IRA's worthless apology

Electronic Telegraph ^ | July 16, 2002 | Electronic Telegraph

[gcruse]

IRA's worthless apology
(Filed: 17/07/2002)

The IRA's apology for the deaths of "non-combatants" is a small, welcome step towards acknowledging that it inflicted the lion's share of casualties during Northern Ireland's Troubles. The Provisionals have expressed regrets for individual atrocities before, if never in so apparently sweeping a fashion.

But despite its expressed desire not to create a "hierarchy of victims", this pronouncement leaves many unanswered questions. Foremost is the issue of who was and who was not a "combatant". For instance, does the expression of contrition include contractors who did work for the security forces? What about the ordinary workers of those companies - also deemed "legitimate targets"? Where does it leave those census collectors - murdered at a time when the heavily Protestant demographic balance in the Province meant that the republicans had no interest in reminding the outside world that they were seeking to bomb a large majority into a united Ireland?

Indeed, since the republican movement now appears to accept the consent principle, by its participation at Stormont, it makes one wonder why it felt it had to kill soldiers and policemen. After all, they were doing nothing more than upholding the concept of consent. Indeed, the apology accidentally points up more clearly than ever the obscenity of the IRA's moral distinction between the security forces and its other victims.

The most startling aspect of the statement is its timing. Republicans know that, after the arrest of three republicans in Colombia, the break-in at the Belfast Special Branch headquarters and recent street disorders, there is a crisis of confidence in the "peace process". Even the British Government is beginning to wonder whether the republican movement is ready to make the full transition from a clandestine criminal conspiracy to a fully constitutional party.

In consequence, the Sinn Fein/IRA leadership knows that there is a serious prospect of the Government (perhaps with the support of Dublin and Washington) introducing legislation to expel them from the Northern Ireland Executive. This announcement is, therefore, the first shot in a campaign to avert such a calamity. It is a stroke that the Provisionals have pulled before, when the noose appeared to be tightening: in the run-up to the Hillsborough summit of 1999, the IRA suddenly established the whereabouts of nine of the "disappeared" (victims whom it had secretly buried).

Republicans know that the impact of the statement on the Unionist population will be minimal: Unionists don't believe the IRA's treacly, belated protestations. Nor, they must calculate, will it have much impact on a still-sceptical British mainland. The real target audience is nationalist Ireland, north and south of the border - which is more easily satisfied with minimalistic gestures and can thus be detached from the emerging inter-governmental consensus. Even in peace-making mode, the grotesque cynicism of the republican movement cannot fail to startle - and will fail to reconcile the communities because it was not made in good faith.

[Brian Allen]

The most startling aspect of the statement is its timing. [The ira knows] that after the arrest of three [Of its Murderers] in Colombia, the break-in at the Belfast Special Branch headquarters and recent street disorders, there is a crisis of confidence in the [So-called] "peace process".

Even the [Fascist, Neo-Axis partner, 'Turd-Way-Tony' Blair's gummint] is beginning to wonder whether [It, having cravenly surrendered to ira atrocities, can get away with maintaining the ridiculous pretense of an ira] ..... transition from clandestine criminal conspiracy to a "fully constitutional party."

[Alberta's Child]

Foremost is the issue of who was and who was not a "combatant".

Well, for one thing Pat Finucane was not a combatant. But that didn't keep the RUC from killing him (with the help of the British military, I might add).

[John Locke]

Well, for one thing Pat Finucane was not a combatant. But that didn't keep the RUC from killing him

Point of information. The only RUC member charged in connection with the death of Finucane, William Stobie, walked out of Belfast Crown Court a free man when the prosecution admitted they had no evidence to present in support of their charge.

Your claim is a damned lie, like most words that come from the mouths of the Bog Irish.

[Alberta's Child]

You really have a way of leaving out some key details, don't you? The case against William Stobie collapsed when the key prosecution witness (Neil Mulholland) suddenly came down with a serious "mental illness" that prevented him from testifying.

You should also have pointed out that Mr. Stobie is no longer able to make a case for his innocence, since he was conveniently murdered by members of the same Ulster Defence Association (UDA) that was responsible for Finucane's murder.

When the British government decides to release the results of their original 1989 inquiry, we'd probably have a better idea of the real story behind this case. Because they have refused to do so, I think anyone who is even mildly familiar with this story has a damn good reason to believe that they are covering something up.