Conference tallis::celt

    I find the proposals quite acceptable. However, the aim is to get all
    parties to talk. Deadlocks arise when two parties have opposing
    proposals and it is here that the International Body as well as the
    players have to be intelligent.
    
    It would be ideal if the paramilitarys could start decommisioning their
    armoury (overseen by an independant party) on the first day of all
    party talks, whilst the British Army returns to Barricks. However, there
    will always be an Army presence on any land that is considered part of
    the UK and it is this that the IRA will have to accept untill Irish
    unification comes about by democratic means.
    
    Shaun.

  I point anyone interested in viewing the British military presence
  in north east Ireland to:

  http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/fodea/aprn/bmgii/index.html


  32,085 strong occupying force.  Take a look at the pictures.  They
  speak a thousand words.

                   Mark

re 32,085 strong occupying force

The actual text is;

"combined military strength of c. 32,085"

This is made up of the British army,
the Royal Irish Regiment and the Royal Ulster Constabulary.

The British could be called an occupying force, but
the other two are indiginous (sp?).

Simon

    .3
    
    It's just Mark twisting the truth to suit the propaganda he spouts.
    
    
    CHARLEY$stuckrecord

 re. .3

  Well Simon, it sounds like we agree on one thing, to quote you
  "The British could be called an occupying force".    What's that,
  about 19,000 of them.

  Here's another question, how would you classify people in RUC
  uniforms with English accents?  

                           Mark


                                   [Image]

                               24 January 1996

                Initial Sinn F�in reaction to Mitchell report

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commenting on today's report issued by the International Body on
Decommissioning, the Sinn F�in President Gerry Adams said:

``In my initial response to the publication of the joint communiqu� last
November I said that Sinn F�in would seek to explore the possibilities
contained in it in a positive way. This was despite our grave and
justifiable reservations about the British government's commitment to the
peace process. Our party's contribution to each phase of the search for
peace has been consistent and positive. Our commitment to inclusive honest
dialogue and a democratic peace settlement is absolute.

``The impasse in the peace process was caused by the introduction of a new
precondition to all-party negotiations by the British government after the
IRA cessation. I am glad that the International Body has accepted the
argument that this is an unrealisable demand, that it should not be a
precondition and that all issues should be dealt with in open democratic
negotiations. This provides a basis for moving forward so that all matters
can be settled to the satisfaction of all sides and as part of the process.

``The British have already wasted 17 months. There is no justification for
further stalling. The onus is very clearly on John Major. He should now act
by immediately commencing all-party talks.''


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sinn F�in Press Office
44 Parnell Square
Dublin 1
Tel: +353-1-8726100 / +353-1-8726839
Fax +353-1-8733074

Released in the US by:

Friends of Sinn F�in
1350 Connecticut Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: +1-202-331-7886
Fax: +1-202-331-8117

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sinn F�in Home Page | Sinn F�in Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Does anyone else think that John Major's election idea could be very
    dangerous?...In my opinion anything as potentially divisive as an
    election in NI right now could completely polarize both communities and
    destroy the fragile trust that peace has brought. NI assemblies haven't
    worked in the past. They have been slagging matches between the two
    sides. All-party talks would probably be shouting matches as well but
    does NI need an election just to get to the same destination a lot more
    slowly? Also, an election would ensure that the Unionist parties would
    have their natural majority of representatives. All-party talks mean
    that everyone comes to the table as equals with equal representation. 
    
    Ray....

    I don't understand this fascination with blaming John Major for the
    stalling of the peace process. I think it's a case of "Whoops the
    unionist are making a right #$%& of it, let's point the finger at Major
    in a desperate attempt to shift the blame from us".
    
    
    CHARLEY

  So, John Major first decides to abide by the decision of an independent
  international commission (when President Clinton was there to scare him 
  into some action) and then refuses to abide by that decision when
  the decision doesn't happen to go his way. The whole world knows that the
  unilateral arms surrender was a ridiculous precondition designed to 
  destroy the peace process.

 17 months later, and all democratically elected representatives are not
  allowed to sit down at the "British peace table".

  I'm disgusted not only with Major and the British Government, but any
  of it's boot-licking sycophant supporters in here, who can justify this
  17 month British farce. You are the problem.  

                            Mark

    The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  The Front Page

    Major backs forum for Ulster talks

    Nationalist attack leaves door open 

    By Philip Johnston, and Richard Savill in Belfast

    The Mitchell proposals

    JOHN MAJOR yesterday backed an elected forum for Northern Ireland to
    allow all-party talks on the future of the province to begin, so
    breaking the deadlock caused by the IRA's refusal to give up weapons.
    The Prime Minister threw his weight behind the plan - first suggested
    by Unionists - after an independent commission ruled out any
    disarmament by the paramilitaries before talks.

    His Commons announcement wrong-footed Sinn Fein and nationalist
    politicians, who denounced the plan while avoiding an outright threat  
    to boycott the proposed elections.

    David Trimble, the Ulster Unionist leader, said that an elected forum,
    which would have no legislative or administrative powers, was "the only
    way forward", given the IRA's stand on arms.

    The elections, which Mr Trimble said should be held in the spring,
    would provide a "pool of representatives" to conduct all-party talks.

    Details on the assembly's size, how it would be elected and the
    weighting to be given to the various parties will be explored by
    ministers in talks with political leaders in the next few weeks.

    Mr Trimble said: "It is essential that the people of Northern Ireland
    have a say in the process at the start.

    "It is the only procedure that brings all parties that contain a
    mandate together in the near future.

    "We have said that, should Sinn Fein obtain a mandate and take their
    seats in an elected body, that mandate will be recognised."

    Mr Major's announcement, which won immediate support from Labour,
    followed the publication yesterday of a report from the international
    commission chaired by the former United States senator, George
    Mitchell, set up to assess the prospects for terrorist disarmament
    before talks.

    To cries of "shame" from Tory MPs, Mr Hume accused Mr Major of seeking
    to "buy votes" from the Unionists to shore up his Commons majority

    It concluded that the paramilitaries "will not decommission any arms
    prior to all-party negotiations" and added: "That is the reality with
    which all concerned must deal."

    The report set out six principles to which it said all parties should
    adhere, including a commitment to "democratic and exclusively peaceful
    means of meeting political ends".

    The speed of Mr Major's initiative led to an acrimonious exchange with
    John Hume, the leader of the mainly nationalist SDLP.

    To cries of "shame" from Tory MPs, Mr Hume accused Mr Major of seeking
    to "buy votes" from the Unionists to shore up his Commons majority, a
    charge that drew a withering rebuke.

    Mr Major said: "If I had been concerned about short- term electoral
    considerations on this issue, I would probably not have embarked on
    this process in the first place.

    "From the outset I have taken risks to demonstrate that what I care
    about is trying to prevent the killing, bloodshed and sheer nastiness
    that has dominated too much of the lives of British citizens in
    Northern Ireland for too many years."

    Mr Hume's initial hostility to the plan suggested that it could prove
    another dead end. But he later said he would listen to Mr Major's
    proposals. He feared that a re-run of the ill-starred assemblies of
    1973 and 1982-86 would merely prove "a talking shop leading to a
    shouting match".

    Recent opinion polls have shown strong support for elections in both
    the loyalist and nationalist communities and Mr Hume will be under
    pressure to soften his line.

    The party's chairman, Mitchel McLaughlin, said recently that a
    45-member forum might help meet his party's requirement for all-party
    talks

    Gerry Adams, the Sinn Fein president, accused Mr Major of "swapping one
    pre-condition to all-party talks for another". He added: "He has
    adopted an entirely Unionist agenda in an attempt to buy Unionist votes
    in Westminster."

    But Sinn Fein has sent out conflicting signals about an assembly. The
    party's chairman, Mitchel McLaughlin, said recently that a 45-member
    forum might help meet his party's requirement for all-party talks. Such
    a proposal would have to be given "serious consideration".

    In Dublin there was a cautious response. John Bruton, the prime
    minister, said an elected body was only one possible idea that could be
    discussed in the talks.

    However, ministers believe that the Irish government will fall in
    reluctantly behind the elections plan.

    Mr Major and Mr Bruton are to meet next month to review progress on the
    "twin-track" initiative they started in November. 

    Their original aim was to achieve all-party talks by the end of next
    month if the IRA had agreed to begin disarming. Elections in the spring
    will now be Mr Major's goal.

    Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

    Personaly, i'm not too keen on this elections idea. I can't really
    comment yet because I have no info on how these elections will be
    represented. If, however, the candidates originate from current
    constituencies then the whole thing will be a farce. The only place
    that Sinn Fein would have a chance of winning is west belfast. But the
    unionists would probably vote SDLP just to stop Sinn Fein from winning
    the seat (as they have done so before). I think its pretty clear that
    if Sinn fein don't get a voice then the violence will return.
    
    Secondly, the unionist majority that would result from such elections
    will effectively create a no progress situation...as John Hume says, "a
    slagging match".
    
    It would therefore be stupid to base elections on the present
    constituency system. what would be needed is equal representation from
    all sides....but there's no need for an election for that.
    
    I'd like to find out how the Government intends to handle this.
    
    Shaun.

    .9
    
    >The British don't want peace<
    
    Then answer this question Mark. How many British civilians/members of
    the armed forces/R.U.C./Loyalist paramilitaries/next doors cat have 
    KILLED/BEATEN/SHOT/STABBED/ MUTILATED/BEATEN Irish civilians in the
    past 3 months.
    
    answer here..........
    
    How many republican paramilitaries have done the above?
    
    answer here..........
    
    If you have answered truthfully (if that's possible) you will see that
    it isn't the British that don't want peace. It's this magnificent,
    romantic cause and it's people that cause the pages of your amnesty
    international reports to become stuck together. THEY are the problem.
    Right now, today. And if you can't see that, well, I'll go and talk to
    an Advocado (do you know what that is?) I'll get more sense and truth
    out of it.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    .9
    
    
    >boot licking sycophant supports<
    
    Hmmmmm...who does this remind me of?
    
    Your hero worship of Bill Clinton is sadly misplaced, as the bloke is a
    complete merchant who only came to Ireland so that clueless Hamptons like 
    yourself would fall for the oldest electioneering trick in the history of
    politics.
                                                                        
    
    hth.
    CHARLEY

    Charlie, I think you're off base about Bill Clinton. He is far from a
    "merchant", at least concerning the Irish situation. Clinton is sincere
    for wanting peace in Ireland. I believe he is the first US president to
    officially visit NI. He met with representatives of both sides of the
    conflict in NI. He granted a visa to Adams to push the peace process.
    He has set up various commissions for peace in NI.
    
    Yes, he has his political problems - but he is the first US president
    that has taken an active interest in promoting peace in NI. That is
    a far cry from any of the previous administrations, including Reagan,
    Nixon, and JFK, all of whom had Irish roots. The scene of the president
    with all the people of Belfast lighting up the Christmas tree was very
    special and hopeful of the potential for peace.
    
    George

    He also needs the Irish Vote in the next Presidential elections.
    
    
    CHARLEY

And John Major doesn't really need the Unionist MPs
over the next year or so either?

    The following is The Times article of the Mitchel report. I pulled it
    off The Times web page without permission. If this contravenes
    copyright or DEC policy then let me know and i'll delete it.
   
   Compromise is the only way ahead, says Mitchell
   
   BY NICHOLAS WOOD, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
   
   
   DESTRUCTION of terrorist weapons should begin during all-party talks
   on the future of Northern Ireland, the report of the international
   body set up by the British and Irish Governments says.
   
   The three-man team, chaired by George Mitchell, the former US senator,
   says its proposal is a compromise intended to break the impasse in the
   quest for a lasting peace in the Province.
   
   The report, which calls on all parties to affirm their commitment to
   six "fundamental principles of democracy and non-violence", says the
   deadlock over decommissioning has obscured the widespread agreement
   that already exists in Northern Ireland: "Members of both traditions
   may be less far apart on the resolution of their differences than they
   believe. No one should underestimate the value of a consensus for
   peace, and the fact that no significant group is actively seeking to
   end it."
   
