Conference tallis::celt

    
    Well,
    
    Lots has happened already.
    
    UUP have elected a new leader
    
    He has already met with Prionsais DeRossa - the Irish Minister of
    Social Welfare
    
    He has managed to upset the DUP by doing so.
    
    Officials of the Irish and British Govts have met and are trying to
    figure out the next moves.
    
    UUP leader will probably meet lots of othe people in the next few
    weeks.
    
    British and Irish Prime Ministers will meed at an EU meeting sometime
    next month and will probably review progress.
    
    So lots happening behind the scenes. 

                         *********************************



              Gerry Adams arrives in U.S. for political talks

RTw  9/11/95 8:38 PM


Copyright 1995 Reuters Ltd.

    WASHINGTON, Sept 11 (Reuter) - Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams arrived
in the United States on  Monday for talks with national security adviser
Anthony Lake and said he would push for the British  government to begin
all-party talks.

     Adams, head of the Irish Republican Army's political wing, told
reporters upon his arrival in Washington  that the Irish peace process was
in "a deepening crisis, resulting directly from the British government's
refusal to move into all-party talks."

     Asked if he would offer Lake any assurances on a complete
decommissioning of the IRA, which Britain  and Northern Ireland have made a
precondition for talks, Adams said the demand was simply London  "making
excuses for not talking."

     U.S. officials said over the weekend that they would be pressing Adams
to move towards disarmament  when he visits the White House this week.

     "Of course, we want to see all of the guns taken out of Irish
politics, but as an objective of the peace  process, not an obstacle to
progress in the peace process," Adams said.

     Earlier, before changing planes in New York, Adams said he could say
that Sinn Fein did not want to talk  to Britain "until they disarm," but
added, "that's an impossible demand to put on those people. What we  have
to do is create the conditions where we have peace and justice. We are not
looking for victory. We  are looking for a negotiated settlement."

     He praised the Clinton White House for being "very even-handed and
very balanced" in its Irish policy,  and said he expected President Bill
Clinton to continue supporting the peace process.

     In an interview with The New York Times over the weekend, Adams said
he would consider any  "reasonable proposal" for an international
commission to discuss the question of when and how the IRA  should be
disarmed.

     But in Dublin on Monday, Adams denied that he had softened his
opposition to an international panel to  break a deadlock on the disarming
of IRA guerrillas and said the newspaper report was "totally inaccurate."

    A planned Anglo-Irish summit last Wednesday collapsed when Ireland
pulled out, saying Sinn Fein would  not work with the commission for fear
it would be a trap to get the IRA to disarm as a precondition for talks.
  REUTER

      Unfortunately the British Government has painted itself into
    a corner with the demand for de-commissioning before talks start,
    mistakenly IMHO, and Gerry Adams is unable to deliver any progress on
    de-commissioning due to the refusal of the IRA to co-operate. Possibly
    the best way forward would be a "No First Use" guarantee from the IRA 
    as has already been given by Loyalist paramilitiary groups. I believe 
    that British and International public opinion would then put sufficient 
    pressure on the British Government and Unionist politicians to start 
    all party talks.
    
                           Dennis
     

  The British government don't want the peace process to succeed.  They don't
  want to have to leave north east Ireland.  They don't want anything less
  than a complete surrender from the Irish Republican Army.  It's been over
  a year since the IRA announced their cease-fire, and the British government
  still refuses to sit down and hold high level talks with Sinn Fein.

  The British should have held public, high level talks with Sinn Fein 
  independent of the actions of the IRA.  Sinn Fein representatives have
  a democratic mandate, and a right to be heard.

  First the British asked for a cease-fire, when that was given they raise
  the bar and ask for a unilateral surrender.  They don't want peace.

  When will British Army weapons be turned in?


                            Mark
    

  

    Well Mark, the interesting thing is that before the cat got
    out of the bag, they were holding unofficial high-level
    talks with Sinn Fein (well at least higher than they're
    holding now). :v)
    
    Now we have a cease fire and they publicly refuse to negociate.
    But who knows maybe they are. In any case they are playing games
    with the Irish people, both Unionists and Nationalists alike.
    They are skilled at it.
    
    First it was the semantic debate over permanent versus complete.
    Now it is over weapons issues. And tomorrow it will be over something
    completely else, say Murphys vs. Guinness. 
    
