Categories
Crime Politics

Northern Ireland’s Legions of the Rearguard?

It was like a news bulletin of 20 years ago. Two Brits and one policeman shot dead.

People old enough to remember the bad days feared the worst and doubtless the perpetrators had hoped for the worst. Their strategy was to force a chain reaction that would unravel the peace process and make their fringe and outdated views relevant again.

Locating the first attack in South Antrim would bring local MP Wild Willie McCrea back on the public stage. Nationalists would recoil. DUP backwoods preachers are emboldened to make provocative statements. Simmering tensions between SF and DUP would boil over leading to paralysis of the Executive. Loyalist retaliation against uninvolved Catholics would harden attitudes, heighten fears and create further momentum for a harder line within the mainstream Republican Movement. This would be aggravated by an over-the-top security force response and a partial return of the British Army to the streets. After a number of iterations of this cycle, SF would find it impossible to survive in Government or would suffer a further damaging split increasing support for the fringe groups, or both. Arms would flow in from Eastern Europe, former USSR states and Africa. Within a few years or possibly sooner we would be back to 1980 levels of conflict and another generation would be filling the jails and the graveyards. Very plausible and very worrying. Except to date none of this predictable chain reaction has happened.

What has actually happened reveals just how much has changed in the North. After an early scary moment when Wild Willie was briefly allowed near a microphone, all parties have acted in a manner which defeats the purpose of the dissidents and have refused to revert to previous form. The Unionists including the DUP and former paramilitaries have by and large resisted the urge to use the killings as a means of embarrassing Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein has come out more strongly in favour of the PSNI than ever before. The First and Second Ministers, Robinson and McGuinness, have stood resolutely together and avoided the temptation to curry tribal favour. The Police Chief Hugh Orde has avoided talking up the role of British Army covert specialist assets. He may indeed have questions of his own to ask the army now. Like what Brits in desert battle dress were doing standing outside their barracks waiting for a pizza delivery in a week when the Police Chief had said the risk of violent attacks on the security forces was at its highest in 10 years. Reassuringly the “republican street” has appeared almost totally opposed to the dissidents who seem isolated and vulnerable to early police penetration and arrest. Hopefully, provided all key actors keep their heads, these events of 2009 will be a footnote to the long history of political violence since 1969 and the Continuity and Real IRA will be of concern to only the most dedicated of Table Quiz anoraks.

Who are the Real IRA and the Continuity IRA? The Continuity IRA derives from a split in the Republican Movement (Sinn Fein and IRA) in 1986 over the issue of abstentionism when those who wanted to stick to the orthodox republican ideology of not recognising partitionist parliaments left Sinn Fein to found Republican Sinn Fein. Gradually they developed a military wing but as long as the mainstream IRA was pursuing its military campaign the Continuity were barely relevant. Using a combination of semi-retired older operatives and very inexperienced youngsters they were notable only for their amateurishness. The Real IRA was initially a much more dangerous organisation who emerged after the second IRA ceasefire in the summer of 1997 which led to the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. This split had been long threatened and had only been delayed by skilful manoeuvring by the Adams-McGuinness faction. The Adams-McGuinness faction had managed to shift a lot of weapons and munitions out of the control of local commanders in advance of the ceasefire and into large secure dumps in the Republic. Nevertheless the Real IRA had access to much material through their leader McKevitt who had long service at the head of the IRA’s logistics operations. However they were short of manpower and were on occasions forced to rely on inexperienced Continuity IRA members. It is believed that the Omagh bomb was manufactured by experienced Real IRA bomb makers but was moved into position by Continuity IRA people who panicked under pressure. This earlier, more effective and politically dangerous RIRA-CIRA campaign was completely halted by the disaster of the Omagh bombing and the dissident factions who collaborated in that catastrophe have never regained the limited public support and ‘military’ effectiveness that they had displayed throughout the summer of 1998. The killings of the past few days have hopefully ended any hope of a revival in a similarly definitive manner.

