Risks must be taken to restore peace

TWO hours of tough and at times, heated discussion took place between the leadership of Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein at Dublin Castle…

TWO hours of tough and at times, heated discussion took place between the leadership of Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein at Dublin Castle on Thursday. Afterwards, Ray Burke said the value of holding future meetings would be determined by whether IRA violence ceased. Any such contact would, he said, "take place at an appropriate level".

It was an ominous pronouncement. And, more than any up beat assessment of the political situation from John Hume or from Government "sources", it may reflect the stark reality of an army council controlled republican movement which has, for the moment, cast Sinn Fein aside.

But the governments cannot contemplate a vacuum filled only by republican and, eventually, by loyalist violence. An alternative, democratic way forward, must be offered to the public. And the political parties in Northern Ireland must be motivated to engage in that process.

There are some positive vibrations coming from London and Dublin as officials move towards compromise. Left to themselves, the governments would have no difficulty in designing a package: the problems arise in attempting to accommodate the conflicting demands of the Northern parties and in bringing them to the negotiating table.

READ MORE

The primary aim of the two governments is to re establish the IRA ceasefire. In pursuit of that objective, the British government is being pressurised to set a firm date for all party talks, as requested by Gerry Adams. In return, however, it is seeking to establish an electoral process - advocated by David Trimble and Ian Paisley - which would lead on to those talks.

As an incentive to Mr Hume, it is prepared to contemplate a "peace" and "talks" referendum. And finally, the Government's idea of "proximity", or Dayton style, talks is being studied as a method of reaching agreement between the parties on the form of an elected body.

Time is the great enemy of this complicated process. Last November, under United States pressure, the two governments adopted a " firm aim" to secure entry into all party talks by the end of February.

There was a realisation in nationalist circles that the ceasefire was running into difficulties and that militant forces were shifting within the IRA. But there was a strong belief the ceasefire would hold, at least until the February 29th deadline. It didn't.

THE IRA broke its word and planted bombs in London. But the commitment of the two governments remained. And, unless it can be given substance, the IRA will be offered some post facto justification for its actions.

Next Thursday is the deadline. And there is no doubt political heads are being knocked together. The reaction of Ulster Unionists at Westminster may be indicative. They are now threatening to vote against John Major when the Scott Report, which could bring down his government, is debated on Monday.

Last week, they spoke of abstaining, when they were more confident of the form and remit of their electoral process. The DUP, which favours a list system election, is set to abstain in that vote. And angry and dismissive tones can also be detected in nationalist voices as various compromises are aired.

The SDLP and Sinn Fein have rejected the UUP blueprint for an elected body. But they are nibbling at the notion of a smaller, list system body which would provide representation at negotiations for all Northern parties with more than one peer cent of the popular vote.

Mr Hume's referendum idea is also in play, not only to identify the intense public desire for political negotiations, but to demolish the IRA's justification for the use of violence in pursuit of a united Ireland.

Once the Scott report is out of the way, Irish officials hope that John Bruton and John Major can get together to unveil a summit package which will set a firm date for talks in the aftermath of an election process and a linked referendum. But there are huge difficulties.

There is little hope that agreement on the precise nature of a time locked, elected body can be agreed before Wednesday, and the parties may be asked to address this issue themselves in two days of "proximity", or accelerated, political talks.

The reluctance of unionists to engage in any negotiations on a political settlement is deeply discouraging. Some senior Fianna Fail people believe they have no intention of coming to the table at all. And efforts by Mr Trimble to link limited discussion with Dick Spring to the up coming London Summit are regarded as an attempt to re establish a 1970s pecking order.

THE role of the United States is hugely important. But it is being deliberately underplayed because of British sensitivities. George Mitchell did not come as a "peace envoy" during the week, or as a man who would advise both governments on how to conduct their business. It was left to Mr Major to suggest a role for him, in private conversation with President Clinton, after he had jetted back to the United States.

Mr Mitchell might not be trusted by republicans, and especially by unionists, because of the difficult compromises he and his colleagues identified in their official report. But if an arms decommissioning body is to be established in the future, he would be an obvious choice as its controlling intelligence.

One of the great imponderables is the role of the IRA in any new political situation. Having broken the ceasefire, the IRA army council has seriously damaged the authority and prestige of Sinn Fein. Rumour suggests that, last December, the council split 4:3 in favour of a resumption of hostilities, with representatives from Dublin and the Border area turning "hawkish". It may be significant that Belfast members, whose constituents were most exposed to economic discrimination and sectarian assassination squads, voted against.

A review of that army council decision is expected to take place within the next few weeks. But without a firm date for the start of all party talks - and the possibility of Sinn Fein involvement in future negotiations - a positive result seems unlikely.

Decisions on these grave matters will have to be taken by the governments and the political parties within a matter of days. They will have to take risks which go beyond those that might be expected of the IRA. For politics and diplomacy are said to be war by other means. And compromise is the life blood of politics.

Quite apart from any decision which may be forthcoming from the IRA, it is time the democratic parties abandoned power play politics in the interests of a negotiated settlement.