The Future of Northern Ireland

 In the 1993 film 'The Firm', a recently graduated law student, played by Tom Cruise, is seen going for job interviews in the opening scenes of the film. When he asks one firm what their offer is, they push a sealed envelope across the table, and say that he should not need to open it. They made him an offer he could not refuse!

The destiny, fate, and future, of Northern Ireland, is likewise hidden. Just like Schrodinger's cat, until the box is opened, you do not know if the cat is alive or dead.

In 2014, as Scotland headed towards it's referendum on the question of independence from the United Kingdom, it dawned on me, that I had not visited all four capitals of the UK. I was familiar with Edinburgh and London, but I had never visited Belfast or Cardiff, nor anywhere else in Northern Ireland or Wales for that matter either. So it was then, that in 2014, I engaged in my Capitals Tour of sentimental sightseeing before any possible constitutional changes took place. Doing so, with one day trip, and three weekend trips.

The idea of visiting Northern Ireland before this time, was not something that had really crossed my mind.

As a young boy, starting to be aware of the world through television, I saw widespread violence, nightly, on the TV. The army, the British Army, was on the streets, bombs were going off, murders were being committed. This was the reality that I was familiar with, and which continued over the next two to three decades.

I have no memory of the civil-rights campaign, only of the violence from the early seventies onwards. I remember seeing people being shot in the street by soldiers, and a priest holding a hanky, as he attempted to reach the fallen. These filmed scenes, and photos, were iconic, and although, in my memory, I saw them live, it is just as likely, that I saw them again in later years. So as a boy, I saw Bloody Sunday in the early seventies, as a young man, was aware of the Hunger Strikes of the early eighties, and then finally, in the nineties, saw war gradually change to peace.

By this time, I had become aware of Irish history and the interference from outside, since the time of the Normans. My own mother talked of how older generations would talk of the atrocities of Cromwell as if they had just happened. I learnt about the history of Ireland, it's union with Great Britain, it's struggle for independence, then the partition of Ireland.

It is this partition of Ireland that brings us up to the present day. For it is now, that we are marking a full century since the creation of Northern Ireland. 

The struggle for independence had been marked by the Easter Rising of 1916, then, after the First World War, by a political movement, supported by the majority, who resolved to rule themselves, and a military struggle to fight for that independence.

Whilst a majority wanted Irish independence, a minority did not. Led by Lord Carson, they resolved to remain British, even if they had to fight, and even fight the British Army, to do so.

Lord Carson, once said that the ideal size of a state, was one where you could saddle your horse, ride to the parliament, conduct your business, then be back home by the end of the day.

Northern Ireland became a state of a similar size. Those who wished to remain part of the UK, the Unionists, were strong in Ulster. However, they wished to carve out, and create, a Protestant state. Looking at the demographics and the practicalities, they realized they could only achieve their aims, by abandoning three of the Ulster counties, and basing their state on the remaining six.

This they did, from 1921, to the 1960s. Then in Northern Ireland, where Catholics were discriminated against, they followed the example of the civil-rights campaigns seen in the United States of America. The late 1960s, was a time of revolt around the world, be that in China or France.

The civil-rights campaign in Northern Ireland caused a reaction. Widespread disorder, with Catholics and Protestants being driven from their homes, and the British Army being sent in to keep the peace. In those early days, there were no real rules of engagement. Before very long, British soldiers and Irish Catholics were bitter enemies. What became known as 'The Troubles' was in reality, a low level civil war. Sides were decided by nationality and religion. Many were murdered, merely for their religion.

A brutal stalemate existed for the next two decades.

Then, in the 1990s, shortly after a particularly bloody series of murders, attempts to make peace started. A ceasefire was arranged, agreed by the paramiltary groups, when John Major was the British Prime-Minister. It broke down, and a rather half-hearted outbreak of violence broke out. It was more of a nuisance than anything, with fake bomb warnings to stop the Grand National horse race, and the like. In reality, the dispute was about, not the issue of war or peace, but rather the mechanics of that peace. If my memory serves me right, it was about having a referendum in Northern Ireland.

The new Government of Prime-Minister Tony Blair, soon got the peace-process back on track. It was a slow process, which ended in the Good Friday Agreement. An all-Ireland referendum was agreed. So too, putting weapons beyond use, early release of prisoners, even, 'comfort letters' from the PM, stating that certain persons would not be prosecuted.

Most important of all, was to be parity of aspirations. Northern Ireland was to be a home, where those who aspired to be British, and those who aspired to be Irish, would have equality. Their different desires would be respected.

It is this peace, which is the most important thing in Northern Ireland. It is maintaining this peace, that is the primary concern in Northern Ireland.

