Britain’s Right, Left and Centre on uniting  Ireland [1985]

Britain’s Right, Left and Centre on uniting  Ireland

[This article by Desmond Greaves outlining three  key issues for people in Britain who were concerned with Irish reunification was carried in the February 1985 “Irish Democrat”.]

The conferences called by the Connolly Association in 1984 highlighting particularly the relationship between the Irish question and world peace, have shown a steadily developing consensus, where only three questions still seem to cause disagreement.

People are confused on the questions of withdrawal of the troops, the attitude to Republican violence, and the part of the Dublin Government.

In each case there is on the one hand a right-wing approach, and on the other an ultra-left which while it sounds revolutionary, really has an imperialist basis.

On the question of the troops the right-wing solution is to keep them there, even at a lower profile, while a long series of   pussyfooting requests for reforms are put in.

In effect they remain there forever, or until the Unionist leopard changes his spots and “consents” to a united Ireland.

It is natural that people who see through this should feel impatient. So we get the cry “Troops Out Now”. If they said just “Troops Out” and left it at that there would be no complaint. They must be got out as quickly as possible.

But many people who talk about “Troops Out Now” forget that there are three categories of British troops in the Six Counties. The first category have been occupying various garrisons for several centuries. Then there are others sent in to support the civil power.  These are the only troops most English people have heard of. But there is also the Ulster Defence Regiment. They are local people who cannot be “got out now”. There is more to it than that simple slogan implies, although of course it is a well-meaning slogan.

The process of getting those troops out moreover is not just a question for the British. The Irish have a right to know if the Ulster Defence Regiment will be disarmed. And as it is presumably not intended that there will be no army there at all, then the Dublin Government is involved.

What is wanted first is a declaration of intent to withdraw by the British  Government, and then discussions with the Irish on what is to follow. Just to pull troops out without making any arrangement with the Irish is imperialistic, and it was actually done. By the Belgians  in the Belgian Congo with the deliberate intention of causing maximum chaos and an excuse to go back.

This is not the hoary old bloodbath argument. It may be putting it a bit crudely to say that it is nothing to do with the English whether the Irish decide to bathe in blood or milk, as long as it is their own. But it is a great deal to do with the Irish that the British withdraw as the Irish want them to withdraw, and that will certainly give the best chance of an orderly transition. “Troops Out Now” for all its revolutionary sound is really a chauvinistic slogan.

On the question of Republican violence the right-wing position is that it is wicked in itself and must be condemned. No doubt it is, but it alters nothing to say so. The violence of the African National Congress is not condemned. Violence directed against South American dictatorship is not condemned. But violence against British imperial institutions or country to the will of the British Government is nasty violence, not to be supported at all, and very much to be condemned for its immorality, while other immorality is ignored.

This is a chauvinist position, and can be seen for what it is, though people take it up in all innocence.

The reaction against this line of arguing sometimes take the form “Victory to the IRA” and I have one pamphlet before me that says that “Ireland’s victory means Britain’s defeat”.

But the war is not being fought between Britain and Ireland, but between some of the British and some of the Irish, a very different matter.

In principle however, there is no reason why any English person should either praise or condemn the violence of the IRA. Every sensible person is opposed to violence in general and wants as little of it about as possible.

But suppose there are patriotic Irishmen in Ireland who want the reunification of their country, has anybody in England the responsibility of telling them what they should do? He is under no more obligation to tell them that they should use the gun than to tell them that they should use the ballot box.

The British occupation is a fact. That fact begets other facts, one of which is that Mr John Hume is returned to Westminster, and another is that Republicans from time to time blow things up.

The Irish will do what they think the situation demands, rightly or wrongly, and listen to nobody. They are not looking for praise or blame from England. What they are looking for is that Britain should recognise the need to withdraw from Ireland and end the partition of that country.

For that to be done it is necessary to have a government that will do it. This can only come through persuasion, and members of the Labour movement are the people to do the persuading. The English have no responsibility in Irish affairs.

So once again, left and right trail clouds of English chauvinism – that hankering after making policy for Ireland that is so curiously blinding.

It is worth adding however that the British Labour movement faces exactly the same weakness in relation to the SDLP. It is utterly monstrous that people should be talking of setting up a British-based Labour Party in Belfast when its sister party, the SDLP, is affiliated to the same Labour and Socialist International.  And nobody in England has the right to say that the citizens of Belfast should or should not send Mr Hume to Westminster. They should back him up now that he is there, though some of us sometimes think he might occasionally take a leaf out of Parnell’s book and move a few leftwing motions that would embarrass the ministry and the Labour Right!

Finally there is the question of the Irish Government. Sometimes I see resolutions calling for a united socialist Ireland.

That is sheer impertinence. Nobody has the right to tell the Irish people whether they should have socialism or not, still less to say, “We’ll hang on to a part of your country until you agree to run it the way we want.”

The people of the Six Counties are debarred from voting for an Irish Government. They are debarred by the British occupation of those counties.

Who then represents the majority of the Irish people? It can only be the Government elected by the majority of those entitled to vote and in a position to do so.

That Government may at one time or another be good, bad or indifferent. But it can’t be ignored. If the British Government decided to withdraw from Ireland,  does anybody seriously argue that it would negotiate with anybody other than Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald?

Maybe he isn’t as socialist as we would like him to be. Nor is he as Republican as some of us might like him to be. But he has the mandate of the Irish people. Criticise him if you wish. Deal with him you must. There is no alternative.

Those who take up a frankly imperialist position refuse to hand over the Six Counties because England wants them. But there is also a “leftist” excuse for keeping Partition, namely that the Irish Government is not good enough to have back the territory it is entitled to.

There is a phenomenon in the Six Counties known as the “Orange socialist”. I seldom heard one denounce De Valera, Lemass, Lynch, Haughey or FitzGerald for wanting the Six Counties. It is always on grounds of socialism – as if they have got socialism from England!

A very substantial part of what may be broadly called the Irish movement in Britain is becoming clear on these issues. When that clarity approaches consensus we want an all-in conference of organisations to organise the Irish vote and bring real pressure on the powers-that-be in this country.

• Feicreanach