Madam, - Dick Keane's call for "us nationalists" to forget about a united Ireland (September 29th) is plausibly dismissed by Martin Mansergh on the grounds that, since it "would require repudiation of the Good Friday Agreement. . . it would be indefensible to have brought about peace by offering that alternative, which has no guarantee of success and then to block it off" (October 8th). But is the agreement inviolable for that reason? Surely not.
Although Dr Mansergh contends that the agreement is a "peace settlement", that is not the case with Sinn Féin and the IRA. They see it merely as a stepping stone to a united Ireland. It is when that objective is achieved that they will recognise a peace settlement. They may also see the agreement as an answer to a long-standing and still existing challenge issued by Mr Gerry Adams, (page 169, Free Ireland: Towards a Lasting Peace) to those "who claim that there is an alternative to the IRA's armed struggle to prove that this is the case".
But there is a better answer than that which is provided by the present process; better because it respects the symbolism of our national flag and calls for a lasting peace settlement as of now. It would have nationalist/republican Ireland demonstrate its resolve to forgive and forget the past, and to cherish the Protestant unionist/loyalist "children of the nation" by arranging a re-definition of the consent principle of the agreement. This would make it absolutely clear that a united Ireland depends on the willing consent of an overwhelmingly majority of the Protestant unionist/loyalist people.
In other words, this consent would reflect the words of William Smith O'Brien who, in April 1848, dedicated the Tricolour as a sign that "the Protestants of the north and the Roman Catholics of the south will unite in demanding the legislative independence of their country". This consent would also reflect the message of Thomas Davis: "if you would liberate Ireland and keep it free you must have Protestant help".
Rather than strike our flag in the face of bigoted sectarianism we should learn its message of reconciliation as the means to freedom - and honour it if we are to have an immediate and lasting peace. - Yours, etc,
JAMES McGEEVER, Kingscourt, Co Cavan.
Madam, - Dick Keane's letters on a "united Ireland" are too superficial to be taken seriously. He accepts that we have "every right to demand a redrawing of the Border". However, this would involve Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh, South Armagh, South Down and West Belfast becoming part of the Republic, leaving Antrim, North Down, North Armagh and parts of Belfast in the "United Kingdom".
This unionist rump would not be viable. It would also leave out of the Republic the many republicans of Dr Martin Mansergh's tradition and many of the descendants of the United Irishmen, who were our first republicans.
From an economic viewpoint it would be unfair to exclude a substantial number of Irishmen and women from our successful Republic with an average per capita income of €39,000 a year and leave then in a failed entity with average per capita income of €29,000 a year.
Mr Keane should come into the 21st century. Like many of us he should bury the prejudices of the past and encourage our separated brethren to share in the development of the future. - Yours, etc,
CATHAL MAC GABHANN, Bearna, Gaillimh.