Adams won’t serve up IRA until Unionists bring guarantees to table
Referring to ‘political unionists’ using the IRA and the issue of IRA weapons as an excuse to thwart progress, he said: “Republicans need to be prepared to grasp that nettle and remove that excuse so that the entire process can move forward.”
Wasn’t removing the excuse saying the IRA was calling it a day and destroying its weapons?
Well, not quite. For the qualification that Adams followed up with was equally crucial.
He said: “We can only create that if there’s an ongoing process of sustainable change.”
Yes, Adams was saying that it is conceivable that the IRA will cease to exist.
But like all of his carefully finessed pronouncements, the latest one this week came with its own share of small print.
Following what Sinn Féin portrays as the betrayal of last October, it is inconceivable that they would offer the IRA up on a plate without preconditions as a precursor to any concession sought.
According to Government sources, the statements this week are part of the “mood music” leading up to all-party negotiations which will start on September 1 or 2.
Sinn Féin is essentially setting out its stall, saying it can envisage a future beyond the IRA and weapons, but only as part of an overall deal where equal concessions are wrung from unionism and from the British Government.
There’s nothing dramatically new to be discerned, said the sources.
“We have been here before,” said one, referring to the many false dawns of the past, the last of which occurred at Hillsborough Castle in October 2003.
“The problem is a practical one. How do you get to that point? Who does something first? How do you present it to create the necessary positive impact. What is the timeframe? It’s unlikely that the DUP will be prepared to take any risks and it may be left to Republicans to move the dynamic.
“But given what happened last October, they will be reluctant to do it.”
The complexion of Northern politics has changed since the November elections. In a sense, the centre has collapsed and given way to the extremes of both tribes.
The inherent problem is a serious lack of trust.
As of now, neither party speaks to each other directly, relying on both the Irish and British governments to act as their proxies in negotiations.
But still, from SF’s perspective the negotiations in September have the potential to be the most significant since the Good Friday Agreement (GFA).
Adams latest articulation of the position is part of a series of speeches and articles he has delivered this summer, in which he has put forward the view that the process needs a “holistic, definitive, conclusive closure on all the outstanding issues”.
But according to a senior SF spokesman, that will require both the DUP and the British Government to “step up to the plate and create a context”.
If republicanism delivers the IRA and its weapons, it will seek, in return, that other sides meet their obligations under the GFA and that guarantees are given about the “continuity and sustainability” of the political process that may flow from any agreement.
Interestingly, DUP’s latest high-profile recruit Jeffrey Donaldson was not as dismissive of Adams’ interview as some of his colleagues.
Donaldson qualified his response by saying he did not know if Gerry Adams meant precisely what some had taken him to mean.
If he did, Donaldson went on to say, it had the “potential to move things forward”.
Donaldson’s slight positivism is intriguing.
One observer said last night that he may be adopting the role of a stalking horse for the party, generating some momentum for change.
Meanwhile, the SF spokesman said: “We are not going into the talks in a half-hearted way or looking for excuses. We want an agreement. It’s in SF’s interests, it’s in the interests of our strategy and of the peace process.”
But given what has happened before, others are cautious about being close to agreement by the time Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern become involved in mid-September.