Irish Republicanism : Progressive and Limited. [Archive]

cullinane

3rd November 2001, 18:30

Is nationalism and the national movement a reactionary phenomenon ?

Has not the Irish nationalist movement against British imperialism, been a movement which is attempting to strike blow against imperialism?

Might not Marxists support such a movement?

By not calling for the end of the Unionist state and the removal of British troops from the island a concession to British reaction and the British bourgeoisie ?

The right of nations to self determination is consistently democratic and revolutionary in the face of imperialism and is in accord with the immediate struggle for socialism. Marxists of the oppressing nation must demand the freedom of the oppressed nation to secede, for otherwise recognition of equal rights and of internationalist working class solidarity is nothing but
downright hypocrisy. The internationalism of the English socialists is nothing but hypocritical if they do not demand the separation of Ireland.

Indeed Marx was a supporter of Irish freedom. In 1867, in a letter to Engels he said "I have done my best to bring about this demonstration of the
English workers in favour of Fenianism (the proto IRA)". He also said "What the Irish need is self-government and independence from England". For Marx,
the separation of Ireland which he demanded, was not from the standpoint of the petty bourgeoisie and their utopia of 'peaceful' capitalism (what an oxymoron!), but from the standpoint of the interests of the revolutionary struggle of the English proletariat. For Marx the freedom of England would be cramped by the fact it oppressed another nation.

James Connolly, who was executed for his role in the Easter Rising of 1916, formulated an analysis which stated that the struggle for national liberation and the fight for socialism in Ireland were inseparable. This holds true today. The Irish working class cannot end partition without overthrowing the Dublin regime or achieve socialism without ending imperialist economic domination of Ireland. The struggle for socialism is thwarted by partition, which arrests the development of class consciousness in the working class of both statelets.

The British presence in Ireland is the fundamental cause of divisions between the Protestant and Catholic working classes in the six counties. The class forces have never developed properly because of imperialist
intervention and because the national struggle remains incomplete. Added to this was the existence of a once very powerful Catholic Church in the Republic of Ireland. Class politics have never developed in the six counties
because of the nature of the state.
The ruling class go to great lengths to portray the struggle in the six counties as a religious war. British troops are portrayed as peacekeepers who have no reason for being in Ireland other than to keep the warring religious tribes apart. British imperialism is a past master of the tactic of divide and rule and has practised such a policy in every colony it has
occupied. Since the plantation policy of the 16th century, Britain has fostered division in order to make its rule easier. This policy is maintained to the present day and results in a divided working class in the
six counties.

Only a socialist revolution is a capable of providing a means to address the needs of the Irish working class. National liberation is but an aspect of the struggle for socialism. Socialism cannot be achieved in one or both
parts of Ireland without reunification, understand that is the very fact of partition that served to divide the Irish working class and mask their actual collective interests as a class. National liberation and socialism cannot be achieved through just military conflict by guerrilla forces but we should defend the right of revolutionary forces to employ this tactic whenever useful to achieve its aims.

the nationalism expressed in Ireland today is like that of Vietnam, Angola or Cuba in their respective struggles. It is progressive because it seeks to dismantle a system of government that is based on exploitation and corruption. In other words the forces engaged in
the struggle for national liberation in those countries are attempting to end their countries' position as a colony or neo-colony.

In general Marxist's demands for self-determination should be negative, in that opposition to national
oppression as basically a means toward the unity of the working class. Thus there should be support for all national liberation movements in order to remove the national question from the agenda. Without confronting the national question calls for "class unity" are only
abstract and empty incantations.

Sinn Fein in its current incarnation is simply a sectarian force. Sinn Fein/IRA seek to present there decommisioning of arms as an achievement on their part. The point is that British imperialism and Ulster Unionism have forced the Provos to surrender arms. Perhaps they may not be literally handing them over. But they are in fact surrendering their arms. Sinn Fein/IRA are following Ulster Unionism's agenda.

All those Provos were killed and all those civilians too for partition in a somewhat different form. Clearly Provos fought, died and suffered so that Gerry and Martin and friends get cosy jobs --and celeb status.