    I think the Irish should hire Yassir Arafat as a consultant.
    
    /g

  George,
    The end result is going to be the end of the Irish Republican Army
  cease-fire, and all because the British forces never really wanted 
  peace and never wanted to talk with their enemy.  This British decision
  is going to cost not only the Irish, but the British people as well.
  What a waste of what had been a golden opportunity.
    You might be right, and the British might be lying to the world again.
  They might very well be making plans without input from all of those
  affected.  They do have a history of being liars to both the Nationalist
  and Loyalist communities.  
                    Mark

Your emotions appear to have blinded you, Mark.  From what I understand,
some of the political parties are not happy about entering talks if they
suspect that the British Government are making too many concessions to
the IRA, not to mention the fact that any major government is very sensitive
about being seen to give in to terrorism (surely the reasons for this are
obvious?)

So, any suggestions how to get around this problem, other than wailing
the tired old complain about the Brits being bastards, etc?  Or is that
all you have to offer?  Seems to me you don't have much to say whenever
there's some progress being made, but you hang around like a vulture
looking for some pickings of potential trouble so you can raise your
tiresome Anglophobic voice at any opportunity.

That's the way it comes across to me, anyway.

Chris.

    Of course the Brits want peace.  The North costs them about 1 million
    pounds a day in insurance, unemployment, security.  As George says,
    they have done a fair bit behind the scenes in the past, despite the
    Maggie Thatcher type picture they present for the English Bulldog
    element of the public.  They are probably negotiating at present.  The
    answer really is for the US or the UN to act as an ombudsman and have a
    process of the IRA giving up some arms while the Brits withdraw some
    troops, all in stages.  I would agree that the British intransigence
    (whether real or not) is a hinderance.  This is the time for peace and
    they need to stop playing games with public opinion and Unionist
    opinion.  However, God willing, a lot is going on behind the scenes and
    progress will continue.  Every day of peace is a blessing and it gives
    the long-suffering people of the north a better appreciation for
    stability which they will be more and more reluctant to give up.
    
    Regards,  Ken Hanly

    RE .7
    
    I have a suggestion.
    
    Why don't the British Government bury their pride and sit down and talk 
    with Sinn Fein. After all they have been doing it secretly, so why can't 
    they do it publicly. I guess their collective egos wont allow this.
    
    Gerry 

    Well, the way I see it is that we haven't had any organized
    IRA terrorism for one year - yet the British response has
    been less than fulfilling.
    
    No wailing, here are some suggestions to get around this problem.
    
    - British announce a phased withdrawal of all their troops from NI
    - British enter full negociations with IRA, Unionists paramilitaries,
      and all other groups on the future of NI
    - All Parties agree to International supervision of a phased
      decommissioning of all arms and weapons
    - Restructuring of police forces in NI
    
    If the Palestinians can garner peace with Israel, then certainly
    the Irish can too. Let's move forward with the peace process, not
    stagnate in this semantic quagmire.  
                              

>    Why don't the British Government bury their pride and sit down and talk 
>    with Sinn Fein. After all they have been doing it secretly, so why can't 
>    they do it publicly. I guess their collective egos wont allow this.
    
Because the British Government and Sinn Fein aren't the only two parties
to be involved in peace talks; any discussions must also draw in representatives
of the Unionists, Loyalists and everybody else who needs to have a say.  Give
too much leeway to one side and you'll lose the trust of the other.
Unfortunately, I don't know what the answers are, but making a big noise
about X isn't being flexible enough, or Y are dragging their heels, or Z
aren't being reasonable doesn't help at all.  Everybody needs to give some
ground, and stop being so noisy in congratulating themselves and putting
down the others.

Chris.

re .10,

I read that after I posted .11!  I agree entirely with your suggestions,
hopefully the major `players' will soon see things the same way.

Chris.

