Jim O’Callaghan may not know it, but like The Skibereen Eagle with Russia, Newton Emerson has his eye on him. Emerson, as you probably know, is The Irish Times’s champion of unionism, and this morning he once again proudly unfurls his banner.
So what does the pride of Portadown tell us this morning? Well, that Jim O’Callaghan “has delivered his blueprint for a united Ireland” in a speech at the Cambridge college which he attended. (No, I didn’t know he was a Cambridge graduate either. Thanks, Newt.)
Why is Jim unrolling his blueprint? It’s “in a bid for the party leadership and as an outflanking manoeuvre around Sinn Féin”. O’Callaghan is blatant/open about both goals, we’re told.
The way the IT columnist sees it, O’Callaghan’s suggestion that a number of Cabinet seats be reserved for unionists is very unpopular among southern voters. Never one to be backward about being forward, Emerson says he came up with that power-sharing idea five years ago. He was greeted with rejection and incomprehension, so that’s how he knows O’Callaghan’s idea will get the thumb’s-down among the southern electorate. Really? I’m struck by how open to the consideration of all options people in the south are, or certainly those who want to plan for a border poll. Maybe they just didn’t like you, Newt.
“It [a sense of exclusion] is unavoidable, given the indivisibility of sovereignty, that one national community will tend to feel excluded from the other’s state” the IT Eagle declares. Sorry, Newt. Sinn Féin leaders and others have said repeatedly that they don’t intend to make the mistakes of unionism in the North and exclude, discriminate and denigrate the minority section of the populace in a reunited Ireland. In fact, republicanism works on the basis of treating all equally – or in unionism’s case, more than fairly.
“Nationalist suggestions of new flags, anthems, Commonwealth membership and similar totems are well intentioned but can fail to confront the uncomfortable fact that unionists would need meaningful power in contentious decisions.”
Similar totems, eh? Maybe Emerson has forgotten the flag protest at Belfast City Hall, when even reduction in the number of days the Union flag should fly drove a considerable number of unionists temporarily bananas.That wee woman with her mouth to the hole in the glass didn’t shout “Meaningful power in contentious decisions!” She screeched “No surrender!”, you’ll recall.
The IT Eagle goes on to commend O’Callaghan on one point: “Recognising Northern Ireland’s historical legitimacy is a brave step for a Fianna Fáil leadership contender but it is essential to any hope of unification with reconciliation.” And there was you thinking NEI was created under the threat by Lloyd George of immediate and terrible war. Which of course is perfectly legitimate, as seen through the Newton lens.
The column ends with a swipe at Sinn Féin and others who habitually refer to NEI – oops, NI – as the North. The unionist columnist declares that the Shinners and others will see reunification as victory (pssst Newton – an Ireland free of British intervention after several centuries of struggle actually will be a victory ). He also says that if the creation of North(east)ern Ireland was a sectarian headcount, a successful border poll for reunification would be the same.
No it wouldn’t. Unionism created NEI by careful measuring and weighing of Protestant and Catholic numbers. Irish reunification will be Ireland taking back what should never have been taken away in the first place. It’s called the self-determination of small nations.
But the IT Eagle this morning has earned our gratitude by making one thing clear: The Irish Times has no intention of standing idly by while Shinners and other subversives attempt to upend the present cosy consensus in the South.
Comments are closed.