Irish nationalism needs to re-imagine itself and its relations with others, suggests Dennis Kennedy
Does Declan O'Loan's intriguing letter of July 31st on the critical choices ahead for nationalist voters in Northern Ireland indicate the beginnings of a fundamental rethink within the SDLP?
The SDLP parted company three decades ago with those who best represented its social and democratic element - Fitt and Devlin - to remain a resolutely nationalist movement. In the competition for nationalist votes since then it has, over time, been soundly beaten by Sinn Féin, despite that party's open links with violence and widely presumed links with criminality.
Seven years ago Mark Durkan launched his "New Nationalism", claiming that the SDLP had radically changed the nature of nationalism. It was never clear in what way this differed from John Hume nationalism, or even Seán Lemass nationalism, and, facing growing competition from Sinn Féin, the SDLP continued to reassert its nationalist credentials.
Whatever the choice was, the voters in the nationalist community have opted for Sinn Féin.
By contrast, in the South the recent election was a major setback for Sinn Féin. MLA O'Loan sees this as voters in a mature or "normal" democracy ignoring nationalist rhetoric and voting instead on policies and competence. His argument is that the SDLP now has the chance, in a "normalising" Northern Ireland, to rebuild its electoral fortunes by reasserting its social democratic position.
He predicts that politics in an increasingly mature democratic context will focus on social and economic policies, not nationalist or unionist rhetoric. But is Northern Ireland moving towards that sort of political normality or maturity?
The system of obligatory coalition creating a forced marriage between extremes is far from normal. Some hope that the experience of shared government dealing with routine practical issues will, in time, divert politics away from the fundamental tribal divide. But the system also cements that divide, and every election is still going to be between nationalism and unionism, with the contest being fought within each community to select the strongest champion for that side. This is not normality; it is living with abnormality.
With smartly-suited Sinn Féin Ministers cheerfully sharing power with Paisley, supporting the police, and dispensing moderation and social concern on a daily basis, the SDLP seems to have nowhere to go. Similarly, the Ulster Unionist Party has yet to find any answer to the new genial DUP.
The SDLP's problem is how to challenge the abnormality. The only way to do that is to confront the fundamental reason for it - the continuing pre-eminence given by political nationalism to Irish reunification. In this regard, the SDLP presents itself, in A United Ireland and the Agreement, as more hardline even than Sinn Féin, saying that it cannot agree with Gerry Adams that "unionist assent and consent would be required" for unity - a simple majority of one in a Border poll would suffice, no matter how resolute unionist opposition to it.
O'Loan talks of the "modern nationalism" of the SDLP. That is arguably an oxymoron. Nationalism is a 19th century concept based on the myth that mankind falls naturally into homogenous "nations", each with a right to its own independence and territory. Irish nationalism has always been territorial.
But even if we regard nationalism as an anachronism, we cannot discount a sense of "national" identity as a reality in politics in Northern Ireland. As O'Loan acknowledges, the Belfast Agreement goes to considerable lengths to ensure respect for such identity and traditions within a Northern Ireland inside the United Kingdom. But the crucial question is whether the agreement does so, on matters such as culture and cross-Border relations, in order to facilitate the movement towards "normality" inside the present constitutional arrangement, or whether it does so in order to ease the path towards Irish unity.
At times O'Loan seems to believe the latter, in line with the SDLP's current policy. He says that the strong relationship between the British and Irish governments alters traditional approaches to the Border question; there will be more development of cross-Border and all-island approaches, he argues, and progress will be real. He writes that the change in unionism cannot be overstated - it has made its peace with nationalists and with the rest of the island, and he insists that the DUP "recognises the full implications" of this.
The DUP would argue that the real implication of its deal with nationalism is that Sinn Féin has accepted office in a devolved UK administration, thereby confirming the constitutional position rather than undermining it.
If the agreement is perceived as a potential facilitator for Irish unity, as Sinn Féin insists it is, then we can forget about "normality" or any progress towards it. The SDLP has a dilemma: does it continue to compete with Sinn Féin for votes by asserting its nationalist credentials and thereby blocking any path to the normalisation of politics, which O'Loan sees as the SDLP's best road to recovery?
Or does it take its courage in its hands and really redefine nationalism by seeking the fullest satisfaction of an Irish identity within the United Kingdom, in accordance with the wishes of a majority and in an increasingly "normal" Northern Ireland?
Across Europe, minorities have learned that it is more sensible and profitable to accept the vagaries of history than to waste energy, distort politics and divide communities by the pursuit of an unobtainable redrawing of the map.
• Dennis Kennedyis a member of the Cadogan Group, an independent Belfast-based forum for political discussion