B
Sarah Creighton, a commentator of a unionist background, recently asked a perhaps tongue in cheek, but nevertheless interesting question for those of us in the south who seek a united Ireland. The writer simply asked, are we were prepared to knock our house down and work with others to build a new and better one?
Sarah’s words, as thought-provoking as they are, are a breath of fresh air from the usual two letter word we have become so accustomed to hearing from political unionism every time someone mentions a border poll. They are also written with an openness and confidence that one doesn’t normally associate with unionist politicians.
Perhaps Sarah had her diplomatic hat on when she recently welcomed the Taoiseach’s ‘Shared Island Project’. One got a distinct sense when reading her words however, that just like the rest of us, Sarah sees through it all and senses the Taoiseach’s and Tánaiste’s cabinet are merely using the project as a stalling mechanism to slowdown the drive for, if not block unification completely.
Another wise lady writer Emma de Souza has an equally healthy grasp of the border poll issue as its developing and sees the games being played by M. Martin and Leo Varadkar to hinder real efforts to plan for a referendum. In answer to the Taoiseach’s false assertion that discussing a border poll is divisive, Emma recently responded by pointing out, “there is nothing divisive about encouraging dialogue”.
This follows on from Leo Varadkar’s recent assertion that Sinn Fein is sectarian because of its obsession with a border poll, with the narrative going on to tell us the republican party wanted a poll immediately and this shouldn’t be encouraged because it is divisive and counterproductive. However, Leo and Micheal Martin understands well that Sinn Fein is not calling for an instant border poll, but rather one year ago while the then government formation talks were in play, the party called for whoever took up office, to make as part of its program for government, a commitment to plan and prepare for a border poll within the lifetime of the administration. In fact, one suspects Sinn Fein wouldn’t have been overly concerned if the timescale for a poll dragged into the next administration, given the scale of the planning and preparation which needed to be in place beforehand.
With that in mind, I suspect Emma de Souza was calling out the Taoiseach and Tánaiste for their faux concerns and reluctance to consider beginning a dialogue about future reunification. While recently writing in the Irish Times, Emma pondered on why Dublin was burying its head in the sand around the issue, given that London was clearly reading the situation for what it was and accordingly was preparing for the coming debate. Emma cited the recent remarks by the English Tory Reese Mog, who said Britain had a strategic political and economic interest in remaining in the north of Ireland, as well as Boris’s infamous bridge over troubled waters to Scotland, as evidence of what’s coming down the line.
So, is Dublin about to be blindsided by an earlier than expected border poll call from the northern secretary? Well, the leader of the SDLP Colum Eastwood certainly fears so. Is it possible that our Dublin leaders would act so irresponsibly by getting caught out due to a lack of preparation for this once in a century prize, and are they the only ones to not have learned from the disastrous 2016 Brexit referendum campaign? To use Roy Keane’s words in footballing parlance “Fail to prepare – prepare to fail”. Or is there perhaps a simpler explanation for Dublin’s irrational behaviour, i.e., that this Fianna Fail/Fine Gael southern duopoly, simply wants the referendum to fail before a single ballot is cast? Is it simply all about self-preservation and clinging to the status quo?
Getting back to Sarah’s earlier reference to our house. As a republican, I personally wouldn’t have a problem going with a new build. A four-bedroom house is always preferable to our current three bed structure that has a good deal of dry rot in it anyway. As Michael Lagan pointed out recently in this column ‘Talking Unity’ that if we want something seriously, then we might need to behave seriously, engage seriously and to begin to try looking at this through the eyes of ordinary unionists, the very people we are asking to change. I don’t believe for a moment that political unionism is open to change or to the idea of a dialogue that might lead to change, but I do believe some of the people who vote for them would be open to change if the circumstances were right. I have a sense that many in this category of unionists are more than a little curious about what might be on the table for discussion when the real dialogue begins.
So, what about the tricolour, should it stay, or should it go?
Would it really come as a shock to learn that many ordinary unionists might look at our national flag and see it as their ‘Butchers Apron’? If a flag, a symbol, which is meant to represent both traditions on our island, fails to receive the allegiance and respect of one of those traditions, then it’s hardly fit for purpose in terms of reconciling its aims. Therefore, giving up a flag should be a small price to pay if it helps to achieve a much greater prize. Wouldn’t there be something very exciting bout Irish people designing their own national flag for the island of Ireland, a flag that would earn the respect of all its citizens.
Shouldn’t the same apply to a future unified national anthem, bearing in mind that we are the ones trying to woo unionists, court them and show them how attractive we look?
Last Monday nights special Claire Byrne show on Irish Reunification, was indeed special for a number of reasons. The main message I took away from the program was the concrete confirmation that an unstoppable and growing campaign for Irish unification is well underway, and perhaps this show, as imperfect as it was, was but the kickstart of this discussion in the south. A couple of not surprising, but disappointing things stood out during the show. The first was that a Taoiseach and two former Taoisigh spoke at length, each repeating over and over, that setting a date for a border poll should be avoided at all costs until the talking takes place first, but since Claire Byrne had failed to ask the speakers the obvious question, l will ask it now. Who exactly have been the ones up to now, who has consistently refused to entertain the notion of beginning such a discussion about unification?
What also stood out during the one-on-one interview between the presenter and Micheal Martin, was the Taoiseach’s failure to answer two important questions that were put to him. They were, “have you had a discussion with the Northern Secretary about a border poll? The second question was linked. “have you considered what might happen if the Northern Secretary were to call an early poll and we weren’t ready because of the talking not having started yet?
That M. Martin avoided answering those questions, told us all we needed to know.
Comments are closed.