The Good Friday Agreement removed the territorial claim over 6 of Irelands counties, ending the territorial dispute with England. To end a bloody and futile conflict, the Irish citizens in the north east of the country had to face the prospect of being dropped from the Irish constitution until such time as there was a democratic vote to re-unite the country.
That was too much for me and many republicans to swallow, but to vote against it would be to vote for a continuation of the conflict which had taken its toll on our communities. I may not have supported this agreement, but I could not bring myself to vote against it for that reason, though unionism had no similar qualms.
Then again, the UUP’s James Molyneaux claimed in 1994 that the IRA ceasefire was “the most destabilising event since partition” and “the worst thing that has ever happened to us”.
With leadership such as this, we can see why.
So even though nationalists were being written out of the constitution of our country, in the spirit of compromise for peace the vast majority accepted our fate and Dublin has shown no interest in us since.
Within unionism, there was a minority prepared to compromise but the majority rejected it, even though that would mean more conflict.
It is only recently that I realised that for unionism, the Good Friday Agreement was just as much of a rejection. For many in the unionist community, it is not simply acceptance of democracy and the principal of consent, (although to date that has never been put to the people nor has any consent been given), but a change in the relationship with the UK. If you think about it, for the government of a monarchy to offer the principle of consent to a province within its kingdom, it needs to have accepted giving up the territory in the first place. Therefore only the timing remains undecided.
It would be unthinkable that the head of state was not consulted in advance and had given her approval of removing the last part of Ireland out of her kingdom.
So there we have it, the Good Friday Agreement in a nutshell.
Ireland had to give up our land first, with a means of getting it back at a future date and Britain gets to keep the land with a means of giving it back again later.
So all of the people in the 6 counties no man’s land having been rejected by both states and left to our own devices in a devolved assembly, complete with training wheels and fitted with anti-sectarian buffers so we don’t hurt one another while we learn the ropes of responsible governance, discover the benefits of agreement and compromise and figure out that sooner or later we are going to have to stand on our own two feet and wash our own faces.
Partition has clearly failed and is now producing new and innovative way of prolonging that failure with the least hassle for the two states. It is time for the do not resuscitate sign to be put on Stormont so we can all move on.
Brexit has once again highlighted the problems of partition and post brexit negotiations must include an Irish unification strategy and an end to this bad joke.
DRN seems to be the policy.
What I am most afraid of is that while these Six Counties voted to stay in are we going to be told Brexit is bad but we will have to live with it.
Republicanism is better served in Europe regardless of its faults.
Are we to believe the Sammy Wilsons of this world. Are we to believe in the magnamity of the British and all will be well. I think not!!!
I suppose the truth is Jim, our economy is too small to lose out on the best trade deals, the lowest borrowing rates and the free markets available to us from economic unions and at the moment, the EU is currently the only option available to us.
Sorry for the spelling I meant to sayDNR
Couple of things, Jessica.
“Within unionism, there was a minority prepared to compromise but the majority rejected it, even though that would mean more conflict.”
You have no way of knowing that a vote against the Belfast Agreement (or an abstention) was made in the expectation of, the knowledge of, support for or even the tolerance of “more conflict”.
There is no necessary connection.
A vote against the Agreement can only be understood as a vote against that Agreement, nothing more. Indeed, the actions of the DUP in relation to the St.-Belfast-Andrew’s-Agreement, strongly suggest that their opposition to one only made way for their acceptance of another – it was a power game.
In terms of the Belfast Agreement, the greatest scandal of the DUP rejection of it was their treatment of David Trimble.
Secondly:
“to offer the principle of consent to a province within its kingdom, it needs to have accepted giving up the territory in the first place. Therefore only the timing remains undecided.”
Well, exactly, at last and hurrah!
As I have been saying for ages and ages and ages, the Union is not safe. The Union cannot be safe when the guardians of that Union have already agreed to its demise.
And as I type, I am reminded of the words of Harold McCusker, and recorded in Hansard:
“Hon. Members can rest assured of this. I shall never have to explain to my constituents again why the Prime Minister believes that they are as British as the people of Finchley. I shall never have to listen to people telling me that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom. We shall never hear those words. They will be removed from the political dictionary of Northern Ireland.”
Why others cannot see this direction of travel is beyond me, but, at least, you, Jessica, are beginning to understand my quandary.
I would dispute one thing, though. You say, “Britain gets to keep the land with a means of giving it back again later.”
You make it sound like Britain wants it, it doesn’t, it is us (Unionists) who want Britain, but we have been shown the door.
Well, there was no way I could support it, but it felt to me that voting against it was voting for a continuation of conflict and I could not bring myself to do that. Once Britain had agreed to the stalemate, there was no way it was going to fail. The conflict had to end and it took longer than the IRA wanted to get it ended.
“In terms of the Belfast Agreement, the greatest scandal of the DUP rejection of it was their treatment of David Trimble.”
Are the political parties any different today Peter?
“Well, exactly, at last and hurrah!
