Like
the vast majority of people, bar those who actually
robbed the Belfast branch of the Northern Bank,
I have no real idea who actually looted the bank's
vaults to the tune of £26 million. However,
I am sure I'm not alone in thinking SF’s response
to the raid lacks credibility. Simply to quote an
anonymous PIRA leader stating his organisation was
not responsible for the robbery at the northern
Bank is pretty thin meat. As to the word of Gerry
Adams, rightly or wrongly it is worthless on something
like this, for the simple fact that he publicly
denied IRA membership. Whilst one can well understand
his refusal to admit membership, to actually deny
it was to degrade whatever he says in the mind of
many —and not only those who oppose SF—
for it placed him in the position of acting like
a cute hoor.
There is little that happens in Belfast which does
not eventually reach the ears of PIRA intelligence.
Whilst no one expects them to act as felon setters,
if they had no hand in the bank robbery it is surprising
that they have not suggested an alternative culprit
for this robbery, beyond, that is, the usual securocrats'
conspiracy. Leaving this particular theft to one
side, many are beginning to believe SF is doing
enormous damage to itself by its refusal to check,
or even acknowledge, that sections of PIRA are engaging
in politically counter-productive criminal activity.
Whilst due to the historical nature of the six county
statelet foundations many nationalists are prepared
to turn a blind eye to this type of thing in the
north, as long as it does not impact detrimentally
on their own lives, a different attitude is taken
as far as the RoI is concerned. The majority of
Irish people, both north and south, now regard the
southern Irish Republic to be a legitimate State
in which the rule of law should prevail. If anyone
doubts this they only have to look back at the killing
of Garda McCabe by members of the PIRA and the response
it provoked.
Indeed, one of the reasons why SF has experienced
electoral growth in recent times in the southern
State is that when they first burst onto the political
scene there, they claimed to represent a more honest
and open type of politics than what had gone before,
i. e., Charlie Haughey’s FF, etc. Instead,
since the second ceasefire, a section of the PRM
has increasingly been engaged in criminal enterprises,
the modus operandi of which would be recognisable
to any US mafia gangster or criminal organisation
anywhere else in the world. In all crime of this
type there is linkage between politics, business,
police and violent criminal elements. Any electorate,
that allows a political party to rise to the top
of the greasy pole, that turns a blind eye to such
behaviour, is mortgaging its future at a very dodgy
bank indeed. If the leadership of SF truly wishes
to become a fully integrated participant in the
democratic process, then they owe it to their electorate
to cast this type of criminal activity into the
Republican equivalent of history's dustbin.
It is worth analysing just how the above situation
may have arisen, as it is clearly creating enormous
bitterness; and I don’t only mean in the usual
places. Discontent is smouldering beneath the surface
within sections of SF’s core communities on
both sides of the border. To understand this one
only had to see the willingness of some people to
post to the recent Dundalk blog phenomenon the names
of members of PIRA in the Dundalk area. Such behaviour
would have been unthinkable within that community
15 years ago. I do not doubt that many who are beginning
to feel discontented with the PRM themselves voted
for SF at the last elections and in most cases still
support the Party. However, by so doing they did
not vote for a criminal conspiracy. People like
Gerry Adams have written or spoken about the disastrous
descent into sectarianism which took place within
the PRM during the ceasefire of the mid 1970s. It
is ironic that what has taken place within the PRM
since the ceasefire of 1997 may well eventually
have far worse consequences and may possibly destroy
Irish Republicanism or at least the Provisional
version of it.
An organisation like PIRA, which was formed to fight
the British and drive them from the north east of
Ireland, simply cannot maintain a ceasefire for
any length of time intact without its leadership
finding viable ways to occupy its volunteers' time.
If they are unable to do this, then the only alternative
left to them is to stand the Army down, otherwise
the danger of it imploding into belligerent factions
or descending into criminality is very real. Under
the terms of the GFA militarily fighting the British
army was a no-no. So volunteers had to be found
work that somehow was linked to the national struggle.
Intelligence gathering was an option for some, who
carried out this type of work on the premise that
information was vital if the ceasefire was ever
called off. But this alone could not take up all
of the manpower slack. The PRM leadership was well
aware from the 1970s ceasefire the devil makes work
for idle hands. So many volunteers were put to work,
'fund-raising', which the leadership clearly felt
was an ideal way for some of the more able and daring
volunteers to spend their time usefully.
Gradually over time, PIRA Head Quarters Staff must
have been spending more and more of their energies
over seeing this type of stuff, as to it appears
did others at a more local level. Money laundering
and buying up legitimate businesses and properties,
plus the more tradition type of scams operated by
criminal gangs the world over all came under the
criteria of fund raising for the movement. One does
not need a crystal ball to know that over the past
six years or so, the turnover from these activities
has become considerable. Thus those volunteers engaged
in such work, whilst perhaps not out-rightly demanding
a larger cut for their endeavours, would be less
than human if they had not griped amongst themselves
about such things. As PIRA is such a tightly controlled
organisation, word of this inevitably got back to
the Army Council, who to keep all on side and to
keep those who might siphon off monies to a minimum,
probably agreed to those engaged in this type of
work receiving a larger cut than the average volunteer
would have received during war time. I suppose by
doing this, we could say the Army Council has followed
the example set by New Labour and F.F. whilst governing
their respective states, and thus the A/C privatised
part of the PIRA.
Things for a time must have seemed fine; SF’s
vote was increasing north and south, cash was rolling
in, feeding the ever-hungry political side of the
movement. The majority of volunteers were content
with being on ceasefire, as many of them were beginning
to attain a standard of living they could never
of imagined whilst fighting the Brits. Plus, as
an added bonus there was little real risk of arrest
or imprisonment. The spanner in the works however
turned out to be the very nationalist communities
from which the PRM first emerged. For those who
lived in these communities saw volunteers who had
lived amongst them all their lives as equals suddenly
having extensions built on their homes, outside
of which in the street stood a newish car. Kids
from well-known Republican families or their acquaintances
were forever knocking on their doors with knocked
off goods from the latest highjacking that had been
reported in the newspapers. Every pub had someone
who was close to this or that member of PRM selling
smuggled cigarettes or in rural areas fuel, etc.
As to most of the latter low-level crime, people
simply did not mind that much, as it allowed them
to buy what they needed at knock down prices. They
did though resent the new wealth that certain republicans
had attained and the more so when they saw SF politicians
denying all knowledge of the activities that allowed
them to come by it. But what they resented most
of all was the PRM leadership within their communities
and beyond expecting them to give them the same
support and loyalty as they had when PIRA were daily
fighting battles with the British army. People well
understood the reason for giving support to the
PRM back then, as they too had supported the war
to remove the British from the six counties and
had often found themselves on the wrong end of Tommy
Atkin's boot. But they see no reason why they should
give the same degree of loyalty to people whose
main aim now seems to be to enrich themselves and
then lie about it by masking this enrichment in
patriotism. I'm sure many sincere members of the
PRM will see this on my part as a harsh, insulting
and unfair judgement. So be it, but they should
ask themselves when their leadership blame the securocrats
for driving the media agenda to criminalise the
PRM membership, where the peg which allows sections
of the media to hang their hats on, originated.
