Friday, Sep 3rd, 2010

Terrorism in North Ireland and selling out the next generation

The latest shootings in Northern Ireland aren’t a return to the old days, and the people will be sold out again.

By Richard Seymour on Monday, March 9th, 2009 - 1,060 words.

Share

Northern Irish politics is, as a rule, boring. Think about the material you have to work with. Between Martin McGuinness’ lachrymose banalities and Peter Robinson’s rigid bigotry (there is a great deal of both in Stormont), there is little room to be inspiring. The only occasional frisson is when one of the demented crackpots of the hard right says something unspeakably ignorant and stupid. Sammy Wilson, the environment minister, denies that there is such a thing as man-made global warming, and that ensures that his smug, dopy-eyed, reddened face gets on the news for a week. (Sammy is also, you may care to know, an Ulster Jobs for Ulster Workers guy). Likewise, when Iris Robinson MP, spouse to First Minister Peter, describes homosexuality as being “viler” than child abuse, there follows a brief uproar before the the usual run of anti-gay violence is resumed with vengeance. (Not that Nothern Ireland has a problem with exaggerated machismo – anyone who says it does will receive a boot in the ballicks.) Though I have not visited NI for years, and don’t feel much connection to it, it is hard not to be embarrassed by the kinds of people who get elected in that neck of the woods. They are so obviously unfit for the job. They should be spreading mulch and spouting misanthropy out in the suburbs and farming communities.

At any rate, this grotesque charade is underwritten by a neoliberal and sectarian consensus that is impoverishing an already vitiated and lacklustre social landscape. The parties compete not on the basis of class issues or even left-right ideologies as such, but strictly on the Nationalist-Unionist dichotomy. To be represented, one has to accept one or other label. Meanwhile, the only answer that any of the political parties offer to the poverty and social misery of the statelet is to turn it into a sort of corporate theme park, open up investment opportunities by privatizing and cutting business taxes. Intriguingly, this is one question on which even Ian Paisley favours a ‘united Ireland’, in that both he and Martin McGuinness favoured cutting corporation taxes to 12.5%, the level pertaining in the Republic of Ireland. If the name were not already taken, the place could soon be re-dubbed the Northern Marianas. No wonder people are anxious to get the hell out of the place. Emigration is at record levels, and a quarter of the permanent residents have spent more than six months abroad. People get as far away as they can for as long as they can, before family commitments or whatever else it is draws them back in. This is grim stuff, but it doesn’t make good copy. It is boring.

No wonder that the newspapers are almost uniformly treating the attack on a military base in county Antrim last night as back-to-the-good-old-days. They are not the only ones to see it that way. Ian Paisley Jr., who is his father with the interesting bits removed, apparently remarked that the attacks represent a “defining moment”, adding that “For the last 10 years people believed things like this happened in foreign countries, places like Basra. Unfortunately it has returned to our doorstep.” How to begin to parse a thought like that? With the suggestion, from a Unionist, that the occupation of the north of Ireland in some sense recalls the occupation of Iraq? Or with the insinuation that the relative peace since Omagh was illusory, merely what “people believed”? Actually, the Unionist right has for some time been trying to increase their leverage by highlighting an alleged resurgence in ‘dissident’ Republicanism, first raised by Sir Hugh Orde. It would be just dandy for them if there was a plausible new terrorist threat with which to either undermine the Assembly, weaken the Republicans, or just mobilise a disheartened electoral base (the DUP were supposed to chase Sinn Fein out of Stormont, not form a coalition with them).

Are we really on the verge of a new war, as the Unionists suggest, and as so much lurid commentary in the British media implies? Hardly. Whoever carried out last night’s attack doesn’t have the muscle to duke it out with the British state, even supposing it isn’t penetrated from top to bottom by intelligence moles. The Provos fought that war for a quarter of a century, and could only reach a stalemate. That failed guerilla strategy was precisely what resulted in the timid consensus politics of today’s Sinn Fein. Groups like the ‘Real IRA’ and ‘Continuity IRA’ don’t take this point, of course. Representing dissenting minorities in the Provisional IRA’s leadership at the time of the Good Friday agreement and the peace process that preceded it, they still insist that a Republic can be acquired by an elite armed struggle. If it can’t, then all has been in vain. As Bobby Sands’ younger sister, former Provisional IRA executive member, and current ‘Real IRA’ member Bernadette Sands McKevitt put it: “Bobby did not die for cross-border bodies with executive powers. He did not die for nationalists to be equal British citizens within the Northern Ireland state”. The blood that was shed in the course of that war is indeed hard to square with such an inglorious outcome. But ironically it was this insistence that led the ‘Real IRA’ to undertake their most infamous attack, the Omagh bombing, which itself was the final nail in the coffin for this kind of combat Republicanism. The idea that the armed struggle could be revived today is frankly absurd. Gerry Adams can openly call for his constituents to support the police hunt because he knows full well that the Catholic working class is sick to death of the futile armed struggle, the brutal ‘discipline’ that went with it and the harsh counterinsurgency of the British state. There is no popular constituency for this kind of fight.