   The dispute over decommissioning is a "symptom of a larger problem:
   the absence of trust. But a resolution of the decommissioning issue
   ... will not be found if the parties resort to their vast inventories
   of historical recrimination. Or, as it was put to us several times,
   what is really needed is a decommissioning of mind-sets in Northern
   Ireland."
   
   The report makes detailed recommendations on the arrangements for
   decommissioning illegally held weapons and suggests further
   "confidence-building" measures.
   
   * Decommissioning
   
   On the key issue of decommissioning paramilitary arsenals, the report
   says: "We have concluded that there is a clear commitment on the part
   of those in possession of such arms to work constructively to achieve
   full and verifiable decommissioning as part of the process of
   all-party negotiations. But that commitment does not include
   decommissioning prior to such negotiations ...
   
   "We have concluded that the paramilitary organisations will not
   decommission any arms prior to all-party negotiations. That was the
   unanimous and emphatically expressed view of the representatives of
   the political parties close to paramilitary organisations on both
   sides. It was also the view of the vast majority of the organisations
   and individuals who made oral and written submissions. It was not that
   they are all opposed to prior decommis sioning. To the contrary, many
   favour it. But they are convinced it will not happen. That is the
   reality with which all concerned must deal."
   
   In a reference to the position of the British Government, it says: "We
   were told that the clearest demonstration of adherence to democratic
   principles is the safe removal and disposal of paramilitary arms, and
   that at this time only a start to decommissioning will provide the
   confidence necessary for all-party negotiations to commence."
   
   But this was not acceptable to Sinn Fein, the SDLP, the Irish
   Government and the loyalist paramilitaries.
   
   "We were told that decommissioning prior to all-party negotiations was
   not requested before the announcement of the ceasefires, and that had
   it been, there would have been no ceasefires; that those who entered
   into the ceasefires did so in the belief that they would lead
   immediately to all-party negotiations."
   
   The report says that each side of the argument reflects a "core of
   reasonable concern" that should be appreciated by the other. "Those
   who insist on prior decommissioning need to be reassured that the
   commitment to peaceful and dem ocratic means by those formerly
   supportive of politically motivated violence is genuine and
   irreversible, and that the threat or use of such violence will not be
   invoked to influence the process of negotiations or to change any
   agreed settlement. Those who have been persuaded to abandon violence
   for the peaceful political path need to be reassured that a meaningful
   and inclusive process of negotiation is genuinely being offered to
   address the legitimate concerns of their traditions and the need for
   new political arrangements with which all can identify."
   
   The parties should consider an approach "under which some
   decommissioning would take place during the process of all-party
   negotiations, rather than before or after as the parties now urge.
   Such an approach represents a compromise. If the peace process is to
   move forward, the current impasse must be overcome."
   
   The report says that adherence to six principles would create the
   climate in which all-party talks could proceed. "These commitments,
   when made and honoured, would remove the threat of force before,
   during and after all-party negotiations. They would focus all
   concerned on what is ultimately essential if the gun is to be taken
   out of Irish politics: an agreed political settlement and the total
   and verifiable disarmament of all paramilitary organisations."
   
   * Weapons disposal
   
   The commission advises on the practicalities of destroying weapons.
   The report's first point is that the decommissioning process "should
   suggest neither victory nor defeat". It says that the IRA and loyalist
   ceasefires are "products not of surrender but rather of a willingness
   to address differences through political means".
   
   Decommissioning should take place to the satisfaction of an
   independent commission, which would be appointed by the British and
   Irish Governments after consultations with all parties. The commission
   would operate independently in both countries and would enjoy
   "appropriate legal status and immunity".
   
   The report says that such a commission should be able to draw on
   independent sources of legal and technical advice and adequate
   resources to receive and audit armaments and to observe and verify the
   decommissioning process. It would also be able to call upon the
   assistance of the British and Irish armies.
   
   Decommissioning should result in "the complete destruction of
   armaments in a manner that contributes to public safety". Techniques
   would include cutting up or chipping of small arms and other weapons
   and the controlled explosion of ammunition and explosives.
   
   Four methods are suggested for the removal of weapons: arms could be
   handed to the commission or designated representatives of either
   government for destruction; information on the whereabouts of weapons
   could be passed to the commission or government representatives; arms
   could be deposited in an agreed location for collection by the
   commission or government representatives; parties should also have the
   option of destroying their own weapons. The report says that the
   decommissioning process should be "fully verifiable" by a commission
   with full access to information from the Irish police and the Royal
   Ulster Constabulary.
   
   * Amnesties
   
   Decommissioning should not expose individuals to prosecution. The
   report says: "Individuals involved in the decommissioning process
   should not be prosecuted for the possession of those armaments;
   amnesties should be established in law in both jurisdictions.
   
   "Armaments made available for decommissioning, whether directly or
   indirectly, should be exempt under law from forensic examination, and
   information obtained as a result of the decommissioning process should
   be inadmissi ble as evidence in courts of law in either jurisdiction."
   
   
   * Building confidence
   
   The report says decommissioning should take place "on the basis of
   the mutual commitment and participation of the paramilitary
   organisations", and goes beyond its strict remit to offer comments on
   further confidence-building measures.
   
   It says that the "early termination of paramilitary activities would
   demonstrate a commitment to peaceful methods and so build trust among
   other parties and alleviate the fears and anxieties of the general
   population". Information on the fate of missing persons and the return
   of those forced to leave their communities would also help.
   
   Further moves by the Government to release terrorist prisoners would
   bolster trust, as would early implementation of the proposed review of
   the emergency legislation for Northern Ireland. The report rejects
   Sinn Fein pressure for decommissioning to be extended to weapons held
   by British troops in Ulster. "There is no equivalence between such
   weapons and those held by the security forces. However, in the context
   of building mutual confidence, we welcome the commitment of the
   governments ... to continue to take responsive measures, advised by
   their security authorities, as the threat reduces."
   
   The report goes on: "We share the hope ... that policing in Northern
   Ireland can be normalised as soon as the security situation permits. A
   review of the situation with respect to legally registered weapons and
   the use of plastic bullets, and continued progress toward more
   balanced representation in the police force would contribute to the
   building of trust."
   
   In a reference to the Ulster Unionist call for an elected assembly as
   a forum for all-party talks, the report says: "Several oral and
   written submissions raised the idea of an elected body. We note the
   reference in paragraph three of the communique [issued by the two
   governments on November 28, 1995] to 'whether and how an elected body
   could play a part'.
   
   "Elections held in accordance with democratic principles express and
   reflect the popular will. If it were broadly acceptable, with an
   appropriate mandate, and within the three-strand structure, an
   elective process could contribute to the building of confidence."
   

    RE: .15
    
    Yes Charlie, and he needs the Jewish vote, and the Italian vote,
    and the African American vote, and so on and so on. So does that
    mean he shouldn't encourage peace between the PLO and Israel,
    simply becuase it's a political issue? Most everything that
    the president does is political in nature.
    
    I don't care about the connection. If Clinton encourages peace
    in NI - that is a good thing. It's good for the people of Northern
    Ireland, good for the British, good for the Irish, and good for
    Irish ex-pats.
    
    [And incidentally, if a vote were held today, Clinton would win
    in a landslide. The Republicans have no viable candidate yet,
    so the Irish vote is quite moot at the moment...]
    
    Geo

"     He also needs the Irish Vote in the next Presidential elections.
"


  Gee, and here I am thinking he needs the American people's vote in the
  next Presidential election.

  Will you also be telling me he needs the Bosnian vote in the next 
  Presidential election.

  What on earth do they feed you in Britain when it comes to American politics?

                       Mark

   

    .19
    
    The same stuff they feed you about Irish politics no doubt.
    
    
    .16
    
    I have never mentioned John Major in any of my notes, nor have I ever
    mentioned whether or not I vote Tory. You assume too much > and wrongly
    at that.
    
    You've got it all wrong chap.
    
    
    CHARLEY

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News


The Mitchell proposals

By Philip Johnston, Political Correspondent

'The paramilitary organisations will not decommission any arms prior
to all-party negotiations. That is the reality with which all concerned
must deal' 


WITH the above words, the international commission set up by the British
and Irish governments to find a way of breaking the impasse over IRA arms
identified the source of the deadlock in Northern Ireland.

In the 17 months since the IRA declared a "cessation of hostilities", the
issue of weapons has loomed higher than the Belfast peace-line as an
obstacle to an agreed settlement of Northern Ireland's historical enmities.

The talks between the Government and Sinn Fein that began within a few
months of the ceasefire eventually ran into the brick wall of what became
known as the Washington Three condition: no negotiations without the
destruction of arms.

To prevent the process collapsing, John Major and his Irish counterpart,
John Bruton, agreed last November to set up an independent group to
examine the issue. George Mitchell, a former US senator, sitting with a
Canadian general, John de Chastelain, and the former Finnish prime
minister, Harri Holkeri, produced their 20-page report yesterday.

The aim

The Mitchell group was asked to find and advise on a suitable and acceptable
method for full and verifiable disarmament; and to report whether there was
a clear commitment among those holding arms to work constructively to
achieve that.

"We have no stake in Northern Ireland other than an interest in seeing an
end to the conflict and in the ability of its people to live in peace," said the
panel. "We are motivated solely by our wish to help."

The problem

The report said the "guns have been silent in Northern Ireland for a year and
half" and its people wanted that to continue. It recognised that 
"reprehensible punishment killings" were continuing but the sustained
observance of the ceasefires should not be devalued.

"It is a significant factor which must be given due weight in assessing the
commitment of the paramilitaries to work constructively to achieve full and
verifiable decommissioning."

However, the commission said that the arms issue could not be resolved
until the parties abandoned "their vast inventories of historical
recrimination". It added: "There must be a decommissioning of mind-sets
in Northern Ireland . . . If the focus remains in the past, the past will become
the future and that is something no one can desire."

The panel said everyone had accepted the principle of disarmament; the
disagreement was over timing. The Unionists would not talk to Sinn Fein
while the IRA kept its weapons; the paramilitaries would not give them up
until talks had ended in agreement.

It was not unreasonable for Unionists to be concerned that political parties
linked to paramilitaries would use the threat of violence to get their way. But
it was "the reality" that weapons would not be given up before talks.

The compromise

Mr Mitchell's group proposes a middle way. Instead of disarming before or
after talks, it suggests weapons should be given up during negotiations. "If
the peace process is to move forward, the current impasse must be
overcome. While both sides have been adamant in their positions, both have
repeatedly expressed the desire to move forward.

"This approach provides them with that opportunity . . . As progress is made
on political issues, even modest mutual steps on decommissioning could
help create the atmosphere needed for further steps."

As it refuses to give up guns before talks, the IRA is pressed to embrace six
principles if Sinn Fein, its political wing, is to enter talks [see panel].

The alternatives

The Mitchell report recognises that its proposed compromise is unlikely to
be enough to produce the required confidence and trust. Many witnesses
suggested other steps. Though the report declines to recommend any in
particular, such steps include:

An early end to paramilitary activities - including surveillance and targeting
- to show a commitment to peaceful methods; provision of information
about people killed but whose bodies have never been found; allowing people
forced to flee their communities to return.

Continued action by the British and Irish governments on prisoners and an
early review of Britain's emergency legislation.

Further measures to lower security in Ulster as the terrorist threat recedes,
though the report rejects equating the security forces' legally-held weapons
and those of the paramilitaries.

Reforms of policing and "a review of the situation with respect to legally
registered weapons and the use of plastic bullets".

An elected body to reflect the popular will. Tucked at the end of the report
are six lines referring to the Unionist idea of elections to test the parties'
mandates.

"If it were broadly acceptable, with an appropriate mandate, and within the
three-strand structure, an elective process could contribute to the building
of confidence."

It is this concept that the British Government will now try to develop.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News
                          

The commission

THE three-member panel headed by George Mitchell was set up to provide
an "independent assessment" of the weapons issue.

Specifically, the two governments asked the body to look at
decommissioning.

London and Dublin also asked Mr Mitchell, Gen John de Chastelain and
Harri Holkeri to report on whether or not those that held illegal arms were
prepared to work constructively towards decommissioning.

