5 articles ** Prisoners Out: Troops out: Talk about what? ** from Workers Solidarity No 46 We welcome the cease-fire. The "peace process", however, has little to recommend it. It represents little more than arguments over who exactly will administer capitalism in Ireland. On issues such as the release of prisoners or the disbanding of the RUC there is nothing to be discussed. Both these should happen unconditionally. The debate over de- commissioning of IRA weapons is meaningless. All that the current negotiations are doing is establishing a pecking order among the parties in the north. In 1962 the unionists accepted the IRA's word that Operation Harvest [the Border Campaign] was over and released prisoners without requiring decommissioning of arms. The opposition of the mainstream unionists to a prisoner release now is based on their opposition to the "peace process", and it's limited threat of power sharing. Sinn Fein says that the armed campaign was a political struggle but the British government classes the prisoners as common prisoners, and so will not release them now as that would be an admission that they are really prisoners of war. Inhuman conditions The refusal to transfer prisoners in Britain to the north means that many of them remain in grossly inhumane conditions, in particular in the isolation unit of Wakefield. Ten of these prisoners have now spent 20 years in British jails, 20 years of severe hardship not only for them but also for their families. Six of these ten were convicted of charges less serious than murder. All the prisoners should be released immediately and unconditionally. The continued unacceptability of the RUC - a sectarian police force - was underlined by events around July 12th. Earlier that week, in Belfast, a number of Catholics had their houses petrol bombed after a loyalist march through the Lower Ormeau Road was stopped. The RUC responded to this, not by going after the loyalists responsible, but by putting the Lower Ormeau under siege on the 12th to make sure the loyalists (in the form of the Ballynafeigh District Orange Lodge) would swagger through a nationalist area uninterrupted. They acted as the paid thugs of loyalism. The RUC sealed off the Lower Ormeau at 5am, using a force of nearly 150 armoured jeeps and over 1,000 officers in riot gear. Five hundred nationalist protesters who tried to reach the Ormeau bridge were attacked by the RUC, hospitalising four. Victim's widow arrested On the Lower Ormeau itself the RUC went so far as to arrest Rosaline McManus, widow of Willie McManus who was one of five men killed by the UDA/UFF at the Graham's bookies' shop massacre on the Ormeau Road in 1992. Her 'crime' was to ask the RUC to ensure that no bands would be playing as the Orangemen passed the shop. The dead man's sister, who was in a wheelchair, was pushed down a nearby side street by the RUC. Camera crews were kept out of the area for three hours. However the debate about creating an "acceptable" police force is one anarchists have little interest in. The RUC already has the harp on its cap badge. Creating a new police force that contained many nationalists might get rid of some of the sectarianism but this new force would still not be acceptable. The problem with the RUC is not just its composition but also the primary role it shares with every other police force. This role is the protection of the property of the rich and the maintenance of order for the government. The southern Garda’ or the British police are not dominated by religious bigots but this has never stopped them being used against demonstrators or strikers. Ludicrous expectations Sinn Fein's radical rhetoric has been dropped, joining any pretence at 'socialist' politics in the dustbin. Their main demand at present is not for 'Troops Out', or even for the release of Republican prisoners. Instead we are requested to protest for 'All Party Talks'. Who can believe now that Sinn Fein are somehow 'different' from other political parties? And who still believes that any group of would-be leaders is interested in real change? Sinn Fein is calling for Gerry Adams, John Hume, Ian Paisley, John Alderdice and James Molyneaux, along with a few other "good men", to sit down and decide the future for the rest of us. It would be ludicrous to expect that anything capable of dealing with the problems faced by ordinary people would emerge from this cabal. In fact, no small bunch of leaders can sort out our problems for us (and particularly not that bunch!!). The problems shared by Catholic, Protestant and atheist workers will only be solved when we come together, recognise our common interests, and take over society ourselves. ********************************************************** ** One year on: Evaluating the Ceasefire ** THE IRA CEASEFIRE is approaching its first anniversary. That year has been striking for two things, on the one hand the success of the 'peace process' in turning Sinn Fein from demonised pariahs to lauded peace makers. On the other hand, the failure of the process to produce any substantial gains for the nationalist community. Although many British soldiers have been returned to barracks, only about 800 have left Ireland. The RUC may have exchanged their machine guns for pistols but they have also moved into areas they previously feared to patrol. Harassment of nationalists has continued. Sinn Fein's paper, An Phoblacht/Republican News, now carries a Peace Monitor instead of a War News column. Every week it reports on beatings, threats & intimidation directed at nationalists by various sections of the British war machine. Although prisoners have been released early in the Republic, no such releases have occurred in