Republicans like De Valera and Collins were fighting to some extent only fighting to change the colour of the mail boxes. That indeed was a visible accomplishment. They certainly did nothing to improve the lot of the
Irish working class - except, perhaps, provide yet more additional evidence that the only real struggle for socialists is the class struggle

cullinane

3rd November 2001, 21:16

Dear comrade,
Thank you for your reply. I've read some of your other posts and you are certainly very committed to the anti imperialist cause in Ireland, and rightly so!
Here are some insightful articles on the decomissioning.
I beg your pardon for the length of them, but I think you'll be interested in reading them.
Regards,
Niall Cullinane

Northern Ireland: IRA decommissions arms
By Mike Ingram
25 October 2001

On the eve of today's deadline for the suspension of the Northern Ireland Assembly
and the possible collapse of the Good Friday Agreement, the Irish Republican Army
(IRA) finally began decommissioning its weapons.

A statement issued by the IRA on Tuesday October 23 said, "In order to save the peace
process we have implemented the scheme agreed with the IICD [International
Independent Commission on Decommissioning] in August."

Within three hours of the IRA statement, the IICD said: "We have now witnessed an
event which we regard as significant, in which the IRA has put a quantity of arms
completely beyond use. The material in question includes arms, ammunition and
explosives." The IICD statement gave no further details, saying that to do so "would
not further the process of putting all arms beyond use."

This came after simultaneous statements in Belfast and New York by Gerry Adams and
Martin McGuinness, the two main leaders of the IRA's political wing, Sinn Fein.

Speaking in Belfast, Adams said: "Martin McGuinness and I have also held discussions
with the IRA and we have put to the IRA the view that if it could make a
groundbreaking move on the arms issue that this could save the peace process from
collapse and transform the situation."

In his remarks, Adams said, "Genuine Republicans will have concerns about such a
move," but rubbished "The nay-sayers, the armchair generals and the begrudgers, and
the enemies of Irish republicanism and of the peace process, [who] will present a
positive IRA move in disparaging terms."

Addressing Republican critics of disarmament, he added, "Others will say that the IRA
has acted under pressure. But everyone else knows that the IRA is not an organisation
that bows to pressure or which moves on British or unionist terms."

Adams' rhetoric notwithstanding, the statement issued Tuesday was a direct result of
the systematic pressure placed upon the Republicans by the Unionists and the British
and Irish governments to end the impasse over arms' decommissioning. Adams chose to
maintain a diplomatic silence about the one pressure group, which, above all, had
precipitated the move-the Bush administration in the United States-in the aftermath
of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

The new political structures set-up by the Good Friday Agreement had seemed closer to
collapse than at any time since it was signed in April 1998. Assembly First Minister
David Trimble and five other Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) members of the Executive had
resigned last Thursday, citing the failure of the IRA to decommission its weapons.
The resignations were post-dated until the end of this week, however, giving Trimble
time to reconsider his position in the event of a move on the part of the IRA.

Trimble's brinkmanship was aimed at placing maximum pressure upon Sinn Fein/IRA to
come up with the goods on decommissioning; the implicit threat being that if the
Assembly collapses then hard line anti-Agreement Unionists would gain the upper hand.
Sinn Fein had to comply with the Ulster Unionist Party's demands, or the Assembly
would collapse and it would instead be dealing with Ian Paisley's hardline Democratic
Unionist Party.

It has never been principally a question of if the IRA would decommission, but when.
Among Irish nationalists there were serious reservations about disarming,
particularly given the pro-Protestant nature of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC)
and the continuing threat from Loyalist paramilitaries. Moreover, the IRA arms caches
were considered to be an invaluable bargaining chip in Sinn Fein's negotiations with
the British government on issues such as policing and the participation of Sinn Fein
in cross-border political bodies. But having explicitly accepted the Assembly as the
legitimate government in the North, the IRA could not indefinitely maintain their own
military capacity.

The statements by the Sinn Fein leadership are interesting for a number of reasons.

Firstly, they seek to present decommissioning as an initiative by the Republicans,
which shows the IRA to be "an example of a people's army, in touch with the people,
responsive to their needs" and themselves as earnestly seeking "to replace conflict
and strife with genuine partnership and equality."