    
    
    
    Mark/George,
    
       Not sure that you're right over this, I believe that the British
    government does want to disengage militarily from N.I. for the simple
    reason that there is nothing in it for us and it is costing us money
    that we don't have to maintain the presence. If all party talks can
    lead to an agreed status for N.I. acceptable to both communities then 
    the troops can be removed to their home barracks, with an initial
    saving, and in the longer term the army as a whole can be reduced 
    in size, with further savings. Also in electoral terms the initation of
    the Peace Process from the Downing Street Agreement is viewed in the
    U.K. as one of John Major's very few positive achievments, a return to
    violence following deadlock on de-commissioning would I believe be
    electorally damaging to the Government
       Unfortunately as I stated H.M.G has painted its self into a corner 
    over the de-commissioning issue and the Unionist parties now refuse 
    to attend all party talks unless de-commissioning has started. I 
    believe that you are tending towards the conspiracy theory whereas I 
    tend more to the cock up scenario. As to the "no first use" guarantee
    can you suggest any reason why the IRA should not offer that as an
    alternative to de-commissioning, after all the Loyalist groups have
    already given such a guarantee. 
    
                                Dennis
    

    >progress will continue.  Every day of peace is a blessing and it gives
    >the long-suffering people of the north a better appreciation for
    >stability which they will be more and more reluctant to give up.
    >
    >Regards,  Ken Hanly

    
    Well put Ken. Every day of peace is worth its weight in gold.
    Let's cement that peace process and make it permanent.
    

One thing that concerns me about the (hopefully impending) all party talks
is, will anybody actually listen to what the inhabitants of NI want?  There's
so much posturing and one-upmanship going on that sometimes it seems that
the people who have to live there are almost forgotten about.  Again, I
don't know the answer, but I hope the myriad politicians can find one...

Chris.

> So, any suggestions how to get around this problem, other than wailing
> the tired old complain about the Brits being bastards, etc? 

  Invite all parties to the peace table for high level talks now. Let the
  people involved have a say in their future.  Anyone who doesn't want to
  show up and have a say, can stay home and let others decide their future.

  Don't release any more British Army murderer's like Clegg.

  Release Irish POWs.

  Agree on an international commission that will oversee the decommissioning
  of British Army weapons and Loyalist paramilitary weapons, they've all 
  got to go.

  Agree on an international commission that will oversee the decommissioning
  of Irish Republican Army weapons, they will no longer be needed.

  Get rid of the RUC, and form a new police force that is not sectarian in
  nature and acceptable to both communities.

  Remove British Army troops from north east Ireland. Put the twisted lads
  back in England where they belong.

  Set up a war reparations committee to begin compensating those who have
  suffered from British injustice.

  Open up the border crossings once again.

  Fund economic development and cross border cooperation with the Republic.
  These funds should come from the England as part of war crimes reparations.

  British government officials to step forward and publicly apologize for
  war crimes committed over the centuries in Ireland, including the murder
  of two million Irish men/women and children during the great hunger.

  That would be a start.

                   Mark



  

  

    The "no first use" seems innocuous and makes sense to me. Though,
    in practice the "no first use" has been going on for a year now.
    The real issue I see is that no ONE party should be given
    veto power over the peace process. I didn't expect the British
    government to be the first ones to exert that veto.
    
    I'm racking my brains here wondering why the process is being
    drawn out so. Is it all so political? Does Major badly need the
    Unionists? Do the British just plain "like being in Ireland"
    for the Guinness and the craic? Is there some secret Nato base
    in the North? Is those oil and natural gas fields near Rockall
    much bigger than expected? Do the British fear for Scotland and
    Wales? Are there too many Germans building Schlosses in Connemara?
    Nil fhios agam...
    
    :v)

>  Don't release any more British Army murderer's like Clegg.
>
>  Release Irish POWs.

interesting distinction made by your choice of phrasing... I don't
really see much difference between the two.

>  Agree on an international commission that will oversee the decommissioning
>  of British Army weapons and Loyalist paramilitary weapons, they've all 
>  got to go.
>
>  Agree on an international commission that will oversee the decommissioning
>  of Irish Republican Army weapons, they will no longer be needed.

interesting choice of words, again... one set `must go', the other is
`no longer needed'

>  Remove British Army troops from north east Ireland. Put the twisted lads
>  back in England where they belong.

`twisted'... your choice of words is flippant, and generally unhelpful.

>  Set up a war reparations committee to begin compensating those who have
>  suffered from British injustice.

...and those who've suffered at the hands of the IRA/Loyalists/other
`paramilitaries'?

>  Open up the border crossings once again.

aren't they already open?

>  Fund economic development and cross border cooperation with the Republic.
>  These funds should come from the England as part of war crimes reparations.

emotional claptrap.  If you want to play it that way, perhaps the RoI
should pay for the defence costs incurred by the activities of some of
its civilians.