the six counties and, indeed, the number of prisoners allowed compassionate temporary release has been reduced. In this situation it's not surprising that a minority are questioning the validity of the ceasefire strategy. Some left republicans see the ceasefire as a sell-out of a previous commitment to socialism and anti-imperialism. There are other republicans who see the ceasefire as a cunning strategy forced on the British government. They seem to expect the Sinn Fein leadership to pull a united Ireland out of the hat at a future stage despite obvious hints to the contrary by the same leadership. This view fails to realise that the peace process is a change in strategy rather then a victory. Some things were meant to be When looked at in the context of the last twenty five years the ceasefire not only makes sense but is inevitable. All other strategies had been exhausted. Britain was not militarily defeated in the 'years of victory' declared by the IRA in early 1970s. Likewise, the economic bombing campaign in Britain and the six counties failed to bring victory. The post Hunger-Strike turn to electoral and community politics represented by Danny Morrison's 'ballot box and armalite' strategy ground to a halt in the mid-80's. Although Sinn Fein had a lot of support in the nationalist ghetto's it was unable to break out of these and attract significant votes from Catholic working class voters elsewhere or the Catholic middle class. In the south, outside of a few council seats it never had any success. Once this was realised it became not so much a question of if, but when an IRA ceasefire would be declared. Talk of fighting the British army to a standstill is all very well but when translated into a yearly toll of harassment, deaths and prisoners the need to move beyond the war of attrition became dominant. Military stalemate This has been recognised by Danny Morrison (seen by many as a hard-liner within the current republican leadership). On his recent release from prison he told AP/RN "It was obvious that something was going on, and it might appear controversial, but it was tacitly understood by many people that there was a military stalemate developing .... the IRA had in 1992 exploded a bomb in the City of London followed by the Bishopsgate bomb in 1993 and the Heathrow mortar attacks early last year. Despite these prestigious attacks there was a stalemate on the military front. So I think people were mature enough to understand developments even though the announcement of the cessation came as a severe shock and ran contrary to all our instincts." The ceasefire was also inevitable in a broader setting. Wars of 'national liberation' don't end with outright victory and independence for the nationalist side. They involve a negotiated settlement. In the Irish context this means one acceptable to the British state. This has been the pattern of the settlements in South Africa, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Palestine in recent years. All together now? Sinn Fein's has long held a strategy of uniting the nationalist family against Britain. In this context the 'peace process' has delivered more than any other strategy. One year ago Sinn Fein were pariahs with virtually no political allies nationally or internationally of any stature. Today the man once known as John Unionist (Bruton) is giving out about the British government stalling in releasing prisoners. The much dreamed of pan-nationalist alliance of Sinn Fein, SDLP, Fianna F‡il and the Catholic Church not only exists but seems to include Fine Gael, Labour and even a somewhat hesitant Democratic Left! Eamonn Dunphy has argued in the 'Sunday Independent' that it is dangerous to continue to demonise Sinn Fein! A world turned upside down, unimaginable twelve months ago. This national success has been matched internationally. Gerry Adams has not only been allowed a visit to the US, but with John Hume has sung a duet of "The town I knew so well" for Bill Clinton. What's more both Bill Clinton and the icon of sacrifice of the 1980's, Nelson Mandela, have publicly given out to the British Government for dragging its heels. All that's missing is a Noble peace prize for Adams (and he's actually been awarded a lesser peace prize by Swiss industrialists). Pan-nationalist alliance Unionism has become more fragmented and isolated. No significant section of the Tories opposes the peace process and no major loyalist mobilisations against the process have been organised in the six counties. The British state has not yet fulfilled Sinn Fein wishes, by becoming "persuading" unionists to accept the inevitability of a united Ireland, but they have pretty much said that as far as the peace process goes the unionist veto is dead. So the peace process has achieved what the armed struggle failed to. The pan-nationalist alliance exists, with Gerry Adams at the head of it. Britain is internationally isolated and seen to be dragging its heels. Unionism is isolated to the point where small sections are willing to consider direct talks with Sinn Fein. But even in the most optimistic forecast of its dividends there are many republicans who are wondering, is this it, is this all? The answer from the Sinn Fein leadership would seem to be 'yes'. To quote Morrison's' interview again "one thing is certain we are not going to end up with a pre-1969 Stormont solution. It is going to be much more radical than that." A mystic vision of a united Ireland is not what drives most republican activists. They became activists because circumstances which included constant harassment, high unemployment and poor housing compel them to fight the sectarian system that created these conditions. They are