I was of course aware of this peace in Northern Ireland, however, so conditioned was I by the warfare of previous decades, that I gave very little serious thought to going to visit Northern Ireland, even though that peace was fairly well established, and was indeed the new norm and new paradigm. It still seemed like a faraway country to me, until that point in 2014, when I saw that it may become a foreign country. So it was then, that I embarked on my Capitals Tour. I spent a weekend in Belfast, taking in the sights. A visit to the Titanic Museum, even inspired me to later see the big blockbuster modern film.

Leaving Belfast to catch a ferry, my taxi-driver told me, that when his children were young, them even having friends visit to play from across the community divide, was something that was impossible. It was too dangerous. It was a matter of life and death. My driver told me things were better now. His children could do what they wanted in life. It was a better way to live.

The people of Northern Ireland have agreed to not kill each other, and keeping this peace is the most important thing in Northern Ireland.

So it was then, when the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, that maintaining that peace was a top priority. The Good Friday Agreement had to be maintained. To do so, required the present status quo to remain in place regarding the border. Or to be more precise, ignoring that the border existed.

I was in France for the 2016 UEFA football tournament. I had bought my tickets long before the UK PM David Cameron decided to stage the referendum in the middle of a football tournament. Despite this attempt to fix the referendum result, and the pathetic negotiations beforehand, the PM was defeated. I myself, determined to vote, had spent 300 Euros to buy plane tickets to make sure I voted. 

Nigel Farage had raised the issue, and made it one that had to be decided. However, it was Boris Johnson who won the campaign, and won the vote. Back in France, I watched the news. The PM had resigned. Boris was expected to stand for election. However, there was what seemed like a political assassination. No one died, but like some machiavellian renaissance plot, a political ally suddenly became an enemy. I was concerned, but watched Boris, though with some forboding. He gave a brilliant speech, before announcing he was not going to stand, and I shed a tear.

The new PM was Theresa May. I was impressed. She seemed resolute in her determination to deliver Brexit. However, as time went by, it became clearer and clearer, that the negotiations were going badly. Her negotiators were very bad at negotiating. It looked like they were negotiating away Brexit itself.

One crucial problem was Northern Ireland. All sides agreed that there should be no hard border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland. A customs border, would be a hard border, and thus would require to be policed, by the police, or border guards, or the army, or some mixture of the three. This would be intolerable, as it would create a border between north and south, thus a border cutting across Ireland, and thus also cutting across the aspiriations of those who supported a united Ireland. A border thus could bring back the violence.

The EU refused to negotiate or allow anything that would create different trading regimes on either side of the border. The demand from the EU, was that to avoid border guards, Northern Ireland must remain in the EU trading area. No UK proposal  to mitigate the problem was accepted by the EU.

For myself, over all this time, I have never seen the border as a big issue. If the aim is to avoid violence, then all the UK Government need do is not man the border. There is no need for Northern Ireland to be in the Single Market. No need to align for trading purposes. If the purpose is to avoid violence, then do not man the border. If the Northern Ireland border, is kept, but not guarded, and the peace is maintained, then don't police the border. If there is not alignment in trade, if a few farmers smuggle cattle and sheep across the border, so be it, but just leave the border open. Sure, some quick actions, like before, to demolish a few bridges, can be done if needed, as long as no troops are stationed at the border. Even illegal immigrants sneaking across the border is no biggy. Small numbers are not going to be noticed. The discreet use of drones could be used to track large numbers. 

THe PM had agreed to the EU schedule and timetable for negotiations, had agreed to their demands. One chief demand was a Northern Ireland Protocol that had to be agreed.

Eventually, the position of PM May collapsed. Boris Johnson was elected as the new PM. Boris has been accused of not being honest or trustworthy, especially regarding what he says, and the decisions he takes, and sticking by his words and decisions, and not reversing them. I believe, this is precisely why he is the best person to be PM at this time. He was probably the only person who could negotiate an agreement. 

The PM is not a stupid man. Shortly after Theresa May became PM, the USA voted in as their new President, a stupid, uneducated, narcissistic, sociopathic, meglomaniac, novice, who ended up exceeding most people's worst predictions, and being the biggest threat to democracy in the USA since the Civil War. PM May managed to tiptoe around him. Boris too, managed to tiptoe around him. By contrast, Boris is an educated man, who can sit down in conversation with Mary Beard, and who can recite the Iliad, from memory, in Ancient Greek. He has also spent many years in politics, including as an MP, and holding high office in the Cabinet, and running London as it's mayor.

