This was a letter penned by a reader (Ian
Eggleston-August 5th) recently praising Dr Coulter's
contributions to 'The Blanket'. Until now,
I would have echoed the letter writer's thoughts.
I will continue to support John Coulter's writing
in any forum.
Let
it be said at the beginning of this that I am not
an apologist or supporter of the current Sinn Fein
leadership and I am certainly not a fan of their
policies with regard to basically anything. My political
views are broadly nationalist and as an Irish nationalist
my aspirations echo those of those who use the term
Republican to describe themselves. I want to see
a united Ireland.
The
transparent and woefully demeaning spectacle of
the Hunger Strike rally in Belfast a few weeks ago
is the latest reason I have to be annoyed with Sinn
Fein. I have, for example, received confirmation
from the Antrim County Board of the GAA that the
name of Casement Park is actually not going to be
changed to An Pairc Nuremberg!
John
Coulter has taken umbrage with the appointment of
Martina Anderson as the Sinn Fein Ambassador to
Unionism. It is easy to see why this does not
sit well with people of John Coulter's persuasion.
When, events like the one in Casement Park are flung
in his face whilst simultaneously the hand of full
co-operation between the two traditions at a political
level and at other levels is put on an official
footing by Sinn Fein, it is easy to understand his
reaction.
Dr
Coulter's writings have caught my eye on dozens
of occasions. I believed that this was a man who
in the finest and truest principles of Protestantism,
was a free thinker, a dissenter! I thought here
was a man who has long held faith and strongly held
principles but is not afraid to think outside the
box. From his analysis of the current political
situation, such as it is, to a wide-ranging variety
of topical debates in a capable and understandable
manner I enjoyed and more than that took on board
some of his thinking. To me he represented a future
of tolerance and mutual respect. Coulter, or at
least his writing, came to symbolize if not embody
that most hackneyed and malodorous political phrase
of the 1990's, i.e. 'parity of esteem'. I thought
wrong.
In
November 2004 an article
appeared on 'The Blanket' bearing the introductory
legend, "Radical Unionist political commentator
Dr John Coulter maintains the only way the republican
movement can disband the Provisionals without causing
a major split is to form an Old Comrades' Association
similar to the Royal British Legion."
In
July this year came…"Tony Blair and
Bertie Ahern have moral duties to save DUP deputy
boss Peter Robinson from being politically mauled
by Paisleyism's religious hill-billies and Rednecks.
Throughout 2006, Robinson has become the Unionist
family's Great White Hope - the man who possessed
the wisdom, vision and courage to form a power-sharing
Executive with Sinn Fein before Northern Secretary
Peter Hain's 24 November deadline. London and Dublin
must face up to what everyone in the North already
knows - the DUP is irreparably split under the surface
despite the party's glossy spin and propaganda about
being unified."
When
taken in its entire context this type of conciliatory
delivery was sometimes presented in an almost jovial
manner. In May this year Coulter
wrote, "The Shinners can deliver a massive
confidence boost to the ailing peace process by
announcing they are formally cutting their links
with the Provos in much the same way the Ulster
Unionists have axed official links with the image-battered
Orange Order." That's fine and dandy then,
as simple as ABC. The sentiment, although drenched
in naivete, could not be lambasted for its simple
honesty, or its intentions to cement a non-violent
settlement in this state.
In
the last edition of 'The Blanket' however,
the good doctor seems to have lost his ecumenical
spirit. In an epistle entitled 'An
Open Letter to Martina Anderson' Coulter expands
large on his bemusement that the high-ranking Sinn
Feiner has been appointed as Sinn Fein's Ambassador
to Unionism.
The
move has been mooted as Sinn Fein opening an all-encompassing
engagement with Unionism, inside and outside the
political arena. The genuineness or otherwise of
the scheme has little to do with Coulters attack
on its figurehead, Martina Anderson. Coulter attributes
the move as a publicity stunt to entice Fianna Fail
into the belief that Sinn Fein will make acceptable
coalition bedfellows after next year's Irish general
election. This is simply unlikely.
The
acceptance, en masse, of the erstwhile P.IRA political
wing into the bosom of Leinster House, is more likely
to be as a result of favorable reports from the
IMC, or more likely again, the southern electorate
putting Sinn Fein in that position. Indicators to
date are that the last factor is entirely possible,
but there is many a slip between the heart and the
hand etching a mark on a ballot paper. The opening
of a focussed dialogue with Unionism as a Trojan
Horse ploy to achieve southern political domination
is as transparent as it is ridiculous. That Sinn
Fein are thinking, 'this is just mad enough to work',
belittles the scheme to a purely cynical exercise.