activists because when at the end of the 60's they and others took part in peaceful attempts to reform this system they were first batoned and then shot off the streets. All has changed, or has it? But even if the peace process resulted in British withdrawal tomorrow, few of these conditions would change. Decent housing and decent jobs are no more likely in a 32 county Ireland with Gerry Adams as Taoiseach. The 'success' story of South Africa illustrates this point. The most ambitious scheme of the post-apartheid government is to provide fresh water to a sizeable percentage of squatter towns by the year 2000. The reason cited for the lack of ambition is lack of money. Yet in both South Africa and Ireland enough wealth exists to make a massive difference to the way most of us live. But it needs to be taken out of the hands of the wealthy and put into the hands of the workers. Gerry Adams may scoff at the Irish left but it is only a united working class that can drive the British state out, and usher in a better life for all. The all-singing, all dancing 'peace process', sponsored by Donald Trump and Bill Clinton may look good but at the end of the day what can it deliver? Even the basic demand of British withdrawal cannot be met by the peace process or any other nationalist based strategy. This can only be won in one of two circumstances. Firstly if the British state decides it no longer has any interest in staying and is satisfied that it can withdraw and leave stability behind. It is unlikely to do this in the short term, as most northern Protestants want it to stay, and it is wary of the destabilisation they could cause in the event of withdrawal. Telling lies It is also wary of withdrawal undermining its credibility in Britain. In the course of its 25 year war it lied to the British working class about what was going on. Republicans were portrayed as psycho-gangsters, terrorising even their own communities. To admit that it lied about Ireland means that it will be less able to convince its own population that sections of British society that dare to fight back are common criminals. During the 1984 miners strikes Thatcher referred to the striking miners as "the enemy within", and they received the sort of media coverage familiar to Irish republicans. They also received the attention of the SAS, often dressed in police uniforms, although in this case they were content with kicking the shit out of miners rather then killing them. The anti-Poll Tax rioters were also portrayed as criminals by the media. The rule of the British state in Britain as well as Ireland is dependant on most of the population of Britain trusting it. Admittance of the true facts of its Irish war threaten this. The only other way the British state will leave Ireland is when it is forced out. The IRA could not achieve this, it was incapable of defeating the British army. Withdrawal will only happen in the face of a united working class in Ireland, supported by vast sections of the British working class. Creating this unity requires an entirely different strategy than anything Sinn Fein could pursue, it requires a break with nationalist politics. Andrew Flood ********************************************************* ** What's happening with Unionism? ** THE 12th OF JULY, always a high point of tension, was used this year by the 'respectable' unionist parties to try to provoke the IRA into breaking the ceasefire. Nothing made this clearer than the events surrounding the attempts of Orangemen in Portadown to march through the Garvaghy Road nationalist estate. The ceasefire was already under strain from the release of Lee Clegg, and unionist politicians were quick to seize on the confrontation there as an opportunity to push republican patience to breaking point. Many people who tuned in to the news late on the evening of July 10th to hear the wild rumours arising from of the loyalist siege of Garvaghy Road must have thought they were hearing the end of the ceasefire. It was said that a mob of loyalists had broken through RUC lines and stormed the estate. Unionist leaders were claiming that up to 200 republicans, some of them armed, had come from Belfast to protect the estate. In the event neither story proved to be true. But it was a situation very much like this that directly sparked the current struggle. Historical bigots David Trimble and Ian Paisley were at the head of the mob trying to storm the estate. They were the voices behind the rumours. Paisley was well aware of the consequences, he encouraged similar attacks at the end of the 1960's which prompted some nationalists to move from civil rights marches to armed struggle. Hugh McLean, a member of UVF who took part in the random killing of a Catholic in 1966, said to the RUC when he was charged "I am terribly sorry I ever heard of that man Paisley or decided to follow him". Paisley and Trimble are not alone, Ken Maginnis the once 'respectable' face of unionism has completely discredited himself by predicting a definite end to the IRA ceasefire on several occasions. The problem for the unionist politicians is that, unlike the period of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, when over a hundred thousand could be mobilised in demonstrations, now they are unable to organise any significant opposition. Even Sinn Fein's first visit to Stormont for talks with British government representatives resulted in a protest of only a dozen or so individuals. Wishing for war This failure is also seen in the North Down by-election where "United Kingdom Unionist" Robert McCartney ran on the basis of opposition to both the peace process and proposals for closer ties with the South. He won (which means little as