September 27th, 2013
In an article published in today’s
Belfast Telegraph, Sinn Féin MLA Raymond McCartney gives a republican analysis
of where political unionism is at.
The Foyle MLA said:
“While a silent centre within broader
unionism recognised that the end to conflict and beginning of negotiations put
us all on a journey of change and transformed the political landscape, other
unionists are challenging their elected leadership.
“They ask if republicans were
supposed to have been defeated, then why can orange marches not parade where
they wish; why does the Parades Commission make determinations on parades; why
should the use of flags and emblems be subject to compromise; why should the
Irish identity and republican tradition be accorded equality? That section of
unionism believes that equality and compromise renders them losers.”
The Sinn Féin MLA said this challenge
from within unionism opposed to equality has sent the unionist political
leadership into a tailspin, and shifted much of it closer to the rejectionist
right wing of unionism.
“That is the
context for their inflammatory language of “cultural war” and
“de-Britification”; and all as a pretext to stop change, to perpetuate
sectarianism and maintain the “them and us” mindset, which divides our people.
“They cannot accept that there is no
single narrative for what happened in the north and they cannot countenance an
alternative that does not match their view that equates to ‘unionists good’,
‘republicans bad’.”
McCartney said the refrain from those
unionists opposed to the Good Friday Agreement is that ‘the unionist community
has been required to give at every turn’.
“What they really mean is that
unionism is no longer the dominant power; that it now has to share power rather
than being able to enforce its agenda on the nationalist/republican community.
“That is the context we have to see
this summers events in and it is the context that will no doubt dominate the
thinking of some as we go through the Haass talks.
“The question that we must all ask
ourselves therefore is - is there a unionist leader who is capable of being
honest with the unionist electorate and giving them real leadership rather than
simply following the loudest siren voice?” CRÍOCH/END
*Below is the full text of Raymond
McCartney’s article:
“Of late, and particularly throughout
the summer, many people have been left confused and bewildered by the antics of
unionism in general and political unionism in particular.
In order to fully
understand what is happening within unionism today we need to look back to 1994
and remember the comment of the then leader of the Ulster Unionist party about
the IRA ceasefire. He is reported as saying; “a
prolonged IRA ceasefire could be the most destabilising thing to happen to
unionism since partition”.
What James Molyneaux correctly
recognised at the time was that republicans had not been defeated and that
changes loomed with the onset of negotiations. In seeking to disguise that
simple fact unionists had sought to paint a picture of republican defeat. They
continuously sold that message to their electorate in the hope of retaining
their votes; they failed to positively promote the Good Friday Agreement as the
historic compromise it represented. However, time has moved on.
While a silent
centre within broader unionism recognised that the end to conflict and
beginning of negotiations put us all on a journey of change and transformed the
political landscape, other unionists are challenging their elected leadership.
They ask if republicans were supposed
to have been defeated, then why can orange marches not parade where they wish;
why does the Parades Commission make determinations on parades; why should the
use of flags and emblems be subject to compromise; why should the Irish
identity and republican tradition be accorded equality? That section of
unionism believes that equality and compromise renders them losers.
The
challenge from within unionism opposed to equality has sent the unionist
political leadership into a tailspin, and shifted much of it closer to the
rejectionist right wing of unionism. That is the context for their inflammatory
language of “cultural war” and “de-Britification”; and all as a pretext to stop
change, to perpetuate sectarianism and maintain the “them and us” mindset,
which divides our people.
A secondary factor of this has been the abandoning
of their liberal outreach agenda to Catholics to support the union. Instead,
over the summer, we have witnessed unionist political leaders, cosy up to the
worst elements of loyalism, as they seek to out do each other to prove who is
the most ‘true blue’.
How otherwise can we make sense of unionist leaders
asserting a common refrain of ‘we will not allow history to be re-written’?
There is an old maxim, accepted as a truism that the victors write the history,
so as far as unionists are concerned they won and there can only be one
history. However, the reality is that there is no agreed history and their
version of it is not universally accepted.
They cannot accept that there is no
single narrative for what happened in the north and they cannot countenance an
alternative that does not match their view that equates to ‘unionists good’,
‘republicans bad’.
They rail against republicans remembering our dead,
claiming that we have inflicted pain and hurt on their community but they fail
to recognise the similar pain and hurt that exists within republican
communities when those that inflicted that pain and hurt are commemorated.
For
those unionists who have always opposed the Good Friday Agreement the refrain
is that ‘the unionist community has been required to give at every turn’. What
they really mean is that unionism is no longer the dominant power; that it now
has to share power rather than being able to enforce its agenda on the
nationalist/republican community.
It is also possible that fear of
demographic change and the inevitability of more change in the north may be
causing genuine instability within some sections of political unionism, even
though republicans will never allow the rights of unionist and protestant
citizens to be undermined.
That is the context we have to see this summers
events in and it is the context that will no doubt dominate the thinking of
some as we go through the Haass talks. The question that we must all ask
ourselves therefore is - is there a unionist leader who is capable of being
honest with the unionist electorate and giving them real leadership rather than
simply following the loudest siren voice?
If there is such a leader and
he - they are all men - possesses the political will, then the Haass talks will
present another opportunity to resolve some very difficult issues. This is a
huge challenge to us all. But we need to approach these talks with an open mind
and in listening mode,
The requirement on all of us as we enter these talks
is that we are resolute in our determination to stand faithfully by any
agreements that we reach and that we treat each other with equality, mutual
respect and parity of esteem. This is essential if we are to reach resolution
of the prevailing issues. If we could agree these as underpinning
principles for the Haass all-party talks, we could be more confident of success
than ever before.”
Sinn Féin Mountmellick – Serving The Community
No comments:
Post a Comment