Boris became PM in the Summer of 2019, but suffered from not having a majority. Indeed, the Remainer Parliament hamstrung him, and denied him the ability to negotiate a treaty, or even call an election. Finally, he got the election he wanted at the end of 2019, and telling the British people he wanted to get Brexit done, he won a resounding victory and majority.

Boris said he could get a quick deal. He had also gone to Northern Ireland and promised the Unionists that they would not be cut off from trading with Great Britain by any trading border running down the Irish Sea. Boris quickly negotiated a deal with the EU, and the UK left the EU shortly after.

Boris agreed the Northern Ireland Protocol. He has been accused of throwing Northern Ireland under the bus to get the UK out of the EU. He said there would be no border down the Irish Sea.

I believe, that Boris negotiated as he did, and agreed as he did, as this was the only way to get the agreement he got. It had to be done!

Now though, peace is threatened in Northern Ireland, by the sale of sausages. Nationality cannot be determined by the brand of sausages that you buy or eat. I eat Irish sausages myself. Having said that, there is a border down the Irish Sea, thus a customs border between different parts of the UK. There is much justified anger about this in Northern Ireland. Many think the situation intolerable.

What is important, most important, is maintaining the peace. A way must be found that deals with these problems. The peace cannot founder on a brand of sausages.

I mentioned earlier, that I did not see non-alignment of trading relations to require the UK Government to guard the border. With regard to sausages, a British sausage, made in a British factory, will be ordered by a British supermarket, loaded onto a British lorry, and then transported to that supermarket, and delivered to that supermarket. It will be counted and stored. Of course, an enterprising individual, could buy that same said sausage in Northern Ireland and drive it into the Republic of Ireland. One hot day a couple of years ago, walking through town, I passed a man trying to sell meat outside a pub. He offered, I declined. Years working in catering, have given me no interest in buying meat in the street off strangers. I think most sensible people would adopt a similar position.

The British Government should not put troops on the border to stop sausages crossing the border in either direction. Anyway, I do not think the UK Government is bothered about Irish sausages. If the EU is really bothered about British sausages, then sure they can man their border. That's up to them, and no concern of ours. I would think it unlikely that their border guards would be attacked, but even if they were, all they would have to do, is withdraw them. The idea that the Irish Republic, and the rest of the EU, want to wage war on Irish people on the border, in order to stop a purely hypothetical invasion by British sausages, is completely laughable. If the EU want to be that stupid, that is up to them. We will not be that stupid! We will not guard the border! We will keep the Good Friday Agreement, and we will keep the peace! 

My decision to write this piece, at this time, was prompted mostly by the announcement by the British Government, that there would be an amnesty for acts committed during the troubles. A trial of an old man who was once a young soldier has recently collapsed. Bloody Sunday was nearly half a century ago. I have no doubt, that soldiers shot dead innocent civilians, on Bloody Sunday, and at other times too. I also believe that there was collusion between elements of the British state and terrorists operating paramilitary death-squads.

I have spent a long time laying out past history for a purpose. A young British soldier, poorly trained for duty in Northern Ireland, was he really guilty of murder? Did he commit murder on his own initiative? Or under orders? What purpose does it serve, having more inquiries, bringing more people before courts? Rules of engagement changed over the years, of that there is no doubt. I am certain, that the 'Just War' course that I did in university, was far superior to anything taught to soldiers in the British Army decades ago.

PM Tony Blair agreed 'comfort letters', that persons would not be prosecuted, to deliver the peace. He did it because it had to be done to deliver the peace. There were many terrible events that took place during that war they called 'The Troubles'. One of the saddest stories I heard, was of the senior politician, with paramilitary links, on his knees begging a mother to give him her son for questioning and promising no harm would come to him. She never saw her son alive again. That politician was one of the main architects of the peace.

Peace was established to stop the killing. If the peace is kept, all those who died, will not have died for nothing. If their deaths, brought about the desire of peace, and brought the peace, then they save the lives of others.

For years, I have thought an amnesty was the correct position. It appears PM Johnson has also held this position, and wishes to implement it. I do not see, how dragging old men through courts, strengthens the peace process. Rather the opposite. Demanding justice for the dead now, seems merely to endanger the present peace. Anger and bitterness, merely perpetuates the divide. A denial of justice for the dead, serves the interests of the living, and the future. Living in the past serves no useful purpose.

An amnesty cannot be one-sided. It must cover everyone. In that way, society can move on. This amnesty is the best thing. Relatives may not think so, may want their justice, however, bringing all this back up, does it really help them?

For myself, dwelling on death and other painful memories, keeping them fresh in my mind, does not help any healing process. Rather, it hinders it. Not dwelling on bad fresh memories, helps the sharp pain to fade over time. That is not disloyalty to the dead. Indeed, in time, there can be better memories.