The dull reality is that this shooting amounts to a brief, bloody intrusion on a perpetually gloomy twilight of increasing sectarianism (there are more ‘peace walls’ than ever before), rising poverty (the worst rates in the UK), and violent criminality (often by the husks of former combatant organizations). It is the convulsion of a movement experiencing its last gasps, one whose purpose was just but whose means were always ruinous. No one who matters need panic. Soon enough, everyone can get on with squandering and selling out yet another generation.

Disagree with this articleAgree with this article (+2 rating, 4 votes)
Loading ... Loading ...

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

5 Comments

  1. Max says:

    "The blood that was shed in the course of that war is indeed hard to square with such an inglorious outcome."
    How to begin to parse a thought like that? The bloodshed was glorious? Your central dichotomy between boredom and implied glory is a bit unnerving. Surely the way out of the "gloomy twilight" lies, if it lies anywhere, through economic invigoration and the nescessary peace?

    Do you agree that the fact that the terrorist acts did not have mainstream support is a good thing, and that the peace held? I thought Jerry Adams walked the line cleverly by condemning the logic of the attack in terms of it interrupting the peace agreement, but offering no personal condolences etc.

    Also, I was under the impression that it was the Belfast Agreement, that spelt the end of mainstream combat Republicanism? Because at that point the Provisional IRA agreed to non-violence.

    That said, this article was hugely informative for me. Nice one.

  2. Nick MacWilliam says:

    Excellent article, there does seem to have been a cooing excitement in parts of the media (Peter Preston wrote a shockingly glib piece in the Guardian) and reminds me of how the press was full of articles anticipating a terrorist war on the streets of Britain shortly after 9/11. Nothing sells papers like a nice act of terrorism and the chance to put fear into the public.

    I agree with Max, the article is hugely informative and really looks into the heart of the troubles.

  3. Rachel King says:

    To piggyback on the above comments, again, great piece and insight into Northern Ireland politics.

    I think this week's events and the stirrings of dissident activity over the last several months are evidence that N.I. desperately needs more integrated, non-denominational schools. There needs to be an entirely new generation, brought up against violence into an accepting environment, to really eliminate these kinds of vicious and vengeful ideals and activities. Even though there has been relative peace for the last decade, violence is still in the blood of too many people on both sides. Many of them just don't know anything else.

  4. M J Collins says:

    No Richard, it is you who are boring. Repeating the begrudging comments of both the SDLP and the Official Unionist party is pretty tedious at best. Promoting it as left wing is misleading. Your lack of knowledge of the Peace Process and the Republican agenda for a socialist united Ireland is only matched by your lack of an alternative strategy. However what is really offensive is your clear location of all political difficulties with the people of the occupied six counties, not a mention of the Brits. And you seem like the kind of guy who would like a mention.

  5. CAPTAIN John Smith says:

    Hey yo listen. So I'm going to do something people rarely do on this forum and admit that they are quite fucking confused. Don't worry, I'm not really asking for explanations,because it would be too complex to ask any fellow internet bystander just to do. I'll look it up myself.
    I mean I basically know what's going on. But I think what I can add is that I'm an American, and an Irish American who, like almost all other Irish Americans (at least of the 18-25 year age range) neither understands nor actually cares about the issue described skillfully above. So, in other words, the 30 million or so people with some proportion of Irish heritage living a few time zones away are completely divorced from the issue. It's odd. Of course, Irish people who came to the United States during the Potato Famine found a place where the old geographic grudges no longer mattered. Then, up till, well, let's say JFK, nobody even really cared if you were Irish or Catholic. Biden's Catholic, actually, and the Anglo establishment, along with the Evangelical wingnuts, don't go after him, partially because the two sides have become wedded by the abortion issue. And, moreso really, the Civil Rights Movement led to the creation a codification system of checkable boxes, which further attenuated ethnic and nation identities. Of course, it has also been a source of political friction.
    So, while it may be obvious to everyone, I'm just saying that this is the reason, geography and a lot of it, the thing North America has, mollifies these meaningless divisions between human beings of all sorts. Of course, the country is all sorts of dysfunction in a lot of important ways, the natures of which I'll leave to your alls' interpretation.
    At any rate, as lame as it may sound, I still hope that everything works out. At least there's been a miniature revolution here where, egad, the President is no longer a giant asshole. Followup question: What is/was the public and governments' general view of American involvement in intra-Irish negotiations and peacemaking in the 90s?

Leave a Reply

Richard Seymour





Articles by this author
Search the site