where these things are denied because these are the values which the Principles of Loyalism encourages us to embrace.  When those on the (far) right behave in an ultra-nationalist way under the impression that it is Loyalist behaviour, they are mistaken.

“Civil and religious liberty are natural and fundamental rights that must be promoted and defended by all who claim the title of Loyalist” (From Principle 2 of Billy Mitchell’s Principles of Loyalism Document)

Nationalism is about drawing a line around a group of people and saying ‘this is us!  Everyone else is them’.  This is inconsistent with cultural Loyalism and political Unionism as ours is a United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; the clue is in the title.  It’s a political Union with multiple nations, countless cultures and a rainbow of peoples.  It is a Democracy which does not blandly conscript its citizens into one single identity, nationality or stereotype.  To claim a person is not British or is some how less British on the grounds of their skin colour or first language is a vile wrongdoing.  If you consider the immigration or political systems to be wrong, then address this as you see fit with your vote and your right to campaign politically.

Politics is now the battlefield, and every vote will count as we endeavour to bring representation to our people and security to the Loyalist culture (and every other).  Acts of racism claimed falsely as acts of Loyalism is manna from heaven for those who would have our country expelled from the United Kingdom.  How could a Chinese person with an emerging interest in Ulster’s history pursue her studies of Carson and Craig toward a Loyalist path when her community is being hounded with racial slurs by those who claim affection for Northern Irelands Britishness?  Why should such a voter be pushed away from learning of David Ervine’s journey from prison to politics?  Why should an African student, in Northern Ireland to study, be denied full participation in the song, dance and craic of the mini-twelfth?  Why should a young couple from Eastern Europe just settling in Belfast not be invited to bring their children to watch the 11th night Bonfire?  Why should a person from Pakistan not receive an invite from his neighbours to hear the remarkable passion of the Lambeg drums on the 12th of July?

If you allow the ill-conceived mindset that every Loyalist must be Christian, White, heterosexual, and born in Ulster to stagnate your mind, then you are surrendering Northern Ireland by ignorance as these potential Unionists just may hold the votes to secure your grand-children’s British citizenship.

Many of our community’s problems stem from isolation, but this is not entirely our fault.  The conflict drove Ulster’s peoples into isolationist positions, particularly the working class.  But this need not be the case any longer.  Tolerance of racism will create and perpetuate a cycle of isolationism.  Streets of people adjacent to streets of other people with all the same problems yet no predilection to strategise together.  It is not because of the Polish family down the street that you have to wait on medical treatment, it is because funding is diverted from hospitals to maintain huge salaries in the financial sector.  It is not because of the Chinese community that there is insufficient housing; it is because the Tory Government have promised private landlords they won’t build social housing in order to keep private rents inflated.  It is not a disgrace that foreign born workers work in Northern Ireland for low wages, it’s a disgrace any of us do!

Our blaming those who live nearby because they look or sound different is a key strategy of those in charge who couldn’t care less about any of us.  Every minute a young Loyalist blames the Polish population in Northern Ireland for his inability to find employment is a minute that young Loyalist lets those who really are responsible off the hook.  Businesses can now quite easily gain free labour through government “work experience” programmes and so have no incentive to employ people on a living wage.  Our government and others turn a blind eye to barbaric working conditions in third world countries and so mass manufacturing operations now don’t exist in countries such as ours.  Even the brightest children who succeed in school will be culled by huge tuition fees unless their parents can afford to support them well into adulthood, and if they can they are unlikely to also be able to support them through a no-pay internship which is par for the course toward a high flying professional career.   There are obvious reasons for our lack of employment opportunities, but none that will be solved by participation in, or tolerance of racism.

 

“An equal society is one in which all members have access to similar resources and opportunities and in which they all value each other for their common humanity.” (From Principle 4 of Billy Mitchell’s Principles of Loyalism Document)

 

In a recent debate with a Republican twitter friend I raised issue with his persistent use of the word “Brit”.  To me, it is a piece of conflict rhetoric with no place in this juncture of our history.  For the record, I know this man not to be a bigot of any kind, but I do consider this term to be a bigoted one.  How is “Brits out” for example not bigoted, I am British, and I was born here!  Why would anyone else who was born here want me thrown out?  I consider it a racist term, but the fact is that the racism of the British far right and specifically its apparent partnership with strands of individuals who claim to be Loyalists greatly inhibits my freedom to attack the bigoted behaviour of others.  We need to address this.  The sooner Loyalism challenges bigotry in a comprehensive way, the sooner we can challenge the bigotry of others.

