|
On
seeing how the current Sinn Fein leadership have dealt
with the revelations about Belfast Republican Freddie
Scappaticci, allegedly being the British agent within
PIRA, code named Stakeknife, one cannot help feeling
that they're saying to themselves, "So what if
we are making this up, what are you going to do about
it, you know only to well this is not the first time
we have done this type of thing. You can bleat all
you like but the sheep out there are being shepherded
by our dogs and our people know only too well that
they can bite."
The
Adams leadership's public response to this wretched
affair has been one of arrogant and nonsensical denial,
coupled with a complete absence of the undoubted political
skills they possess and have displayed in the past.
For example, in years gone by, even if they were 100%
certain that the Stakeknife story was untrue, they
would have played it against the British for all its
worth, the more so in the USA. Instead they issue
lame denials, subtle threats to those within their
own constituency who disbelieve them and a silence
that is also echoed in Downing Street.
This
stance got me thinking about the whole issue of decommissioning
PIRA weapons and the Sinn Fein leadership's public
attitude to it. The public perception that emulates
from Adams and CO, via the media, is that they are
unable to convince rank and file volunteers to allow
the decommissioning of weapons. Adams wishes this
were not so, but he can only march at the same pace
as the army if he is to retain any influence with
it. Otherwise there will be splits, renegades, etc.
The outcome of which would be more violence such as
that which tragically occurred in Omagh. But is this
necessarily so?
To
date each time Adams and CO have wished to tread new
soil previously outside
the Republican tradition, they have done so with comparative
ease after careful preparation, issuing very subtle
threats and publicizing the fact that trust and loyalty
- not to them but the RM - were their watch words.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the decommissioning
of weapons is causing on the surface more problems
than it is worth for the Adams leadership. Whilst
they may have at one time felt they could circumvent
it, international events post September 11th have
proved otherwise and this strategy now looks like
a non runner. Add to this the fact that the British
have sniffed the Sinn Fein leaderships desperation
to see the GFA fully implemented; it is after all,
all they have to show in the North for the major concessions
they have made to the British State (many of which
are way outside historical parameters of the Republican
movement). Thus logically for them all their strategies
for the immediate future in the northern Statelet
flow from the decommissioning of weapons.… Unless
this comes about there will be no more rides in ministerial
cars, gradually the invitations to the Thief in Chief's
White House will dry up, and Sinn Fein could very
well go the same way as the Officials/Workers Party.
So
the question needs to be asked, if as it seems, the
Sinn Fein leadership genuinely believes that the armed
struggle is over, why, once having gained the release
of Republican prisoners and signed the GFA, did they
not give the order to dump arms and stand down the
army? Whilst they may have had a somewhat bumpy ride
from the Oglaigh na hEireann, less so from the British
government, subsequent events have shown this would
have been nothing they could not endure and rise above.
In doing so they would have removed the major stumbling
block to the full implementation of the GFA, the success
of which they have staked so much upon. Sure there
would almost certainly have been other obstacles put
in their way by the Unionists, but in the main these
would have been far more obviously political and thus
far easier to circumnavigate.
For
the majority of PIRA volunteers there would have been
no shame in standing down the army and dumping weapons,
as it was custom and practice within the Republican
movement when a military campaign had run its course
without achieving victory. Previous generations of
Republican soldiers had done so and rightly held their
heads high. The one thing one can say without hesitation
about the volunteers that have made up the ranks of
PIRA since its formation, is in the annals of Irish
Republicanism they are second to none in their willingness
to fight against overwhelming odds and sacrifice their
all. They gave it their best, no-one could ask more
of them.
On
the order being given to stand down and dump arms
there would have been many witty remarks along the
lines of "the long war to the long wait",
etc., but most Republicans, despite their disappointments
would have recognised that they gave it their all,
but militarily the opposition was too great when coupled
with the wheels of history travelling against the
Republican movements flow.
So
the question that must be asked again is why the Adams
leadership did not choose to go down this road. Perhaps,
if the army had been stood down and weapons dumped,
the loyalty and military discipline that Adams has
continuously traded upon to get his way within the
RM would no longer have been applicable. All those
Republican volunteers including many who had ceased
serving but still felt a loyalty to their command
structure, would have been released from military
discipline, loyalty to the serving leadership, etc.
Many of these men and women have long felt uneasy
about the direction the leadership has been going
in. Recognising Stormont is one thing, but serving
as Ministers in a northern Statelet administration,
maybe RUC committees in the future, visiting the White
House prior to the Iraq war, undenied rumours of weekends
at Chequers, the Stakeknife affair etc, for many is
more than a step too far. Once released from their
immediate obligations would there not have been a
rush of questions directed at the current leadership
from those volunteers that had been stood down, possibly
followed by the wider RM and its supporters?
If
so and the army had been stood down, the Adams leadership
would have had no-one to legitimately elbow former
comrades back into line. For this leadership the cat
may well have escaped from the bag. That being the
case, who knows what type of Socialist Republican
Movement might have blossomed? One thing we can be
certain of, it would not be in the image of the undemocratic,
conservative, top down leader orientated RM that Adams
now leads.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
