27 November 1997 Edition
More than British PR needed
BY SEAN Mac BRADAIGH
All the other participants to the process have withstood criticism and challenges from within their own ranks to do what they are doing. It's time Tony Blair's government did the same. The pursuance of a security-led agenda is incompatible with building the peace process
Following four months of a highly disciplined IRA cessation, the only token British gesture towards demilitarisation in the Six Counties was Mo Mowlam's announcement on Tuesday that daytime British army foot patrols would cease in nationalist West Belfast.
So minimalist is this move that it amounts to no more that a British government PR exercise.
There is no excuse for British army foot patrols in West Belfast or anywhere else in the Six Counties. The presence of British soldiers merely serves to insult and antagonise the nationalist population; it has no alleged security function. British soldiers are certainly not protecting the people who live in nationalist areas, rather they make the community feel permanently insecure in their own homes and on their own streets.
Tuesday's announcement was aimed at giving the illusion of movement on the ground in the absence of any substantive changes. The intent is entirely transparent to nationalists on the ground in the North, so its only real effect can be with people in the 26 Counties and abroad.
The British army still patrols the streets and countryside of many other nationalist areas across the Six Counties. In some cases they patrol areas they never patrolled before the IRA cessation. Nationalists are still being stopped, searched and harassed by the British army. House raids and searches are continuiung. British military bases are still being built upon and fortified. Children in nationalist communitites are still growing up with foreign soldiers on their streets. Their earliest experiences are still that of living in a militarised zone. The people of South Armagh are currently subjected to the most militarised conditions in the North, with previously unknown foot patrols saturating the area, the busiest helicopter traffic in Europe ferrying soldiers in and out, the military comandeering farm land and GAA pitches and unequalled electronic surveillance of the population. The nationalist community are those who are benefiting the very least from the current absence of armed conflict.
Coupled with the move on British foot patrols in West Belfast was Mowlam's announcement of a series of policy objectives for the RUC - another PR exercise, this time around one of the world's most notorious paramilitary police forces. The announcement indicates that the British government is still intent on maintaining the fiction that the RUC can be made acceptable to the community.
This ploy should be placed within the context of last week's events in Armagh and Lurgan and of the vindictive campaign of intimidation by the RUC against young nationalists in these areas.
Mowlam should not be wasting her time and everyone else's by setting targets for the RUC. The British government would be far better placed admitting that the true nature of the RUC is that of a sectarian, counter-insurgency force designed to meet the needs of a political order which the current peace process should be designed to end. This means moving decisively away from the use of blunt tools such as the RUC to impose the one-dimensional law and order of a state which has been exposed as an abject failure.
The lack of real movement forward on the ground in the North is of course mirrored by the complete lack of movement in the talks process. The same forces who are responsible for ensuring that the role of the British army remains high-profile in the Six Counties and that the RUC is not tampered with are also at work in ensuring the minimal progress in political talks. So far the securocrats in the British military and political establishment have succeeded in slowing progress to such a level that the process is standing still. The danger which needs to be faced up to is that if it remains static rigor mortis will inevitably set in.
The onus for turning this situation around rests with the British government. All the other participants to the process - nationalists, republicans and unionists, have shown courage, determination and at this stage fortitude in remaining at the talks table and with the peace process. They have each of them withstood criticism and challenges from within their own ranks to do what they are doing. It's time Tony Blair's government did the same. The pursuance of a security-led agenda is incompatible with building the peace process. Blair must decide whether, if he really is on the side of progress, he is wiling to face down the nay-sayers, the spooks and the right wingers in his own establishment. For progress to be made it is inevtiable that this stand will have to be taken sooner or later. The time for Blair to make that stand has come.
All the other participants to the process have withstood criticism and challenges from within their own ranks to do what they are doing. It's time Tony Blair's government did the same. The pursuance of a security-led agenda is incompatible with building the peace process
Following four months of a highly disciplined IRA cessation, the only token British gesture towards demilitarisation in the Six Counties was Mo Mowlam's announcement on Tuesday that daytime British army foot patrols would cease in nationalist West Belfast.
So minimalist is this move that it amounts to no more that a British government PR exercise.
There is no excuse for British army foot patrols in West Belfast or anywhere else in the Six Counties. The presence of British soldiers merely serves to insult and antagonise the nationalist population; it has no alleged security function. British soldiers are certainly not protecting the people who live in nationalist areas, rather they make the community feel permanently insecure in their own homes and on their own streets.
Tuesday's announcement was aimed at giving the illusion of movement on the ground in the absence of any substantive changes. The intent is entirely transparent to nationalists on the ground in the North, so its only real effect can be with people in the 26 Counties and abroad.
The British army still patrols the streets and countryside of many other nationalist areas across the Six Counties. In some cases they patrol areas they never patrolled before the IRA cessation. Nationalists are still being stopped, searched and harassed by the British army. House raids and searches are continuiung. British military bases are still being built upon and fortified. Children in nationalist communitites are still growing up with foreign soldiers on their streets. Their earliest experiences are still that of living in a militarised zone. The people of South Armagh are currently subjected to the most militarised conditions in the North, with previously unknown foot patrols saturating the area, the busiest helicopter traffic in Europe ferrying soldiers in and out, the military comandeering farm land and GAA pitches and unequalled electronic surveillance of the population. The nationalist community are those who are benefiting the very least from the current absence of armed conflict.
Coupled with the move on British foot patrols in West Belfast was Mowlam's announcement of a series of policy objectives for the RUC - another PR exercise, this time around one of the world's most notorious paramilitary police forces. The announcement indicates that the British government is still intent on maintaining the fiction that the RUC can be made acceptable to the community.
This ploy should be placed within the context of last week's events in Armagh and Lurgan and of the vindictive campaign of intimidation by the RUC against young nationalists in these areas.
Mowlam should not be wasting her time and everyone else's by setting targets for the RUC. The British government would be far better placed admitting that the true nature of the RUC is that of a sectarian, counter-insurgency force designed to meet the needs of a political order which the current peace process should be designed to end. This means moving decisively away from the use of blunt tools such as the RUC to impose the one-dimensional law and order of a state which has been exposed as an abject failure.
The lack of real movement forward on the ground in the North is of course mirrored by the complete lack of movement in the talks process. The same forces who are responsible for ensuring that the role of the British army remains high-profile in the Six Counties and that the RUC is not tampered with are also at work in ensuring the minimal progress in political talks. So far the securocrats in the British military and political establishment have succeeded in slowing progress to such a level that the process is standing still. The danger which needs to be faced up to is that if it remains static rigor mortis will inevitably set in.
The onus for turning this situation around rests with the British government. All the other participants to the process - nationalists, republicans and unionists, have shown courage, determination and at this stage fortitude in remaining at the talks table and with the peace process. They have each of them withstood criticism and challenges from within their own ranks to do what they are doing. It's time Tony Blair's government did the same. The pursuance of a security-led agenda is incompatible with building the peace process. Blair must decide whether, if he really is on the side of progress, he is wiling to face down the nay-sayers, the spooks and the right wingers in his own establishment. For progress to be made it is inevtiable that this stand will have to be taken sooner or later. The time for Blair to make that stand has come.