PRC-UTE
9th July 2005, 20:56
WAS THE IRA CAMPAIGN SECTARIAN?
A response to Stephen King and J.O'Hagan
by Liam O'Ruairc
In his letter to the editors of "Fourthwrite", J O'Hagan writes: "I'd be interested to read a response by your collective to the piece by Stephen King who argues that the campaign was 'undoubtedly sectarian' all along. Your man Liam O'Ruairc seems to believe that the IRA planting bombs for 30 years and cleaving the working class had some connection with the 'tradition of the oppressed'. Perhaps he can show how the campaign wasn't sectarian, divisive and ultimately a terrible waste of life and talent."
What follows is a response to Stephen King and J. O'Hagan. Note that they do not present any evidence to back their claims.In fact, there is no objective basis to qualify the IRA campaign as being sectarian in nature. Empirical evidence indicates to the countrary; both in terms of casualties and ideology.
According to Malcolm Sutton's "Index to Troubles related deaths" (Beyond the Pale, Belfast, 1994 -a reliable source of figures), the Provisional IRA has been responsible for the deaths of 1758 people in the period between January 1 1969 and December 31 1993. Of those, 345 (19.6% of total IRA killings)were uninvolved Protestant civilians (uninvolved meaning they were not active loyalists or working for the security forces etc.), a third (106 of them) killed in 1975-1976 alone. And among those 345 deaths, 133 were the result of deliberate sectarian killings. It also should be noted that 85 of these sectarian killings took place in the 1975-1976 period. The majority of IRA victims (around 1000 that is more than 50%) were members of the British security forces (British Army, RUC, UDR, ...). From these figures, it is clear that the IRA campaign was directed against the British state rather than the protestant community. It was not sectarian in nature, although some individual sectarian attacks and murders unfortunately did take place (like the Kingsmill massacre in 1976). But sectarian murders committed by the IRA were more the exception than the rule (as they represent 133 killings on a total of 1758), especially given the fact that the vast majority of them (85) were committed in a short period of time (1975-1976). Relative to loyalist killings, the non-sectarian nature of the IRA campaign becomes even more evident. In the 1969-1993 period, loyalist paramilitaries have been responsible for the killing of 911 people. Of those, 612 were uninvolved innocent catholic civilians (67.2%), and a substantial number of the rest were Protestants killed because they were married to or mistaken for a Catholic. The loyalists explicitely target civilian members of the Roman Catholic community. Such a campaign is clearly sectarian in nature.
It could be objected to our argument that because security forces like the RUC, UDR-RIR are predominantly Protestant in composition, the IRA campaign against them is in fact sectarian. The same could also apply for workers who have been murdered because they worked for the security forces. Or that because bombing campaigns have destroyed predominantly protestant businesses or towns, the attacks are sectarian in nature. Empirical evidence suggests that the IRA did not target the RUC, UDR or construction workers specifically because they were Protestants. The IRA kills RUC or UDR members and alleged "collaborators" irrespective of them being Catholics or Protestants; in the same way that when the British Army kills an IRA member, the volunteer is killed for being an IRA activist and not for being Catholic. And predominantly Catholic towns such as Derry or Strabane have suffered as much from IRA bomb attacks than predominantly Protestant towns like Lisburn.
Let's move now from empirical evidence to the motivations behind the IRA campaign. The republican ideology is non-sectarian in nature. Republicanism, in Tone's words, aims to substitute the common name of Irishmen instead of Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter. One cannot be sectarian and republican at the same time. That has unfortunately not prevented some elements of the IRA of being sectarian; but non-sectarianism is an IRA organisational ethos. Otherwise, it would be very hard to explain why a small number of Protestants were active in the IRA. Loyalism, by contrast, has never produced a Catholic version of Ronnie Bunting. One has yet to find Catholics who were members of the UVF or the UDA. And at the level of ideology, loyalism is characterized by Protestant exclusivism. Loyalists hate Catholics not for being Nationalists, but just because they are Catholics.
The IRA campaign was no more sectarian than ANC attacks against white commercial premisses and security forces were racist.
While undoubtedly, there are many aspects of the IRA military campaign which have indeed strengthened (as opposed to have caused) the sectarian divisions in the Irish working class, it is wrong to absolutise these aspects and present them, as J.O'Hagan does, as if they were the only ones. No categories or phenomena are absolute, since all stand in relative connection; the point is to understand what is most fundamental, most important to the practical politics of any given situation. J. O'Hagan fails to do this, since the main feature of IRA violence is that it is the violence of the oppressed masses directed against the oppressor and arising out of profound economic and social causes; out of the age-old struggle of the Irish people for justice and democracy, and in the present phase of the struggle, directly out of the working class revolt in the six counties. The IRA campaign is intrinsically linked to the "tradition of the oppressed" and not to sectarianism.