The three men made repeated visits to Belfast, Dublin and London. Ian
Paisley's Democratic Unionists refused to give evidence, denouncing the
commission as an "abrogation of British sovereignty".

The panel did not deal directly with paramilitary groups. The three men held
their meetings in private. Commenting on his work, which included
countless submissions from official parties and the public, Mr Mitchell said
he would take away from Northern Ireland "a vast expansion of my
vocabulary of synonyms".

Mr Mitchell, 62, was born to Irish-American parents in Maine but adopted.
He practised law and was a federal judge until he entered the senate as a
Democrat in 1980. Mr Clinton made him a part-time adviser on economic
affairs in Northern Ireland.

Mr Holkeri, 58, was prime minister of Finland between 1987 and 1991 - the
first Conservative to hold the post since the Second World War.

Gen de Chastelain, 58, has been chief of the defence staff of the Canadian
armed forces since 1989. In 1993-94 he was Canadian Ambassador to
America before being recalled to active duty.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News

                          

The commitments

The commission set out key recommendations for all parties to affirm and
signal their total commitment:

   1 The democratic and exclusively peaceful means of resolving
   political issues

   2 The total disarmament of all paramilitary organisations

   3 Agreements that such disarmament must be verifiable to the
   satisfaction of an independent commission

   4 Renouncing for themselves and opposing any effort by others to
   use force or threaten to use force to influence the course or outcome
   of all-party negotiations

   5 Agreeing to abide by the terms of any agreement reached in
   all-party negotiations and resorting to democratic and exclusively
   peaceful methods in trying to alter any aspect of the outcome with
   which they may disagree

   6 Urging that "punishment" killings and beatings stop and taking
   effective steps to prevent such actions.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News

How the parties reacted: Leaders united over need for action

Unionists

THE Ulster Unionist leader, David Trimble, said he was "not optimistic"
that the target date for talks by the end of February could be met.

The only Mitchell recommendation was a firm commitment to six
principles, which should be honoured before, during and after talks. "We
need actions . . that will point clearly and unequivocally to a renunciation of
violence," he said.

However, reaction from the rest of his party was mixed. Ken Maginnis,
security spokesman, said members would have no difficulty in accepting the
six principles set out to show peaceful intent.

"Obviously the Ulster Unionist Party will accept the report and hope that
progress can be made. It contains a good deal of what we have been
advocating for some considerable time," he said.

A statement from the Ulster Unionist headquarters said it was
"unthinkable" to abandon the requirement that arms should be surrendered
before talks start.

Ian Paisley, leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, called for immediate
elections to a constitutional convention in Ulster.

"The conclusion by the international body that it is not practical to ask
terrorists to give up their weapons plays into the hands of Sinn Fein/IRA
and is utterly rejected by the overwhelming number of people in Northern
Ireland.

"Talks cannot be held if one party is literally holding the gun to the heads of
the other parties."

Sinn Fein

Gerry Adams said the commission had accepted the argument that
decommissioning before talks was "an unrealisable demand".

The Sinn Fein president added: "The British have already wasted 17
months. There is no justification for further stalling. The onus is very
clearly on John Major. He should act now by immediately commencing
all-party talks."

He said the Mitchell Commission was "John Major's baby". "It didn't
support his position. It came up with another position and that position
removes all preconditions."

The Conservatives

Andrew Hunter, chairman of the Tory backbench Northern Ireland
committee, said the report was "profoundly disappointing" but should not be
dismissed summarily. It was wrong about disarmament but "contained many
good points about the need to build confidence".

The committee's vice-chairman, David Wilshire, said: "We are being asked
to accept that we negotiate with terrorists who still have guns and
explosives. I find that a quite intolerable position.

"I hope [Mitchell] will accept it is unrealistic to expect people like me to
cave in on a matter of principle - that you don't negotiate with armed
terrorists."

Dame Jill Knight, vice-chairman of the Tory backbench 

1922 Committee, said: "Unless weapons have been handed over, there is no
indication of the sincerity of participants in all-party talks."

Loyalists

Politicians from groups associated with Loyalist paramilitaries welcomed the
report. Gary McMichael, of the fringe Ulster Democratic Party, said it was
"a genuine attempt to deal with a very complex issue". He welcomed the
proposal of an amnesty over past crime when arms were finally
decommissioned, something his party had submitted to the commission.

The Nationalists

John Hume, leader of the Social Democratic and Labour Party, dismissed the
idea of an elected body to negotiate a way forward.

"That is not what the report recommends. It says that if it were broadly
acceptable, with an appropriate mandate, and within the three-strands
structure, an elected process could contribute to the building of confidence.

"We have made very clear that, as part of that three strand process, certainly
we will be discussing institutions for Northern Ireland, and an elected body
can emerge from that - but not as a precondition."

Dublin

The Irish government and opposition parties in Dublin gave a positive
reaction to the Mitchell report. Official sources said it endorsed Dublin's
view that paramilitary disarmament in advance of all-party talks was not
realistic.

Dublin believes the report will significantly advance the prospects of
launching all-party talks by the end of next month. The two governments
plan a summit next month to review progress.

Dick Spring, the Irish deputy prime minister, said the report was a "clear
independent assessment" and offered "a possible way to get us to all party
talks by the end of February".

He added: "Decommissioning as a precondition was never really on and it
could never be upheld because it was unachievable and unattainable."

Fianna Fail, the main opposition party, said it "warmly welcomed and fully
endorsed" the report. "This will pave the way for the immediate
commencement of all-party talks by the end of February."

It endorsed the recommended confidence-building measures to be taken on
all sides "in relation to such matters as prisoners, the quantity of
legally-held weapons, and more balanced representation in the police."

Jean Kennedy Smith, American Ambassador to Ireland, said the report
was "balanced and fair" and would provide "a strong basis for continued
negotiations and discussions".

"This report proposes a road-map through the maze of demands and
preconditions to forward movement in the peace process," she added. "The
United States government is committed to do everything possible to
maintain the momentum of the peace process."

The former Irish prime minister, Albert Reynolds, said the Mitchell report
may have given Mr Major "a way off the hook" of the disarmament
condition.

"In general terms it represents a good day's work," he said. "They have not
given everybody everything they wanted, but they have struck the right
balance, and produced a formula to enable everyone to move forward."

Opposition

Labour's Northern Ireland spokesman, Marjorie Mowlam, said: "We hope
that all parties study the report carefully and look at the many options that
Mitchell puts on the table to bring trust and confidence towards the
development of all-party talks as soon as is possible.

"It's only by talking, it's only by dialogue, that we will move the process
forward."

Paddy Ashdown, Liberal Democrat leader, said: "I think Mr Mitchell has
done a serious, careful, thorough piece of work.

"It deserves the support of all sides and I believe it is going to get it. I hope it
will unlock the roadblock."

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News
                          

How the arms would be destroyed

By Richard Savill, Irish Correspondent

THE international commission's proposals for the destruction of
paramilitary weapons threw up its own issues yesterday - the confidentiality
of the terrorists who hand them in; and the complex arrangements needed
to make certain that they were destroyed.

The panel proposed that the decommissioning process should not expose
individuals to prosecution, which is certain to upset relatives of some of
those killed during the 25 years of violence in Ulster.

The panel recommended that amnesties should be established in law in both
jurisdictions north and south of the Irish border to prevent individuals
involved in the disarmament process being prosecuted for possession of the
firearms.

It also advised that arms made available for decommissioning should be
exempt under law from forensic examination and information obtained as a
result of the process should be inadmissable as evidence in courts of law in
either jurisdiction. Mr Mitchell said: "If you do not provide an amnesty then
you are ensuring that those arms will not be disposed of."

His report also proposed that the disarmament process should take place to
the satisfaction of an independent commission, acceptable to all parties.

The commission would be appointed by the British and Irish governments
after consultations with other parties to the process. 

Procedures for destruction would include the cutting up or chipping of small arms and other
weapons

It should have independent sources of legal and technical advice and
resources to monitor the handing in of arms and their decommissioning -
meaning destruction. The panel said it should also be able to call on the help
of the British and Irish armies "when appropriate".

Procedures for destruction would include the cutting up or chipping of small
arms and other weapons, the controlled explosion of ammunition and
explosives, and other forms of conventional munitions disposal. The process
could encompass a variety of methods, including:

The transfer of arms to the commission or to the designated representatives
of either government for subsequent destruction.

The provision of information to the commission or to designated
representatives of either government, leading to the discovery of arms for
subsequent destruction.

The disposing of arms for collection and subsequent destruction, by the
commission or by representatives of either government.

The report said parties would also have the option of destroying their
weapons themselves but the process should be fully verifiable.

The British and Irish governments and the security forces provided the
commission with estimates of the arsenals held by both sets of
paramilitaries. But the report did not give an inventory.

Defence experts have estimated that the IRA's arsenal includes 650 AK47
rifles, a dozen general purpose machine-guns, about 20 heavy- calibre
machine-guns, 100 Webley revolvers, 2.5 tons of Semtex and 40 RPG
rocket grenade launchers. 

The IRA could also boast enough assault rifles to equip two battalions

Loyalists have never been able to match the explosive capacity or the
detonating expertise of the IRA. The largest shipment known to have
reached loyalists was in 1988. This included 200 assault rifles, 90 Browning
pistols and 10 RPG7 rockets. Loyalists have also tried to equip themselves
with home-made weapons.

The submission by the Ulster Unionist Party to Mr Mitchell said it was
generally believed the IRA held between 80-100 tons of weaponry and the
loyalists a further seven to eight tons.

It said the 2.5 tons of Semtex had the potential to detonate an Oklahoma
type bomb every day of the year for nearly seven years. The IRA could also
boast enough assault rifles to equip two battalions (1,200 men).

The Ulster Unionists said the IRA's arsenal was enough to keep a terrorist
campaign going for at least another 15 to 20 years. There were more than a
dozen Duska heavy machine-guns capable of shooting down helicopters and
up to a dozen Sam 7 surface-to-air missiles.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News

House of fallen hopes

Stormont, the classical-style parliament building set in 300 acres of
parkland six miles east of Belfast, was opened in 1932 by King George V.

The last Northern Ireland government to sit there resigned in 1972 after
London assumed responsibility for law and order in the province.

Direct rule followed and Stormont has since represented for nationalists the
entrenchment of Unionist domination.

In 1975 a new form of assembly sat there - the ill-starred constitutional
convention.

That was followed by a 78-seat assembly set up by James Prior that sat at
Stormont on and off between 1982 and 1986.

The latter was regarded as unworkable by the nationalist SDLP, which stood
on an abstentionist platform, as did Sinn Fein.

The Democratic Unionist Party later boycotted it over sharing
chairmanships.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News
                          

Election option: Major turns idea of an Ulster assembly into a trap for
reluctant republicans

By Philip Johnston, Political Correspondent

IT IS 10 years since the last assembly in Northern Ireland was dissolved in a
welter of acrimony, boycotts and abstentions.

John Major yesterday offered to dust down at least a shell of the wreckage to
pluck a political success from the jaws of what looked ominously like a defeat
when the Mitchell report landed on his desk this week.

He told MPs: "It is now apparent that there may well be another way
forward, consistent with the basic principles we have always adhered to."

Accepting the conclusion of the Mitchell commission that the
paramilitaries would not disarm ahead of talks, he effectively put aside his
15-month demand that they should.

He then latched on to six lines buried away at the end of the report that
suggested that an elected body might be a good way to produce the
confidence and trust needed to get all the parties round the negotiating table.

The idea was first proposed by Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionists several
months ago.

But when it became apparent that the Government's demand for
disarmament was on a road to nowhere it was seized on and developed by
David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party.

The kind of assembly outlined by Mr Major in the Commons yesterday
would be a fundamentally different creature from the regional government
that resigned in 1972 as London assumed power over the province.

It would be shorn of any legislative or administrative powers.

An outline of how it would work has already been suggested by Mr Trimble

Essentially an elected body would be a forum for the all-party talks that the
Mitchell report made clear would not be possible on the basis of prior
disarmament.