I frequently say that non-Loyalists have nothing to fear from genuine Loyalism.  Let’s together set out to prove it.

Let’s be British.

Share

All Political Careers End In Failure: Dr. John Coulter

John Coulter

Written By: John Coulter
Published: January 26, 2014 Last modified: January 22, 2014

“All political careers end in failure” may have been a maxim attributed to Enoch Powell, the leader Unionism never had, but it may be that ex-Stormont First Minister Ian Paisley senior, now Lord Bannside, is an exception.

The firebrand former leader of the party he founded, the Democratic Unionists, used two interviews on BBC Northern Ireland to fire broadsides at those within his own ranks he has accused of forcing him to quit the posts of First Minister, DUP boss, and Moderator – or leader – of the Protestant fundamentalist denomination he founded in 1951, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster.

Now in his 80s, plagued by health problems in recent years and confined to the backbenches of the House of Lords, ironically Paisley has committed the cardinal sin on which he had frowned throughout his political career – airing the party’s dirty linen in public. Like any political movement, his DUP has had its share of splits, rows and factions. But, to the media, the DUP was always united.

The fall of Paisley, to be replaced by his long-time deputy Peter Robinson, the current First Minister and former East Belfast MP, has seen the modernising wing of the party take over from the once dominant Christian fundamentalist faction.

Even Paisley’s brand of Free Presbyterianism was seen as the DUP at prayer. Although it had only around 16,000 followers out of an Ulster population of one million Protestants, its influence within the DUP was substantial. Under Paisley, discipline within the DUP was Stalin-like. The same had been true of the party under Robinson – until now. The fallout from the two Paisley interviews could see a revival for the fundamentalist faction.

While Paisley himself may never be back at the helm of either his party or church, exposing and attacking those who forced him from office will have massive repercussions for the DUP – and Unionism – with European and council elections looming in May.

The success of the present Stormont Executive is reliant on the DUP and Sinn Fein working together and holding the so-called middle ground of Ulster politics. If Paisley’s fundamentalist fans seize the initiative, the impact will be to force the DUP to the radical right, thereby putting an intolerable strain on its working relationship with Sinn Fein.

While Sinn Fein has been able to contain political opposition from dissident republicans, and a revival of the moderate Social Democratic and Labour Party, the DUP has been unable to control the growing tide of working-class Loyalism away from the power-sharing Executive.

The DUP had no option but to declare the recent talks hosted by American diplomat Richard Haass a failure. While Sinn Fein has adopted the Haass proposals, Robinson’s DUP has had to reject them to maintain party unity and discipline.

In May’s elections, all Sinn Fein has to worry about is republican voter apathy. The DUP has to contend with a range of rival pro-Union parties. Unionism currently holds two of the three Ulster Euro seats. Protestant disillusion and a split Unionist vote could put one of those seats in jeopardy.

The DUP rose to power by playing up the fear factor. Since 2003, it has won Stormont and Westminster elections by campaigning on a “Stop Sinn Fein” platform. So what will be the DUP’s focus in May?

The Robinson clique will champion saving MEP Diane Dodds’ seat by branding the other parties as splitters. But Paisley’s double whammy has put Robinson’s leadership under tremendous stress. And his outbursts have DUP grassroots members to ask privately question if Robinson is still the right leader to win elections.

Paisley loyalists think they have a strong hand because even though there is a wide range of pro-Union parties, none of them is in a strong enough position to replace the DUP as the lead Unionist party. If the pro-Paisley camp succeeds in replacing Robinson, could that encourage rival hardliners in Sinn Fein to view Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, the architects of the republican peace agenda, as approaching their sell-by date? The focus is on the revival of the religious fundamentalists in the DUP. Is anyone watching the Young Turks emerging in Sinn Fein?

This post first appeared in www.tribunemagazine.org

Share

LETHAL ALLIES: ANNE CADWALLADER…A REVIEW by MENIN

Lethal Allies:  Anne Cadwallader (Mercier Press)

 

Seen all the media hype and ‘who-ha’ around the book but as usual I won’t know what’s its really like until I read it for myself.  It doesn’t  take very long to get into the slant of the book which in fairness the author makes explicit early on.  So the author must take on board that this will sound like Republican propaganda dragging up the old, old stories. Everyone in the early 70s knew dirty tricks where going on. The recent fuss over the MRF is puzzling to a person, like myself,  who was involved in the troubles,  went to prison,  had friends killed,  seen buildings blew apart, etc, etc.

