IT IS the attitude and judgment of the next Taoiseach, rather than any paper policy commitment, that will determine how this State handles the peace process in the next crucial period. John Bruton and Bertie Ahern have fundamentally different attitudes to dealing with the North, although neither is to be found in a manifesto.
Mr Ahern's view is that in handling the peace process, the Taoiseach of this State must take on the role of leader of nationalist Ireland. Had Mr Albert Reynolds not done this there would have been no IRA ceasefire, say Fianna Fail figures.
Mr Bruton's view, however, is that the Taoiseach must be even handed in dealing with the North, adopting a more neutral position and seeking always to appear reasonable to unionists.
Both men repeated these positions just last Friday. Mr Ahern said Mr Bruton's difficulties in relation to handling the process stemmed from his refusal to accept the role of leader of nationalist Ireland.
Mr Bruton rejected this, saying he did not believe in leading a "pannationalist front". A Northern settlement was about everyone, not just nationalists, he said.
Northern Ireland is the issue that proves the thesis that voters make decisions based on perceptions, not on policy commitments. Manifesto commitments on Northern Ireland - insofar as they exist - are almost entirely aspirational and uncontroversial. Labour and Fine Gael make no mention of Northern Ireland in their manifestos. Democratic Left manage a fleeting reference, Fianna Fail and the Progressive Democrats have slightly longer - but no more contentious references. The Green Party proposes a couple of novel ideas, but is unlikely to have a major input into Government policy on the North for some time.
In policy terms, there is complete consensus on Northern Ireland, based on the Downing Street Declaration and the Framework Documents. But it is in the handling of the North rather than on policy that the parties differ. And the public perceives sharper differences between the parties on how they would handle the North than on any other issue.
The results of an Irish Times/MRBI opinion poll published 10 days ago show the public believes Fianna Fail would handle this issue better than all other parties combined.
Asked which party would best handle the problem, 43 per cent said Fianna Fail, 22 per cent said Fine Gael, 7 per cent the Labour Party, 2 per cent the Progressive Democrats and 1 per cent Democratic Left. Six per cent said none of these parties while 19 per cent offered no opinion.
Most manifestos contain general aspirational notions about the North. The Fine Gael and Labour Party manifestos have no mention of Northern Ireland at all.
Fianna Fail claims the high ground on the handling of the peace process. It was a Fianna Fail Taoiseach, Mr Albert Reynolds, who was the central figure in the Republic in the manoeuvring that led to the 1994 IRA ceasefire. He was alone in retaining faith in the possibility of the ceasefire being delivered. Fine Gael led the opposition in telling him he was wasting his time.
Having helped deliver the ceasefire, Fianna Fail does not exactly blame Mr Bruton and Fine Gael for its collapse. However, it regularly points to the fact that it left office with a ceasefire in place, and that the ceasefire collapsed a year later.
Whether the British government's intransigence on the decommissioning issue which preceded the breakdown of the ceasefire could have been dealt with more effectively by any other government is debatable. The British government's imperative was to survive, and a central part of its survival strategy was keeping the Ulster Unionists - who held crucial Westminster votes - on side.
There is a fundamental difference between Mr Ahern's and Mr Bruton's approach to the North, one that is acknowledged by both men. A Fianna Fail leader sees the Taoiseach's role as one of primarily representing nationalist Ireland, Mr Ahern said last Friday. Mr Bruton, however, rejected this view on the same day, talking of the need to bring both communities along, and rejecting the idea of a "pan nationalist front". He has sought to adopt an approach of seeking a settlement in the North through adopting a basically neutral approach as between nationalists and unionists.
Fianna Fail and others accuse Mr Bruton of making several crucial errors of judgment in his early days handling the peace process. The first, and most important, is said to have occurred in March 1995 when he implicitly accepted the decommissioning precondition "Washington 3" for Sinn Fein entry into talks.
On March 7th the Northern Secretary Sir Patrick Mayhew, set out three conditions for Sinn Fein entry into talks. A willingness in principle to disarm progressively; a common practical understanding of how decommissioning would take place; and the actual decommissioning of some weapons.
On March 13th as he left for Washington to meet President Clinton, Mr Bruton said he would tell Mr Clinton there would have to be some movement on the arms question to allow talks to begin between Sinn Fein and British ministers. In the subsequent fortnight he made several statements implicitly supporting Sir Patrick's position on decommissioning.
Mr Bruton effectively allowed the decommissioning issue to be placed at the top of the peace process agenda.
His defence was put forward in an article in the name of Fine Gael parliamentary party chairman Mr Phil Hogan in this newspaper last year. The Taoiseach was right to suggest movement on decommissioning - not to do so would have been to condone the holding of arms as a political bargaining counter. Those who said otherwise were intellectually paralysed by the IRA agenda".
The Labour leader, Mr Spring, has more experience of handling the issue than any other party leader. He was involved in negotiating the AngloIrish Agreement in 1985, and has been the constant presence through both phases of the handling of the peace process.
His role under John Bruton as Taoiseach is perceived as having been quite different that under Mr Reynolds. Under Mr Reynolds, Mr Spring was the more moderate Dublin voice, appearing somewhat sceptical of the courting of the Republican movement and sounding more acceptable to unionists than his Taoiseach.
Under Mr Bruton he has been grandly designated as "the most detested politician in Northern Ireland" by the UUP deputy leader Mr John Taylor. He has been the one who has seemed more in touch with Northern nationalists and republicans, offsetting what many northern nationalists see as a Taoiseach overly concerned about unionist views.
The Democratic Left leader Mr Proinsias de Rossa has been quite close to Mr Bruton in his view and rhetoric about Northern Ireland. Democratic Left is now four splits away from the Provisional Republican movement, and its lack of empathy with Northern republicans is extreme.
Progressive Democrat rhetoric has traditionally been particularly hostile to the republican movement, although since the peace process began they have also made efforts to be encouraging as well as condemnatory of the republican movement, and this is reflected in the party manifesto.
None of the subtle differences between the parties can be gleaned from reading their manifestos, and none of the main political parties could object to anything that is written in any of their opponents documents on Northern Ireland.
They all want peace, an acceptance of democratic principles, inclusive talks, consent, a NorthSouth dimension. Most contain general aspirational notions about Northern Ireland. The Fine Gael and Labour Party manifestos have no mention of Northern Ireland. Democratic Left's document confines itself to an aspiration to a speedy resolution of the conflict, an end to violence, the development of "inclusive, democratic policies" and a negotiated agreement based on consent.
Fianna Fail's contribution is longer, but equally uncontroversial. The party wants to reestablish the peace process, bring momentum, get everyone to commit themselves solely to democratic principles, ensure respect or the electoral mandate of "all parties that have renounced violence or good". It does not say how it will determine whether violence has been renounced "for good", or just temporarily.
The Green Party's section on Northern Ireland highlights the party's proposed contribution to the political decision making process, the preferendum". Under such a process, the people would not be presented with a deal to which they would vote yes or no, but a series of options for which they could express preferences. In this way a more acceptable consensus agreement would be reached, says the party.
If voters make their decision on the issue of Northern Ireland next Friday - and polls show that very few do - they will make it on perception, not stated policy.