As I have been saying for ages and ages and ages, the Union is not safe. The Union cannot be safe when the guardians of that Union have already agreed to its demise.”
We all see things from our own points of view Peter. It never occurred to me either until conversations on this blog. I always felt we (republicans) were sold out by dropping the territorial claim, I never really considered how it would look from a unionist perspective until recently.
“Why others cannot see this direction of travel is beyond me, but, at least, you, Jessica, are beginning to understand my quandary. ”
I hope also you are seeing my points of view are equally as valid and sincere.
Which is why compromise has to be the solution.
“Are the political parties any different today Peter?”
Well, politics doesn’t have the best of names, that’s for sure, but selling the St. Andrew’s Agreement as a victory Trimble couldn’t achieve is a feat beyond compare.
It’s a bit like spray painting the ‘Wooden Spoon’ in a shade known as ‘Puce Gold’ and parading it about like the F.A. Cup (or the Sam Maguire, to bring a bit of cross-community balance to the proceedings).
“I hope also you are seeing my points of view are equally as valid and sincere.”
Well, I had certainly never thought that a Republican might contemplate a withdrawal from the EU in favour of joining an international organisation in which one of the major players was England.
That’s certainly sounds sincere.
As to Republicans feeling sold out over the territorial claim, I see it like this:
Unionists are famed for saying, “Not and inch!”
In amending the Constitution, the Republic gave an inch, but stand to gain a mile.
Now, why do I think Unionism will fall *because* of its slogans? – it’s a deep, deep irony indeed.
Irish are slow learners. They seem to think everyone acts in the best interests of all, especially the English. The GFA is easily framed as a surrender and possible regrant, worse than the policy of Elizabeth Tudor and yet they accepted it. And as for the south it was not the first time the north has taken one for the team.
In May 1916, a Friday henceforth known as “Black Friday” in Irish history, the north voted for partition. Here is a link that lays out why.
http://www.irishnews.com/arts/2016/06/23/news/black-friday-the-day-nationalists-voted-for-partition-575618/
It is about time we caught ourselves on and put our own interests on par with that of the rest of the island.
Thankfully I never voted for the GFA, I do not accept that was the only deal possible.
Thanks for posting that link Croiteir.
Makes the current situation in Ireland all the more poignant
I agree completely, I believe it is time we stood up for ourselves against the south.
The argument with England is over. It is time we had our rightful place in our country respected.
“The Good Friday Agreement removed the territorial claim over 6 of Irelands counties, ending the territorial dispute with England.”
Actually, it didn’t. The amendment to the South’s constitution some 18 months later did.
“To end a bloody and futile conflict, the Irish citizens in the north east of the country had to face the prospect of being dropped from the Irish constitution until such time as there was a democratic vote to re-unite the country.”
The ‘conflict’ had already ended.
“That was too much for me and many republicans to swallow, but to vote against it would be to vote for a continuation of the conflict which had taken its toll on our communities.”
Really? So the Provo ceasefire wasn’t permanent? We were conned?
The IRA ceasefire was conditional on britain accepting the agreed terms of the truce to permanently end the conflict, it was not a surrender.
A lot of these things were agreed before the vote, accepting no victory against the IRA, dropping articles 2 and 3, agreeing to implement irish unification on a 50%+1 majority, never allowing a unionist majority to have sole control in Stormont, the timing of their implementation was not predetermined and yes the meat on the bones came later. But the key foundations remain in place.
Many do feel it was a con.
“The IRA ceasefire was conditional on britain accepting the agreed terms of the truce to permanently end the conflict, it was not a surrender.”
I’ve no idea what that means. Could you explain and/or provide a link?
“So even though nationalists were being written out of the constitution of our country, in the spirit of compromise for peace the vast majority accepted our fate and Dublin has shown no interest in us since.”
How were ‘Nationalists’ weren’t being written out of the Southern constitution?
“Within unionism, there was a minority prepared to compromise but the majority rejected it, even though that would mean more conflict.”
That’s untrue. A majority supported it.
And how would would rejection have meant more conflict? The Provo ceasefire was only temporary?
“Partition has clearly failed”
By what criteria has it clearly failed?
Economical, social and political
“Economical, social and political”
What economic, social and political criteria, when were they set and by whom?
The ‘North’ in 1916 was the economic power house of Ireland, if not the whole of the – then – United Kingdom. Now we’re an economic basket-case, and have been since the 1950s. Socially a (relatively) benigh form of voluntary Apartheid has been in place since about 1880. Politically, the Unionists had half a century to convince the Nationalists of their bona fides. The Nationalists of east Ulster were Redmondite, they were prepared to accept a Parliament with fewer powers than the London County Council set up in 1900. They fought and died in their thousands for the Empire between 1914 and ’18. They got treated like dirt when they returned. The ‘criteria’ set here are very low.
“The Nationalists of east Ulster were Redmondite, they were prepared to accept a Parliament with fewer powers than the London County Council set up in 1900.”
No they weren’t.
Such nonsense.