Chief Constable Orde

“Northern Ireland’s bloody past has caught up with the progressive peace process and is in danger of jeopardizing it,” has been the narrative in the mainstream media in the last couple of weeks. Stating that recent events are throwbacks to the Northern Ireland of old is not a false assessment of the current situation. However, the media is either lazy, or guilty of failing to look at history, because they are committing mistakes like many British governments of the past have done in their biased representation of the politics of Northern Ireland. Covering dissident republicans murdering British soldiers does not cover the multifaceted nature of the problems in Northern Ireland’s past, and should not constitute the narrative about Northern Ireland now. The media needs to widen the focus of its lens to realize that there are many more similarities about today’s situation to the Northern Irish politics of old. Salient among them is this recent comment from Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde, of the Police Service of Northern Ireland:

“The idea that there will be SAS walking around with machine guns, as some people have tried to portray, is rubbish. They are offering support of a purely technical nature . . . They [SRR soldiers] will support my officers in keeping communities safe and keeping dissident republicans under the cosh.” (Irish Times, 7th March 2009)

There have been very few articles about the recent killings that talk about Orde’s comments and the anger caused by them. The idea of British soldiers, in whatever capacity, on Irish mainland is very contentious. But Orde was not merely giving an idea, this was him giving the order.

The main drive behind the peace process has been the collaboration between all forces to try to envision an Ireland where sectarianism (and old historical biases connected to it) do not rule. In recent years this sentiment been echoed continually by all ends of the Irish and British political spectrum. Yet Orde’s statement in front of BBC journalists — an organization which has historically failed to show neutrality in Irish political affairs (and others more recently) — without discussing the issue and its repercussions with Sinn Fein or the SDLP or any other party that might have legitimate concerns with it, is completely ignorant of the history of the Troubles. Not only was Orde tactless in his warning to dissident republicans but he also undermined the republicans who helped broker the Good Friday Agreement, and let’s not forget how his comments detract from the actual Agreement itself.

A British commander ordering soldiers to Northern Ireland without discussing the matter with Sinn Fein has echoes of past British action in Ireland. How did Orde think that this would not have serious consequences? Sinn Fein losing their voice in political discussion disfranchizes all republicans not just the dissident ones he wants under the “cosh.” If Sinn Fein is not allowed a chair at the table once more, then we all know what types of groups people will turn to. The irony of Orde’s comments, apart from his quip about ensuring the safety of the communities, is that he has made the republicans who want to use peaceful diplomacy seem ineffective in many ways (and has not quelled any dissident republican threat but antagonized it). Although this threat of further dissident action, in the aftermath of Orde’s actions and the subsequent killings, will not get support from those that want peace it was never going to anyway. Instead, those that feel disfranchized and those that feel that Sinn Fein can only take Irish republicanism so far now, have been shown they will take advantage.

I said that Sinn Fein have been made to look ineffective in many ways. Let me explain. Sinn Fein was never consulted about Orde’s plans and that therefore calls into question the respect that he and the British have towards them. Also, although Sinn Fein did protest about Orde’s measures and their lack of involvement in the process, their views were still not considered. After the recent killings, carried out by two different republican dissident groups, Sinn Fein has been criticized by some factions of the republican contingent for allegedly pandering to British forces. By publicly condemning those that carried out the killings as traitors, Martin McGuiness has felt the wrath of many republicans Yet this will bring no gain with the British contingent for Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein has attempted to make peaceful diplomatic ties with British and Protestant factions, which have historically labeled the second largest party in the Northern Ireland Assembly untrustworthy. Indeed factions of the media have recently recommenced this theme.

Ironically it has been the untrustworthy nature of the factions that Sinn Fein deals with that have been repeatedly seen, and once again this is evident even within times of peace now.
The majority of the media has hailed this as the time Sinn Fein has to make choices about its future.

However the irony of them being prevented a voice has not been picked up on. A journalist at the Mail states that Sinn Fein should abide by an “unwritten rule” by having to accept that “the government must have the monopoly of force” and therefore seemingly accept any way the police and security will carry out the policing of Northern Ireland, including the possible deployment British troops. Once again Sinn Fein as a political entity and a voice has been trampled on.

The events after Orde’s comments have not proven the validity of his comments and actions. Northern Ireland is still a place architecturally and mentally caught up in sectarianism and Orde’s comments are not a revelation to the people of Northern Ireland. Indeed the threat to peace in Northern Ireland comes from many spheres. This week Orde has even publicly downplayed the dissident republican threat which calls into question the actual need for his comments at all.

Orde’s actions are a throwback to dark times in Irish and British relations. If Orde and the mainstream media are attempting to undermine Sinn Fein then they have to be willing to accept how the republican sentiment will materialize in its absence as a diplomatic force.

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.