30 April 1998 Edition
Gnawing through the twines
By Laurence McKeown
I was speaking to an acquaintance at the weekend who aired the view that everyone should have the opportunity to be a columnist at least once in their lives. I totally agree and if the editor was in favour and volunteers stepped forward then I would gladly stand down.
Another comment he made was that neither Deirdre nor myself was spotted at the Ard Fheis this year. As he said this he looked at me inquisitively and raised an eyebrow. The conspiracy theorists are out in full these days. I had to tell him that his informant was wrong and that I had indeed been present.
I mention these two topics of conversation because they are related in a way. I will not be able to attend the upcoming special Ard Fheis and therefore am going to exploit my privileged position as a columnist to air my views in this arena. That may not be fair as the readership of this paper far exceeds the number who will attend and air their views at the Ard Fheis but then being a reader doesn't entitle you to vote on motions so maybe it isn't such a great advantage that I have over the delegates. For the record though I just want to express a few opinions on the Good Friday Agreement and the current situation in general.
Firstly, like most others, I don't think it a great Agreement. When compared with republican objectives it falls short by a long, long way. But who has ever claimed otherwise? Certainly not those who were involved in negotiating it.
So were they wrong to be involved in negotiations that led to such an ``outcome''? I don't think so. If we had been absent from the talks - a situation which would have suited a lot of people - then the final package would have been an awful lot weaker then what it turned out to be. And if we voluntarily exclude ourselves from any future participation then we accomplish the task for those whose aim has always been to exclude us anyway.
Republicans must be in there putting forward a republican agenda on all issues at all times. To recognise that the Six-County state exists, or that some form of Assembly is probably going to be cobbled together, does not mean that we must bestow any legitimacy upon that state or institution. It just means that we don't attempt to bury our heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist or try to wish it away. Which is why I am glad to hear phrases now common in republican-speak such as ``objective reality''. When we first came out with language like that in the Blocks we were instantly tagged as being Marxists and ``out of touch''.
It is often difficult though to be objective. It is much easier to go with the flow of emotions and the most militant or radical sounding statements. It is also difficult to shake off the very real desire to achieve victory in an instant and the belief in ``just one final blow''. But history, as we have discovered in our struggle, is rarely made in such a manner. It is much less dramatic and heroic. Usually gains are made in a painstakingly slow manner. The thick twines that bind the state together are gnawed through over time rather than snapped instantaneously. And all of that requires tenacity and perserverance.
It also requires a strategy that is long-term in its application and tactics that are flexible, often momentary, and sometimes apparently contradictory.
Ultimately it requires activists who are steadfast and level-headed and who understand that what they are involved in is a process. There's never a beginning or an end. It's ongoing. Because if we stop moving forward, stop making gains, then the status quo remains intact and in such a situaton those pushing for change are obviously the losers.
The status quo in the north is currently not only not static, it is in crisis. For unionists, all the old certainties have dissappeared and that is traumatic for them. Republicans have taken bold and decisive steps that have confounded our opponents who would have predicted otherwise.
My view is that we must continue to confound them, to baffle them, puzzle, confuse and divide them while all the time advancing towards our objectives. In the struggle to achieve those goals there will be enough barriers and obstacles placed in our path. We shouldn't add to them by self-imposed constraints.
I was speaking to an acquaintance at the weekend who aired the view that everyone should have the opportunity to be a columnist at least once in their lives. I totally agree and if the editor was in favour and volunteers stepped forward then I would gladly stand down.
Another comment he made was that neither Deirdre nor myself was spotted at the Ard Fheis this year. As he said this he looked at me inquisitively and raised an eyebrow. The conspiracy theorists are out in full these days. I had to tell him that his informant was wrong and that I had indeed been present.
I mention these two topics of conversation because they are related in a way. I will not be able to attend the upcoming special Ard Fheis and therefore am going to exploit my privileged position as a columnist to air my views in this arena. That may not be fair as the readership of this paper far exceeds the number who will attend and air their views at the Ard Fheis but then being a reader doesn't entitle you to vote on motions so maybe it isn't such a great advantage that I have over the delegates. For the record though I just want to express a few opinions on the Good Friday Agreement and the current situation in general.
Firstly, like most others, I don't think it a great Agreement. When compared with republican objectives it falls short by a long, long way. But who has ever claimed otherwise? Certainly not those who were involved in negotiating it.
So were they wrong to be involved in negotiations that led to such an ``outcome''? I don't think so. If we had been absent from the talks - a situation which would have suited a lot of people - then the final package would have been an awful lot weaker then what it turned out to be. And if we voluntarily exclude ourselves from any future participation then we accomplish the task for those whose aim has always been to exclude us anyway.
Republicans must be in there putting forward a republican agenda on all issues at all times. To recognise that the Six-County state exists, or that some form of Assembly is probably going to be cobbled together, does not mean that we must bestow any legitimacy upon that state or institution. It just means that we don't attempt to bury our heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist or try to wish it away. Which is why I am glad to hear phrases now common in republican-speak such as ``objective reality''. When we first came out with language like that in the Blocks we were instantly tagged as being Marxists and ``out of touch''.
It is often difficult though to be objective. It is much easier to go with the flow of emotions and the most militant or radical sounding statements. It is also difficult to shake off the very real desire to achieve victory in an instant and the belief in ``just one final blow''. But history, as we have discovered in our struggle, is rarely made in such a manner. It is much less dramatic and heroic. Usually gains are made in a painstakingly slow manner. The thick twines that bind the state together are gnawed through over time rather than snapped instantaneously. And all of that requires tenacity and perserverance.
It also requires a strategy that is long-term in its application and tactics that are flexible, often momentary, and sometimes apparently contradictory.
Ultimately it requires activists who are steadfast and level-headed and who understand that what they are involved in is a process. There's never a beginning or an end. It's ongoing. Because if we stop moving forward, stop making gains, then the status quo remains intact and in such a situaton those pushing for change are obviously the losers.
The status quo in the north is currently not only not static, it is in crisis. For unionists, all the old certainties have dissappeared and that is traumatic for them. Republicans have taken bold and decisive steps that have confounded our opponents who would have predicted otherwise.
My view is that we must continue to confound them, to baffle them, puzzle, confuse and divide them while all the time advancing towards our objectives. In the struggle to achieve those goals there will be enough barriers and obstacles placed in our path. We shouldn't add to them by self-imposed constraints.