No one in the US really cares what Sinn Féin thinks about US foreign policy, writes Trina Vargo
David Trimble has a habit of deflecting attention from the real issues to be dealt with in Northern Ireland - issues which he has a responsibility and an opportunity to resolve.
He wrote recently in the Washington Post to urge the Bush administration to be more aware that Sinn Féin is "anti-American". To do so, he points to articles in An Phoblacht opposing the Bush administration's current policies on Afghanistan and Iraq, and past US policies on the Middle East, Cuba and Central America.
What Mr Trimble is actually saying to the Bush administration is: "Sinn Féin is not your friend. We, the unionists are, so take our side on issues involving Northern Ireland and help us push Sinn Féin out of the peace process."
That strategy hasn't worked, and it won't work for many reasons. No one in the US really cares what Sinn Féin thinks about US foreign policy. With only five seats in the Dáil, Sinn Féin has no say in Ireland's foreign policy. Even if Sinn Féin becomes the largest party in Northern Ireland, it won't have any say in Britain's foreign policy. So what the party thinks about US foreign policy is of little relevance to Americans.
Some of the articles Mr Trimble points to - on US policy on Cuba, Reagan-era policies in Central America, and opposition to war in Iraq - are views held by a substantial number of Americans - are Americans "anti-American" for holding those views?
Mr Trimble thinks that because of its "anti-Americanism", Sinn Féin should be banned from the White House and banned from fundraising in America. Sinn Féin successfully raises money in the US, but British law allows Sinn Féin to raise money in Britain also, and Mr Trimble is free to try to raise money in the US as well.
It is clear that White House access is granted to help advance the peace process in Northern Ireland. Any access Mr Trimble may have is not because he supports Bush administration policies on Iraq or Afghanistan, but because of his important role in the Northern Ireland peace process.
Mr Trimble also brings up Colombia regularly. Unionists argue that whatever may have happened in Colombia is an infraction of the IRA's ceasefire.
But the Bush administration has rightly recognised that, while alleged activity in Colombia is of concern for its own reasons to Americans - and also to many in Northern Ireland - it is not an infraction of the ceasefire and should not be treated as such.
President Clinton's decision to grant a visa for Mr Gerry Adams to visit the US, changed US policy toward Northern Ireland and led to the IRA ceasefire and the current peace process.
Mr Trimble and other unionists may have had dreams that a republican administration in the US would back them, but the Bush administration is right to be an honest broker in the peace process, not a partisan player. Some unionists have not come to grips with the fact that the IRA ceasefire has held for more than six years. A thousand people are probably alive today because of this and no one believes the IRA is about to end it.
The IRA should get rid of its weapons, the sooner the better. Their painfully slow willingness to get rid of what they've already given up serves no purpose. For Sinn Féin to fully function as a democratic party, it needs to be rid of the albatross of a paramilitary organisation and play its part in ending any continued violence, including punishment beatings. The elimination of the gun from Northern Ireland can be achieved through the political process. It should not be used as an excuse to dismantle that process.
If Mr Trimble's goal is an end to paramilitary activity, he should also play his part in bringing this about. That means making clear that he will fully and inclusively operate the institutions of the agreement. By failing to acknowledge that the talks are about anything other than a single item agenda on disbandment, failing to turn up for those talks, and threatening to withdraw his party from those talks, Mr Trimble has not done this.
Unionism should also make clearer its attitude towards loyalist violence. Too often its condemnations of loyalist violence are centred on feuding or racketeering rather than the sustained attacks on Catholics that have continued since the agreement.
The difference in quality and quantity between unionist responses to republican and loyalist violence is striking and unacceptable.
The current crackdown on loyalist paramilitary activity is welcome. If this is sustained and developed, it will help to provide greater confidence in the ability of the police to defend Catholics.
Whether or not the IRA itself was ever able to defend Catholics, the police demonstrating their determination to do so would help remove the necessity perceived by some in vulnerable communities for paramilitary protection.
There are more important issues for Mr Trimble to deal with in Northern Ireland than Sinn Fein's "anti-Americanism" and Colombia.
The vast majority of Americans share the objective of removing the gun from Northern Ireland politics. But it is wrong for Mr Trimble to attempt to destroy the peace process when he doesn't get his way.
Enormous progress has been achieved in the past decade, and the Bush administration is right to do all it can to preserve it.
Trina Vargo is the president of the US-Ireland Alliance