|
John
Hume is a likeable person and a man who has done much
good but as a republican I see his ideas as a danger
to the realisation of the republican objective. They
are a danger because John is not a nationalist - he
is a European Regionalist - and he looks forward to
the day that Europe becomes one based upon a regional
carve-up.
As
a history lecturer John Hume in the fifties had previously
been involved with others attempting to ensure that
Derry would be the site of a new university; but again
because of the sectarian bigoted mentality of unionism,
Coleraine was granted the university instead. And
because of his involvement in the university issue,
at least one member of the Catholic church hierarchy,
according to a Priest friend, had discussions with
John Hume at the beginning of the civil rights campaign
suggesting that he get involved with the campaign
because of its control by Communists and revolutionary
Republicans. His consequent involvement and the puzzling
behaviour of Eamon McCann at its first meeting ensured
that the Derry Citizens Action Committee came into
the control of moderates and never formally affiliated
to Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association; and
this was a source of irritation for those who desired
a united civil rights movement.
Hume's
stance however was typical of a person who had political
ambitions and a political agenda, and in many respects
he was his own man. For John Hume held meetings with
others, including representatives of the north's so-called
security forces, without notifying the DCAC that he
was doing so. He had also on occasions provided the
Dublin Government with information relating to the
goings-ons in NICRA, for he had earlier made contact
with the moderates there. For example, Dr.Con McCluskey
at a NICRA meeting attempted, with the help of other
moderates, to get NICRA to break the connection with
the USA-based National Association for Irish Justice
led by Brian Heron; they were unsuccessful, but it
was Hume who informed the Dublin Government of the
outcome.
The
Dublin Government via one of their top civil servants,
Eamonn Gallagher, also received in strict confidence
information from Hume relating to the proposed establishment
of the SDLP approximately six months before the party
came into being. In his role as a mole for the Dublin
Government there is a note by the leading civil servant
in which he states: "Mr. John Hume informed me
in strict confidence yesterday that plans are going
ahead for the creation of a new opposition party in
the six counties..." and "The general colouration
of the party is left of centre. It will be called
the Social Democratic and Labour Party - the latter
word in deference to Fitt and Devlin... he [Hume]
is anxious that the Taoiseach and the Minister should
know this in advance of any announcement of the formation
of the new party but he is very anxious that no word
of its creation should leak out in advance".
The
Government warmly welcomed the development, the consequence
of which represented a stab in the back to the late
Eddie McAteer and the Nationalist Party of the north
by their so-called allies in Fianna Fail.
The
reasoning behind the Government's behaviour lay in
their fear of the increasing influence of the Republican
Movement both north and south of the border. They
saw the appearance of a new moderate party as a possible
means of destroying the ambitions of the revolutionary
republicans. In fact, two Dublin Government Department
of Justice memoranda in 1969 called for a tough political
reaction to what was plainly seen as a major threat.
Both, delivered to the government within the short
time span of four months, expressed alarm at what
the department saw from the republican movement. In
the year prior to this (1968), the Army Council of
the IRA had met in September and had taken some important
decisions, but these decisions also appeared in the
above mentioned memoranda which implied that a high-placed
informer existed.
A
close scrutiny of the Belfast Agreement, and Hume's
contribution to the latter is revealing. Although
Hume's ideas may have been filtered through other
agencies such as the Dublin and British Governments,
they still provide an insight into the structural
developments which he has in mind for Europe. In fact,
the Belfast Agreement is a possible prototype for
what Hume envisages for the government of the continent.
Of
course he should not be seen as the sole originator
of the ideas, for their source is the Social Democrats
of the European Parliament of which the British Labour
Party and the SDLP are affiliated. It is indeed interesting
that a European Union (EU) document pertaining to
regional structure in Europe envisages that the island
of Ireland will be divided into two regions: the 6
counties will be known as Ulster and the 26 counties
will be known as Ireland. This does not bode well
for our future and implies that the EU bureaucrats
recognise Britain's illegal claim to part of our national
territory.
Within
this context it would be naïve to believe that
the powers that be in Brussels paid scant attention
to the struggle that was taking place in Ireland.
In fact, they would have insisted to the British and
the Dublin Governments that as they were trying to
build a united Europe, the former had better get their
houses in order and bring an end to the conflict.
The type of unity envisaged by Brussels however is
not one to which an Irish republican could subscribe,
for its eventual reality is anti-nationalist. Whereas
what constitutes authentic continental unity is a
Europe of Free Nations, a Europe with a Republican
heart - 'government of the people, by the people,
for the people' - not a bureaucratic sweat shop for
international capitalism.
John
Hume shares the vision of those bureaucrats which
is: the unity of people, not land, in the interests
of capitalism. Whereas the concern should be for the
unity of people on the land, that is, Ireland - a
basic definition of our nationality, which, like Pearse,
I believe is a spirituality. Both governments support
the vision of the Social Democrats via Hume, and I'm
afraid in its realisation there is no place for Tone's
imperative of breaking the connection with England
and self-determining our future as a nation.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