John Coulter may well be proven correct in this
respect, but I had credited him with enough intelligence
to let time and investigation become the ultimate
arbitrator with regard to this plan.
The
'Open Letter' descends into a catalogue of slaughter
in the in the 1970's and 1980's. The hurt expressed
in the IRA slayings are self-evident, it is real.
Dr Coulter describes the murders of one of his relatives
and two of his friends in that period and attributes
a remarkable back tracking attitude from the outstretched
hand that he had verbally painted in an impressive
number of articles.
That
the killings happened at all are as regrettable
as the day is long. I'm sure that there have been
plenty of long days and nights contemplating these
deaths. Yet, the fact is that in the few years I
have read his work, I can never recall these events
being mentioned before. If I am mistaken, I apologize.
The point I am making is basically why after imparting
tolerance and no shortage of sense in that period
has the mood changed? Is it the case when there
is a chance, only a chance mind you, that the theorizing
has to stop and real engagement with Fenians might
actually occur, the true colours are beginning to
emerge?
The
letter implores the following, "tell the Prods
the Provos have permanently disbanded and Sinn Fein
is a purely political organization like the now
defunct Irish Independence Party." I assume
the implication is that which is based largely on
wishful thinking. It is clear that John Coulter
believes that the only strength that Sinn Fein has
or had was lodged in the military campaign of the
IRA and that the political wing was merely a publicity
conduit for the justification of violence. His hope
therefore that Sinn Fein will now automatically
slip into electoral history and obscurity and irrelevance
like the IIP is so far off the mark for a political
analyst it is astonishing. Whether you agree with
them or not Sinn Fein will be around for a long
time.
Also,
the failure to recognize that the acceptance of
the Belfast Agreement in 1998 by Sinn Fein was probably
more to do with the recognition and shift to politics
as the primary outlet for Republicanism as it was
with negotiating a settlement with Britain is also
baffling for a journalist who operates at this level.
As
someone who has worked within the Unionist press
I read with interest the complete proposal from
Martina Anderson when it was published in full some
weeks ago in the 'Londonderry Sentinel'.
Having worked in their offices I was fully aware
that despite substantial political progress in the
north in the last decade there is an abject wariness
of dealing with Sinn Fein. This does not emanate
from the editor or indeed the reporters who work
there. It does however matter to an extent when
in the predominantly Unionist catchment area of
the 'Sentinel' readership there is notable nationalist
representation from both Sinn Fein and the SDLP.
Therefore despite the past tetchy relationship with
the paper and the Republican movement it was a conciliatory
gesture for Martina Anderson's proposals to be published.
To elucidate on the history of the strained relationship
between the paper and the Republican movement in
Derry may be of use.
Established
in 1829 the paper showed its editorial line immediately
by launching blistering attacks on Daniel O'Connell
as the campaign for Catholic Emancipation reached
its zenith. Based on the West Bank of the Foyle,
at one stage actually on the Walls of Derry, it
eventually found a home in the 1970's on the Strand
Road. It resided happily there, being published
every Thursday, and being bought, no matter what
anyone says now, by Catholic and Protestant alike.
The
paper undoubtedly retained an Unionist ethos while
reporting widely on events on both sides of the
community until at some point in the mid-1980's
the Provisionals in their 'wisdom' flattened the
office with a bomb. The owners and predominant readership
took this a 'slight' indication that their paper
would no longer be welcome on the city side of the
river and promptly relocated to the East Bank. As
time passed the views narrowed and the papers outlook
was transformed from a worthy cross community read
to a wholly Unionist affair. As the UUP were supplanted
in Derry by the DUP the paper again reflected a
more dogged Unionist line. Throughout this time
and to this day, the paper maintained a tradition
of employing Catholic born journalists. This was
entirely in support and trust of the concept that
reporters can be objective, or at least keep their
traps shut in the face of opposing propaganda. This
is something Dr Coulter has failed miserably to
do on this occasion.
Therefore
it could be contended that it was a courageous move
by the paper to print Ms Anderson's essay on the
development of firmer bonds with Unionism. To date
as far as I am aware, no Unionist or Loyalist representative
in the city, or any reader has responded negatively
to the article. These representatives too have experienced
the wrath of Republican violence. Of course it could
be that it is considered so far to be totally unworthy
of response as far as the Unionist community in
general is concerned. Yet it could also be the case
that a positive response is being formulated away
from the glare of publicity.
As
a Catholic, and a journalist who has written wholly
objectively for an Unionist publication, I have
dealt with most of the main Unionist figures at
work in the north-west political arena. I have to
say that almost exclusively I have found them to
be earnest and considerate representatives who fight
hard for all of their constituents. I am also all
too aware of the concept of Protestant alienation
in Derry City and the idea that the majority of
Protestant people believe that at many levels the
city council is operating discriminatory policies
against them. Perception and reality blur in this
state to a dangerous mixture. In Derry this is also
true. Recent spates of interface violence emerged
again in Derry this summer. Behind the scenes I
am aware that both Republican and Loyalist figures
busied themselves trying to halt the rot.
