Collusion is no illusion !!

by tom Tue Jul 26, 2005 16:04

How do you explain the differences between the UVF and LVF in their present feud? I’m from down south and have no direct knowledge about what’s happening in Belfast’s loyalist areas ; but the two factions certainly don’t seem to be on the same side from what I can see. Republicans I speak to dismiss it all as a fight between rival drug gangs or rival gangs of police informers. Given their records of collusion ,given the carnage that both these groups have inflicted on the north's Catholic community over the years it’s understandable .
But , at the same time, when David Ervine suggests that the LVF was “created by the state” and is being controlled by British intelligence services ,doesn’t that resonate with what republicans have been saying over the years ? see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4709937.stm

Furthermore , when Ervine says the UVF sees that its role now is to “defeat the LVF” doesn’t that imply that the UVF might see itself ,subjectively at least, in conflict with the British state?
I would agree with you about the essential nature of all pro-British paramilitary groups – they were all set up to defend the British Empire after all , but , isn’t there something else going on here as well ?

by By Any Means Necessary Tue Jul 26, 2005 16:28

When the LVF were formed by Billy Wright, they were the first to accuse the Mid-Ulster UVF of being run by the British security forces.

I think that this is both a turf war, which the LVF are going to lose, as the two largest pro-unionist paramilitary groups ( UDA & UVF ) have ganged up together ( despite their own history of feuding ).

The use of gangs by the British to stifle nationalist aspirations has a long history in the British empire.

The use of "loyal" criminals has a long history in the six counties, which is largely ignored by a pro-brit press.

The PSNI has happily allowed drug dealing unionist paramilitaries the freedom to build their networks. The "respectable" unionist population has also allowed criminality to exist within their communities, while asking for the "blood" of rebels and republicans.

The treatment of loyal criminals by the police, the handing of bail sentences of parole and the length of sentencing by the courts, contrasts significantly to the treatment of republican linked "offenders".

by Barry Tue Jul 26, 2005 17:25

Both the UVF and the LVF are controlled by the crown forces , as is the UDA . All are up to their necks in drug dealing and gangsterism . Its little more than a turf war . The recent loyalist feuds were not driven by any ideological differences but by the emergence of egos . Both Billy Wright and Johnny Adairs inflated egos could not be contained within the confines of the GFA . Both had been built up by the media to be loyalist supersoldiers and were daft enough to believe their own propaganda . It was only when both tried to assert their own control , rather than do what British intelligence told them that they went behind bars . They believed in their own myth , rather than the reality of what would happen once HMs spooks removed the guiding hand from their career .

However I find it a bit odd that the shinners are highlighting collusion in this form . In October 2000 in Ballymurphy 100s of their members took to the streets after they murdered Joseph OConnor . Their rentamobs placed pickets on the homes of Anthony McIntyre and Tommy Gorman as the crown forces stood idly by . Joseh OConnors widow and bereaved mother were also intimidated by Sinn Feins rentamob . Mackers and his 6 months pregnant partner were driven from their home . Many commentators at that time pointed out that Joe OConnors murder took place blatantly in accordance with state interests . Neither the Catholic Church , the nationalist politicians and media criticised SAinn Fein for this in any way shape or form . Nor did the RUC make any arrests or any attempt to prevent it . That is collusion without a doubt .

http://members.freespeech.org/irishpows/NEWS/GFA_ENFORCERS/writer_forced_out_mcintyretwomey.htm

http://rwg.phoblacht.net/2support.html

Honestly , its a bit mad for a party whose leadership is gagging to be part and parcel of the administration of British rule in Ireland to be complaining about collusion with the British .

by By Any Means Necessary Tue Jul 26, 2005 17:43

Is it the British state and their allies that are the barrier to unity...or the SF party ?

Like it or not on this island SF are the biggest political party with unity as the driving force to its manifesto.

RSF's rhetoric sound excellent on paper, they however have no firm base in working class communities, who need political leadership.

It also galls me that the very individuals who were pow's and led the way in the war against the brutal occupation are now being attacked by former allies.

Intent to withdrawal is the aim, how do you get this without negotiation ?

