The leaders of the two biggest parties in the Dáil, Leo Varadkar and Micheál Martin, have done the State some service by rebuffing the ill-considered request by 1,000 luminaries who have written an open letter calling for the establishment of a citizens’ assembly to pave the way for a united Ireland.
Nothing could be more dangerous for both parts of Ireland in the unstable political atmosphere generated by Brexit than the emergence of a pan-nationalist front pressing for the realisation of the “first national aim”.
Ulster unionism is currently is a bad place thanks to the political miscalculations of the Democratic Unionist Party. Abandoned by their allies in the House of Commons, unionists are facing an uncertain future with trepidation. The last thing nationalists should be doing is attempting to exploit their anxieties. That is precisely what the latest campaign for a united Ireland is designed to do.
It would have a very different nature to that which many of us would like to see
Waving the red rag at a wounded unionist community may make political sense for Sinn Féin, who thrive on conflict and dissent, but it does not reflect the mood of mainstream opinion in the Republic. Thankfully that was evident in the Dáil earlier this week when the Taoiseach was pressed by Sinn Féin’s Martin Kenny and Labour leader Brendan Howlin to act on foot of the open letter.
Varadkar initially sought to side step the issue, but the Fianna Fáil leader came to his aid with an emphatic and clearly argued case as to why it was the wrong way to proceed in the current climate.
“The entire point of the Good Friday agreement was to stop an endless focus on a binary constitutional choice from destabilising society,” said Martin, who pointed out that the pathway was already there in the agreement for the evolution of politics in the North.
Emboldened by the Fianna Fáil leader’s approach Varadkar moved on from saying he would give “very careful and serious consideration” to the proposal from the 1,000.
No validity
Instead he pointed out the reality that the kind of citizens’ assembly being sought would have no validity unless unionists agreed to participate, and, of course, there is no prospect of that happening.
“It would then be a pan-nationalist assembly and not an assembly of all the citizens of Ireland. It would have a very different nature to that which many of us would like to see,” said the Taoiseach.
Between them Martin and Varadkar exposed the hollowness of the proposed assembly, with the Fianna Fáil leader in particular putting the spotlight on Sinn Féin for its failure to make politics work in the North. He also drew attention to the undemocratic way the party had operated in the suspended power-sharing executive.
The big difference between here and the UK is that the two main party leaders have refused to go down the Cameron route
One of the startling disclosures during the cash-for-ash inquiry was the fact that the Sinn Féin minister for finance in the North had to seek the authority of non-elected party officials Ted Howell and Pádraic Wilson before he could wind up the discredited scheme.
“It reinforces the fact that Sinn Féin is unfit to be in government established under Bunreacht na hÉireann because its own party demands take the place of engagement and persuasion,” said Martin.
Surely the whole point of the peace process was that an agreed Ireland, rather than the domination of one side by another, had replaced the traditional nationalist aspiration of united Ireland.
Power-sharing in the North, co-operation between North and South and a close relationship between the Republic and the UK are all part of that process. This, as the Taoiseach told the Dáil, is still the best model for our generation, rather than dividing people into opposing camps determined to force their constitutional claims on the other.
Tired old cliché
In recent decades Irish nationalism has moved beyond slogans like “England’s difficulty is Ireland’s opportunity” into an appreciation that co-operation rather than conflict is a far better route to an agreed Ireland. Attempting to take advantage of the Brexit confusion to pursue a united Ireland is little more than a reworking of that tired old cliché.
Appealing to outdated concepts of national identity is what has got the UK into its current pickle. What the whole Brexit process has shown is how dangerous it is for the political establishment to indulge such sentiments.
Nigel Farage was a marginal figure who caused occasional embarrassment to the Conservative Party until David Cameron decided to trump him by holding the referendum on continued EU membership.
That released the Little Englander genie out of the bottle. The result has been political havoc for our nearest neighbour, deep divisions in society and economic consequences that will be felt by the British people for decades to come.
The demand for a citizens’ assembly to pursue a united Ireland strategy is a mirror image of what happened in the UK. Old nationalist slogans are being reworked in an effort to mobilise public opinion to pressurise the Government into a back-to-the-future anti-partition campaign.
The big difference between here and the UK is that the two main party leaders have refused to go down the Cameron route. Martin in particular deserves commendation for not seeking party advantage, which is always the temptation for an opposition leader. Instead he has put the country’s interests first, just as he has done throughout the Brexit saga.