>  British government officials to step forward and publicly apologize for
>  war crimes committed over the centuries in Ireland, including the murder
>  of two million Irish men/women and children during the great hunger.

more emotional claptrap (and before you get on your high horse, *I'm*
descended from people who fled Ireland during the famine)

Not a particularly helpful list of suggestions, seems more like a recipe
to satisfy the cravings for revenge for those with a grudge caused by
some hidden agenda.  No chance of moving forward here, you know that such
extreme suggestions are unacceptable to many people, but at least you can
smugly blame them for not being cooperative I suppose.

Sad, really.

Chris.

  >Remove British Army troops from north east Ireland. Put the twisted lads
  >back in England where they belong.
    
    There are always going to be a few Rambos/Wackos in any
    military force. Britain has them, we have them, so I think
    you're making some sweeping generalities here Mark.
    
    Many of those soldiers are very young, from the poorer parts
    of England, and have no idea what they have gotten into.
    
    I have less of a problem if you meant to question the over-
    militarization of NI, its use as a weapons training ground,
    the anti-terrorism methods of the British military, house
    demolitions, etc. These policies all being driven by the
    "officers" or higher-ups, or probably (more accurately?) by
    the RUC.
    
    /g 
                                               

George,

re .17

  1)Yes, John Major does need the unionists so badly, they are his working 
majority in the House of Commons and the Tories will be decimated if and when 
an election is held.

  2)Oil and gas etc, don't think that this comes into the argument. If the 
peace process does eventually lead to some form of re-unification it will be  
decades away, political parties seldom look further than the next election.

  3)Scotland and Wales. There is only a small minority interest in 
independence in Wales, Scotland is a different matter, there will certainly be 
a devolved assembly in Scotland after the next general election, which may 
eventually lead to independence for Scotland if the majority desire this 
outcome (opinion polls show approximately 30% in favour of complete 
independence at the moment). I don't believe that what happens in N.I. will 
influence this one way or the other.

  4)NATO base ????. I personally would be amazed if NATO had any secrets left.
 
  5)The crack (is that the translation of craic ?). Well I've always enjoyed 
it but I don't think that any political re-arrangements would change that.

  6)One thing that you have missed. I think that there would be a reluctance 
among the British electorate to see people who consider themselves British 
"abandoned" for want of a better word. If however changes were agreed to by 
all parties then this would be welcomed.

  I have some sympathy with what you say about no ONE party having a veto but 
remember that the majority community must be comfortable with the final 
outcome of all party talks or there will almost certainly be a return to 
violence and sectarianism.
  
  I would advocate the "no first use" guarantee as a way for H.M.G. to get 
itself of the hook upon which it hung itself by the mistaken initial 
insistence on a start to de-commissioning before all party talks. This 
guarantee would defuse the argument used by the Unionists for refusing to talk
at the moment which is "If we talk to Sinn Fein and things don't suit them the 
IRA will threaten a return to violence to exert pressure".

                            Dennis  

    Mark,
    
    Some of what you've said up to now makes sense but .16 is so full of
    (dated) Republican cant that it could only be written in the U.S.
    
    
    The biggest problem now is the British (Tory?) unwillingness to admit
    that the IRA cannot be defeated and that Sinn Fein has a mandate.
    
    Regarding the Famine, reputable scholars in Ireland are now agreed that
    a big part of the shortage was caused by (Irish) merchants operating
    the free market and selling food abroad at a better price than would be
    available here. This is not to say that the British Government does not
    have a case to answer but bear in mind that back then they did not
    consider their inaction wrong.
    
    In essence that's probably the issue. Britain has never admitted it was
    WRONG WRONG WRONG in its treatment of Ireland and big areas of the
    establishment today in Britain still don't believe it.
    
    Paul

 Paul,
   In truth, I entered the note after having read the information in the
 latest Amnesty International report on north east Ireland.  Basically 
 it's business as usual for the British government and the British forces.
 I'm angry.  I'm angry that the British haven't used a golden opportunity
 to mend their ways.

   
 Is it "dated" to ask for all party talks immediately?  Is it "dated" to be
 disgusted with the release of Clegg?  If Clegg can be released after a couple
 of years, why must Republican prisoners rot in British jails after decades?
 Is that "dated"?

 If the British want the Irish Republican Army to turn in it's weapons, then
 why is it "dated" to ask for that them to also turn over their weapons?

