Sinn Féin’s Brit-bashing is damaging to political discourse

One of the most pernicious aspects of the Brexit shambles as far as this country is concerned is the way it has legitimised a virulent form of Brit-bashing which had almost disappeared from political discourse in the decades since the Belfast Agreement.

This could be as harmful for Ireland as in the long run as the economic consequences of Brexit.

The new mood facilitated the action of Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald holding up a banner with the legend “England get out of Ireland” at the St Patrick’s Day parade in New York.

It marked a return to the old “Brits out” rhetoric which effectively suggested that Ulster Unionists have no right to live on this island.

The DUP's Westminster adventure is coming to an end

---

The Irish Times view on sexual consent classes: time to bring this hidden violence into the public eye

---

The Irish Times view on the New Zealand mosque murders: the world after Christchurch

---

Kathy Sheridan: Context is all when it comes to republican symbols

---

Of course the stupidity and arrogance of right-wing British Conservatives and the way they first promoted Brexit and then blocked any coherent way of implementing it is as infuriating as it is astounding.

While the Belfast Agreement has brought peace to the island it has failed to generate any real reconciliation between two communities in the North

It has done serious damage to the international standing of the United Kingdom and has created bitter political divisions that will mark the country for a long time to come.

It may be tempting for the Irish to gloat at the way the British have humiliated themselves, particularly as some of the Brexiteers clearly have nothing but disdain for us.

However, that is not just an ill-mannered response to the problems our nearest neighbours have brought on themselves but is potentially counterproductive in the long run.

European Union treaties

Those who wag their fingers at the British and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) for their idiocy on Brexit tend to ignore the foolish behaviour of the Irish electorate in the not so distant past. In the space of a few years in the first decade of this century the Irish electorate twice rejected European Union treaties on the basis of clearly spurious arguments.

Thanks to the patience of our European partners, including the British, we were given the chance to vote again with purely cosmetic additions to the treaties specifying what was not in them rather than any changes in the treaties themselves.

It is also worth remembering that some of those who are currently most vociferous in denouncing the British and all their pomp were just a just a few years ago attacking the EU and Germany in equally extreme language for allegedly foisting austerity on Ireland when in fact we were the architects of our own problems.

In our own interests as well as theirs a firm but temperate response to the political nervous breakdown convulsing our neighbours is the best course of action.

The Border backstop was a legitimate way of protecting the interests of the State and the EU itself in the Brexit negotiations but it would be a tragedy if it also resulted in a reversion to the old suspicions that poisoned relations between the two islands as well as the two communities in the North for so long.

While the Belfast Agreement has brought peace to the island it has failed to generate any real reconciliation between two communities in the North. Brexit and the accompanying fall back on tribal sloganeering threatens to undermine the very basis of the agreement.

A long extension would make sense only if the British signalled their intention of moving to a much softer Brexit or a second referendum

The manner in which the prospect of a united Ireland is now being spoken about is a manifestation of the new mood and a sign that the harsh lessons of decades of violence have already been forgotten.

This unspecified form of a united Ireland being bandied about owes more to Charlie Haughey’s vision of a unitary State rather than the nuanced recognition of different varieties of Irishness, including a unionist one, which underpinned the Belfast Agreement.

Whatever form Brexit ultimately takes, this country will face two serious political challenges in the period ahead. One will be to try to re-establish a relationship of trust between the governments of Ireland and the UK and the other will be to endeavour to get a resumption of the power-sharing executive in the North.

Loose talk of a border poll and a united Ireland will certainly be no help in achieving the second of those objectives.

Choice

As for the continuing Brexit saga it appears that things are narrowing down to a choice between a short extension of article 50, to allow for another attempt to get the withdrawal agreement over the line in the House of Commons, or no agreement at all.

A long extension would make sense only if the British signalled their intention of moving to a much softer Brexit or a second referendum. There is no sign that there is a majority in the Commons for either of these options.

In any case even if there was it would pose huge problems for the EU as it would require the UK to take part in the European elections on May 23rd.

The most likely outcome of such a contest would be a large anti EU British contingent in the next parliament.

That would be a potential wrecking ball for the parliament and for the other institutions of the EU as it would provide a focus for all of the populist forces which will inevitably be represented in the next parliament to come together in a mission of destruction.

A short extension represents the best option all round.