Liam O'Ruairc
13-06-2000
NOTE:
I have found those two articles very helpful:
* Robert W. White "The Irish Republican Army: An assessment of sectarianism" in "Terrorism and Political Violence", vol.9 n.1, Spring 1997, pp.20-56
* Robert W. White "The Irish Repubican Army and Sectarianism: Moving beyond the annectdote" in "Terrorism and Political Violence", vol.9 n.2, Summer 1997, pp.119-131
source (http://rwg.phoblacht.net/fwcritic4.html)
A response to Stephen King and J.O'Hagan
by Liam O'Ruairc
In his letter to the editors of "Fourthwrite", J O'Hagan writes: "I'd be interested to read a response by your collective to the piece by Stephen King who argues that the campaign was 'undoubtedly sectarian' all along. Your man Liam O'Ruairc seems to believe that the IRA planting bombs for 30 years and cleaving the working class had some connection with the 'tradition of the oppressed'. Perhaps he can show how the campaign wasn't sectarian, divisive and ultimately a terrible waste of life and talent."
What follows is a response to Stephen King and J. O'Hagan. Note that they do not present any evidence to back their claims.In fact, there is no objective basis to qualify the IRA campaign as being sectarian in nature. Empirical evidence indicates to the countrary; both in terms of casualties and ideology.
According to Malcolm Sutton's "Index to Troubles related deaths" (Beyond the Pale, Belfast, 1994 -a reliable source of figures), the Provisional IRA has been responsible for the deaths of 1758 people in the period between January 1 1969 and December 31 1993. Of those, 345 (19.6% of total IRA killings)were uninvolved Protestant civilians (uninvolved meaning they were not active loyalists or working for the security forces etc.), a third (106 of them) killed in 1975-1976 alone. And among those 345 deaths, 133 were the result of deliberate sectarian killings. It also should be noted that 85 of these sectarian killings took place in the 1975-1976 period. The majority of IRA victims (around 1000 that is more than 50%) were members of the British security forces (British Army, RUC, UDR, ...). From these figures, it is clear that the IRA campaign was directed against the British state rather than the protestant community. It was not sectarian in nature, although some individual sectarian attacks and murders unfortunately did take place (like the Kingsmill massacre in 1976). But sectarian murders committed by the IRA were more the exception than the rule (as they represent 133 killings on a total of 1758), especially given the fact that the vast majority of them (85) were committed in a short period of time (1975-1976). Relative to loyalist killings, the non-sectarian nature of the IRA campaign becomes even more evident. In the 1969-1993 period, loyalist paramilitaries have been responsible for the killing of 911 people. Of those, 612 were uninvolved innocent catholic civilians (67.2%), and a substantial number of the rest were Protestants killed because they were married to or mistaken for a Catholic. The loyalists explicitely target civilian members of the Roman Catholic community. Such a campaign is clearly sectarian in nature.
It could be objected to our argument that because security forces like the RUC, UDR-RIR are predominantly Protestant in composition, the IRA campaign against them is in fact sectarian. The same could also apply for workers who have been murdered because they worked for the security forces. Or that because bombing campaigns have destroyed predominantly protestant businesses or towns, the attacks are sectarian in nature. Empirical evidence suggests that the IRA did not target the RUC, UDR or construction workers specifically because they were Protestants. The IRA kills RUC or UDR members and alleged "collaborators" irrespective of them being Catholics or Protestants; in the same way that when the British Army kills an IRA member, the volunteer is killed for being an IRA activist and not for being Catholic. And predominantly Catholic towns such as Derry or Strabane have suffered as much from IRA bomb attacks than predominantly Protestant towns like Lisburn.
Let's move now from empirical evidence to the motivations behind the IRA campaign. The republican ideology is non-sectarian in nature. Republicanism, in Tone's words, aims to substitute the common name of Irishmen instead of Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter. One cannot be sectarian and republican at the same time. That has unfortunately not prevented some elements of the IRA of being sectarian; but non-sectarianism is an IRA organisational ethos. Otherwise, it would be very hard to explain why a small number of Protestants were active in the IRA. Loyalism, by contrast, has never produced a Catholic version of Ronnie Bunting. One has yet to find Catholics who were members of the UVF or the UDA. And at the level of ideology, loyalism is characterized by Protestant exclusivism. Loyalists hate Catholics not for being Nationalists, but just because they are Catholics.
The IRA campaign was no more sectarian than ANC attacks against white commercial premisses and security forces were racist.
While undoubtedly, there are many aspects of the IRA military campaign which have indeed strengthened (as opposed to have caused) the sectarian divisions in the Irish working class, it is wrong to absolutise these aspects and present them, as J.O'Hagan does, as if they were the only ones. No categories or phenomena are absolute, since all stand in relative connection; the point is to understand what is most fundamental, most important to the practical politics of any given situation. J. O'Hagan fails to do this, since the main feature of IRA violence is that it is the violence of the oppressed masses directed against the oppressor and arising out of profound economic and social causes; out of the age-old struggle of the Irish people for justice and democracy, and in the present phase of the struggle, directly out of the working class revolt in the six counties. The IRA campaign is intrinsically linked to the "tradition of the oppressed" and not to sectarianism.
Liam O'Ruairc
13-06-2000
NOTE:
I have found those two articles very helpful:
* Robert W. White "The Irish Republican Army: An assessment of sectarianism" in "Terrorism and Political Violence", vol.9 n.1, Spring 1997, pp.20-56
* Robert W. White "The Irish Repubican Army and Sectarianism: Moving beyond the annectdote" in "Terrorism and Political Violence", vol.9 n.2, Summer 1997, pp.119-131
source (http://rwg.phoblacht.net/fwcritic4.html)