Sir, - I am surprised that not more is being made of the historical parallels of the Good Friday agreement. Speaking in the debate on the Anglo-Irish Treaty, Michael Collins said: "It gives us freedom - not the ultimate freedom that all nations desire, but the freedom to achieve it." Gerry Adams speaks in much the same way about the merits of the present agreement.
The issue that really divided Sinn Fein in 1921-22 was the form of words in the oath of fidelity to the King. The most divisive issue for republicans now is the new wording of Articles 2 and 3.
After the Civil War De Valera sensibly decided to take the constitutional route and in 1927 entered a Southern partitionist parliament. Traditional republicans called this an act of treachery. No oaths of loyalty to a monarch are required now, but Gerry Adams will lead his party into a Northern partitionist assembly.
While refusing recognition to the legitimacy of Northern Ireland, De Valera recognised it de facto. Gerry Adams still talks about "the Six Counties" but has in effect recognised Northern Ireland ever since he joined the talks process.
In many ways we are back once again in the period 1920-1922, the period of the Government of Ireland Act and the Treaty. If we ratify this new "treaty" in all 32 counties of the island of Ireland, we will have accomplished what those two agreements wished to achieve but failed: the two parts of Ireland will co-operate in harmony without threat, fear or suspicion of each other. They will naturally draw closer together economically, socially and culturally. Any further unity of a constitutional nature will be by the consent of both parts separately and is clearly in the hands of succeeding generations.
The destructive voices from the past still thunder, however. Cries of "sell-out" can be heard from both republican and unionist extremes. It is now up to the rest of to see that the vote goes for the future and not the past. Beidh an la linn! - Yours, etc.
Robin Glendinning,
Island Reagh, Comber, Co Down.