|
Since
I interviewed Martin Cunningham a number of weeks
ago, Sinn Fein have been fighting a rearguard action
on a range of fronts. Fionnuala O’Connor observed
that it ‘sounded riled.’ But true to form,
the party denies that it is under any pressure. Most
commentators, however, regard this as the obligatory
lie which over time has become so established a ritual,
that people would suspect the leadership had been
on a trip to Lourdes, if it were to suddenly speak
truthfully. Nor can much in the way of morale inducing
protein be extracted from the flabby succour offered
by the party faithful, its dutiful hacks and their
Pravda-type organs. The feedback they provide from
internal groupthink is merely an echo of what the
leadership thought to begin with. Besides, internal
attitudes and discourses at grassroots level scarcely
count within Provisional nationalism. Little of what
is said or thought there, outside the cabal of leaders,
will have the remotest impact on strategy. The hardening
in language from Washington, London and Dublin, not
to mention swathes of political pundits, indicates
that Provisional activists on the ground will be the
voices least listened to when the leadership has to
make hard and fast decisions. Ignoring the voices
of those at grassroots level is what leadership-led
means.
Over
the years procedure sometimes more than policy proved
a greater irritant to those at odds with the leadership;
strategic management rather than strategic direction.
And nowhere does this appear to be truer than in the
case of Martin Cunningham. His opposition to the party
hierarchy, while certainly not void of ideological
substance, is replete with accusations of organisational
mismanagement. Curious to find out if his experience
mirrored my own I probed him on the main difference
between the Sinn Fein he joined and the party of today?
Dictatorship,
just dictatorship. Total control. Total censorship.
Loss of contact with the party roots. The leadership
is inebriated with its own success. In its bid to
top the poll and overcome the SDLP it has in fact
become the SDLP. When I read Eamonn McCann recently
saying Sinn Fein was now a unionist party I felt
that had I read this a year ago it would have seemed
like blasphemy. But now it is true. Anybody who
disagrees with the party is sent on their way –
quite a few republicans have gone and what have
they been replaced with? It is not a democratic
party.
I
put it to him that some observers would see his stance
as a failure to adapt to modernisation. Sinn Fein
inhabit a new political environment; neither personnel
nor skills suited to the party a number of years ago
transfer easily to service the needs of the party
today. Like other parties, had the leadership not
to make a difficult choice between holding onto its
older members or scouting for new activists that would
better allow it to respond to the imperatives of an
intensely competitive political field? Bobby Charlton
was a gifted goal scorer in his day, but where would
Manchester United be in today’s world if he were
still their centre forward? And what after all is
the problem with prioritising women candidates –
why should Catriona Ruane not be given preference
over others if she is capable and up to the job?
He
responded to this without the slightest guff. What
struck me most was that for a Sinn Fein public figure
he, quite unlike his leaders, answered directly and
did not go off on some ridiculous tangent. He immediately
rejected my suggestion that new blood was causing
bad blood:
The
Comhairle Ceanntair in South Down was actually a
dictatorship run by a particular family. The leadership
seemed happy to let it get on with whatever it was
doing because it didn’t pose any problems to
it. Aiden Carlin, who was one of our younger members,
was at one point physically manhandled by the most
prominent member of this family and pinned up against
the wall and told that he must show respect. After
their influence was curbed and I was selected, the
party took off in a serious way. Our overall health
had never been better. We were actually discussing
politics instead of nonsense. There was a change
in internal party culture. Now the youngest person
through the door had his or her ideas listened to
with the same respect as those who felt they should
have a privileged position because of seniority
gained through longest serving membership.
He
stressed that there was no opposition to new members
which could have annoyed the leadership. It was happy
enough to hold onto an old guard in South Down. ‘Since
I opposed that element there has been a complete turnaround
in attitude towards me. I am public enemy number one
in the constituency.’
Having
dealt with the question of new members, he went on
to rebut any implication that he was an obstacle to
female candidates coming through, and pointed to his
willingness to set aside his own plans and pound the
streets to get Bairbre de Brun elected. The thrust
of his contention was simply that while the leadership
can demand that local constituencies avoid an all-male
ticket, the choice of who the female candidate should
be was a democratic matter for the constituency to
decide. Representatives are not representative if
they are appointed rather than elected.
I
pressed him to put more meat on the skeletal sketch
of dictatorship he had presented.
Well,
the county was split and divided and I now live
in the occupied part – the bit taken in under
the wing of South Armagh. It now runs the party
from Drogheda in Louth right down to Portaferry.
It is run like a dictatorship. An unelected committee
imposes its will on the constituency. We are told
who will be councillors. Local constituencies are
not allowed to choose their own councillors. I almost
feel a fear amongst the councillors to express an
opinion.
Such
comments bring to mind criticism directed against
recent elections in Iran: ‘these are not elections,
they are appointments.’
I
suggested that South Armagh was clearly doing this
in the interests of the Adams leadership. He responded
by saying that at one point he felt that South Armagh
was doing this to push Adams aside and build up its
own power base.