No wannabe taunts or £hinn $ein rhethoric, I just want you to give us an altenative to the democratic path which was once denied to the six county nat / rep population and now seems to be in reach.

The war got us to the negotiation table, do you expect us to stop now ?

by nemo Tue Jul 26, 2005 18:47

"working class communities, who need political leadership."

Like a fart in a spacesuit

by Barry Wed Jul 27, 2005 03:01

Firstly Any Means necessary , as regards your point about RSF rhetoric may I politely and comradely suggest you take that up with RSF as its nothing to do with me .

OK ANM , you wish to address the greatest barrier to Irish unity . Obviously this is the British states assertion that the Irish people are not a sovereign people and Britains constant and core demand that we Irish , north and south , practice a form of politics which recognises this . Politics based upon the pre acceptance of any form of legitimacy given to the partition of Ireland is simply the acceptance of British politics here .The British state demands that we Irish people practice British politics in our own country .

By accepting and supporting the GFA all the nationalist parties , including Sinn Fein unfortunately acquiesce to this demand whether we like it or not . The GFA is clearly based upon the premise that partition is legitimate . Anyone who supports or accepts the GFA supports or accepts partition whether they like it or not . The GFA is British politics in Ireland and Britains vision of all our futures . It is by any definition a barrier to Irish unity . It is a barrier to the exercise of national sovereignty by the Irish people .

That is all the Sinn Fein leadership brought back from the negotiating table . Francie Molloy made it very clear in 1999 that Sinn Fein had accepted both partition and the Unionist veto . The Sinn Fein leadership , whether you or I like it or not have accepted the legitimacy of partition and British politics in Ireland . While their manifesto certainly calls for unity , and the vast majority of Sinn Fein members certainly wish to see it their manifestos position and their active support for the GFA is totally contradictory .

The Sinn Fein leadership unfortunately went to a negotiating table with the British state and negotiated away Irish republicanism . As soon as they accepted the legitimacy of partition they accepted the primacy of British politics in Ireland over the primacy of Irish sovereignty and the right of us as a people to determine our own future free from outside interference . Irish Sovereignty is non negotiable . Either we have the right to determine our own future free from foreign interference or we dont , there is no grey area to this whatsoever .

If you disagree with this position Id appreciate it if you would explain what the barrier to Irish sovereignty is and how you believe it can be overcome .

Thanks also for this opportunity to engage in rational and meaningful debate .

by Fitz Wed Jul 27, 2005 03:16

By Any Means, you say "The war got us to the negotiation table, do you expect us to stop now?"
What was the war about? A slightly more equitable "Northern Ireland"? What has been negotiated? The acceptance of partition, seats in Stormont (and eventually Westminster), and recognition of the Unionist veto? The GFA is an even worse deal than Sunningdale, which could have been accepted decades ago, back before alot of deaths, and back when Gerry Adams was firmly against it.
I say, yes. Stop supporting the GFA now. Support the Éire Nua peace plan.

by By Any Means Necessary Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:49

In the end I have no arguement with Barry's rationale.

However the reaction of the unionist minority to the ceasefire, their assistance in trying to get capitulation from the IRA and their compliance with a political smear campaign against the party and its members (Stormont, Castlereagh, ......ect ), while SF was engaged in an all Ireland political campaign..shows how strong this political path is.

In many ways the GFA was good for republican communities in the occupied six counties as the pow's released gave us back activists who were committed to the communities they had fought to defend..( the political leadership i was talking about ...nemo..), it also gave unionists the opportunity to show their true colours without hiding behind a law and order debate..

Since the GFA unionism has split and some sections hate their ideological former allies more than the "pan-nationalist front"

I believe in republican socialist unity and that leadership is there to lead. the vote was taken with consultation of the party membership and we moved on...even though some of us voted against the line of the leadership...

.the current policy of "enterism" into the stormont arrangement has moved things on, it is another avenue of struggle.

