Uncertain path in Northern Ireland

“We are satisfied that the arms decommissioned represent the totality of the IRA’s arsenal,” said Canadian General John de Chastelain on Monday when, as head of the independent monitoring body, he confirmed the Irish Republican Army finally had destroyed its arms cache.

His conclusion was echoed by the two Catholic and Methodist clergymen who witnessed the destruction.

And it was accompanied by British and Irish government leaks to the effect that, after this “historic development,” the Northern Ireland power-sharing Executive, including Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness as ministers of the Crown, would soon be up and running again — probably by New Year.

Not before rain fell on this parade, however, from a cloud no bigger than a man’s hand.

In the same Monday press conference, Gen. de Chastelain qualified his conclusion, saying, “We can never be completely certain.” They had to rely to some extent on the IRA’s word.

His Finnish decommissioning colleague added to the uncertainty when he seemed to confirm no weapons destroyed dated later than 1996. The IRA is known to have acquired weapons in 1999 (one was used to murder a dissident.)

And in a third and especially significant wrinkle, a writer in the Guardian (the British newspaper most sympathetic to Irish republicanism) alleged a deal was forged behind Gen. de Chastelain’s back between the British government and the IRA that would allow the slightly former terrorists to retain side arms for self-defense.

What are we to make of these cross-currents? The smart money in Anglo-Irish journalism suggests the IRA destroyed the heavy stuff it no longer needs against the British Army. After all, the war against the British state is over. But it is quietly keeping smaller arms it needs to enforce its authority against dissenters in the Catholic ghettoes.

In the mordant words of Henry MacDonald in the Guardian: “These handguns … remind those inside the nationalist community who are not “on message” with Sinn Fein that to challenge the hegemony of the republican movement can still have fatal consequences.”

Still, the threat of bombing London apparently has ended. That is enough for London, Dublin and Washington to declare the IRA has purged its sins and its Siamese twin, Sinn Fein, therefore eligible to return to ministerial office.

Under the rules of power-sharing, however, such an outcome, requires consent of the unionist majority — and in particular of the Rev. Ian Paisley’s Democratic Unionist Party. He and other unionists still resist on grounds Sinn Fein-IRA should face a long penance of nonviolence before being trusted with power again.

Until two weeks ago such resistance would probably have prevailed. But the moral authority of the Protestant and unionist community has been seriously undermined by the “loyalist” riots across Northern Ireland a fortnight ago.

These began in Belfast but spread quickly to Newtonabbey, Carrickfergus, Lisburn, Larne, north Down and Ards. More than 140 bombs were thrown and 115 shots fired at police. Eighty-one police officers were injured. And, rather than spontaneous outbursts, the riots apparently were organized by Protestant organizations such as the Orange Order.

Why did the loyalists damage their own side so spectacularly? Insofar as the riots had anything like a rational cause, it was that “loyalists” felt London and Dublin had ignored the unionist majority. The governments had appeased Sinn Fein because the IRA was ready and able to use violence and intimidation. Very well, the loyalists would do the same and get respect too.

There is a grain of truth in this argument. British Minister Peter Hain confirmed as much when he listed the benefits to Protestants of the Good Friday power-sharing agreement. These included Dublin’s acceptance that Irish unity would need majority consent in the North; in other words, not tangible gains but avoidance of possible defeats and a very slight strengthening of the status quo. It is not very persuasive.

Story Continues →