Sinn Féin News, January 26, 2007
Opinion:
Policing debate another historic milestone in evolution of republican strategy
BY LAURENCE McKEOWN
"Yes, we came out from behind the doors and we're now a long time out from
behind them -- a long time out from the corners where our backs were to the
wall, a long time off our knees. And the only ones who can put a limit on
our future destinies are ourselves." (Laurence McKeown)
Laurence McKeown was a republican POW in the H Blocks of Long from
1976-1992. During that time he spent four-and-a-half years on the Blanket
Protest and 70 days on hunger strike. Released in 1992 he is the author of
several books and a play and works as Development Officer with Coiste na
n-Iarchimí, the umbrella organisation for republican ex-prisoners groups.
On Sunday delegates to the Special Árd Fhéis will vote on the one motion
before them, the outcome of which will decide how republicans engage with
policing and judicial processes in the North. The event marks another
historic day in a string of such days over the past 13 years. Those mandated
to vote will represent cumainn from all parts of the country but there are
many other republicans, outside of the party, who have an equally keen
interest in the outcome.
The vote follows debate and discussion that has been intense in recent weeks
and yet the topic has been around for nine years -- since the signing of the
Good Friday Agreement. In many ways, some opinions expressed of late reflect
the ambiguity and unease that some republicans have harboured from the
signing of that Agreement -- an unease that understandably arises when
moving from an historical position, strategy and culture of resistance to
one of engagement, negotiation and governance. Although the core principles
of that new strategy are very clear, simple, and frequently articulated by
leadership and even rank and file membership, the working out of the
strategy in concrete situations often unnerves.
Karl Marx once wrote: "Men (sic) make history but not in circumstances of
their own choosing." It took republicans some time to learn that. In the
early 1970s the slogan on the walls was 'freedom '73' followed by 'freedom
'74'. We never had a 'freedom '75' as reality began to sink in that it was
going to be a long, hard struggle. It wasn't until 1986, however, that Sinn
Féin finally changed its position on abstentionism -- a policy that
prevented them from taking seats in Leinster House. The change in policy
didn't mean an acceptance of Partition - merely a recognition that the
overwhelming majority of people on the island accepted the institutions of
government in the South and republicans had to work with that reality. The
change to policy was neither easily nor quickly arrived at but it signalled
a crucial step in a long road moving from wishful thinking to accepting
material conditions and then working to change those conditions.
Eight years later the Army made a similar decisive move when it called the
first cessation of military actions. It did so after drawing the conclusion
that a military stalemate with British forces existed. The IRA had the
volunteers, armaments, commitment and support to continue the armed struggle
but thankfully by then republicans realised that it can never be simply
about continuing - it has to be about reaching the objective. It has to be
about winning. And a stalemate situation is not winning. The only one who
gains in a stalemate is the status quo and therefore the onus will always be
on those seeking to bring about revolutionary social change to take the bold
initiatives. That's what the Army did in 1994, again in 1997, and in
subsequent periods.
Although the head should rule the heart it was nevertheless difficult to
give up on the desire to militarily drive the British out of Ireland. We
held dear those historical scenes of Fidel and Che driving into Havana, guns
held aloft, and the scramble from the roof of the American Embassy in Saigon
(now Ho Chi Minh City) as US forces fled before a victorious Vietnamese
revolutionary guerrilla army. We wanted to see the same here. The 'method'
of reaching our objective at times seemed more appealing than reaching the
objective itself.
In hindsight, it was never going to happen that way because Ireland is not
Cuba or Vietnam. And many other successful revolutionary struggles since
then did not end in similar fashion. More common has been firstly a
cessation of military actions followed by a period of negotiation and
subsequently a negotiated settlement. And struggle, as we all know, doesn't
end with the ending of one particular tactic -- that of armed struggle. It
broadens, becomes more diverse and requires greater participation, courage
and confidence. It demands commitment, dedication, and revolutionary
discipline -- a discipline that comes from within, not imposed from without.
It requires a belief in the capacity and ingenuity of its leadership. Most
importantly, it calls for an imagination that can see the 'new' beginning to
take form whilst the 'old' still exists; a rejection of absolutist
positions; a capacity to duck and dive, twist and turn in true guerrilla
fashion to counter opponents' tactics; and, a strength and confidence gained
from long experience of struggle.
There are some who feel they cannot take such a leap, can't support the Árd
Chomhairle motion and therefore must leave the party. That is fair enough.
Everyone must be clear in their own mind what their personal politic is as
well as that of the party. When they feel too much of a sacrifice is being
demanded in terms of the former then it is probably best they part company.