It is highly unlikely that the proposed new body could sit in Stormont given
its chequered history.

An outline of how it would work has already been suggested by Mr Trimble,
though the Government also has ideas.

If the nationalists are to be brought round the table there would need to be
weighting to ensure they were not swamped by the inevitable Unionist
majority.

Mr Trimble sees the elected body as preparatory and a means of moving to
full-blown negotiations at a later stage "when conditions are right".

Unionists have spoken of a 90-seat convention; the Government is thought
to favour something smaller, possibly around 50, all elected by proportional
representation.

From the convention would be drawn a number of committees to start the
talks on an all-party basis and to take evidence from business and other
interests in the province about future arrangements.

Sinn Fein members would sit in the convention on the basis of their mandate from the
electorate

Mr Trimble has also been careful to foresee an input for the Irish Republic
in the assembly. It would be invited to put forward ideas about cross-border
institutions and other elements that appeared in the Anglo-Irish framework
document last February but which are looking increasingly redundant.

Sinn Fein members would sit in the convention on the basis of their
mandate from the electorate and participate fully without pre-conditions.
The committees would be open.

It is also suggested that sitting MPs could be ex-officio members of the
convention, keeping politicians such as Ian Paisley and John Hume - who
have been at the centre of previous boycotts - at arm's length.

Mr Major envisaged the convention as a "pool of representatives", whose
input would be weighted according to their showing at the polls.

While the initial response from Sinn Fein and nationalists has been cool - if
not hostile - there are indications of differences that could be exploited.

Mitchell McLaughlin, Sinn Fein party chairman, said this month that the
party would seriously consider taking part in an elected talks forum.

However, the republicans regard a 90-seat convention as unwieldy and
would prefer something smaller.

If Sinn Fein were to agree to a forum, it would also insist on a proper
negotiating body and not just the talking shop proposed by Mr Trimble.

Mr McLaughlin said that delegations could be chosen from a group of
around 45 to try to achieve a political settlement.

With the Government's "Washington Three" condition on arms - no
all-party negotiations without decommissioning - now effectively consigned
to the bogs of Irish history, the elected forum will take its place as the game
to be played out in the coming months.

Mr Hume's apoplectic reaction in the Commons did not bode well for nationalist agreement to
participate

Mr Major said the Government was prepared to introduce legislation and
seek the urgent approval of MPs and peers to allow "an elective process to go
ahead as soon as may be practicable" - in practice, as soon as agreement on
the idea was forthcoming. However, that did not look an easy prospect last
night.

Mr Hume's apoplectic reaction in the Commons did not bode well for
nationalist agreement to participate; nor did the response of Gerry Adams,
the Sinn Fein president.

The Irish government is split, with John Bruton, the prime minister,
thought to be more enthusiastic than his deputy, Dick Spring, the leader of
the main coalition partner.

Mr Trimble urged the Government to expedite the process, even suggesting
elections in April or May, to avoid their running into a possible general
election this year.

But if the SDLP and the republicans believe waiting for a Labour
government might change matters, they were swiftly disabused by Tony
Blair, Labour leader. He said that those who had ruled out disarmament as a
means of moving the process forward were under an obligation to accept the
only alternative now on offer.

The Mitchell report, which had looked like a victory for Sinn Fein, turned
rapidly into a trap.

And in the Commons yesterday, Mr Major duly sprung it.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

The Electronic Telegraph  Thursday 25 January 1996  Home News
                          

Call to expel Irish envoy over 'leak'

By Philip Johnston

THE expulsion of the Irish ambassador was demanded by a Tory MP last
night for allegedly leaking details of the report to put a favourable "gloss" on
its findings a day before publication.

David Wilshire, MP for Spelthorne and vice-chairman of the party's
backbench Northern Ireland committee, said the ambassador, Ted
Barrington, briefed Conservative backbenchers on the report at a lunch on
Tuesday.

"I have spoken to MPs who were there, and they have said the ambassador
went through the document, putting the Irish government's spin on it," said
Mr Wilshire.

"We should pack the ambassador back to Dublin. This is an abuse of his
position and a breach of the diplomat's code."

"They discussed issues in the current peace process including decommissioning. However the
ambassador did not read out extracts from the report as has been suggested"

David Trimble, Ulster Unionist leader, also protested, saying Mr Barrington
had behaved disgracefully.

Mr Barrington met Tory MPs at the embassy for what was described as a
"long-standing arrangement". 

An official said: "They discussed issues in the current peace process
including decommissioning. However the ambassador did not read out
extracts from the report as has been suggested."

But leaking by the Irish side helped to frame the subsequent debate on the
report when it was published yesterday. Informed speculation about its
findings had been carried in Dublin newspapers on Tuesday based on
briefing from Washington.

Virtually the whole document was reported in Dublin yesterday, hours
before Mr Mitchell's press conference.

The leaks meant that prominence was given to the international body's
conclusion that it was unrealistic to expect the IRA to disarm before talks
rather than to other elements that the British side were keen to emphasise,
such as elections.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

Electronic Telegraph  Friday 26 January 1996  Home News
                          

Major holds out prospect of Ulster Grand Committee

By Philip Johnston Political Correspondent

THE Government is offering Northern Ireland a full-blown Grand
Committee in a further overture to the Unionists after John Major's 
announcement of proposed elections in the province. 

The move came as Mr Major sought to repair relations with Dublin amid
recriminations over his handling of the Mitchell report on IRA
disarmament. 

The Grand Committee would place the province on a similar footing to
Scotland and Wales. It would be a forum for taking questions and holding
ministers accountable. It could also take some legislation.

Sir Patrick Mayhew, Northern Ireland Secretary, said last night: "Our
objective is a widely acceptable political settlement.

"But pending such a settlement, I would like to improve the democratic
accountability of the Northern Ireland Office and the Northern Ireland
departments."

The committee would sit in Belfast and meet more regularly than the
monthly Northern Ireland Question Time at Westminster.

Ministers have been reluctant to activate the full powers of a Grand
Committee, as nationalists have in the past seen it as part of an
integrationist agenda. It would be in addition to the assembly proposed by
Mr Major that has caused such anger among nationalists and in Dublin.

Mr Major and John Bruton, the Irish prime minister, will meet next month
to review progress on November's "twin-track" initiative. But Dick Spring,
Ireland's foreign minister, said last night that an earlier meeting was needed
to clear the air.

Despite efforts in London to play down talk of a rift, it was clear relations
were under strain. Mr Spring told the Dail that any proposals that "espoused
the position of one community over the other" in Northern Ireland were
unacceptable.

He added: "An elected body, as proposed yesterday, does not represent a way
out of the impasse."

His comments reflected concern in Dublin that elections may be divisive
and had put paid to efforts to start all-party talks next month.

But Mr Major said in the Commons: "The impediment to all-party talks is,
and has been, the unwillingness of Sinn Fein/IRA to begin the
decommissioning of their arms. If they will begin the decommissioning of
arms there would be no justification for any party not to attend and join in
all-party talks leading to negotiations."

The Irish government wants all the parties to sign up to the six principles set
out in the report from former US senator George Mitchell this week. These
include a commitment by the parties to "democratic and exclusively
peaceful means of meeting political ends".

Dublin officials expressed anger that Mr Major had effectively discarded the
Mitchell recommendations.

In a speech to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Mr Bruton stressed that
the two governments had agreed in November to aim for all-party
negotiations by the end of next month.

But Unionists said the six principles were insufficient to get them into talks.

Irish sources last night underlined the split between the two governments by
releasing details of a telephone call on Tuesday night between Mr Major and
Mr Bruton before Mr Major's Commons statement.

Mr Bruton made clear that the question of elections should be resolved
during, not before, all-party talks which were due to start at the end of
February. He emphasised that elections were not a way of starting all-party
talks.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

Electronic Telegraph  Friday 26 January 1996  Home News
                          

John Hume - the moderate who started to raise his voice

By Philip Johnston

FOR more than 25 years John Hume has been the quiet, moderate voice of
Irish nationalism. A Bogside man, one of six children, he has striven
tirelessly to improve the lot of the Roman Catholic community from which
he came, while strenuously opposing the violence that sectarianism
spawned.

Abroad, the SDLP leader is Ulster's best-known son, increasingly spending
more of his time overseas as a Euro-MP and as an ambassador for his home
city of Londonderry.

At home, his consistent stand against the IRA earned him respect. In the
Commons, Tory MPs who would otherwise dislike his belief that a solution
to Northern Ireland's problems must involve Dublin, would tend to
acknowledge his integrity.

It all began to change, however, over his association with Gerry Adams in
1992 to bring about an IRA ceasefire. The cessation of hostilities announced
17 months ago was the legacy of his contacts with Sinn Fein and, as the
"peace process" began to accelerate, he took much of the credit.

On Wednesday in the Commons, however, Mr Hume spectacularly misread
the mood at Westminster. Tory MPs cried "disgraceful" as he accused the
Prime Minister of playing politics with the lives of people in the province.
As the hubbub mounted, he shouted across the floor: "I live with it - you
don't." As John Taylor, MP for Strangford, reminded him, Unionists lived
in the province as well.

The outburst, which called into question his judgment and his political
acumen, marked a watershed for Mr Hume. Increasingly he is seen as
arrogant and aloof, behaving as though the "peace process" is his personal
fiefdom.

His recent behaviour has demonstrated that he has no instinctive feel for
Westminster; he is rarely there and does not like the place.

What happened on Wednesday during the Prime Minister's statement was a
shock for nationalists. For years, it has been the historic role of the
Unionists to act as the blockage on "progress" and of Mr Hume to depict
himself as the voice of common sense.

These roles have been reversed, with Mr Hume now portrayed as the man
who would stand in the way of democratic elections. There are some who
fear he has spent so much time with Mr Adams that he is beginning to
sound like him.

However, Mr Hume is astute enough to know when he has been pushed into
a corner. Insiders think he will have no option but to agree to the elections
and to stand, while trying to turn the initiative to his own advantage.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

    I have to say that I think the telegraph's article on John Hume is a
    load of crap. He is probably the most knowledgable and intelligent person
    on NI affairs. He was there at the beggining of the civil rights
    movements and he is still there today. He has lived through the
    troubles always condemning the violence and always the most saneist
    voice of the catholic communities. His fears that an elected assembly
    would turn into a slagging match have been proven twice before and thus
    his views should be heard out and noted. The conservatives can shout
    'shame' as much as they like but if only they were to look into the
    mirror long enough they would realise that it is they who should be
    shamefull.
    
    Shaun.

    .31
    
    amen....
    
    the telegraph's attack on Hume is utter rubbish. God only knows what
    they're trying to achieve by this article. The Telegraph is known as a
    Conservative Party mouthpiece though....
    
    Ray....

    "...which called into question his judgment..."
    "...he is seen as arrogant and aloof..."
    "...he has no instinctive feel for Westminster..."
    "...he has spent so much time with Mr Adams that he is beginning to
     sound like him..."
    
    This makes The Sun look good.

    The John Hume is the one person that I truly trust in this whole
    delayed mess.  The Telegraph must have had Ian writing for it under a 
    penname.  I have had the fortune of meeting him on a few occasions in
    Ireland and in the USA and he is as real in person as his writings
    portray.
    
    I still hope and pray for peace, but I honestly do not see any 
    middle ground between Paisley and Adams.
    And the election proposals is a farse!
    
    diddo diddi .31.
    
    Cheers,
    Paul   

Just out of interest, why are Sinn Fein/IRA so worried about the prospect
of taking part in an election?

//atp

Because they're the one political group who've achieved the dubious accolade 
of being even more unpopular than the Conservative party.

Chris.

    Did any one see Martin McGuiness on "On The Record", on sunday. Why he
    couldn't just answer the questions being asked him I don't know. I
    listened to the whole thing and he answered not one question, every
    answer was effectively an accusation that the British Government have
    thrown the Mitchell Report in the bin with their elections proposition.
    He may have a right to feel a bit pissed off by the whole thing but it
    doesn't do his or Sinn Fein's credibility anygood by always sounding
    off the same rhetoric.
    
