Subdued reaction from unionists is a positive sign
It is surprising that, as yet, no one seems to have drawn the obvious conclusion. Could this be deliberate?
What has been remarkable about the reaction of unionism and the DUP is not their lack of embrace for the IRA’s historic initiative. Rather, it is that they did not respond to it in some kind of triumphalist fashion, which obviously would have been disastrous.
Think about it. Unionism and the DUP’s arch-enemy, the IRA, have completely and unconditionally disarmed (according to General de Chastelain), having earlier declared an end to their military campaign. But no one from the unionist camp is hailing it as a victory of any sort. There has been no flag-waving, insults, provocation or any kind of one-upmanship from any quarter. In this sense, the reaction has been generally respectful, and therefore positive.
I believe, firstly, this is because unionism and the DUP represent a constituency of people who are fundamentally decent and don’t want to reopen old wounds.
Secondly, it confirms the DUP is on board in this new departure even though they have reservations and, officially at least, remain opposed to the Good Friday Agreement.
It is to be expected that if they are to play a role in facilitating acceptance within their political constituency for the new dispensation, they will want to do so on their own terms.
It has to be remembered that DUP leader Ian Paisley is viewed with suspicion within sections of unionism (those usually labelled ‘loyalists’).
There would be no point in any community or individual making triumphalist noises as a sad and terrible chapter closes - the full story has yet to be told. I suspect that when it is told, the picture it will reveal will be one in which every one of us, without exception, Irish and British, was the victim of duplicity, cunning and manipulation.
I also believe that the sceptics and dissidents (and there are some of these in the nationalist/republican camp too) of this new departure should be accorded the necessary breathing space to absorb the significance of these developments. In return, they must agree not to use this breathing space to physically threaten or attack anyone. Or indeed to prepare for such attacks when circumstances might change in the future. There can be no such thing as ‘an acceptable level of violence’.
Allowing people time should not be used as an excuse to hold up progress towards normalisation of civil life. This can only be accomplished through the vigilance and conscious activity of the population as a whole, not through measures implemented ‘from above’.
There is one issue sceptics raise in which they may have a point. That is the lack of transparency, accountability and consultation in verifying the IRA’s decommissioning. It has led some to cast doubt on whether the IRA has really ‘gone away’.
It is the lack of transparency and accountability in how politics really works in the society that first fuelled the conflict, then sustained it over 30 years.
Oscar Ó Dúgáin
52 Ascaill Dhroichead Chairduibh
Fionnghlaise
Baile Átha Cliath 11