I do support the idea of Nua Eire as a framework for people's govenment in Ulster with local councillors being the most important representatives of communities in parish / constituencies assemblys..the grassroots approach to government as opposed to the trickle down " english democratic model"

Comrades I do also believe that the majority of people living on this island have been duped into believing that the structures and political arrangements that were given to us by the brits and their dublin allies are the best we can get....which we all know is bollixs..
...
.again a socialist 32 county republic, independence and republican solidarity ...by any means necessary...

by eeekkkkk Wed Jul 27, 2005 16:26

Anyone on thread want to inform us who have heard this mentioned lots of times on here. What was it? Is it on Web? When was it? Who came up with it? etc.

by By Any Means Necessary Wed Jul 27, 2005 16:36

A blue print for a federal state, based on four regional assemblies, with administrative links to the Dail...

Orginally put to the SF membership in the 1970's but its roots go back to the 1930's and I think that it has a republican / socialist influence from the county Tyrone.

I have seen a few pamphlets from the 70's, it is a good model for progress.

by eeekkkkk Wed Jul 27, 2005 16:38

Information wants to be free.

by Barry Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:10

Eire Nua was a policy document devised by Sinn Fein in the early 1970s . Its chief proponents were the late Daithi OConaill ( a Corkman) and Ruairi OBradaigh , among others . Its roots lay in the belief that a mere extension of the 26 county state over the entire island wasnt workable and indeed held very little out to the north easts protestant population who feared being swamped in a catholic state . Also the 26 co state had failed to deliver a just or workable system of government for people south of the border as well . It envisaged four federal provincial parliaments to conduct the day to day affairs of each region , Ulster , Munster Leinster and Connacht as well as a national parliament concerned primarily with defence , taxation and the protection of citizens rights under a new constitution . It also envisaged the development of a new Irish administrative capital in the midlands in an attempt to decentralise the machinery of government . Basically the intent behind Eire Nua was a wish to create a completely new political beginning in Ireland , North and South by devolving as much power as possible down to the level of local communities . It could be argued there were influences of the revolutionary writer Franz Fanon within the document with its emphasis on creating an entirely new political system geared towards the needs of the native people as opposed to a formerly colonised people simply adopting the old political machinery of their oppressors , which obviously would lead to very little political change in real terms .

Eire Nua was even discussed by various strands within loyalism and unionism and the general conesnsus among them was that in the event of a British withdrawal , which appeared likely at that time , they would regard it as a workable and fair settlement . It was also discussed with protestant Church leaders by the Sinn Fein leadership during the Feakle talks (that the special branch smashed into and disrupted) .

Unfortunately the man most opposed to Eire Nua was Gerry Adams who seemed to have a hatred of it bordering on the pathological ( Ed Moloneys "Secret History of Sinn Fein " goes into that in detail) . Upon his being elected President of Sinn Fein in 1983 he had it dropped unceremoniously as a policy document on the grounds it was a "sop to Unionism" . Amazingly this man would sit in Stormont in the morning .

When Ruairi OBradaigh and Daithi OConaill formed RSF in 1986 they once again revived the Eire Nua ideas and came up with a further revised edition to the document ( which placed even more emphasis on political power being strengthened at street and community level), along with a document called "Saol Nua" ( a new way of life) which was concerned with economic and cultural development , green issues etc . Both documents are official RSF policy today .

Although not a member of RSF I fully support Eire Nua as a well thought out and imaginative approach as to how Ireland could be run in the interests of its people and actually by its people . Basically the essence of Eire Nua is power to the people , not to the party or the state .

The Eire Nua and Saol Nua documents can be found here . Worth a read . I think even Eammon McCann was complimentary about them .

http://www.rsf.ie/

by tom Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:11

Eira Nua is still the RSF plan for a federal united Ireland . I think you should be able to check it out at their website.

by seedot Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:33

Eire Nua has often struck me as a v. decentralised, almost grassrots proposal - which of course could explain Adams dislike.

Of course it still uses things like 'parishes' as its lowest level of organisation but in many ways it has struck me that not only could it provide common ground between left wing unionist and republicans, but also between republicans and libertarian and other socialists.

by Barry Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:47

well in rural areas the communities themselves are built around parishes . I agree with seedot that this document has a lot of potential . Hopefully more people will get a chance to study it because of this thread . Its very thought provoking and intelligent .