 The RUC are a big part of the problem.  Is it "dated" to ask that they be
 disbanded?  They are one of the worst offenders of human rights according to
 Amnesty International.

 I was wrong to label all of the British Army troops as "twisted".  I've spoken
 with some who have brains, and have said they don't want to be in north east
 Ireland, and don't understand what they are doing there.

 Is it wrong to ask for "war reparations"?  When Germany is still paying out
 to the survivors of it's genocide, and Japan is being asked to pay for it's
 war crimes, then why shouldn't Britain pay for it's even more recent war
 crimes?  Why shouldn't the family members of the civilians murdered by the
 British Army bombs in Dublin be compensated?

 Why shouldn't the billions Britain spend for a military presence be converted
 to spending for economic development, at least for a few years?

>  Regarding the Famine, reputable scholars in Ireland are now agreed that
>    a big part of the shortage was caused by (Irish) merchants operating
>    the free market and selling food abroad at a better price than would be
>    available here.

  History is always being rewritten and revised.  Until someone can show me
  evidence disputing the British took the land by force in the first place,
  then extracted rent from the rightful owners, then threw them off to starve
  when they couldn't meet that rent, and finally exported tremendous amounts
  of food under British military escort out of a country of starving people,
  then I will judge them as guilty of a crime against humanity.

> This is not to say that the British Government does not
>    have a case to answer but bear in mind that back then they did not
>    consider their inaction wrong.

  I'm not talking about inaction, I'm talking about actions, and those
  actions were wrong.
                     


                               Mark




   

    >History is always being rewritten and revised.  Until someone can show me
    >evidence disputing the British took the land by force in the first place,
    >then extracted rent from the rightful owners, then threw them off to starve
    >when they couldn't meet that rent, and finally exported tremendous amounts
    >of food under British military escort out of a country of starving people,
    >then I will judge them as guilty of a crime against humanity.
    
    Mark, I can follow a lot of your argument, but for someone who quotes
    the socialist James Connolly, you are surprisingly protective of the
    Irish capitalist class, whose long and appalling record of neglect of
    poverty is only surpassed by their historical betrayal of the
    nationalist minority in the North over the last 80 years. Of course
    many of the landlord's agents who got rich out of evictions were Irish,
    and they were much hated and hounded for it during the land war.
    
    The peace process is not about British war criminals mending their
    ways. It is about an accomodation between British and Irish capital as
    they realise the old methods of exploitation are no longer
    appropriate. It may bring some concessions to the nationalist minority,
    but the lot of the protestant and catholic workers in the North will
    not improve much. The process is more or less on course. John Major has
    to watch his right wing and doesn't want to see all party talks which
    collapse after 10 minutes. The British government and British forces
    will survive the peace process and any number of Amnesty reports
    intact,to carry on as ever. Indeed it has learned a lot about containing
    protest and revolt in the last 25 years. James Connolly recognised that
    it would take a far more profound revolution to stop that, even though
    he had no hesitiation in supporting the nationalist uprising in 1916. 
    He also recognised that the unity of all workers living on these
    islands was essential to any such revolutionary process. 
    
    What has provisional Sinn Fein done to promote that unity?
    
    Kevin       
    

 Kevin,
    Sinn Fein, under the leadership of Gerry Adams has done the most to
 broker a peace process.  Mr. Adams has offered his hand to his former
 enemies, and asked that they all work together to improve the lot of all
 Irish men and women. This is from a man and his community who have suffered
 the most from the British policies.  Most of the suffering has fallen upon
 the nationalist community, but some has also fallen upon the loyalist  
 community.

    Poverty is a big part of the problem.  Injustice is another.  If the
 British can be forced somehow to recognize a democratic mandate, and let
 all parties be heard, then the peace process stands a chance.  Peace is part
 of the solution to bringing about economic improvements to all of Ireland.

    I don't think capitalism is necessarily a bad thing.  It drives a lot of
 economic development in this world.  The key is to keep a rein on it, so
 that workers are not exploited.  That can be accomplished through Government
 controls (when the government is a democracy), and the collective bargaining
 of labor unions.

    As for Irish capitalist who have betrayed the nationalist in the north
 east, well you can always count on them to sell you the rope that you'll
 hang them with. :-)

                              Mark
  

                        Mark