However, the comments of a party member who now appears motivated on the
policing issue only after failure to be selected by party colleagues as an
electoral candidate, ring a little hollow. Likewise those who cite a lack of
debate when it could be more accurately stated that what they dislike is the
outcome of that debate. Because let's face it, the debate has been around
for years and those who haven't engaged in it or preferred to put it 'on the
back burner' were kidding no one other than themselves -- or else never
fully understood or internalised the strategy in the first place. As for
those who left the Movement many years ago but who continue to talk about it
and the leadership with an energy that often surpasses that of the ordinary
rank and file party member, their comments have long since lost any
coherence or critical content they may once have held. When you are neither
responsible for anything, nor accountable to anyone, then you can enjoy the
freedom to engage in flights of fancy. Many of us indulge in a similar
pursuit after a few pints but usually have the sense to realise -- or good
friends, partners, or comrades to remind us -- that's not the real world.
The reality of course, for those who do leave the Movement at this juncture
is that, just as in the case of those who walked out of the Árd Fhéis in
1986, there is nowhere else for them to go. Like it or lump it, there is no
organised group on this island, outside of the Republican Movement, who has
the capacity to bring about the type of changes we all envisage on this
island -- political, social and economic. The southern political parties,
the SDLP, the churches, the unionist parties and the British government have
to varying degrees an interest in maintaining the status quo. Republicans
are the only 'agents of change'. And change doesn't fall from the sky. An
all-island police service doesn't simply one day appear out of nowhere.
Neither does a 32 county democratic, socialist, republic. Things don't just
happen -- you must make them happen. And that often entails taking the
painful, soul-searching decisions that we would rather not.
In this current phase of struggle we are not only pursuing a path forward to
new political structures on the island but also engaging with the past --
and the two must occur simultaneously. There is a need for a truth recovery
process and for those seeking knowledge about their family members,
relatives and neighbours killed in the conflict to reach some sense of
closure. There is no reason why efforts towards those ends should in any way
be deflected by engaging with the current policing and judicial
arrangements. Indeed it can be more rightly argued that only by engaging
with them can we more quickly uncover evidence of the collusion we know
existed between the RUC and unionist paramilitaries.
The reasons for participating in political institutions and other bodies
North and South, at a local and national level, have never been because
republicans think those institutions, as currently structured, are the best
or only way they could ever be. We participate in those institutions to
represent our electorate, promote a republican agenda, and bring about
change. In that regard, remaining outside institutions and structures that
provide an opportunity for ensuring accountability over policing, the courts
and prisons, has jarred with the overall logic of the current strategy.
Leadership would argue, of course, that in this instance it was best to
resolve several major issues first which would ensure better systems of
accountability later. However, that time has now come.
The one criticism I have of the Árd Chomhairle motion and the process that
led to it is that debate around recognising the current policing and
judicial arrangements in the North was tied to what the DUP may or may not
do in terms of power-sharing. If we believe it is right to do it, that it is
the way to advance our strategy, then it is the thing to do -- and it
doesn't matter what the DUP do afterwards. Yes, we would like to see the
Assembly and institutions up and running but that is their decision, outside
of our influence. There are some who believe the DUP will never share power
with republicans; that the only time they do (in local councils) is when
republicans with the majority of seats, share that power with them. But that
shouldn't matter. That shouldn't influence the decisions republicans take to
advance their politics and struggle. More importantly, there are other
institutions in the north, much more powerful than the RUC ever was, that
have been largely ignored in the debate around policing. Those who staffed
the highest positions of the Northern Ireland Office throughout the decades
of the conflict and devised and implemented discriminatory policies against
working class communities and republicans in particular are seldom
mentioned. The structures and processes they set in place still remain today
and we bear the impact of them, most particularly in terms of financial
investment. It has been repeatedly identified in post-insurrectionary phases
of struggle around the world that the civil service apparatus of the former
regime is the greatest block on bringing about radical or progressive change
under a new system of government. It's easy to spot the armoured jeep pass
through our estates or identify the uniformed figure but less so the hand of
oppression in the pin-striped suit.
Last week I escorted a group of republicans from Dublin around Long Kesh --
one of the most brutal symbols of the British presence in Ireland and yet
equally a symbol of the victory of the human spirit (of republicans) over
oppression. Today it still stands only because its former inmates prevented
its demolition -- a small but significant indication of the political
strength the nationalist community now wields in the North. As we stood in
the prison hospital recounting the days of hunger strike in 1981 one of the
visitors asked how it was in later years. I summed it up by recalling a
conversation I had with a prison security governor in the late 1980s, by
which time we had achieved all the demands for which our ten comrades died.
Referring to the period of the blanket protest, the security governor
commented, "Our big problem was that no one ever thought about what we would
do once you came out from behind those doors." A prison governor never spoke
a truer word.
Yes, we came out from behind the doors and we're now a long time out from
behind them -- a long time out from the corners where our backs were to the
wall, a long time off our knees. And the only ones who can put a limit on
our future destinies are ourselves. Béirigí an bua.
See you all on Sunday.