    Shaun.

    .35
    
    Sinn Fein/IRA are so worried about elections because they'll have
    absolutely no chance of gaining a result of any kind.
    
    
    CHARLEY 

    .38
    CHARLEY....
    
    Any election would return the same people with probably the exact same
    amount of votes as the last time.... i.e. the status quo. So why bother 
    when the results are already known?...they will have to talk to each other 
    sooner or later....an election will only serve to prolong the status quo.
    
    Ray....   

Electronic Telegraph  Monday 29 January 1996  Home News

Spring accuses Major of 'divide and rule' ploy

By Richard Savill Irish Correspondent

DICK SPRING, the Irish deputy prime minister, accused Britain yesterday
of pursuing a "divide and conquer" policy following John Major's proposal
for an elected forum for Northern Ireland.

His comment, the most outspoken yet in the latest Anglo-Irish rift,
reflected continuing anger in Dublin over the British election initiative 
which is opposed by nationalists.

Dublin is contradicting Britain's view that it was properly informed of the
election move and Mr Spring declared that the Irish government "will not
be treated in that manner in the future".

He told Irish Radio that London had fallen back on "an old British tactic" by
suggesting in briefings that there were differences on Ulster policy between
himself and John Bruton, the Irish prime minister.

"It is not just an Irish experience. We have seen this is many parts of the
World," he said. "The British set out to divide and conquer. They have made
attempts before to divide Mr Bruton's department and mine, but they have
not succeeded."

Mr Spring is due to hold talks with Sir Patrick Mayhew, the Northern
Ireland Secretary, in London on Thursday and wants to "get back on track"
in the wake of last week's events.

"There will be difficulties in the Anglo-Irish relationship from time to
time," he said, "and last week was a difficult week in relation to that
partnership. But we have to get back to talks. The British know full well how
we feel after the last few days. We have made it very clear, and we will not be
treated in this manner for the future.

"We are a sovereign government, we are dealing in international relations,
and we will continue on behalf of the Irish people to negotiate as a sovereign
government."

Sir Patrick said that elections to a negotiating convention were the only way
forward to all-party talks, unless the paramilitaries began handing in
weapons.

But Dublin believes all-party talks should go ahead if Sinn Fein and the IRA
subscribed to the six principles set out in the report from George Mitchell,
the former US senator, to demonstrate peaceful intent.

John Hume, leader of the nationalist SDLP, said his party was "totally and
absolutely opposed" to the election plan. "The electoral process as it has
been proposed is not a process that we would want to take part in . . . it's only
wasting time," he said on ITV's Jonathan Dimbleby programme. "We'll
have nothing to do with such an election, full stop."

Mr Hume appeared, however, not to rule out taking part in elections for
some kind of forum. He said he would "listen very carefully" to what Mr
Major had to say at a scheduled meeting between them tomorrow.

Martin McGuinness, the senior Sinn Fein strategist, spoke at a republican
rally in Londonderry, to commemorate 'Bloody Sunday', when 13 people
were shot dead by Paratroopers in 1972. He said an elected body was another
"pre-condition" to talks being laid down by Britain.

His party's leadership would have to consider whether to boycott such an
election.

The debate is now expected to switch to Washington. Michael Ancram,
Northern Ireland minister and Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein president, are
expected there this week, followed by David Trimble, the UUP leader.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

    
    To me elections at this time is yet another stall tactic and
    would/could be redundant.  I believe all of the party
    representatives concerned now are elected officials, so why have
    more elections.  Correct me if I'm wrong as to 1 or 2 ot the party heads
    not being presently elected as their local representatives.  
    The objective now is to get all parties to sit down together.
    The Mitchell report seemed very unbiased and clear cut, paving the way to 
    all parities negotiations.
    
    This new election proposal by Major and the Unionists naturally 
    worries and frustrates, neutral observers and Irish Nationalists,
    not to mention going against the international neutral committee.
    I have only heard a few lines concerning it involving hundreds of 
    representatives.   My concerns/suspicions are;
    	1. This Major proposal is yet another side step pre-condition to
           skuttle  the talks.
        2. I would be leary of a Paisley backed Unionist election proposal.
           It is probably loaded with gerrymandering to prolong their
           power control.
        3. This goes against the Mitchell's reported recommondations.
        4. Reinforces Major's need to not loose the Unionist vote.
        5. Effective talks towards  peace would never work with hundreds
           of elected representatives.  The larger the meeting assembly
           the less effective it is at accomplishing anything.
    
    Cheers,
    Paul  
        

Just a disclaimer to start off my note, this isn't a dig at anyone or any 
particular party, just a question from the curious.

It's often claimed that Major is trying to stall the peace talks.  Could 
anyone tell me how he would benefit from doing this?  Or, how would someone 
else benefit by accusing him of this?

Chris.

    re .42
    
    The obvious benefit to Mr. Major is continued support from the unionist
    parties in Westminster. His majority is wearing VERY thin! Therefore
    it's to his advantage to keep the unionists voting for him for as
    long as possible, since he would be trounced in a British general election.
    

>    The obvious benefit to Mr. Major is continued support from the unionist
>    parties in Westminster. His majority is wearing VERY thin! Therefore
>    it's to his advantage to keep the unionists voting for him for as
>    long as possible, since he would be trounced in a British general election.

there is that, I suppose.  Thing is, by using this tactic he may win a few 
more Unionist votes, but at the same time he's giving Labour a prime chance to 
discredit him even further.  The guy's a prat (okay, I seem to have had an 
eloquence failure today! :)

Chris.

    Actually, the Unionists have always said that they only support Major
    on issues they feel they can do so. If they disagree with whatever he
    is attempting to get through Parliament, they can and do oppose him.
    Note too, that currently Major still has a majority in Parliament, even
    without the Unionists. I'm not saying that Unionist support isn't a
    factor, of course it is, but it seems to be being given undue
    prominence.
    
    Laurie.

    Re -.1
    
    Major's "majority" is down to approximately 6 MPs. Given that not all
    MPs will be in attendance for a particular vote I would say it is
    extremely desirable for him to have the support of the unionists if not
    absolutely crucial.
    
    I think we are being rather generous to the British Government in
    assuming that their reasons for stalling the peace talks are based on
    short term parliamentary power and not on the jingoism which drove them
    to create the whole problem in the first place.

    
    
    
    The longer you delay talks AND somehow maintain a ceasefire, the more
    difficult it becomes for the paramilitaries to go back to shootingf.
    
    It's a very difficult and dangerous balancing act, but as long as you
    maintain the promise of talks, and keep the sponsors of the talks
    interested, you marginalize the paramilitaries.
    
    No comment on whether or not I think this is smart or will be
    effective, but I do think that this is what the British Government and
    the Loyalists want.  

    .46
    
    What jingoism is that Eddie?
    
    
    CHARLEY

    RE: .47
    
    >The longer you delay talks AND somehow maintain a ceasefire, the more
    >difficult it becomes for the paramilitaries to go back to shooting.
     
    This is one way of looking at it, but I disagree.  The hard line 
    extremist are probably pushing to abandon the ceasefire since it has 
    not led to pease talks.
    Very gradual tit-for-tat retaliation/assinations could begin again and
    escalate.
    
    Heard on the BBC this morning that a man, identified as a IRA man, was
    shot in the head.  Now if this was done by the Loyalist
    Paramilitaries... look out and run for cover.
    
    I always said that if the British Government would show true open
    fairness with ALL people of Northern Ireland then they would gradually
    eliminate the IRA recruitment power for new members.
    As it is now and has been. The BG has not been fair to all people of
    the north, thus helping the IRA recruit new members.
    
    Cheers,
    Paul  
                                                        

    The man shot was leader of the political wing of the INLA (Irish
    Republican Socialist Party i think). He is also believed to be the
    Chief of Staff of the INLA. He was shot several times in the head and I
    wouldn't be suprised if this was an internal affair or a bit of
    IRA-INLA feuding.
    
    Shaun.

    The Electronic Telegraph  Wednesday 31 January 1996  The Front Page

    INLA chief shot dead in dole queue

    By Richard Savill, Irish Correspondent

    THE reputed leader of the republican terrorist group, the Irish
    National Liberation Army, was shot dead in Belfast yesterday as he
    signed on for unemployment benefit.

    The killing of Gino Gallagher aroused fears of another bitter feud
    developing within the paramilitary organisation.

    Mr Gallagher, 33, married with children, was ambushed by a lone gunman
    who was waiting inside a social security office off the Falls Road. He
    was hit several times in the head and body.

    Police said the gunman approached from behind and shot Mr Gallagher in
    front of customers and staff.

    The gunman, wearing a bobble hat, a wig and what police suspect were
    false glasses, then "coolly" walked through the public area and escaped
    on to the Falls Road.

    Security sources believe Mr Gallagher, an outspoken critic of Sinn Fein
    and the IRA for what he saw as the abandonment of the republican cause,
    had been involved in an internal power struggle.

    There were suggestions last night that he had taken over as chief of
    staff of the INLA a few months ago.

    The organisation, which was responsible for the murder of Airey Neave,
    the Conservative Northern Ireland spokesman, at Westminster in March
    1979, is notorious for internecine feuds. 

    "There are certainly strong indications that this part of an internal
    INLA feud"

    Bill Stewart, RUC Assistant Chief Constable for Belfast, said: "The
    investigation is at a very early stage and we will be pursuing every
    avenue open to us, but there are certainly strong indications that this
    part of an internal INLA feud."

    He added: "The politics of that feud, or questions about whether it
    constitutes a breach of the ceasefire, are quite outside our remit as
    investigators, but any such incident heightens fear in the community
    and must be denounced in the strongest possible terms."

    Another theory was that Mr Gallagher's killing was carried out by a
    representative of the wider republican movement who wanted to see the
    removal of a man critical of the IRA ceasefire.

    Northern Ireland ministers were swift to condemn the killing. Lady
    Denton said it pointed up "in the most chilling way" the reason why the
    Government continued to emphasise the need for disarmament.

    The INLA has not formally declared a ceasefire and there has been
    evidence of tensions within the organisation over the best way of
    driving Britain out of Ireland.

    The tensions surfaced after a Dublin court appearance last year of four
    INLA suspects charged in connection with a major arms haul.

    They announced from the dock that they had been operating an
    "unannounced ceasefire".

    The four included Hugh Torney, 41, and Dessie McCleary, also 41, both
    of whom are being sought by Irish police after failing to answer bail
    two weeks ago.

    After the dock announcement, the INLA leadership issued a "clarifying
    statement", saying its suspension of military operations was a
    "tactical cessation" and did not constitute a ceasefire.

The Electronic Telegraph  Wednesday 31 January 1996  The Front Page


Hume leaves door open to Ulster deal

By Philip Johnston, and Richard Savill in Belfast

JOHN MAJOR's plan for an elected forum for Northern Ireland was still on
track last night. Ninety minutes of talks with John Hume, leader of the
nationalist SDLP, left the door open to an agreement.

Mr Hume has opposed such a forum for all-party talks but said his party was
"engaged in a process with the Prime Minister which we hope will lead to the
outcome of a common approach to a comprehensive negotiated peace
settlement." More meetings are planned.

Both sides declined to spell out their discussions at Westminster but Mr
Hume's emollient approach suggests that the Prime Minister has ideas that
could appeal to nationalists.

Mr Hume pointedly refused to repeat his strong criticism of elections.

His position is pivotal to the attitude taken in Dublin; and if he is ready to go
along with elections it would put Sinn Fein in difficulties.

Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein president, reaffirmed his "implacable" opposition
to an elected body after meeting Sir Patrick Mayhew, Northern Ireland
Secretary, in Belfast. But Sir Patrick made clear that he had no intention of
backing down.

Sir Patrick was encouraged that Sinn Fein had quickly answered his call for a
meeting. It had listened intently to what he had said and he believed it had
understood his assurances that the Government was not proposing an
old-style Stormont parliament.

Sinn Fein has not ruled out standing in elections but would probably not
take its seats.

If a strict time limit can be set for the forum, with a promise of an early
move to negotiations and a role for Dublin, it might prove attractive to
nationalists.

