Goodwill and political commitment will be essential elements in the search for an agreed and inclusive settlement in Ireland. Lateral thinking and common sense must also prevail. All of the political parties must be prepared to consider, in a flexible and creative manner, the ideas of others.

Ireland was partitioned in 1920 in the context of a significant IRA uprising and a British policy driven by the strategic military and economic imperatives of that period. The British government, while recognising that the IRA could not be defeated, nor the Irish people brought to accept British rule, nevertheless contrived to defend its selfish strategic, political and economic interests in Ireland by imposing partition through the threat of force. It is a matter of historical fact that not one Irish MP, unionist or nationalist, voted in favour of partition.

Sinn Fein has always argued for a United Ireland and stated that partition, by any democratic standards, has been inimical to the best interests of the people of Ireland. The Sinn Fein analysis has rested primarily on the democratic principle of national self-determination in Ireland, the denial of that right by successive British governments and the tragic record of discrimination, division, conflict and death that has resulted.

BRITAIN'S role as a world power has diminished to a remarkable degree since the 1920s and this, allied to the ending of the Cold War, has affected those historical strategic imperatives, which hitherto dictated the relationship between Britain and Ireland.

In recent years it has become possible for British cabinet ministers to disclaim any selfish strategic or economic interest in Ireland. This is most welcome, particularly if the present process of dialogue can be developed to the point where the British government also ends its political interest.

In Ireland, the policies of the European Union are increasingly impacting in an all-island context. Social and economic harmonisation has emphasised the impracticality of two systems of government on such a small island.

Two economic systems, two transportation systems, two health systems! We have two of everything, including the highest registers of unemployment and social deprivation!

Yet an apparently impervious mindset acts to deflect the intrinsic dynamic for change in all of this.

The twin disciplines of competition with other economies and the overwhelming desire to face a stable and democratic future must eventually compel the political parties in Ireland to address the inherent instability and inefficiency of the present constitutional arrangements.

Other factors also command attention as we approach the end of this most turbulent century.

The demographic trends, as reflected in the 1990 census figures, clearly point to increasing tension and instability as the unionist community contemplates losing ever more political control and power in the six counties.

THE next census, in little more than three years, will produce additional factual, statistical and demographic evidence that the tide of history is eroding the ability of unionist politicians to exercise a veto over political change in our society. Already four of the six counties (Fermanagh, Tyrone, Derry and Armagh) have actual and increasing nationalist majorities. The previously all-powerful Unionist Party has lost political control of many of the largest cities and towns in the North.

The insecurity and volatility of opinion within the unionist community and the obvious and growing confidence within the nationalist community are graphic testimony to these facts. The necessity for new thinking should be obvious to all.

But common ground does nevertheless exist. For example, which government, political party or leader would any longer deny that the former Stormont regime was undemocratic in its conception and its practices? Few, if any.

The concept of consent, topically described as a principle, was not an issue in those days.

Which government, political party or leader would defend the current status quo as the democratic model for our future? Not even Ian Paisley or Robert McCartney. Does this not indicate that there exists a potentially significant consensus across the full spectrum of political opinion in Ireland, on the political failures of the past, on current political realities and on the consequent need for change?

Political leaders and the political process must demonstrate there is an effective alternative to conflict. They must devise a constitutional and political framework through a democratic process of negotiation that will accommodate and manage change.

A crucially important question must be addressed in the course of the Stormont talks process. The question could be framed in the following manner: "Will there be a united Ireland?" All parties, whether nationalist/republican or unionist, and both governments, must contribute to resolving this question.

Of course, there are very many people, and not all of them from within the unionist community, who will argue that a united Ireland will never happen and that the only viable solution is a modern variation of partition with in-built human and democratic safeguards within the existing constitutional arrangements. We will listen to these points of view.

However, ask this question of any nationalist in any part of Ireland (and the diaspora) and they will answer: "Yes, I strongly believe that there will be a united Ireland."

Obviously, within the unionist community there are those who also believe this and thus, however reluctantly, share the view of an overwhelming majority of opinion on this island.

The debate on whether a united Ireland is currently on the political horizon is often characterised by disagreement about when and how this is likely to develop, not if it is going to happen.

The fear of change is a well-known and understandable reaction. It is especially so when cultural and religious identity is perceived to be at risk. But the central question of whether or not a united Ireland is going to emerge must be comprehensively answered. Only when that happens will it be possible to avoid the "zero sum" conundrum.

AN open discussion in Britain, as well as in Ireland, on the question "Will there be a United Ireland?" is an indispensable element in the current search for a long-term and democratic settlement. For the purpose of that debate, the issue of when and how a united Ireland might emerge should be addressed separately and subsequently.

This approach to the core political issue would create a non-threatening opportunity for all sections of society to participate in a democratic consideration of this crucial matter. It would thus be possible for all those who have an interest or opinion about this matter to assemble their definitive arguments, especially the clinical and scientific arguments, and thus identify and explore all the democratic possibilities.

Democratic opinion must seek to change British government policy from one of upholding the Union to one of ending the Union.

Nationalists and republicans must seek to convince unionists that a united Ireland is the desirable and inevitable outcome of global, European and national developments.

Unionists must seek to demonstrate that a united Ireland is an impossible dream and that continued partition is the long-term answer.

A resolution of this issue would set out the parameters of the task before the participants in the talks. A negotiated solution will be based on clear understandings of new constitutional options. Today's politicians can secure a long-term and stable democracy and avoid the consequences of either an imposed settlement or an exclusionist outcome based on simple majoritarianism.

The effective deadline of May 1998 is a realistic timetable to establish sufficient consensus on future democratic goals. Intensive negotiations based on such substantial common ground between all shades of political opinion will promote agreement on the means by which such change will be managed.

The challenge will be to build an agreement and constitutional framework that will address the long-term political needs of Freedom, Justice, Democracy, Equality and Peace.

Mitchell McLaughlin is national chairman of Sinn Fein