Id just like to say to people - Imagine actually living in an Ireland run along these principles . What would our quality of life actually be like . Why cant we ?

by Patrick Wed Jul 27, 2005 22:11

THE ORIGIN OF ÉIRE NUA

In the mid-sixties Daithi O'Conaill, the author of Eire Nua, was involved with a very successful local co-operative venture in Co. Donegal. The co-operative was located in a remote, economically depressed and neglected area, plagued by emigration and unemployment. Working with Fr. McDyer, the founder of the co-operative concept, Daithi realized that local people when given the opportunity and direction could manage and improve the local economy, stem the flow of emigration and improve the quality of their own lives.

During his involvement with the venture Daithi also realized that the physical remoteness of the local people from the center of power in Dublin was directly related to the neglect and hardship suffered by them. This condition was further exacerbated by the psychological barrier created by their forced separation from their neighbors in the six counties of Ulster occupied by the British. The experience of directing, working with and observing local people succeed in managing their own affairs, independent of central authority, had a profound effect on Daithi and was responsible for planting the seeds of the Eire Nua concept in his mind. Nurtured by his political ability and his desire to plan for the future, the seeds took root and blossomed into the concept of a new beginning not just for Donegal and Ulster but also for all of Ireland.

Daithi realized that the first step in creating a new Ireland was the reunification of the nine-county province of Ulster. In expounding on this concept in 1969, he wrote:

By creating a provincial parliament for the nine counties of Ulster, within the framework of a new Ireland the partition system would be disestablished and the problem of the border removed. The Protestant people of Ulster would have a working majority and would have immediate access to power. Furthermore, the devolution of power to the local level would ensure for each community the opportunity to foster its own traditions and culture. Each region and community would have within itself the immediate power to deal with its own social and economic problems. Such devolution of power from one central authority to the people is the essence of democracy. The Nationalist population would be of sufficient strength to ensure a strong and credible opposition within reach of power. For the first time in fifty years we would see a normalization of politics with an end to the domination of one community by another and the resultant frustration and conflict.

In 1969 when war broke out again in Ireland, Daithi was deeply involved with the Republican movement. Prior to the onset of internment in August 1971 he presented his ideas of Eire Nua to the Republican leadership and was subsequently given the green light to proceed. On the 21st of August 1971 at the West Ernan Hotel in Monaghan, with over 500 people anxiously waiting outside in the square, the Leadership of Provisional Sinn Fein publicly announced the Eire Nua program. Historians, local and foreign media and prominent people including Sinn Fein delegates from all over Ireland enthusiastically greeted the birth of Eire Nua.



THE LAUNCHING OF ÉIRE NUA

In 1967 while Daithi O'Connaill was putting the finishing touches to Eire Nua, an unrelated movement was coming to the forefront in the occupied six counties of northeast Ireland. The non-violent civil rights movement inspired by Martin Luther King took to the streets demanding equality in employment, housing, voting rights, police, and civil rights. These demonstrations were met with violent opposition from Stormont, the Northern Ireland Government. They were attacked and beaten by Unionists mobs led by the police (RUC) and B Specials (militia). Their homes and communities were burned to the ground, many were killed and thousands were forced to flee across the border to the Irish Free State.

One of the most significant marches of this period took place from Derry to Belfast. Bernadette Devlin, a student activist, led it. The marchers were set upon by a frenzied mob of Unionists led by the RUC and B-Specials. This was the first time that the outside world saw the true nature of the Northern Ireland State. The Republican movement was not initially involved in events of this period. However, as the state-led violence escalated against the Nationalists, the IRA was asked for help in defending the communities against the Unionist onslaught. During this same period, while thousands were fleeing across the border, the Irish Free State, notwithstanding its promise of "not standing idly by", did in fact stand by and let the onslaught happen. Meanwhile the IRA, acting in a defensive role, was successful in securing the Nationalist areas.