However, if Mr Major goes too far he risks losing Unionist support.

Mr Major's ideas for an elected body probably differ markedly from those of
the Unionists, who do not see it as a forum for proper negotiations and want
it to sit for two years.

Ian Paisley, Democratic Unionist leader, will have talks in Downing Street
today and David Trimble, Ulster Unionist leader, will meet Mr Major
tomorrow.

In a flurry of effort to sustain the search for a lasting peace, Michael
Ancram, Northern Ireland Minister, is in Washington to brief the
administration on the latest initiative.

Tomorrow British and Irish Ministers will meet in London to clear the air
after Dublin accused the Government of using "divide and conquer" tactics
to break the deadlock over disarming the paramilitaries.

Electronic Telegraph is a Registered Service Mark of The Telegraph plc 

                                   [Image]

                               30 January 1996

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Adams Calls on Major to Retract All Preconditions

Following his meeting this morning with British Secretary of State for the
North, Patrick Mayhew, the Sinn F�in President Gerry Adams said:

``This mornings meeting was at the request of Patrick Mayhew. We listened
very intently to what he had to say. We took the opportunity of dealing in
detail with our implacable opposition to Mr. Major's unionist proposal which
he made last Wednesday. There is now a heavy onus upon John Major to move
this process forward, to honour the commitments which he made with John
Bruton and previously with Albert Reynolds.

``I told Patrick Mayhew that John Major should publicly retract the
statement which he made in the British House of Commons and that he should
also publicly set aside the precondition which he has stalled this process
on for almost 17 months. I outlined our view that elections should take
place after negotiations. I pointed out that if Mr. Major is really so
concerned about elections then he should call a Westminster election.

``The primary responsibility for unlocking the impasse in the peace process
rests very much on the British government. It needs to clarify its position,
to retract the proposal put forward by John Major and to join with the Irish
government and the rest of us in moving the entire situation forward; to
meet the commitment of all-party talks by the end of February.

Mr. Adams added:

``There is no going back to Stormont as far as Sinn F�in is concerned, as
far as nationalists throughout this statelet are concerned and so far as
nationalists throughout this island are concerned. That's the reality and
that's the main reason why there will be no return to Stormont. We are not
going back to be treated the way we were treated since this statelet was
established.

``What we are concerned about is making peace, not making propaganda, not
being involved in little conspiracies with other parties as John Major has
done. What we need to do is to move the situation forward. The British Prime
Minister, should clearly, if he has notions on elections, put those where
they belong - into the twin track process, and into all of the other
political processes of discussion.''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sinn F�in Press Office
44 Parnell Square
Dublin 1
Tel: +353-1-8726100 / +353-1-8726839
Fax +353-1-8733074

Released in the US by:

Friends of Sinn F�in
1350 Connecticut Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: +1-202-331-7886
Fax: +1-202-331-8117

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Sinn F�in Home Page | Sinn F�in Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]

So Sinn Fein are building towards a permanent peace by getting their military 
division of thugs to set off bombs in the middle of London just as people are 
coming out of work?  Nice one.

Chris.

    You said it Chris, as I've mentioned once or twice before, only one
    side does not want peace.
    
    But, I expect the less clued-up members of this conference still to
    blame the British Govt. for this action.
    
    Of course, the Govt. *were* unjustified in calling for the
    de-commissioning of arms. How dare they.
    
    
    CHARLEY

                                 [Sinn Fein]

                              19 February 1996

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Adams Expresses Shock and Sadness at London bus explosion

Sinn F�in President Gerry Adams speaking on radio this morning, following
last nights explosion in London, expressed his shock and sadness at what had
occurred and extended his condolences and sympathy to the families
concerned.

Mr Adams said:

``I want to say that none of us should be deflected from the necessary work
of rebuilding the peace process by this tragic incident or by the knee jerk
reaction of some politicians who for 18 months refused to accept the
challenge to actually talk. Indeed the greatest failure in all of this has
been the refusal by people in responsible positions to actually talk.''

Mr Adams added:

``Sinn F�in wants to see an end to all armed actions. We have to restore the
peace process.

``That means all of us taking risks and all of us being resilient enough to
face up to the needs of the situation. When the peace process broke down in
the Middle East, Arafat and Rabin didn't walk away from the situation, they
didn't close doors. When the same thing happened in South Africa; Mr.
Mandela and Mr. De Klerk didn't walk away from the situation. They were in
many ways compelled to redouble their efforts.

``The tragic lesson is that we cannot have peace in Ireland unless two
conditions prevail; firstly, John Major must become a partner to that peace
process and secondly, is that you cannot have peace unless you have talks.

``If the IRA was involved last night then of course the responsibility for
what occurred lies with them. We who are in political leadership have a
responsibility to assert the primacy of dialogue, of honest dialogue, as the
vehicle for change and to get that as speedily as possible back on the
tracks.

``As far as I'm concerned the way to end the war is to get around a table
and talk, and seek an agreement and an accommodation for the people who live
on this island.

``What we have to do is to create the conditions whereby those who ended
their cessation, in this case the IRA, are persuaded to recommence it. The
way to rebuild the peace process is to anchor it in a foundation of
dialogue. Make it unnecessary and impossible for people who feel they have
to resort to armed struggle to do so by uplifting and asserting the
supremacy and the primacy of dialogue. I will use whatever influence I have,
along with others, to create the type of conditions to bring this about.''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sinn F�in Press Office, 44 Parnell Square, Dublin 1
Tel: +353-1-8726100 and +353-1-8726839   �   Fax +353-1-8733074

Released in the US by:

Friends of Sinn F�in, 1350 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington DC 20036
Tel: +1-202-331-7886   �   Fax: +1-202-331-8117

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Sinn F�in Home Page   �   Sinn F�in Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web publication by [email protected]
Web archival by [email protected]

I'm sure that those hypocritcal condolences mean an awful lot to the family
of the dead.

//atp

<<< Note 1542.57 by MOVIES::POTTER "http://avolub.vmse.edo.dec.com/www/potter/" >>>

>I'm sure that those hypocritcal condolences mean an awful lot to the family
>of the dead.

>//atp


FWIW it appears that this was a "suicide" bombing. The dead man was the bomber
     and his colleague is in hospital ( probably suffering from injuries
      from the Police ..er  not ).  I have no sympathy with the dead in this
      case. 

     Stuart

I wouldn't call it a suicide bombing, which would imply a deliberate 
intention to blow themselves up. I subscribe to the cockup theory. 

Dave

    RTw  02/19 2040  British police question IRA bomb suspects
    
    By Patricia Reaney
    
    LONDON, Feb 20 (Reuter) - Violence will not deter Britain's efforts to
    secure peace in Northern Ireland, the government pledged, as police
    questioned two people arrested after an IRA bomb tore apart a London
    bus, killing one and injuring eight.
    
    One of the survivors of Sunday's blast was under armed police guard in
    hospital on Tuesday, prompting speculation that the device had gone off
    prematurely and he and the bomb victim were members of the IRA.
    
    "That's not a possibility we have discounted yet - I'm not prepared to
    be more specific," Commander John Grieve, head of the anti-terrorist
    branch of the police, told reporters on Monday.
    
    
    Police arrested two men on Monday under Britain's Prevention of
    Terrorism Act, under which they can be held without charge for 48
    hours. They also said a weapon had been recovered from the scene.
    
    Sunday's bomb, the third in London since the IRA ended its 17-month
    ceasefire 10 days ago, further imperilled the peace process in Northern
    Ireland but Britain pledged it would not derail it.
    
    The British government in this democracy will not be shifted from its
        chosen and democratic course by bombs, or by the threat of bombs, or by
        any variety of violence," Britain's Northern Ireland Secretary Sir
        Patrick Mayhew told parliament.
    
        "The perpetrators of violence themselves should realise that in this
        democracy they will make no political progress whatsoever by means of
        violence."
    
    After the blast the Irish Republican Army, which has fought a 25-year
        battle to oust Britain from Northern Ireland, said it might broaden
    its campaign to other cities.
    
        "If what is happening in London doesn't get the message home, the same
        signal will be sent by activity in other major British cities," a
        leading IRA source told Reuters.
    
        Mayhew insisted a further escalation of violence would only harden the
        minds of ordinary people against the IRA.
    
        British Prime Minister John Major, who discussed the latest attack with
        his Irish counterpart John Bruton during a 30-minute telephone
        conversation, promised to step up the fight against terrorism.
    
    Irish Foreign Minister Dick Spring also insisted the peace efforts must
        continue. "Our priorities are to reinstate the ceasefire as quickly
    as possible," he said after a special meeting with Bruton in Dublin.
    
        But Gerry Adams, leader of IRA's Sinn Fein political wing insisted the
        peace process was over and what was needed was to rebuild it.
    
        The London bombings heightened fears that violence will also resume
       in Northern Ireland and the Irish republic with Protestant loyalists
        launching reprisal attacks.
    
        Irish police, during a crackdown on security, found several detonators
        concealed in a returned rental car at Dublin airport on Monday.
    Police said the devices were not thought to be connected with any planned
        attacks on Dublin, considered as the heart of Irish nationalism.
    
    
        The IRA has blamed Britain for the breakdown of the peace process
        saying that after 17 months of peace, promised all-party talks had
        still not begun. Both London and Dublin insist the IRA must reinstate
        its ceasefire before the political process can move forward.
                                                                    
        REUTER

       RTw  02/19 1621  Irish police find detonators - radio
    
        DUBLIN, Feb 19 (Reuter) - Irish police carrying out a security
        crackdown after the IRA bombings in London found several detonators
    in a returned rental car at Dublin airport, Irish radio said on Monday.
    
        It said the detonators were found concealed in a rental car that had
        been brought back to Dublin airport about 10 miles (16 km) from the
        capital.
    
        The radio said the find was being examined by police and no further
        details were immediately available.
    
        The airport straddles the main road from Dublin to Belfast, which has
        traditionally been the centre for the 25-year Northern Ireland
        conflict.
    
    
        But the airport is also a main route for up to 20 flights daily to
        London, the current target of IRA bombers fighting to end British
    rule
        of Northern Ireland.
    
        Security in and around Dublin has been visibly increased because of
        fears that Northern Irleand's Protestant Loyalist gunmen will launch a
        reprisal raid for three IRA bombings in London within 10 days, two of
        them fatal.
    
        Leading Loyalist spokesmen say their armed supporters claimed the right
        to attack Dublin which they see as the centre of Irish nationalism.
    
        There have been no reprisal raids by Loyalists since the IRA ended a
        17-month ceasefire 10 days ago with an attack on London's Canary Wharf
        which killed two people.
    
    
        REUTER

    I wonder if Gerry Adams will show the depth of his sympathy for the
    families of the innocent civilians who are dead and injured, by carrying
    the coffin of the tyro-bomber at a hero's funeral with full military
    honours, just as he did for that poor kid killed in the Shankill Rd.
    bombing.
    
    Laurie.

    AP 25 Feb 96 23:05 EST V0293                                     
    
        Copyright 1996 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
    
        N. Ireland Rallies For Peace
    
        BELFAST, Northern Ireland (AP) -- Church bells pealed throughout
        Ireland on Sunday as tens of thousands called upon the Irish Republican
        Army to stop its killing. It was the most widespread protest against
        IRA violence in two decades.
    
        Britain, meanwhile, ordered another 400 soldiers back to Northern
        Ireland.
    
        In downtown Belfast, 10,000 demonstrators chanted "Cease-fire now! Give
        us back our peace!" in response to the IRA's breaking of a 17-month
        cease-fire with bombings in London.
    
    Thousands more delivered the same message in 10 other Northern Ireland
        towns, and an estimated 60,000 marched in the Irish Republic.
    
        "We are not going to allow the agenda for this democracy to be set by
        the army council of the IRA," said Irish Prime Minister John Bruton
        in a peace march from his hometown church in rural County Meath.
    
        "This secret organization, whose membership is unknown, who are
        accountable to no one, who do not stand before the public to get
        approval for what they do, has no right to act on our behalf. And the
        people of Ireland are saying: Stop," he said.
    
