stronger than the resistance to it. In assessing the outcome of last week's deliberations, and our own positions, we need to explore whether this is a possibility. The IRA ceasefire
The background to the Agreement was the IRA cessation of August 1994. The republican objective was to genuinely explore the possibilities of a just settlement.
The IRA initiative was abused by those politicians resisting change and by securocrats who cannot accept the fact that the IRA is intact, strong and undefeatable Nor could they contemplate a resurgent nationalist community asserting its rights, because the existence of the northern state was founded, first, on the denial of the right of the Irish people to independence and, second, on the denial of fundamental civil, national and democratic rights to Irish nationalists in the North. Their obstructionist approach led to the breakdown of the first IRA cessation.
It should not be necessary to stress that these people are still in positions of power in the British establishment and still wor-
A new phase of struggle While recognising that last month's agreement between Britain and Ireland has "broken the stalemate," in the Irish conflict, Sinn Fein will only adopt a definitive position on the document when it reconvenes its Congress in several weeks. In his Presidential Address, Gerry Adams outlined the thinking of the Sinn Fein leadership.
"On April 10th, when these talks concluded in their last plenary session, I spelt out the Sinn Fein position. I made it clear that the presence of the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and the British Prime Minister had created a focus which broke the stalemate. I said that This focus could have brought even greater forward movement and in the months ahead it can deliver further
I outlined our view that British policy in Ireland has manifestly failed, that partition has failed, and that the days of unionist rule are gone forever. I made it clear that there can be no going back to the failed policies and structures of the past, to the domination of a one-party unionist state supported by the British government. ...]
It is not enough to read this document on its own, line by line or word by word. Parts of it are ambiguous and contradictory. It needs to be examined in the context of strategy and struggle. And in preparing for the next phase we need also to examine the positions and strategies of our opponents and enemies. 2 International Viewpoint #300
While our goals and principles must not change, our strategic objectives, strategies and tactics must be constantly reand rooted in objective
In the last 30 years the struggle so far has come through a series of phases from the civil rights days and the mass and popular uprising of the early seventies through periods of intense armed conflict and the prison struggles including the hunger strikes into electoralism and the
That struggle goes on but it could be moving once more into another defined phase because whatever else this document does, it has the potential to redefine the relationship between these islands, thus concluding one phase of our struggle and opening up another one. A transitional programme
If we are to learn the lessons of the last 30 years, if we are to have confidence in our own strength and in the achievability of our goals, then we must continue to build our political strength and while winning friends for our position, we must also confound our opponents.
We have argued that the movement from today's inequality, division and conflict must be transitional. We have argued that progress can be achieved through a rolling process which builds a bridge into the future. In fact, in a document of that name, I presented a case for transitional and other arrangements into a peaceful and democratic Ireland. It is my view that many of these ideas should underpin our strategy in the time ahead.
Such a transitional process could provide a pragmatic route to our ultimate goal but only if the dynamic for such change is king to a unionist and militarist agenda.
There is no big secret about republican strategy, just as there is no big secret about British government and unionist strategy. They want to maintain the union and we will always want to end it in order to push for our objective - Irish reunification and
The talks process has not settled centuries of British interference in Ireland Major issues remain unresolved. As Irish republicans we believe that Britain's involvement in our country has been disastrous for us and for them also.
We were bequeathed conflict and death, we were bequeathed division. Britain has never had any right to be in Ireland. Britain will never have any right
But the British government can play a positive role before leaving by trying to redress some of its wrongs and by helping to create the conditions for a peaceful transition to a just settlement. Unionists for a united Ireland
We knew from the outset that other parties had already subscribed to a unionist veto described euphemistically as 'consent. That veto led to partition and to great suffering by nationalists. It was a great historical wrong which allowed a national minority to veto progress by the Irish nation.
That veto, and the pandering to that veto, has fed unionist intransigence to this day. It did so at the talks. It continues to feed intransigence and to delay a just settlement. Significantly, that veto has also been the pretext for continued British involvement in Ireland.
Republicans seek agreement between the people of this island as a way of resolving this conflict. That means winning unionists, or at least a sufficient number of unionists, over to the goal of a United Ireland. Is that possible? Have we confi-
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
The Northern Irish Agreement
----- photo credits and running heads -----
-Steve Bell 1998-1094-9-4-98-
dence in our republican analysis, in our arguments and in our vision of the future? Of course, how quickly we can do that depends on nationalism and republicanism building on the limited political consensus which has marked recent events. Into the new phase of struggle
But consent has to be a two way street. We have not heard much about the principle of nationalist consent.
Nationalists have had to struggle long and hard for our rights and we republicans have been in the vanguard of that struggle and will remain in the vanguard of that struggle throughout the challenging period before us....
Much has been said about the Agreement. [...] On the one hand it upholds the unionist veto over the constitutional position of the north, and, on the other hand it reduces the British territorial claim [and] compels unionists to accept key and fundamental changes involving all-Ireland dimensions to everyday life.
So while the Agreement is not a settlement, it is a basis for advancement. It heralds a change in the status quo. And it could become a transitional stage towards reunification but only if all those who express an interest in that objective, especially the powerful and influential, move beyond rhetoric to build a real, dynamic for national democratic change.
But they must move beyond rhetoric. It was never and it will never be enough to say the nationalist nightmare has ended And we, who are in the vanguard of this struggle, those risen people throughout this island and abroad are the guarantors of that.
So Sinn Fein will subscribe to what we view as positive in the Agreement, to those aspects which contribute to moving us towards our overall objectives, and it is you, the activists, who with the leadership, shall decide on that.
Some of our critics will say: 'You can't do that! You have to buy into it, all or nothing!" But they are wrong. [....] We will not be caged in, psyched out, intimidated, cajoled, patronised or bought off. We have our eye on the prize. The prize of freedom. * contents
2 Ireland: A new phase of struggle
• Gerry Adams