Secondly, Adams speaks of his desire to turn what has been a "crisis-driven process"
into a "people-centred movement towards a democratic peace settlement."

And finally, he baldly asserts, "Irish Republicans hold that the British connection
is the source of all our political ills."

These propositions should be considered carefully.

Any informed follower of Irish political affairs knows full well that the major
impetus for IRA decommissioning came from the US. Indeed, the past few years have
stripped Sinn Fein of any pretence of being an independent political force. Ever
since efforts to arrive at a new political settlement in Northern Ireland began, Sinn
Fein has sought to recast itself in the role of a favoured political representative
of American imperialism.

Washington's political interests in Northern Ireland have grown as it has superseded
Britain as the dominant economic power throughout the entire island. In addition to
the dominance of North American companies in the Irish Republic, they also made up 52
of the 152 overseas companies operating in Northern Ireland in 1997. This compares
with 47 from the United Kingdom, 14 from the rest of Europe, 13 from the Irish
Republic and 10 each from Asia/Pacific and Germany. It is in order to safeguard these
interests and establish new ones that the Clinton administration became intimately
involved in the setting up of the Northern Ireland Assembly. Throughout the whole
"peace process", the American ruling class has sought to bolster Sinn Fein as its own
counterweight to Britain's proxy, the Unionists.

In recent weeks, however, relations between Sinn Fein and Washington became strained,
especially following the arrest of three alleged IRA men in Colombia on charges of
providing military training to the Farc guerrilla movement, which opposes the US
client regime in Bogata. One of those arrested was Sinn Fein's representative in
Cuba, Niall Connolly. Adams made the ridiculous claim that Connolly's appointment had
been made without his knowledge or the authorisation of the international department
of Sinn Fein.

Most significantly, the September 11 bombings of the World Trade Center in New York,
and the subsequent war against Afghanistan unleashed by the US has changed the whole
context of Northern Irish politics. From that point, the Bush administration made
clear that they would no longer sanction Sinn Fein/IRA's radical nationalist
posturing, which had become an embarrassment at a time when an "international war
against terrorism" had been proclaimed. Washington will have told the IRA in no
uncertain terms to carry out decommissioning as anticipated in the Good Friday
Agreement, and that Sinn Fein should start behaving like the grown-up bourgeois party
it purports to be.

As Adams admits, the so-called "peace process" has never assumed the character of a
"people-centred movement towards a democratic peace settlement", and nor could it.
Its entire purpose was to develop the new political structures necessary to ensure a
stable environment in what has become a potentially lucrative investment platform for
those seeking access to the European market. From the start, the working class has
been excluded from the political process. Instead the imperialist powers and the
Irish bourgeoisie have sought to bring the Nationalist and Unionist parties into
government, to control the working class, while maintaining the old sectarian
divisions that have prevented any effective social and political opposition to the
profit system from emerging.

Sinn Fein frequently advances itself as a socialist party, but this is belied by its
strenuous efforts to rescue the Good Friday Agreement at all costs. Adam's claim that
the "British connection" is the root of all evil is a flimsy cover for Sinn Fein's
pro-capitalist politics. While maintaining the pretence that the peace process is
simply a means to an end, or a stage in the struggle for a united Ireland, the
Republicans have accepted a settlement that was drawn up to maintain the strategic
interests of big business. Behind their opposition to the "British connection", the
Republicans say nothing about the role of the Irish bourgeoisie and of US imperialism
in perpetuating the brutal exploitation of the working class, Catholic and Protestant
alike.

Wherever nationalist movements have emerged from disaffected layers of the radical
petty bourgeoisie-whether in the Middle East, Africa or Ireland, and even when they
have won power-have proved themselves incapable of establishing any genuine
independence from imperialism. Instead such nationalist forces invariably align
themselves with one or other imperialist power, as the local overseers of the
exploitation of their country's resources and the labour of the working class.

Sinn Fein says the conditions are being created for the transition to a new society.
In reality, what London refers to as the "normalisation" of the situation in Northern
Ireland means the creation of a capitalist government, steeped in sectarianism and
presiding over a conflict-ridden society in which the working class are offered up as
cheap labour to international capital.

