Sunday Business Post, December 12, 2004

Blair and Ahern dance to Paisley's tune

12 December 2004 By Paul T Colgan

The British and Irish governments are dancing to the DUP's tune.

One thing was clear during Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern's marathon press conference in Belfast last Wednesday: both were backing the call for photographic proof of IRA decommissioning.

As they were bombarded with questions on whether the IRA had “reneged'‘ on a decommissioning deal, they were at pains to stress that no such arrangement had ever been agreed.

But it is now apparent that the two leaders believe that republicans should meet the DUP's demand for visual confirmation of IRA disarmament.

The position adopted by the governments had been expected by Sinn Féin. Saving Private Trimble has become Saving Private Paisley.

All the Northern parties, the two governments and even the Bush administration have pressured Sinn Féin in recent days in a bid to force an IRA U-turn on the ‘Polaroid moment'. The DUP can now call on a range of new allies to back its argument for visible decommissioning.

The governments believe that the DUP is interested in a deal, and are willing to concede the party's key demands. By publishing their joint proposals, Blair and Ahern are hoping to prove the DUP's power-sharing credentials and shame republicans into giving the party what it wants.

Just as last year's joint declaration was conceived to bolster the position of Ulster Unionist leader David Trimble as he went into Assembly elections, the current government pressure on republicans is designed to shelter the DUP from the blame game.

If the name-and-shame approach fails to force the IRA's hand, the governments will pin their hopes on a decisive DUP electoral victory. With the British general election looming next spring, the DUP can relax in the knowledge that Blair and Ahern will do little to paint them as the bad guys.

London and Dublin will pave the way for a DUP victory over the UUP in the hope that a resounding win will embolden Paisley to be more reasonable in his dealings with Sinn Féin.

Observers claim such an approach is deeply naive, and the strategy of DUP appeasement is a potentially dangerous one. The decision to publish the proposals could easily backfire, observers believe, as many grassroots DUP members will have found them unacceptable.

Nationalists have said that the joint proposals are not as damaging to the Good Friday Agreement as they had originally feared.

A raft of changes to the Assembly has been mooted, but observers believe none of them will stand in the way of effective power-sharing if the DUP chooses to work the institutions on a equal footing with Sinn Féin.

The joint election of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister has been scrapped; the DUP and Sinn Féin, as the two largest parties would simply have to nominate candidates to the positions.

A new ministerial code has also been suggested to prevent the DUP from engaging in the sort of non-cooperation that plagued the previous administration.

The British government also plans to repeal the Northern Ireland Act of 2000, which enables it arbitrarily to suspend the political institutions whenever it chooses.

It is difficult to see how the DUP could tally these changes with its vaunted claim that it was out to destroy the Good Friday accord.

Unionist sources are already suggesting that many DUP supporters will be “shocked'‘ by the details of the proposed deal.

Most of Paisley's followers had invested their total faith in his ability to secure an honourable deal, choosing to ignore media coverage which suggested he was actually conceding considerable ground to nationalists.

Now that the ins and outs of the package are laid bare, there are likely to be some uncomfortable moments ahead for the DUP leadership.

“While the DUP has obviously got what it always wanted - not having to go into an election having done a deal - they have conceded on a number of areas,” said an Ulster Unionist source.

“On policing and justice, they have gone far further than anything we'd have agreed to.

“The prospect of Northern MEPs and MPs being allowed to speak in the Dáil is also completely anathema to us. We see it as a breach of sovereignty - it would have been a deal-breaker,” the source said.

He said the DUP had clearly signed up to the Agreement, and significant sections of the 1998 document remained untouched.

“They're going to have a lot of difficulty with their grassroots. You just can't magic away - having said in 2003 that you are going to destroy the Agreement - that in 2004 you explicitly accept the fundamentals of the Agreement,” he said.

However, some nationalists are concerned that, while the new proposals are not as bad as previously thought, they contain several hidden veto opportunities for the DUP.

The SDLP has warned that the election of the new executive will come down to a 50/50 vote in the Assembly.

The SDLP claims that the DUP can use the vote to block the nomination of nationalist ministers it does not like. A failure to win consensus in the Assembly will lead to fresh elections.

While the DUP is not likely to use this more than once, nationalists are concerned that the threat of such a move will pressure Sinn Féin and the SDLP into nominating ministers to the DUP's liking.

“There's a lot that the DUP have bought into which we like, but we're not going to pretend that there aren't problems here,” said an SDLP source.

The DUP appears to have made gains with respect to the operation of the North-South bodies.

Under the proposals, the power-sharing executive would have a central role in the preparations for North-South meetings. Draft North-South decisions would be circulated to all the executive ministers ahead of any meetings.

According to the document, “any member of the executive would have the right to seek an executive discussion on such a paper'‘.

Some observers believe that the measure would allow the DUP to frustrate the smooth operation of the North-South institutions.

A review of the all-island bodies is also planned. While some nationalist sources suggest that the review will actually enhance cooperation between Dublin and Belfast, they also concede that the DUP may use the opportunity to undermine the North-South dynamic.

Nationalists are sceptical about the DUP's power-sharing bona fides.

Some suggested that, even if the deal were to get off the ground, Sinn Féin and the SDLP would be engaged in “a battle a day'‘, with unionists keen to frustrate their equality and North-South agendas.

They claim that the principle of joint governance would rankle with the DUP, regardless of what the IRA does.

However unlikely the photographic proof of IRA disarmament, a photo of Paisley and Sinn Féin chief negotiator Martin McGuinness together is even more unimaginable.