In
politics, for a political party to reach a watershed
is an unusual event, much predicted by media pundits,
or written about after the supposed event has taken
place. But at the time such a thing occurs, it more
often then not passes by without so much as a murmur,
only for it to be later recognised as a watershed
by a future generation of historians. However, the
robbery at the Belfast branch of the Northern Bank,
as far as the Provisional Republican Movement (PRM)
is concerned, is such an event. Whilst leading figures
in the PRM such as Messrs Adams, McGuinness and
McLaughlin have done their best to offset blame
from the PIRA onto the ever-resourceful 'securocrats,'
in the main they have made little headway in their
attempt to move the blame from the shoulders of
their own militia, and in the process have stirred
up a great deal of murky water. Whilst it will probably
make little difference to the PRM core constituency
in the north whether or not PIRA actually committed
the heist, the same cannot be said about the wider
electorate, north and south, which SF has carefully
cultivated of late, hoping it will bring them electoral
growth in the forthcoming elections on both sides
of the border. This group, due to the brouhaha in
the media over the robbery, may well now pause before
voting SF. This is especially true of communities
which have no history of republican struggle or
representation. Whether these individuals then go
on to cast their vote for SF will in my view depend
on the PIRA having been stood down between now and
when these elections take place.
Unlike
in the past when similar events have taken place
and SF has issued denials, the current negative
publicity has affected far more than those who normally
oppose the PRM. Many left political activists, environmentalists,
trade unionists and progressive minded members of
the media who in the past were prepared to give
SF the benefit of the doubt and indeed wished them
well, have reached the end of their rope with Mr
Adams and his immediate circle. They are beginning
to feel their trust has been used, if not abused,
and the SF leadership cadre has treated them as
useful idiots just once too often. Due to the sheer
hard work and personal sacrifice on the part of
many rank and file SF party activists, that party
had banked a great deal of good will in the consciousness
of the aforementioned group. Many now feel Mr Adams
and his colleagues have spent this recklessly and
their account is in the red by a considerable sum.
The only way that SF fortunes can be turned around
amongst this group is by SF's leadership rejecting
sleight of hand, top down, undemocratic politics,
and by bringing to an end the criminal acts and
illegal scams that PIRA are undoubtedly involved
in. And just as important for those who live in
the south, is recognition by SF that by entering
the Dail the PRM also signed up to respect the institutions
and the laws of the southern State.
But
it is more than just the Northern Bank Heist that
has brought these doubt and worries to the fore,
and it is not only people who are outside the Party
(SF) who are expressing them. The Adams leadership
to outsiders is increasingly resembling a Trotskyite
sect in the manner it oversees the party membership.
SF local party cumann are tightly controlled from
the centre; only those who give absolute loyalty
to the leadership or acquiesce by keeping their
thoughts to themselves gain a foothold on the greasy
pole. Such a system of party management is specifically
designed to stop alternative power bases emerging
and unwelcome guests joining the top table.*
SF activists are kept at a high level of activity,
often on doubtful endeavours which have little real
links to the struggle at hand. The centenary of
SF is an example of such blind activism. Somehow
over the last few weeks, Gerry Adams, whilst promoting
his party's centenary, has managed to equate the
politics of James Connolly and Arthur Griffith as
being part of the party's heritage, despite the
fact that their politics were diametrically opposed
to one another and James Connolly had never been
a member of SF. Griffith's political beliefs were
light years away from the republican socialism Connolly
advocated and, I might add, that which many rank
and file SF members of today adhere to. The purpose
of keeping Sinn Fein's membership at such a high
peak of activity is to give them little time to
think about current political events, read, study,
and chew the fat from Party Policies and strategy.
This low level of independent thought amongst many
of today's SF members is demonstrated when one argues
with them. At first they will remain polite, putting
forward their party's policies, quoting various
Ard Fheis resolutions or party positioning papers
to back up their arguments. However if you persist
on rejecting their points, for example by pointing
out it is all very well to have a resolution opposing
PPF, but it is little good if when SF Ministers
are in office they ignore it and implement PPF,
they then become angry and question your motives
with clear hints that you have a 'pro-British agenda',
if not something more sinister. Now if you live
outside of SF's thief-dom this is laughable, but
if you do not, this can be very threatening, as
it more than likely is intended to be.
In
many ways I no longer feel the question of who robbed
the Northern Bank is the major issue. For SF it
has moved beyond this. For what this robbery has
highlighted via the Press and TV is what exactly
the military wing of the PRM actually gets up to.
True, to quote a Belfast wag, even the dogs in the
street knew what PIRA were about. But many people
were able to push such thoughts to the back of their
minds, preferring the more sanitised version that
had brought about the ceasefire and maintained it.
Since the robbery this is a much more difficult
thing to do, as it has never been so starkly placed
before the electorate north and south. The fact
that even those sections of the media which has
been sympathetic to what they saw as Mr Adams' predicament
have been critical highlights the fact that many
members of the profession of journalism feel somewhat
embittered with the PRM and have decided the days
of giving SF what can only be described as a free
ride due to its participation in the peace process
are over. What has been portrayed in the media over
the past three weeks is far from the sepia portrait
of gallant freedom fighters that the PRM likes to
portray itself as. Instead an unsavoury picture
has been painted in which the PIRA's daily fare
is the type of work that would have made John Gotti
proud. Loan sharking, Tax/VAT scams, docks heists,
counterfeiting consumer goods, money laundering,
providing door security, kick backs and armed robbery.
Thus
a large and diverse group of public opinion has
been formed across the political spectrum which
believes that PRM has reached the end of the road
as a dual organisation. This includes former PIRA
volunteers, who feel even if no member of the PRM
were lining their own pockets whilst carrying out
the above mentioned criminal acts and all money's
were going into the PRM coffers, this would not
make a ha'pence of difference. For the simple fact
is the PIRA raison d'être was to remove the
British State's occupation of the six counties by
armed struggle. It was not set up to finance any
political party. And to continue these criminal
activities cannot but blacken the name of all those
who have fought and died under its banner during
the period 1969-97. Thus it is high time the current
leadership of SF honestly decided if it really believes
in the democratic process as practised by all the
other parties on the island of Ireland who recognise
the writ of the Dail and Stormont, both of which
Sinn Fein have signed up to do. If they do, then
they have no choice but to call the necessary army
authority and propose to it that PIRA is stood down.
If this were rejected then they (SF) would have
no alternative but to formally break from the PIRA.
If this happens there may be unpleasant consequences
for us all, but this continuous drip, drip of criminality
cannot but undermine the whole basis of our democracy
and whilst it continues any hope of moving towards
a more fair and equal society in either the Republic
of Ireland or the north of Ireland, let alone advance
the cause of reunification, is unrealistic.