The signing of the Good Friday Agreement has produced no let up in sectarian
violence. It reinforces the idea that it is not fundamental class divisions which
mark Irish society north and south-with working people sharing a common class
interest-but mutually hostile religious communities, which must compete for scarce
resources by championing the sectarian parties.

IRA decommissioning will not satisfy the more extreme forces within Unionism. Paisley
claimed that a "dirty deal" had been struck between Sinn Fein and the government.
"There is no talk about the end of the battle, the war being over, no talk of the war
being over," he blustered. Paisley insists he will not be satisfied, even if General
de Chastelain-head of the decommissioning body-has said that decommissioning has
started.

While the IRA's move was welcomed by Trimble, who said he would seek the backing of
his party over the weekend to resume its place in the Assembly, Jeffrey Donaldson, a
leading UUP figure opposed to power-sharing said, "We will need urgent answers from
General de Chastelain about key questions. If it's a one-off gesture then that
presents problems for Unionism."

Loyalist paramilitaries, meanwhile, have given no indication that they will follow
the IRA in destroying their weapons. As the events of this week were unfolding, two
Catholic schoolgirls aged eight and 11 were taken to hospital following a Loyalist
attack. The 11-year-old suffered shrapnel wounds and the other extensive shock, after
a pipe bomb thrown by Loyalist thugs exploded in front of them. Just hours before, a
24-year-old Protestant man was shot in the chest as he walked home. These are only
the latest in a series of sectarian attacks, throughout Belfast.

For the past three-and-a-half years, the working class has been presented with a
false choice of either the power-sharing Assembly or a return to "The Troubles". To
avoid a return to violence, working people are supposed to accept the unchallenged
domination of the Unionists and Republicans over their respective populations.

The prerequisite for a progressive resolution to the problems of Northern Ireland is
the active involvement of the mass of ordinary working people in the political
process. Decisions concerning the political and constitutional framework of the North
cannot be left to the representatives of British, Irish and US imperialism. The
establishment of a truly democratic form of government throughout Ireland requires a
new party of the Irish working class. This new party must take as its standpoint the
perspective of socialist internationalism, seeking to unite working people throughout
Ireland with their class brothers and sisters internationally.

Northern Ireland: How the US told the IRA to begin decommissioning
By Mike Ingram
31 October 2001
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

An article in last Sunday's Observer newspaper gives a revealing insight into
how the commencement of IRA weapons decommissioning came about.

The intense pressure from the US, which any informed observer could not but fail
to see, is explained at great length. Some illustrative details could only have
come from sources within the American or British government, or possibly from
within Sinn Fein.

The author, Alan Ruddock, begins his account with the morning of September 11,
the day of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre in New York, as the US
special envoy to Ireland, Richard Haass was preparing for a meeting with Sinn
Fein leader Gerry Adams. Under the heading, " How America held the IRA over a
barrel," Ruddock writes:

"After a few minutes of talking about 'inching forward' towards the peace
process, Haass finally snapped. 'If any American, service personnel or civilian,
is killed in Colombia by the technology the IRA supplied then you can f**k off,'
he shouted, finger jabbing towards Adam's chest. 'Don't tell me you know nothing
about what's going on there, we know everything about it,'" Ruddock writes.

Haass was referring to the arrest of three alleged IRA men in Columbia in
August, one of whom was Sinn Fein's representative in Cuba, Niall Connolly.
After the meeting with Haass, Adams made the spurious claim that Connolly's
appointment had been made without his knowledge or the authorisation of the
international department of Sinn Fein.

In a World Socialist Web Site article of October 25, we drew attention to
American interests in Northern Ireland and the fact that "Sinn Fein has sought
to recast itself in the role of a favoured political representative of American
imperialism." The article by Ruddock says, "Adam's principal concern remained
the maintenance of warm relations with the American administration and the
preservation of millions of dollars from rich, conservative Irish-Americans."

Ruddock cites the case of Bill Flynn, "one of the pivotal figures in
Irish-American politics." Describing him as a "close confident of Irish
nationalists," Ruddock states that Flynn, as chairman of the Mutual Bank of
America, "is a conservative that no government in Washington can ignore."