it was a guaranteed unionist seat) but the turnout was just 38.7 percent, the lowest in more than 20 years. When the Unionist leaders talk of an imminent breakdown to the ceasefire they are not expressing a fear, they are expressing a wish. Not only are the unionists failing to mobilise mass opposition to the peace process but the loyalist paramilitaries, for once, are refusing to play along. In the week after the 12th the political wings of the loyalist paramilitaries were put to the test by the threat of a body calling itself the 'Protestant Defence Force' to strike against Catholics it thought responsible for arson attacks on Orange halls. Far from playing along, both the PUP and UDP came out against it. David Irving of the PUP warned against perpetuating the cycle of sectarian violence, Gary McMicheal of the UDP pointed out that the Combined Loyalist Military Command would take a "dim view" of anyone breaking the ceasefire. The tail that wags the dog Parts of the left have got somewhat over excited by the new prominence of the PUP and the UDP, seeing them either as a cunning proto-fascist plot or a left-wing break with unionism. Their emergence and willingness to talk with nationalists and the left is significant. David Irving has spoken at meetings with the Communist Party, Militant Labour, and this year addressed the Dublin Council of Trade Unions. However there is a long tradition of working class loyalists complaining about being sold out by ruling class unionism without breaking from sectarianism in the course of doing so. Given, in particular, the horrific killings carried out by some of the prominent figures in the PUP/UDP it is correct to be cautious but their current complaints provide evidence of the growing tensions within unionism. Loyalty's reward Among working class loyalists there is growing awareness that loyalty to the British crown has delivered less, in some cases, than the armed rebellion of the republicans. The biggest thing the British state gave in return for their loyalty was guns to kill Catholics with. A Health Profile of the Greater Shankill Area, which was published in June, showed -> Only one third of men in the district described their health as good compared with 60% in Belfast overall. -> Male unemployment in the area is 40%, compared with a Belfast average of 19%. The female rate is 35%, compared with an average of 11% in the entire city. -> Over 80% of pupils in the Shankill left school without any qualifications, compared with two thirds in Belfast overall. -> Only 1 per cent were educated to degree level, compared to 9% in the whole city. -> Just one in 12 children attended a grammar school compared with an average of one in four in Belfast. Sinn Fein can't do it Sinn Fein, because of their nationalist politics, will always be unable to attract support from significant numbers of Protestant workers. The most they can do is call on them to "see sense". Again, to quote Morrison on his release from prison: "...part of our analysis is that the unionist community is more in advance of the unionist leadership which hasn't produced a De Klerk, someone who is imaginative and courageous enough to say, 'we're going to have to deal here, we're going to have to settle and accept that everyone is going to have to compromise'." This pretty much paraphrases 1994 Ard Fheis speech by Gerry Adams, in which he also called for a "Protestant De Klerk". This represents the limits of republican thinking towards the Protestant working class. They may be able to recognise that Protestant workers have been tricked but they are unable to appeal to them on the grounds of common interest, as this would be a fundamental break with the politics of nationalism. Such an appeal would also be something that the nationalist bosses in Ireland and Bill Clinton would not be keen on. There can not be a loyalist socialism. Loyalism means loyalty to the ruling class of Britain and Northern Ireland. For this reason it is wrong to see the PUP or UDP as socialist, or even close to socialism. A socialist movement requires support from all sections of the working class and a break with orange and green politics. The ceasefires have made it a little easier to put forward this viewpoint, it is up to all of us to make the best use of this opportunity. Joe Black ********************************************************* ** An Anarchist strategy ** WHILE WELCOMING the ceasefire we don't expect the "peace process" to lead to much. Sinn Fein's politics offer little more to Northern workers, as a class, than the politics of the fringe loyalist groups. Both aspire to getting a better deal for the poor and oppressed in their communities but neither are capable of delivering, as they are limited to rhetorical appeals to the workers of the other side to "see sense". Neither can offer a way forward because neither can unite workers across the sectarian divide in a common struggle. Anarchism, at the moment, is a very much smaller force in Ireland then even the fringe loyalist groups, but it does offer a way forward. We argue for working class self- activity that appeals not to politicians or priests as allies but to workers everywhere, in Ireland, in Britain and internationally. But this unity cannot be based on just 'bread and butter issues'. In the past Catholic and Protestant workers have united in common fights to get more from the bosses. The largest and better known examples of this are ->1919 Engineering strike when the mostly Protestant workforce of Harland and Wolff elected a strike committee that happened to be mostly Catholic. ->1932 Outdoor Relief strike when the unemployed of the Falls and the Shankill rioted in support of each other, and