Martina
Anderson makes no effort to disguise her long-term
role as an Irish Republican. Charged in 1981 with
possession of a firearm and intent to cause an explosion
she went on the run, before being arrested in Glasgow
in 1985 and given a life sentence for conspiracy
to cause explosions in the UK. Incarceration saw
her inhabit some of the toughest jails that the
British penal system had to offer, including Durham
and Brixton. Her time was not wasted. Vigorous campaigns
at prison reform in these institutions invoked the
wrath of successive governors and saw her spend
a considerable time in 'punishment' blocks. It did
not however prevent her gaining a First Class Honours
Degree in Social Sciences.
Repatriated
to Maghaberry in 1994 and released under the terms
of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, she has worked
at Stormont for Sinn Fein and been elected to the
party's Ard Comhairle. In short she is not exactly
a lightweight and it is unlikely that she has been
ordered to construct a nefarious campaign to lull
Unionists into donning tricolours and skipping up
the Andersonstown Road hand in hand with Adams or
McGuinness.
Indeed
this work is backed up by Ms Anderson's work at
this year's Sinn Fein Ard Fheis. In proposing a
'Bill of Rights' she said: "I believe these
motions to be central to the whole course of the
republican struggle as it must evolve, and as it
has evolved over the past century. An Ireland of
equals has to be based on the premise that All of
us on this island, without regard to distinctions
of religion, race, gender, simply in virtue of the
fact that we are all human beings, have equal rights.
"That is our campaign, to engage with all the
people to enshrine the rights of all in a judiciable
Bill of Rights for all Ireland and a forum for participatory
governance where the current governments could not
dismiss the need to consult - Imagine all that.
These are the stepping stones to an Ireland of Equals."
In
his 'Open Letter' Dr Coulter says: "And don't
try to bluff and insult the Prod community, Ms Anderson,
by feeding Unionism some well-spun Sinn Fein crap
that suffering, injustice, and grief are exclusive
to republicanism."
I
don't think that this is the case at all. Well spun
it may be but I don't think in a political epoch
defined by spin, that this is a crime. On July 17,
2002 the IRA released a statement apologizing and
offering its condolences to families of all the
civilians who died as a result of its campaign of
violence. A report carried by the BBC said: "The
IRA used the term "non-combatants" in
the statement, to mean those who are not members
of any paramilitary organisation, members of the
police, Army or anyone connected with the security
forces. The group said there had been "fatalities
amongst combatants on all sides". We also acknowledge
the grief and pain of their relatives. The future
will not be found in denying collective failures
and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the
plight of those who have been hurt. That includes
all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and
non-combatants."
This
would seem to put pay to Coulter's contention that,
"Forgiveness for victims is not one-sided.
As well as a willingness to forgive, there must
be the willingness to be forgiven - and the latter
has never been shown by the republican movement."
Or
what about, "And so Ms Anderson, its time to
put your money where your mouth is. Tell me when
Unionism can expect the IRA's willingness to be
forgiven and its apology for the generation of genocide?
I await your response with interest."
Or
better still, "Protestant families need closure
on the death and maiming inflicted on their loved
ones. If, Ms Anderson, you want genuine Unionist
trust, you need to instill in republicanism a willingness
to be forgiven for the crimes the movement has committed
and to publicly apologise to Unionism for the hurt
and harm it has dished out over the years."
It
is a powerfully assured being indeed who can request
that people must acquiesce to an unlimited rate
to be subject to forgiveness. This would be acceptable
only if there was a solitary aggressor. The use
of the word conflict by its definition to describe
what happened here, shows that this was not the
case, as Dr Coulter knows very well.
It
is an even more powerful entity that speaks for
an entire population and demands that supplication
and repentance is a pre-requisite to acceptance
into society. Despite my original beliefs in moderate
Unionism as a positive entity in this sorry place
that we call home, is Dr Coulter a typical example
of this entity? That is, is he representative of
a brand of moderate Unionism that is superficially
sincere, when underneath beats a compulsion for
the "sackcloth and ashes" brand of Unionism?
I
would venture to suggest that the above is not the
case, at least I hope so. Acceptable only as one
off piece of ill-considered, but somewhat understandable
anger I would hope that Sinn Fein would respond
to his 'Open' epistle. However, if I were he I would
not be holding my breath. Dr Coulter's letter may
merit the lack of response it richly deserves. What
price is true faith in progress these days?
