Sir, - Mary Holland describes as eminently reasonable the Sinn Fein assertion that the IRA ceasefire is for real and that the Belfast Agreement does not require the hand-over of weapons as a precondition for Sinn Fein taking seats on the Executive (Opinion, March 11th).
This view is outside the consensus of well meaning observers including the Taoiseach, and indeed Irish Times Editorial writers, who see clearly that armed groups can play no role in modern democracy.
It is not possible to simply take the word of Sinn Fein that the ceasefire is `'for real" when that party steadfastly refuses to say the war is over, and would not say so even under the immense diplomatic pressure surrounding last September's Clinton visit to Belfast. The last ceasefire, (1994-96) was described by Gerry Adams as "complete". Unfortunately this did not mean permanent, as even George Mitchell found out only a few weeks after accepting the IRA's bona fides. Even in the last week Gerry Adams has twice menacingly accused unionists of trying to force the IRA back to war.
It is genuinely unhelpful to go along with the Sinn Fein claim that the agreement contains no pre-condition for decommissioning. The Belfast Agreement was not written in terms of pre-conditions. Instead it listed a set of obligations which each side was required to fulfil. All participants committed themselves to "the total disarmament of all paramilitary organisations".
All democrats should be pressing Sinn Fein to explain when and how it intends to fulfil this clear commitment. At present Sinn Fein simply tells us not to expect any decommissioning at all.
Every other party including my own, has fulfilled all of its commitments. Attempting to excuse Sinn Fein for reneging on its commitment can only exacerbate the current impasse. - Yours, etc., Dermot Nesbitt,
(Assembly Member for South Down), Assembly Buildings, Stormont, Belfast.