| The Joe Horgan Column By Joe
Horgan
A momentous day surely. Wandering in by chance I managed to get the live
transmission of the weapons inspectors press conference in which the three
appointed dignitaries and the two clerics were stating they believed they
had seen the end of the IRA as an armed force. It was amazing stuff.
Stopping to think that the IRA had come this far, with a role in a Stormont
assembly administering the rule of a Northern Ireland state the only thing
on offer to them, was truly incredible. After all that death and destruction
the stated aim of the revolutionary movement, a united Ireland, seems as
far away as ever. Yet John de Chastelain’s team of weapon inspectors and
the independent observers are now all stating that they have witnessed the
giving up of the IRA’s arms. Thank God, a momentous day, surely.
The general made some unambiguous statements in that press conference,
some words that left no room for interpretation. He said that he believed
of the IRA that the ‘totality of their arsenal is gone.’ He was of course
questioned on this and pushed on the amount of weaponry and the verification
of their destruction. He said that in line with all known intelligence on
IRA weaponry from both Irish and British sources he believed he had seen
it all destroyed. He stood his ground as did the other observers but it
was one statement he made in particular that stood out. When pushed further
on doubts about his statement, he asked, why would I lie? Why, indeed. Even
in the fevered, paranoid world of northern politics why would anyone believe
this body of observers was lying or so easily duped? Surely this statement
by the decommissioning body that they now believed the IRA had disposed
of all of their weaponry would be a cause for rejoicing. Bertie Ahern said
it was ‘momentous’. Tony Blair said it was a ‘landmark’. This surely was
something that might give the north a chance, a small chance, a little whisper
of a brighter future. But sure as rain, with depressing inevitability, with
the safest bet you could ever put your house on, Unionism baulked.
The DUP declared that John de Chastelain was ‘a complete failure’. Ian
Paisley said that Unionism could have ‘no confidence’ in the statements
of the good general. The Unionists picked up on the fact that de Chastelain
said that he could not say with 100 per cent certainty that all IRA weaponry
was gone.
You could have written that script well in advance. The mantra of Unionism
distrust is never disturbed by change. But what exactly is this all about?
For a start, to pick up on the general’s assertion that he could not be
100 per cent certain that all IRA weaponry is gone is clearly ludicrous.
How could he be? How could anyone? Ever? No one will ever be able to state
that it is a verifiable fact that no IRA arms exist in the country. That
can never be said until many, many decades from now when the IRA is but
a memory. And perhaps not even then. What was actually most illuminating
is that the Unionists talked of having no confidence and therein, I believe,
lies the crux. What is really at the heart of this is that, for all it’s
posturing, Unionism indeed has no confidence.
The build up to this statement has seen the north of Ireland blighted
by violence emanating purely from the Unionist side. Loyalist communities
have attacked Catholics and Nationalists, the police and most of all each
other in what has been at times the old cliché — an orgy of violence. Indeed
there may well be a few souls around the Nationalist and Republican areas
of the north that gave an involuntary shudder at the disappearance of arms
that initially appeared back in 1969 as protection for beleaguered Catholics.
The surrendering of arms in the north has always been a symbolic element
in this peace process. It has few implications in security terms as guns
can always be bought again and homemade bombs are made from everyday ingredients.
In that case Unionist rejection, and how well those two words go together,
suggests not ongoing security concerns or a belief that a return to IRA
war remains imminent. The most we could say is that they have grounds for
suggesting Adams and co. can be duplicitous and that it is hard for them
to trust them. Fair enough. But what is really on display here is that Unionism
as a political creed is on the verge of bankruptcy and that beyond ‘no’
they have nowhere to go. The day they do will be momentous indeed.
|