The Observer states Flynn told the IRA that, after Colombia, "the only way to
rescue the party's reputation in the US capital was for the IRA to disarm."

"They listen to me because they know I am a strong supporter of what they are
doing to unite Ireland," Flynn is said to have told the Observer.

According to the Observer, Flynn is the "figurehead" for a group of US
businessmen sympathetic to Sinn Fein, "who are simultaneously crucial to
fundraising while also pushing for an end to the military campaign. Last year
the party raised more than $1 million from corporate Irish-American backers and
Adams realised that, such was the gravity of the situation, Sinn Fein risked
having to close its crucial Washington office."

Flynn was no less forthright than Haass in his communiqués with Adams, which the
Observer say were couriered by special envoys, as both men were too nervous of
being bugged to use the telephone. Flynn told Adams, "They (in Washington) are
not going to put up with any more nonsense... After Columbia and then September
11, the time had come for real politics, and we had got to decommission."

Niall O'Dowd, publisher of the New York-based Irish Voice, told the Observer, "I
think that the Americans played an understated but very significant role. And I
think that time will reveal the importance of what they did, especially the
presence of their ambassador at Sinn Fein's Ard Fheis a couple of weeks ago. In
that apparent contradiction was a clear pointer that the US was still involved
and engaged, despite Columbia and the World Trade Centre."

The article claims that, "On September 27 at a safe house in Dundalk, an Irish
border town where many IRA men on the run from the British security forces live,
the Provisionals' leadership held an historic meeting.

"Pat Doherty, a Sinn Fein MP, proposed that, for the coming few months, Martin
McGuinness should become the IRA's chief of staff [a position he was rumoured to
hold before becoming a more public figure in Sinn Fein following the 1981 hunger
strikes] putting the pro-decommissioning wing in the driving seat."

Over the next few weeks, the Observer reveals, the Sinn Fein/IRA leadership held
meetings throughout Ireland with key figures who were persuaded to back
decommissioning. "However, the leadership avoided holding an 'Army Convention'
fearing a nationwide gathering of the volunteers would become a focal point for
dissent."

This is the background to the closely choreographed events leading to the
simultaneous announcement by Adams in Belfast and McGuinness in Washington on
October 22, calling on the IRA to "save the peace process". The following day
the IRA announced that it had begun to decommission "to save the peace process
and to persuade others of our intentions".

Ruddock says, "It was made clear that America had two big sticks to wield-visas
for Sinn Fein leaders and the right to fundraise in the US. These would be
withdrawn unless there was decommissioning."

Absent from the article is any assessment of what America gets in return. To
examine this calls into question the democratic pretences of the Good Friday
Agreement and the new political structures it has brought into being. Far from
heralding the control of the people of the north of Ireland over their own
destiny, the Northern Ireland Assembly brings together Unionist and Republican
parties that do the political bidding of one or another of the British, American
and Irish governments.

For Britain, the peace process was driven primarily by the fact that its old
methods of rule over the north though Unionism and the Protestant ascendancy
were no longer effective. With the north's economic decline since the 1960s,
Britain's public spending on the province increased substantially. While
cross-boarder trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
increased, with the Republic being northern Irelands' number one export market,
the south was the main beneficiary. Britain even saw its own interests in the
north decline as America's advanced.

For the southern government, the peace process was driven by the requirements of
international trade and investments. The Republic had benefited at the expense
of the north, becoming the prime European location for transnational
corporations, particularly American. But if this was to be expanded, the armed
conflict had to be ended.

For the US, the stabilisation of the situation in the north was essential both
for existing investment in the south and new possibilities in the north. With
the failure of earlier attempts to reach a settlement that excluded Sinn Fein,
it was evident that the Republicans must be included within any new political
structures.

Their role as proxy for the US, however, has given them standing beyond their
wildest dreams. Not only can they maintain US funding for their organisation,
but they are now treated as respected bourgeois politicians. One can only
imagine McGuinness' self-congratulatory frame of mind as he was ushered into the
State Department to meet General Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State as what
the Observer calls a "small treat" for having agreed to disarm. How better to
mark Sinn Fein's transition to respectability than to have the titular head of
the IRA shake hands with the man leading America's supposed "war on terrorism".