        In Dublin, U.S. Ambassador Jean Kennedy Smith joined a 25,000-strong
        rally in College Green, where three months ago President Clinton
        addressed a crowd confident that the IRA cease-fire would last.
    
        In Washington, Clinton threw his support behind those calling for
        peace.
    
        "Those who seek to use violence and terror should hear the voices of
        today's vigil being conducted across our lands: No to violence, yes to
        peace," he said in a statement Sunday.
    
        In London, about 60 people attended a vigil on the steps of a church in
        Trafalgar Square, near where a bomb exploded prematurely on a bus a
        week ago, killing the IRA man carrying it and wounding nine people.
    
        The demonstrations were reminiscent of the 1976 protests that mobilized
        tens of thousands and earned two Belfast women a Nobel Peace Prize,
        but never pressured the Catholic-based IRA or its "loyalist" Protestant
        enemies to lay down arms.
    
    In a statement Sunday night, the British Army said another 400 soldiers
        were being sent back to Northern Ireland. That brings to 900 the number
        of troops ordered to return to the province since the cease-fire ended
        with a truck-bomb explosion in London's Docklands business district on
        Feb. 9.
    
        The IRA said it ended the truce because Britain moved too slowly
        toward calling multi-party negotiations on Northern Ireland's future.
    
        On Sunday, a few dozen supporters of the IRA-allied Sinn Fein party
        stood stone-faced at the rallies in Belfast and Dublin,  holding
        placards demanding "Make Peace Work -- Negotiate Now."
    
        In Dublin, their presence was noted with boos and jibes.
    
    "The people of Ireland will not tolerate any person walking around with
        a peace symbol in one hand and a piece of Semtex (plastic explosive) in
        the other," said labor union leader Peter Cassells.
    
        Sinn Fein officials expect to meet British representatives Monday in
        Belfast, their first talks since the breaking of the cease-fire.
    
        Sinn Fein chief negotiator Martin McGuinness, a reputed former IRA
        commander, said he might be able to reinstate the cease-fire if the
        British and Irish governments announce a date for negotiations
        involving Sinn Fein and Northern Ireland's Protestant leaders.
    
        Protestant politicians say they will not meet Sinn Fein until the IRA
        renounces violence.
    
        Protestant paramilitary groups are still observing their October 1994 
        truce, but say any IRA attacks in Northern Ireland will trigger
        retaliation.
    
        The IRA has killed more than 1,700 people, the loyalists about 900,
        and British troops and police some 350. On Friday, the British army 
        resume foot patrols alongside police in predominantly Catholic parts of
        Belfast for the first time in 11 months.

        RTw  02/27 2039  London, Dublin to meet on Northern Ireland
    
        By Helen Smith
    
        LONDON, Feb 28 (Reuter) - The prime ministers of Britain and Ireland
        will meet in London on Wednesday to try to repair a Northern Ireland
        peace process shattered by a series of Irish Republican Army (IRA)
        bombs, British officials said.
    
        John Major and John Bruton will meet at the British leader's London
        office, 10, Downing Street, at 1230 GMT.
    
        It will be the first meeting between the two men since the IRA called a
        halt to its 17-month ceasefire on February 9 in frustration at the
        British government's failure to set a firm date for all-party talks.
    
        The two leaders are expected to endorse a package of peace measures
        intended to persuade IRA guerrillas to resume their truce and get all
        sides of the conflict, including the IRA's political arm Sinn Fein,
        to hold talks.
    
        They are expected to set a date for negotiations and discuss elections
        and a possible referendum on Northern Ireland peace.
    
        The prime ministers, who are due to fly to Bangkok for a summit of the
        European Union and the Association of South East Asian Nations later
        this week, held two telephone conversations late on Tuesday in a last
        minute effort to resolve details paving the way for their talks.
    
        The decision to meet followed a day of negotiations between British
        and Irish officials, while Major held talks with Northern Irish 
        politicians in London.
    
        John Hume, who has played a key go-between role with Sinn Fein, emerged
        from his meeting with Major saying that he was confident the IRA would
        renew its truce once a date had been set for all-party talks.
    
        "A very positive approach has been made by Mr Major," said Hume, whose
        Social Democratic and Labour party shares Sinn Fein's goal of reuniting
        Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic.
    
        Britain has refused ministerial contact with Sinn Fein since the IRA
        ended its ceasefire and officials said Wednesday's meeting would spell
        out the conditions for Sinn Fein to rejoin the peace process.
    
        The peace package is likely to include Dublin's plan for preliminary
        Bosnia-style "proximity talks" to defuse suspicions between the
        parties, followed by elections in Northern Ireland, favoured by London.
    
        The elections, perhaps as early as April or May, might be accompanied
        by an all-Ireland referendum on peace and would be followed soon after
        by talks among those elected.
    
        Sinn Fein's foes, Protestant Unionists who want the province to stay
        British, say they will have no dealings with Sinn Fein until the
        ceasefire is restored for good and Sinn Fein declares a public
        commitment to peaceful and democratic methods.
    
        Reverend Ian Paisley, the leader of the Democratic Unionist party, said
        after meeting Major that he would boycott any meeting with Sinn Fein if
        it were called before the IRA renewed its ceasefire.
    
        If such a meeting were held, "there would be more absentees than ever,
        because the British Government could not go, the Dublin Government
        could not go, and we certainly wouldn't," Paisley said.
     
        The political progress was achieved despite severe strains between
        Major and the main Protestant party, David Trimble's Ulster Unionists,
        over claims Trimble had sought to wring concessions from Major in
        exchange for his party's backing in parliament.
    
        The offer, which Trimble denies making, was rejected and Major
        reassured parliament he would not stoop to deal-making over the peace
        process.
    
        REUTER
    

        The Electronic Telegraph  Wednesday 28 February 1996  World News  
    
        Security is stepped up for funeral of bomber
    
        By Richard Savill, Irish Correspondent
    
        TIGHT security will surround the funeral of Edward O'Brien, the IRA
        London bus bomber, when he is buried in his native town of Gorey, Co
        Wexford, today.
    
        Republican sources gave assurances that, in accordance with the wishes
        of the family, there would be no paramilitary display.
    
        O'Brien's body arrived in Gorey yesterday. There was a strong police
        presence as the hearse arrived at Rosslare port, Co Wexford, on a ferry
        from Fishguard.
    
        As the hearse set off on the 30-mile journey to Gorey, it was flanked
        by four cars carrying armed members of the Garda Special Branch.
    
        Detectives and uniformed police were on duty outside the funeral
        parlour as members of the family, neighbours and friends arrived to
        pay their respects.
    
        Police sources said they were determined that there would be no
        paramilitary involvement in the funeral, as requested by the man's
        parents, Miley and Margo O'Brien.
    
        The funeral will take place after Mass at St Michael's church, Gorey.
    
        O'Brien's parents have "unreservedly condemned" paramilitary
        organisations and have expressed "deep-felt sorrow" for those injured
        in the bomb blast.
    
        O'Brien's coffin was taken to St Michael's yesterday afternoon, where
        it was received by the local curate, Fr Walter Forde.
    
        Police mingled with mourners and, after the family left, took up
        security duty around the church to prevent any paramilitary display.
    
        Fr Forde said the church and the people of Gorey "warmly welcomed" the
        assurance that there would be no paramilitary display.
    
        He said 200 letters had been received by the family and all but a
        handful had expressed sympathy and understanding.
    
        "They were very touched by that," he said. "They were very touched by,
        for example, the words of Sir Patrick Mayhew in the House of Commons
        last Thursday when he saluted their courage."
    

    Today REUTER has reported that the I.R.A. has warned Loyalist militants
    to abide by the 17 month ceasefire but made no mention of returning to
    it themselves.
    
    They quoted "We have no desire for any type of military engagement with
    loyalism" 
    
    Awwwwwww diddums.
    
    This says just one thing to me.
    
    It seems that the I.R.A. can blow up pensioners on buses but they are shit
    scared of someone that can fight back. Coward faggots.
    
    
    CHARLEY

.66,

rather coarse wording, but in essence I believe you are correct.

Chris.

    Re .66, .67
    
    So you two do would rather see people being killed in two places and by
    two terrorist organisations rather than just one?
    
    Hmm... I wonder why people say the Brits aren't interested in peace.

>    So you two do would rather see people being killed in two places and by
>    two terrorist organisations rather than just one?

Asinine comments like that mak it tempting to pick one particular extra
location, but I rather think that the posters were suggesting it would be
much better if there weren't people doing killing at all.

//atp

>    So you two do would rather see people being killed in two places and by
>    two terrorist organisations rather than just one?
 
/atp said it for me.  I was highlighting yet another example of the IRA's 
cowardice.  I have made it perfectly clear that I do not care for terrorist 
organisations, your above comment is clearly ridiculous.
   
>    Hmm... I wonder why people say the Brits aren't interested in peace.

How so?  Not that I expect this comment to be justified, it's just another 
example of someone `fanning the flames', as it were.

Chris.

    .68
    
    That's very clever Eddie, well done. Come and get a sweetie.
    
    
    CHARLEY

Two comments from IRA/Sinn Fein reported this morning,

1.

They are not going to enter into the latest talks as they 
don't have enough dynamics.

2.

They will not decomission any arms etc until, and I paraphrase here,
the completion of the settlement.

Simon

Glad to see they're not being obstinate and stubborn.

//atp

    qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
        RTw  03/05 2039  IRA warns Loyalist foes against violence
    
        By Andrew Hill BELFAST, March 6 (Reuter) - The IRA warned its Northern
        Ireland Loyalist foes on Tuesday to abide by their 17-month ceasefire
        but made no mention of Britain's demand that it renew its own broken
        truce.
    
        The Irish Republican Army (IRA), which seeks to end British rule of
        Northern Ireland, said in a brief statement: "We have no desire for
        any type of military engagement with Loyalism."
    
        Its message, sent to news organisations, was aimed at militant
        Protestant Loyalists who fought for 25 years to maintain British rule
        in Northern Ireland until October 1994 when they matched an IRA
        ceasefire.
    
        It was the IRA's third statement since February 9 when it announced
        the end of its own ceasefire and detonated the first of three London 
        bombs to pressure Britain into calling all-party peace talks.
    
        But the statement made no mention whatsoever of British and Irish
        appeals to the IRA to restore the truce to earn a seat at all-party
        talks starting June 10 for its political wing, Sinn Fein.
    
        Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein's chief negotiator, said in a Tuesday
        night speech that his party would seek a second ceasefire only if peace
        talks were held without preconditions.
    
        "We are prepared to go back again and ask for a second (IRA) cessation
        but this time we can only do that if we can be absolutely certain that
        all-party peace negotiations can begin."
    
        Britain and its Irish partner in the Northern Ireland peace process
        say a new ceasefire will gain Sinn Fein automatic entry to the
        peace talks but until the truce is restored no government minister
        will talk to them.
    
        Sinn Fein says it should be taking part in ministerial preparatory
        talks like all other Northern Ireland parties by virtue of its 12
        percent electoral vote irrespective of whether the IRA ceasefire is
        restored or not.
    
        Sinn fein President Gerry Adams, McGuinness and other senior party
        members tried to attend preparatory talks chaired by Britain and
        Ireland in Belfast on Monday but were turned away at the gates.
    
        The IRA statement made no mention of the Northern Ireland peace
        process, suggesting that its definitive response to the British offer
        could take some time.
    
        There have been no bombs since a February 18 explosion in London which
        killed the IRA bomber carrying a device to an unknown destination.
    
        Instead the statement was aimed at the outlawed Ulster Volunteer Force
        and Ulster Freedom Fighters, the Loyalist groups who killed 900 members
        of the Catholic community from which the IRA draws its support.
    
        "Loyalists should consider their position very carefully. The Loyalists
        leaderships have shown themselves capable of imaginative thinking in
        recent time. They should continue to do," the statement said.
    
        It was issued after political groups close to the Loyalists feared they
        would be unable to control their militants for much longer unless the
        IRA ceasefire was put back in place.
    