What types of people participate in such organisations? We are told that the CIRA is strongest in Fermanagh and Armagh and Limerick and Tipperary. Limerick and Tipperary? You can’t be serious. Yes I am and recent court cases bear this out. On a quiet Sunday in Limerick in early January strange figures were noticed walking uncertainly around O’Connell Street. Skinny long-haired youths in drab combat jackets that were far too large for them, the odd pair of sunglasses, older and often overweight men and women in leather jackets trying to look important and serious. The casual observer might have thought it was some sort of experimental drama or a retro charity event. In Bedford Row, though, where these odd groups could be found massing, you would have realised that it was the annual Sean South Commemoration. Here things were more serious. A Band was playing and motley uniforms had been assembled into military-style formation. The banners said Republican Sinn Fein, (CIRA) and 32 County Sovereignty Movement, a group which is sometimes seen as the political wing of the RIRA. These are people for whom politics are a set of immutable certainties. It was odd, slightly amusing and also sad to see these people whose views once so dangerous and relevant were now so marginal and irrelevant to others in the street many of whom were too young to remember the ‘troubles’ and many others were not even Irish and who must have been really confused. Now of course this gathering appears far more sinister giving some sort of spurious legitimacy to the arbitrary taking of human life.

Hopefully some or even many of the people who turned out in Bedford Row to commemorate Sean South will reflect on the extent to which they may not only have collaborated or condoned the killing of three professional people but also have been party to a conspiracy to end the peace on this island. Everybody including the dissidents will need to learn the right lessons from these unacceptable and unnecessary attacks. Commemorations we can accept or even indulge. Actions designed to stop the peace process clock and return the island to hatred and bloodletting can not be condoned. Maybe these misguided and discredited legions of the rearguard have unwittingly provided a useful service to Ireland, reminding us and more importantly our leaders, how precious boring peaceful politics is, however infuriating and cantankerous it might appear at times, and how unthinkable the alternative would be.

12 replies on “Northern Ireland’s Legions of the Rearguard?”

If we accept that the “dissidents” that killed two British soldiers and one policeman in Northern Ireland are murderers and are flying
in the face of the democratic wishes of the vast majority of people on this island as expressed via the Good Friday agreement, then do we also accept that the leaders of the 1916 Rising also deserve to be the subject of our abhorance?
Over 90 years ago, Padraig Pearse and his group of dissidents, just a few
years after King George received a rapturous reception on O’Connell Street Dublin,
– Ireland appearing quite content to be part of the UK …… took over the GPO in Dublin, and minus a mandate from the living, instead opted to take their mandate from the deceased: “Irishmen and Irishwomen:
In the name of God and of the dead generations from which she receives her old tradition of nationhood, Ireland, through us, summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom.” Pearse, the main author of the proclamation, is claiming that Ireland, “through us” has an historical raison detre to strike down anyone that impeded their march toward a United Ireland – in the name of God, a celestial recruiting sergeant. Likewise, the 1916 “dissidents” then went about their business of killing British troops and policemen – just like the “dissidents” in Northern Ireland did last week.
No doubt they also feel that they – minus any mandate – are obliged to strike for freedom. Meantime, the people being struck are merely the collateral damage of an ancestral imperative. In seven years time we will celebrate to centenary year of the 1916 Rising, no doubt with much aplomb. However, the leaders of the Easter Rising – Pearse being a bit of a religious fanatic and likening Ireland to Jesus and the resurrection – justified the killing of British soldiers and policemen and anyone else that stood in their way on the grounds of their perceived ancestral imperative – just like the present group of dissidents do. But in seven years time one group will be lauded as the founders fathers of the state, while the other will be condemned as murderers. But they are both branches of the same blood soaked tree.

Hi Bock!

“I think they faced considerable popular abhorrence at the time.”
It would have been more accurate to reply ” I think they, too, faced considerable popular abhorrence at the time.”
Thanks!
Sharon.

don’t forget that all these murderers are facing financial ruin since the Good friday agreement and the ending of hostilities on the back of which they earned a substantial living through terrorising and extorting money with menaces from all around them and using the local betting shops and public houses as recruiting grounds drawing in those that feel aggrieved and hard done by to do their bidding.

Sharon

I can only express things my way. If you want to express them some other way that’s your entitlement but suggesting alternatives for me is slightly sinister.

That may be because I don’t trust ideological republicans and might still be afraid they’re holding a gun behind their back.

Or to put it another way, I might be worried you’re telling me what my opinions should be. In a completely democratic way, obviously.

Hi again , Bock!
“Slightly sinister” ? My God , Bock – I simply suggested a one-word change to what you had wrote , and have often in the past suggested changes/additions to some of your writings ; but I never before got this attitude from you .
And this business of me “holding a gun” behind your back is ludicrous , as is the suggestion that my comment could be interpreted as me trying to tell you what your opinions should be.
I don’t know what brought this on , Bock , and whilst I will continue to read your blog (because you are usually sharp with what you write) I will be less inclined to post a comment from now on.
Thanks anyway!
Sharon.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.