against the police. Both these were broken by the unionist bosses convincing Protestant workers that it was all a 'Fenian' trick and that their real interests lay in loyalism. Look at the poverty figures for the Shankill road today and you can see who was really tricking who. But the bosses' trick worked and economic unity crumbled, to be replaced by a vicious pogrom and the expulsion of Catholics and left-wing Protestants from the shipyards in 1919 and sectarian rioting in 1933. For this reason, the idea we can wish the division of the working class in the north away by simply talking about wages and living conditions is a fantasy. More recently there has been unity in support of the nurses' pay claim, against health service cuts and against sectarian intimidation in Housing Executive and Dept. of Social Security offices. All of these instances are heartening. Unfortunately little permanent unity has been built upon these successes because of a failure to confront 'communal politics'. Protestant workers have to reject loyalism and unionism as ruling class ideologies. They have to see their allies as being workers who happen to be Catholic, north and south, and their enemies as the loyalist bosses and the British state. This is no easy break to make but the big benefit of the ceasefire is that it is now easier then it was a year ago. No to the bosses Orange or Green Catholic workers have a similar break to make. The politics of both the SDLP and Sinn Fein are essentially about extending the southern state northwards. This would have the benefit of ending rule by sectarian bigots (although the southern Garda’ are no more keen on the working class then their northern counterparts) but that's about it. Many workers in the South have spent a good part of the last decade fighting the power of the Catholic church, from its influence on the legal system to its covering up of child abusing priests and enslavement of unmarried mothers in the Magdalen laundries. Apart from that, the recent Dunnes Stores strike demonstrates that the gobshite Southern bosses are every bit as mean as their northern equivalents. It also demonstrates they can be beaten, if workers stand together. Workers' unity against the bosses is required but the form that unity takes is also vital. The unity must be political as well as economic. The RUC, the border, clerical control of schools and hospitals, and laws restricting divorce, gay sex and access to abortion all need to be opposed. We cannot rely on a few "good men" to sort out the situation for us. That is the mistake most of the socialist movement made this century and is the reason why we had 'socialist' dictatorships like the USSR and China on the one hand, and 'socialist' sell-outs like the Labour Party or Democratic Left on the other. There is, however, a different current in socialism, based not on good leaders but on the self-organisation of the working class. This self-organisation is what anarchism is all about. We don't believe the way forward lies in finding the right leader, whether it's Gerry Adams, Tony Blair or Lenin. Instead we see the way forward lying with ordinary people; taking control of our lives into our own hands, coming together and starting to fight back. The role of anarchists is not to assume the leadership of such a process but to argue for self-activity, encourage it and seek to encourage those fighting back to unite in an overall struggle against capitalism and for a new society. And that's where you come in. Unlike other left papers, we won't end every article by telling you the only way forward is to join the party. What we do say is find out more about anarchism and look at ways of encouraging self- activity in the struggles you are involved in. If you decide you like what we say then please do get in touch and help us in saying (and doing) it. Above all recognise that the answer is not getting 'our' leaders into talks but in taking back control ourselves. **************************** CHARLIE AND BILL "Begrudgers, throwbacks and die hards". That is what the media called anyone objecting to the official state visit by Prince Charles. Their consensus had decided that anyone who would object must be "living in the past". You would think that the British ruling class had done nothing at all to stir up the troubles, that Prince CharlesÕ Parachute regiment had never murdered 14 civil rights marchers on Bloody Sunday. And we were supposed to feel privileged that a filthy rich parasite was condescending to have a free holiday here at our expense. Not everyone swallowed this forelock touching embarrassment, orchestrated by the politicians and their Dublin 4 media friends. 2,000 republicans, socialists, anarchists and anti-royalists took to the streets of Dublin on May 31st. The Workers Solidarity Movement played its part by giving out 5,000 leaflets urging support for the march, and organising a lively contingent on the night. Demonstrations like this play a useful role. They remind us that there are rich and poor, workers and bosses, rulers and ruled. To recognise this and object to it is not begrudgery but realism! We know how things are now and we are declaring we want something better. When Bill Clinton comes over on November 30th he should not be able to live the high life without encountering a protest or two. It will certainly give heart to dissident Americans to know that in Ireland there are those who oppose the US stateÕs intervention in other peoplesÕ countries and support for dictatorships in the third world. One question is whether Sinn Fˇin will be on the streets or at the dinner? Will a handshake for Gerry Adams be more important than taking a stand against injustice?