I read the book with a rather untypical slant. I was a UVF life sentence prisoner, I grew up in central Belfast  (admittedly a long way away from most of the events in the book) but I had one friend executed by the police on a  Belfast street and another friend shot and seriously wounded by the police.  It is a given, that my wounded friend was to be executed also only for the intervention of a bystander. I had friends killed by loyalists and British soldiers. I had friends killed by Republicans. I may be a Prod but am no stranger to dirty tricks, beatings by the police, harassment by the army, etc.  For many people the ‘70s in N.Ireland was a semi-war zone.

The basis of the facts are taken for granted. The shootings,  bombings and events are well documented and now supplemented by the HET. But, as noted in a previous book review on this site there is a distinct lack of context.  The early ‘70s in this country were ferocious and horrible. What of the continued IRA violence, which we as young loyalists, responded to,  especially after 1972? The emotional aspects to the killings and the suffering of the families are powerful testimony in this book. I just hope that the many readers will consider the anguish and pain that took place in thousands of homes here and in England, Scotland and Wales. Mother losing sons and never really getting over it.

There are some details I am puzzled over. Given the nature of the book with so many names flying about why was the author coy about not naming the two people convicted of killing young Duffy? (see page 72) I know the two men well and they were regarded as different,  namely in that they were innocent compared to the rest of us. So maybe this fact does not fit in well with the thrust of the book namely that the UVF and security forces were in cahoots, slaughtering innocent Catholics. In this case 2 UVF men were set up by the very security forces that were in collusion with them? The two men served out 15 years each for something they did not do.

On page 80 there is reference to a named source. Given nearly everyone else (except 2 ) are named why not reveal this? This is a form of censorship by the author?

A bigger question that arose while reading this book was, given the power of the security forces, why did they not target the real activists, operators, players?  It appears from every case here  (bar Green who could not be easily denied as an activist) that each and every victim was innocent.  (The majority of people killed by Republicans were innocent.)  The question is;  why would these trained soldiers and policemen,  presumably with an agenda to halt IRA violence,  not target the IRA men they knew where involved?  As a reader of the book I have to assume from the author that the police and army were so stupid they had not the foggiest idea who the IRA activists were?  This also do not sound reasonable when one considers today just how infiltrated the IRA had become.  There appears to be no IRA supporters in south Armagh, no usual haunts or pubs they frequent. I think we all accept now that the British Army and more so its intelligence branch took time but riddled the PIRA from the inside. (The RUC/Special branch riddled the loyalists from the inside.) I suspect there were deeper moles in the IRA long before Stakeknife and Callaghan.  Why would the security forces target innocents and drive people towards the IRA?

The author is asking us to believe that the police, the courts, the Lord Chief Justice and senior civil servants all are in cahoots here. I leave out the army because they were fighting a terrorist movement using all means at their disposal for a political end.

This is a well-researched book with a clear agenda but that does not mean we have to take it to be the entire truth.   Finally, what does this book mean in the larger context of N.Irealnd, its future and dealing with the legacy of the conflict? Does it help and heal? Given the way the story is delivered it will not be seen as helpful within the  loyalist community.  It has the feel of continuing the ‘struggle’ in a different guise. All of us have to agree on something about the past otherwise we are all going to limp on to an uncertain future.

Menin.

 

 

Share

LEVIATHAN: Billy Joe

LEVIATHAN

 

Colossus like—head and shoulders—stands out from the crowd
Bellows—a frank acerbic stream—a torrent clear and loud
A  steadfast Giant—articulate–in his calculated prose
A new—and rising—reprising star—and the one the masses chose.

Charismatic and engaging—rhetoric skilled and finely honed
Representative of those who formerly felt alone
Talismanic—his astute charms did woo the common man
And lead the way– in disarray— to a distant promised land.

HE reached that shore-of a Province torn-and with disciples cast aside
HE gained his crown—did not look down—took censure in his stride
HE claimed his throne-and stood alone—and cast his gaze below
Contemptuous then-up to the end—still basking in the glow.

Share