The PM proposes an amnesty, no doubt because he believes it is best to strengthen the peace. I think so too.

Maintaining the peace, is the most important thing.

Next year, there will be new elections to the Stormont Assembly. The most important thing will be to keep the peace and the easiest way to do that is by maintaining the status quo. The present constitutional setup is the status quo position. There is peace now. It is change that can threaten the peace.

It is now legitimate for Irish nationalists to aspire to Irish unity. That aspiration is accommodated within the present set up. There is even a mechanism for moving towards it. However, any actual move, would threaten the status quo. Whilst there is agreement, that a referendum is a mechanism to implement change, the actual use of a referendum would bring uncertainty into the situation. Even the staging of a referendum, even of itself, could plunge Northern Ireland back into violence.

How would a referendum be staged, and how would the decision be implemented?

Well first of all you have to have a question, but what would that question be?

We should accept that the fate of Northern Ireland is in the hands of it's people. That much has been decided by the Good Friday Agreement and the referendum that accompanied it. So any act of self-determination would be by the people of Northern Ireland, and solely by them, and not by anyone else.

It is always assumed that a referendum question would ask if the people of Northern Ireland wished to remain British or join the Irish Republic, but how would that decision be made? Would it be by a simple majority of all in Northern Ireland, or by county, or some other geographical division?

If a small majority voted for unity with the Irish Republic, but a large minority voted the other way to remain British, then we are back in the same territory as a century ago.

There are two possible scenarios which never seem to be discussed. Maybe it has never occurred to anyone.

I hinted above, of Northern Ireland being in a similar situation as a century ago. Logically, like then, Northern Ireland could be partitioned. That would probably suit the preference of most who voted. A look at the demographics, such as Wikipedia's entry for Northern Ireland on the internet, shows that the province is fairly evenly divided. Support for Irish nationalism is strongest in the west and south, whilst British sentiment is strongest in the north and east. Maps show a pretty clear division and it could be assumed that an easy division could be obtained by a referendum vote.

However, there are places like Belfast which have a mix of populations. Many would never be satisfied. We can easily imagine some town on some theoretical new border. The population of the town is mixed. The difference between  the majority position and the minority position is very small. Would the minority accept the majority position? perhaps they may think that their town should be divided by the river that flows through it, or by some other division.

We would be opening Pandora's box!

A referendum to partition Northern Ireland, would seem destined to cause an outbreak of violence, as people argued, and struggled, to have their bit of land, on their side of the border.

Any referendum to deal with Northern Ireland as a whole, would likely lead to the same result too.

Unless of course, after a century of life as Northern Ireland, the people there, considered themselves as more united as a people than as part of another people.

If people view themselves as more British, or more Irish, then maybe they will lean towards that identity.

However, Northern Ireland has been an entity for a hundred years. Certainly in more recent times, perhaps a stronger Northern Ireland identity has emerged. Perhaps that is now the dominant identity.

A logical argument could be made for a theoretical independent Northern Ireland state. It may not be everyone's first choice, but maybe it could be a decently popular second choice. It could be the historic compromise position.

I recall years ago, reading an argument for a nine-county Ulster with a balanced population, that would not have a dominant and dominating majority. Nowadays of course, we are almost in that position now with the present six-county Northern Ireland. The population is almost finely balanced between the two traditions.

Of course, whilst I view an independent Northern Ireland as a viable theoretical possibility, I can also see great problems with it. For most, it would probably always be a poor second choice. Worse, Irish Nationalists would merely view it as a temporary half-way house on the road to Irish unity, and would work to completing that journey. Worst of all, like all the other referendum proposals, it could lead to an outbeak of further violence.

This is what must be avoided!

Therefore, the safest option, to maintain the peace, is to accept that it is legitimate to aspire to a united Ireland, but that there is no change to the status quo, that actually takes Northern Ireland to that destination.

The status quo option, is that the destination is never reached!

The innocent young lawyer at the start of the film 'The Firm' is less innocent now. Things have happened that have opened his eyes. He had tried his best to escape from his troubles. Chased, bedraggled, he turns up to meet his client. His client is a Mafia Boss played by the actor Paul Sorvino. This Mafia Boss looks a wild man, barely in control of himself, his breathing is short, at any moment he looks like he will burst into action, brutal violent action, he looks as if he could grab his lawyer, the actor Tom Cruise, and pull him apart limb from limb. It is actually a most impressive performance by Sorvino who is concerned about Cruise divulging information.

The lawyer has an answer to the safeguarding and security issues, and makes the Mafia Boss an offer he cannot refuse, telling the Mafia Boss, that he the lawyer, was like "a ship carrying a cargo that will never reach any port."