        "They (the Irish Republican Army) are at this time consistently and
        in a very serious way trying to provoke us," Gary McMichael of the 
        Ulster Democratic Party told a London news conference after preparatory
        talks with British government ministers.
    
        The statement also follows weekend reports, which police are taking
        seriously, that a Loyalist splinter group wants to attack suspected
        IRA members to avenge the London bombing campaign.
    
        REUTER
    

Re .69

Alan,

I have extracted the followling piece from reply 1542.66 by CHARLEY.
    
>    It seems that the I.R.A. can blow up pensioners on buses but they are shit
>    scared of someone that can fight back. Coward faggots.
    
Can you please show me which particular bits of this comment lead you to 
the conclusion that "...the posters were suggesting it would be much better
if there weren't people doing killing at all" ?

I interpret this to mean that the noter would be pleased to see more 
violence errupting (but only if it isn't on his doorstep).

Re .66

You seem to have added ageism to your list of faults. Why should pensioners 
be singled out from other innocent people? Do pensioners take precedence 
over babies, toddlers, children, young adults, adults...

When was the last time the IRA blew up a pensioner on a bus anyway?

    

Eddie, 

I grant that .66 was pretty badly worded.  It was certainly not how I'd have
expressed my amazement at the overwhelming hypocrisy shown by the IRA.  But
having read many other articles by its author and the author of .67, I am quite
sure that the authors are in favour of negotiations with groups which show a
commitment to democratic methods, rather than in favour of lots more killing.

//atp

    .75
    
    <sigh>
    
    >I interpret this to mean that the noter would be pleased to see more
    violence errupting (but only if it isn't on his doorstep).
    
    If this is indicative of your state of mind I think you need help.
    
    I was pointing out yet another instance of the two things that the
    I.R.A. are supremely good at. Cowardness and Hypocrisy.
    
    >When was the last time the IRA blew up a pensioner on a bus anyway?
    
    Strangely enough, there were pensioners on the 171 that blew up
    recently. Don't you read the news? 
    
    >You seem to have added ageism to your list of faults.
    
    Clueless statement. You're getting desperate, I can tell.
    
    
    CHARLEY
    
    

Give it up, Eddie, we all know that your motivation is your hatred of people 
born on the `wrong' side of the border.

Chris.

       RTw  03/11 1632  Dublin and N.Irish Protestants in rare talks
    
       By Andrew Marshall
    
       DUBLIN, March 11 (Reuter) - Leaders of Northern Ireland's pro-British
       Protestants held rare talks with the Irish government on Monday to
       bolster peace efforts shattered by the collapse of the IRA's 17-month
       truce.
    
       Irish Prime Minister John Bruton, echoing Dublin hopes that the
       encounter would promote reconciliation after decades of distrust, said
       it would be "a very important meeting" in the run-up to all-party
       Anglo-Irish sponsored talks in June.
    
       But David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, the chief voice
       of the Protestant majority, was cautious entering the first full-scale
       meeting between the two sides since 1992.
    
       "We hope very much that the Irish government will be able to make a
        positive contribution to all the issues that are relevant in those
        (June 10) talks," he told reporters.
    
        His deputy John Taylor refused to withdraw a recent remark that Irish
        Foreign Minister Dick Spring was the most detested figure in Northern
        Irish politics.
    
        "I am waiting tonight to see if I can change my mind," Taylor said as
        he stood close to Spring outside Government Buildings. "Of course I
        have not changed it at the moment."
    
        Earlier Trimble made it clear that he wanted evidence of Irish
        willingness to join with Britain in eradicating Irish Republican Army
        weapons as a key step to political progress.
    
        Northern Ireland Protestants, wary of the Ireland's constitutional
        claims to their territory, vow to maintain links with Britain that the
        banned IRA have fought to break for 25 years.
    
        Ireland and Britain, partners in a new initiative to bring all the
        parties around the table on June 10, are adamant that Sinn Fein, the
        IRA's political wing, will not have a seat until the republican
        extremists declare a new truce.
    
        Despite dogged IRA determination not to bow to disarmament demands,
        Trimble signalled that a handover of arms was proof Protestants need to
        underwrite the permanency of any future IRA cessation.
    
        Criticised for talking to Dublin by his Protestant political foe,
        firebrand cleric Ian Paisley, he said Dublin must tackle the question
        of legislating for a "verification commission," as proposed by a
        U.S.-backed mediation team to oversee "decommissioning" of IRA
        arsenals.
    
        "I have raised this matter with the British government, and they have
        assured me that they are at this moment making the necessary
        preparation to introduce such legislation," Trimble said on Irish
        radio.
    
        "I have not heard any word from the Irish government on this
        matter...If they do leave it to be discussed (until)...the end of June,
        then they will be introducing a significant delay."
    
        Speaking on Irish radio before the meeting Spring confirmed that
        guerrilla disarmament was a priority for Dublin and said Ireland had no
        problem with it being the first item on an all-party talks agenda.
        But, without being specific, he said they were other points highlighted
        in the January report by a panel led by former U.S. senator George
        Mitchell, which Ireland would want to discuss.
    
        The IRA claimed responsibility for three bomb incidents in London last
        month that killed three people, including a guerrilla caught in a
        premature blast.
    
        REUTER
    

    RTw  03/20 1530  Britain to unveil compromise N.Ireland poll plan
    
        By Martin Cowley
    
        BELFAST, March 20 (Reuter) - Britain, caught in political crossfire
        between Irish nationalists and pro-British Unionists, has opted for
        a compromise election plan to pave the way for all-party peace talks on
        Northern Ireland, British officials said on Wednesday.
    
        They said the plan, which tries to meet competing demands of both
        camps, was being discussed in Belfast on Wednesday night by Britain's
        Northern Ireland Secretary, Sir Patrick Mayhew, and Irish foreign
        minister Dick Spring.
    
        British officials said the poll would be a mixture of the constituency
        elections favoured by Unionists, who want the province to stay British,
        and a list system favoured by their nationalist opponents and smaller 
        parties.
    
        Under the scheme, expected to be unveiled by British Prime Minister
        John Major in London on Thursday, the poll would elect 90 members to a
        Forum, five from each of the province's 18 constituencies, and two more
        each from the 10 best-performing political parties.
    
        The 110-seat body, which is expected to be elected at the end of May,
        is supposed to be a stepping stone towards all-party peace talks
        starting on June 10.
    
        But the run-up to the poll has been clouded by threats of boycotts from
        both sides of Northern Ireland's sectarian divide and by the breakdown
        of an Irish Republican Army (IRA) guerrilla ceasefire to its 25-year
        war on British rule.
    
        Britain and its Irish partner in the search for a permanent end to the
        political and sectarian conflict say the IRA's political wing, Sinn
        Fein,  will be excluded from the talks until the IRA restores its
        ceasefire.
    
        The election plan would make it easer for Sinn Fein's Protestant
        Loyalist foes to take part in the Forum under the best-performing party
        clause, Irish officials said.
    
        They fought a 25-year war to maintain British rule but have abdided by
        their own ceasefire while warning that they reserve the right to
        retaliate if the IRA goes on bombing.
    
        There was no immediate reaction to the details of the plan which Spring
        and Mayhew were discussing but the official announcement was expected
        to generate more controversy.
    
        Irish nationalists, who want an end to British rule, fear such a body
        will be a re-run of all-powerful Unionist-dominated assemblies which
        were the norm before the conflict erupted 25 years ago and parliament
        was suspended.
    
        They also believe that any new Northern Ireland assembly should be a
        by-product of the all-party talks and not a forerunner of them and have
        threatened not to take part.
    
        Unionists, who fear any dilution of the province's British ties, say
        the whole plan is aimed at making it easier for Sinn Fein, which has a
        scant 12 per cent of Northern Ireland votes, to have a large say in
        the province's future.
    
        But Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams, cast into the political cold since
        the end of the IRA ceasefire, said there was no guarantee that his
        party would contest the election at all.
    
        "Nothing should be presumed. What we will do is to wait to see
        precisely what is being put forward, and then we will take our decision
        collectively at party leadership level," he said.
    
        He told Irish radio the Irish government of Prime Minister John Bruton
        should stand up for Irish nationalists and end its refusal to talk to
        him.
    
        "At the moment all I can do is to repeat the need for the Irish
        government to stress the rights of Irish citizens and the principles
        which should govern any successful peace process."
    
        REUTER
    

       RTw  04/01 1539  Britain names N.Irish peace poll runners
    
        By Martin Cowley
    
        BELFAST, April 1 (Reuter) - Britain took the unprecedented step on
        Monday of naming political parties which it will permit to contest an
        election that it regards as central to its peace plans for Northern
        Ireland.
    
        Britain said the move was crucial if long-awaited all-party peace talks
        were to start on June 10.
    
        London said the May 30 election is a gateway to talks that will include
        Sinn Fein, the political arm of the Irish Republican Army.
    
        Neither Sinn Fein nor the main Catholic-supported nationalist Social
        Democratic and Labour party have decided whether to contest the 
        election. Both are expected to boycott a Protestant "Unionist"
        dominated forum.
    
        "It will be necessary to designate the parties that are to participate
        in the election. This is something new in Northern Ireland electoral
        practice," ministers said in a consultation paper presented to Catholic
        and Protestant politicians.                                        
    
        "In view of the short time available to meet the deadline of June10
        for all-party negotiations, it will be necessary to include the names
        of the parties within the legislation that is approved by parliament."
    
        An accompanying list sets out 15 political groups, which includes all
        the major parties along with Sinn Fein, but omits the Irish Republican
        Socialist Party, the political arm of the left-wing Irish National
        Liberation Army guerrilla force, and Republican Sinn Fein, a rival to
        mainstream Sinn Fein.
    
        No reference was made to the possibility of non-aligned "independent"
        candidates contesting the election but Britain said the consultation
        period will last until April 10.
    
        Analysts said it ran counter to normal practice of parties and
        individuals being free to contest a poll after lodging a financial
        deposit.
    
        London and Dublin had hoped when they set the June 10 talks date that
        the IRA, which fought a 25-year war to oust Britain from Northern
        Ireland, would reinstate a truce which it ended in February when it
        planted bombs in London.
    
        Britain proposed elections to a new peace convention to get round a
    
       deadlock over the IRA's refusal to give up arms. It said a forum would
        operate parallel to all-party talks.
    
        Majority Protestant politicians want the forum to a have sounding-board
        role for any consensus arising out of the talks.
    
        Catholics fear the elections and forum are a "trojan horse" to buttress
        British rule and block a Dublin role in talks.
    
        Ian Paisley, leader of the staunchly pro-British Democratic Unionist
        Party, railed against Britain's plans when he spoke to reporters after
        meeting British junior Northern Ireland Minister Michael Ancram.
    
        "The whole attitude of the (British) government is to get a forum where
        the Unionists - although they are in a majority in the country - will
        be in a tiny minority at the negotiating table," he said.
    
      "I never saw (such) a rigged election, or a rigged assembly or a rigged
        body. It's worse than anything that Communism ever devised.....The body
        is completely neutered."
    
        REUTER
    

re: .81

Interesting, at least for what it left out!

Apparently the Conservative party was one of those left out. I don't
have many details but it is supposed to have upset local tories.

M

>Apparently the Conservative party was one of those left out. I don't
>have many details but it is supposed to have upset local tories.

Good.

Chris.

Of course, neither to Tories nor the Labour Party officially organises in
NI, as far as I know.  Which does, of course, give some credence to the
Nationalists' claim that they are disenfranchised - they cannot vote for the
party that will inevitably be their government.

//atp

re: .84

That was true until a very few years ago. I think English political 
parties avoided organizing in Ulster because it was always assumed 
that, at some point, Ulster would re-unite with Eire. 
Given that that was bound be a stressful situation, they didn't
want to split their own party.

So while the public words spoke of Ulster being in the Union in perpetuity,
their actions denied this. I think local Tories decided to act upon the
words and started to organize. This was at the encouragement of the 
more extreme end of the English Conservative party. 
This "row" has exposed another division.

I don't have a lot of details though, I don't know if anyone else  has
seen this discussed anywhere?

M