But
was this not all part of the overall game plan? Ultimately,
Adams had taken a horse from South Armagh and gave
it a saddle in return, and now the area was trying
to make the best of the con job he had inflicted on
them. For an area that had waged war so brilliantly
and professionally, it must be hard to concede that
for their efforts the leadership only won them what
John Hume had – and he never had to lie all night
in a wet field on the end of a mine.
Whatever
the reason I am deeply concerned that people from
outside the constituency have take it upon themselves
to partition the county and impose their will upon
the local party structures.
There is an elitist attitude that I didn’t
see before within the leadership. I used to think
that McGuinness and Adams didn’t know what
was going on behind them. I though it may have been
the result of people in middle leadership pushing
it in their own interests and trying to take control
of the party while the leadership was too busy negotiating
with Tony Blair. Maybe it was naiveté on
my part. I now hear other people saying that the
leadership is in total control of the party and
that middle leadership only carry out what the leadership
tells them to do. The leadership seem to want to
put people in who are not capable of any thought.
In one case in Drogheda they replaced one good republican
councillor with somebody else who didn’t know
the difference between the cenotaph and the republican
plot.
I
asked him if in his view there were fascistic tendencies,
not fascism in its pure sense but fascistic strains?
There
is definitely an element of that. I have asked myself
if it is run more along Baath party lines than republican
lines. They seem to have got worse this year and
more so since they have become the largest nationalist
party. They seem to think that the party can get
anybody elected upon a Sinn Fein ticket. But this
is the rock that the SDLP perished on. They put
up candidates who didn’t do any work. The people
that they are putting in are turning Sinn Fein into
a Muppet party. Somebody said to me once ‘what
is the difference between a Sinn Fein member and
a shopping trolley?’ When I gave up they told
me a shopping trolley has a mind of its own.
Overall,
he seemed philosophical about the type of criticism
that would come his way from those deeply unhappy
that he had spoken out. ‘I saw it happen to John
Kelly and the spin put on it that he is miffed because
he wasn’t selected.’ I observed that they
do this to everybody that falls foul of them. Their
first instinct is not to engage with the argument
but to dig around for something nasty to say about
their critics. It is a time honoured smear tactic
within republicanism. At the formation of the Provisionals
the Sticks threw wild allegations about, and when
the IRSP formed Goulding’s men managed to surpass
their own rapid anti-Provisional invective, launching
into venomous diatribes. It is just in the nature.
None more vindictive than those who turn - they perpetually
feel the need to douse with vitriol anything that
reminds them of what they used to be themselves.
Does
he take hope from what John Kelly has to say –
does it show that people are no longer prepared to
bow down and be bullied by an increasingly Stalinistic
leadership?
Well,
John Kelly has given hope. I am certainly prepared
to speak out against it. I am finished with the
party. Maybe this will be a wake up call for the
party. It is difficult for me. I had that much respect
for McGuinness and Adams. It is like a Jekyll and
Hyde. It is as if they have taken some funny pills
and have changed overnight. Maybe they were always
just like this.
Is
there any means by which those who stay in the party
can merely democratise it without even going as far
a to radicalise it - a democratised republicanism
would be immeasurably better than what exists now?
It
would but it is not going to happen. I tried to.
We stood firm in our cummann, refused to bow down;
they tried to impose their dictatorship through
divide and conquer. They have learned well from
the Brits – they have divided the county up.
I
put it to him that Sinn Fein councillor Eoin O Broin,
arguably the most astute and radical politician in
North Belfast, maybe the only one, claimed that the
party was in fact very democratic and allowed a lot
of debate. On occasion O’Broin had gone to print
to make this very point, and he seems to have no difficulty
in debating the issues with the party’s republican
critics. It is hoped by many that O Broin and those
of like mind will be able to democratise the party
in the face of stringent opposition from the old guard.
Cunningham’s response was simple – ‘if
democracy exists, I have never seen it.’
Sinn
Fein instinctively decided to initiate disciplinary
charges against Martin Cunningham. He resigned rather
than go through the charade of feeding the self-importance
of those who would ‘try’ him. He dismissed
the charges, one of which refers to unauthorised contact
with the media, as a set-up. ‘There were more
charges brought against me than Saddam Hussein. Apparently
I'm not supposed to get an article in the paper about
potholes.’ He was further accused with threatening
public resignation from the party during November’s
Assembly election campaign ‘in an effort to blackmail
or coerce Sinn Fein.’ He thought ‘this was
a bit rich coming from them.’
In
many ways the experience of Martin Cunningham typifies
the nature of Sinn Fein. Few expect the party to become
radical. But even for it to become social democratic
it would need to dispense with its dictatorial military
leaders. So imbued with the habits of managing a military
machine it was inconceivable to them that a political
party should be run any differently. They appear instinctively
incapable of relinquishing the power and dominance
such control gives them. Sinn Fein has a role to play
in Ireland North and South. Its martial politicians
should clear off and let the party get on with it.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
