THE SINN Fein submission to the International Body rules out any unilateral surrender of arms but suggests the disposal of arms by those groups which have them might be acceptable, with an agreed independent third party as scrutineer.
The 29 page document published yesterday also asserts that, given an acceptable political scenario, the practicalities of disarmament could conceivably be worked out and agreed "in a matter of hours".
The document offers a detailed but cogent analysis of the origins and development of the Northern conflict from the republican perspective, and it repeatedly accepts that: "The issue of arms must he settled to everyone's satisfaction."
It quotes from a British government paper which said: "The holding of illegal arms and the use of violence and threats have no place in a peaceful, democratic society."
The Sinn Fein submission says: "Sinn Fein unequivocally supports that position. In fact, we widen it to include all guns and we believe that in any democratic society all arms must come under democratic authority and control.
"The entire logic of a peace process is that through substantive all party peace talks the people of Ireland will arrive at a peace settlement which removes the causes of the conflict and takes the guns, for ever, out of Anglo Irish politics."
However, the document accuses the British government, in its demand for an arms surrender from the IRA, of turning an objective of the peace process into an obstacle to progress.
"There is no expectation among any of the opposing factions that the issue of arms will be settled except in the context of a negotiated settlement," it says. "The big achievement has been to silence the weapons so that a negotiated settlement can be achieved and as part of this that those who have the weapons will be persuaded to dispose of them."
The submission notes that both governments explicitly set inclusive and comprehensive talks as their goal but after 16 months these have not begun. "This is frustrating and threatens to dissipate the momentum towards a lasting peace."
It acknowledges that the removal for ever of the gun from the political equation is a clear and absolute objective of a lasting peace: "This is an absolute requirement."
But the importance of this goal means that it needs to be situated in the context "where it is most likely to be achieved in practice".
An agreed political settlement must encompass demilitarisation, it argues, summarising the elements of this as requiring agreement on:
"The transitional role and deployment of the British army and the RUC, pending the establishment of acceptable law and order forces;
"A withdrawal of British troops and the creation of an unarmed police service must be part of a general demilitarisation of the situation. No one seriously expects them to surrender their weapons;
"A review of the proliferation of licensed weapons in the hands mainly of unionists;
"The removal of all repressive laws and a review of the performance and independence of the judiciary;
"The release of all political prisoners;
"The disarmament of all armed groups."
In summary: "It is Sinn Fein's belief that the disposal of arms by those in possession of them is a method which may find acceptance.
"The entire issue of arms will need to be dealt with in a way which imbues and maintains public and political confidence.
"An independent third party could prove to be of assistance here. This would, of course, have to be agreed by those in possession of weapons.
"Public safety considerations must be high on the agenda of any process. Adequate safeguards against misappropriation of arms by others is clearly an important matter."
The submission repeats Sinn Fein's demand that peace talks should be initiated as a matter of urgency and within an agreed timeframe". These should address: political and constitutional change; a democratisation of the situation; and a demilitarisation of the North.
Sinn Fein would bring to the negotiating table its commitment to ending "British rule in our country". However, the submission adds: "We accept also that there are those who have a different view, a view which they will take to the negotiating table.
"We are wholly committed to a process of democratic and peaceful negotiations and to seeking an agreed political settlement which has the allegiance of all the Irish people".
It argues that if there was already a peaceful, democratic society in Ireland there would be no need for a peace process. But it says the peace process is "at an absolute impasse", as the British precondition on arms "not only denies Sinn Fein and our voters the right to negotiate the future of our island, but by extension denies that right to the rest of the Irish people also".
The British did not previously insist on that precondition: "In over 20 years of contacts between Sinn Fein and the British government the issue of an IRA arms surrender was never raised ... In our view had a surrender of IRA weapons been imposed as a precondition to peace negotiations prior to the cessation, there would not have been an IRA cessation on August 31st, 1994".
The submission gives in detail the background of sectarian attacks against which the IRA, "which had been dormant", reorganised and rearmed: "Today, the British government calls for an IRA arms surrender, choosing to ignore nationalist fears of a repeat of 1969."
It asserts: "In conferring on the unionists a veto over the commencement of negotiations, and in insisting on the surrender of IRA weapons as a precondition ... the British government are encouraging rather than discouraging unionist intransigence.
Because of the historical context, and the continuous militarisation of the North, "the demand for the IRA to surrender its arms is unrealistic - that is why republicans insist that disarmament by the IRA is but one stand of demilitarisation and cannot be separated from it".
Asserting that Britain's presence in Ireland, as well as "in colonies all over the world", was maintained through the use of so called legal weapons, the document says: "This distinction between legal and illegal is subjective, dubious, lacks moral credibility and is particularly insulting to the many victims of Britain's `legal' violence".
It argues that negotiations, as a tool of conflict resolution, "need to be understood to be a necessity and a duty and not the property of a party to the conflict - and its allies to withhold or award as a privilege".
It refers to the international experience of the use of inclusive dialogue in conflicts such as South Africa, the Middle East and the former Yugoslavia.
The Sinn Fein submission asserts that: "It has been argued that the British government is simply asking for a symbolic gesture and an acceptance of responsibility for 25 years of war.
"But it is a gesture which would symbolise an IRA surrender. This is hardly a reasonable or justifiable demand, particularly in the light of the British government's reluctant and begrudging response to the new situation."
It adds: "A psychology of surrender is no more obtainable than an actual surrender. It is from that deeply ingrained and unshakeable position that the `pike in the thatch' tradition persists and which, in more modern times, has been translated into rusting guns in forgotten caches: decommissioning through disuse and falling into disrepair."
The document contends that one of the decommissioning methods raised by the British in a document on ways of removing arms was "the destruction of arms by those in possession of them".
In this context, the Sinn Finn document advances the view that "as part of a peace settlement, the disposal of arms by those in possession of them is a method which may find acceptance".
Arguing that the weapons issue will need to be dealt with in a way which imbues and maintains public and political confidence, Sinn Fein says it believes, "without prejudice to the specifics of the `who', that the independent third party concept is one which may find acceptance. This would, of course, have to be agreed by those in possession of weapons".
It says the misappropriation of weapons is of acute concern to nationalists: "This arises from the long history, especially in the course of the past 25 years, during which many nationalists were brutally murdered by some of the several hundreds of British army weapons stolen directly by loyalists or in some instances misappropriated by serving British army personnel acting for or on behalf of loyalist paramilitaries."
Sinn Fein says it has consistently argued that the decommissioning issue is at this time "a stalling device and a bogus argument created by the British to avoid the commencement of all party talks".
"Without an overall settlement, what difference would the disposal of weapons make?"- the submission asks, posing a series of questions as to how the nationalist population could be protected from the further use of loyalist or security force weapons, and "What would prevent the IRA from re arming?"
In a further significant comment, the document states: "It is self evident that threats of any description from any quarter have no role in any such [democratic talks] process. They are certainly no part of any talks process, in which Sinn Fein will engage.
It notes finally: "The unfortunate reality is that if the British government's precondition is sustained then the peace process is, in effect, being closed down."