In the meantime, the British Government poured tens of thousands of troops into the north under the pretext of defending the Nationalist communities against the Unionist mobs. However, the role of the British army soon became evident when they ceased playing the role of "peacemaker" and were instead deployed as security forces” in Nationalist areas. To counter the successes of the IRA in defending these areas, the Stormont Government, on August 9th 1971, with the help of the British army introduced internment without trial. The victims of this pogrom were all taken from Nationalist areas.

During this period the civil rights movement became radicalized as a result of the treatment they received at the hands of the Stormont government. They participated in acts of civil disobedience including anti-internment protest demonstrations. It was on one such demonstration in Derry on Sunday, January 30th 1972 that British paratroopers opened fire, killing thirteen instantly and wounding scores of others. This murder of unarmed demonstrators became known as the Bloody Sunday massacre and in effect signaled the end of peaceful protests and the beginning of war.

Aware of the consequences of the approaching war, the Army Council of the IRA endorsed Daithi O'Connaill's plan for a political solution for Ireland. On August 11th 1971, two days after internment, they issued a statement calling for the setting-up of an alternative form of government for Ulster.



THE PROMOTION OF ÉIRE NUA

The statement of August 11th 1971, calling for an alternative form of government for the nine counties of Ulster, was the official launching of Eire Nua. One week later on August 18th, Ruairi O' Bradaigh, President of Sinn Fein, issued a statement endorsing the proposals. The statement said that the people of Ulster should proceed to set up a Regional Parliament for the nine counties of Ulster. It continued by saying that the settlement of 1921 that set up both the Stormont and Dublin parliaments was unworkable and against the interests of the Irish people. It called for the dismantling of both statelets to make room for the New Ireland. It concluded by calling on the people of Connacht to consider joining Ulster in setting up their own Regional Parliament.

On August 21st 1971, a convention was assembled in Monaghan to consider the establishment of an Ulster Parliament (Dail Ulaidh). Invitations were sent to a broad spectrum of people including elected officials representing various political viewpoints. All nine counties of Ulster were represented. This convention drew both national and international attention and received major media coverage. Amongst those attending were two Westminster parliamentarians, Frank McManus and Paddy Kennedy. Since these were the only parliamentary level officials present, it was decided that as a first step a council would be set up to promote Dail Ulaidh. Paddy Kennedy and Frank McManus were selected to head up the council. Aided by a constitutional expert from Dublin the council drafted structures for local and provincial governments.

The next meeting of major significance was held in Tuam, the old capital of Connacht. Desmond Fennell and Maura Conlon organized the meeting. Various organizations and individuals attended from all five counties of Connacht. This meeting drew national attention and received major media coverage, as did the meeting in Monaghan. A council was set up for the same purpose as was the council in Ulster and Officers were elected to head it up. Follow-up meetings were held in Tuam, Westport and Drumshambo.

In the spring of 1972 a committee was formed at University College Galway to study the implications of and make recommendations for setting up a federal system consisting of the four provinces. The main question considered was whether Eire Nua was to be set up as a unitary system with regional assemblies or a federal republic with four provincial parliaments. The basic difference highlighted by the committee was that a regional assembly could be suspended at will by the central government, as was Stormont by the British government. On the other hand in a federal arrangement there would be a sharing of powers between the provinces and the center. In this situation the Federal government could not suspend the provincial parliament. The Supreme Court would be the final arbiter in all disputes between the provinces and the center. The latter arrangement was selected by the Leadership of the Republican Movement and is today the basis for the Eire Nua program.



GROWING RESISTANCE TO ÉIRE NUA

The suspension of the Stormont government by the British government in the spring of 1972 created a political vacuum. It provided a realistic opportunity for the political parties in Ireland to put forward their solutions to achieve a permanent peace for the Irish people. The Irish Republican movement stepped into the breach and continued to politicize the Eire Nua program. A further obstacle was removed when on June 28th 1972 a bilateral truce was called between the IRA and the British government. However, the Dublin government and the various political parties who had paid lip service to Irish unity remained silent and instead resorted to undermining negotiations for peace.

On June 28th 1972 a press conference was held at the Ormond Hotel in Dublin to promote the Eire Nua program. The program was based on the formation of four Provincial Parliaments with a federal Parliament at the center. Media representatives attended the press conference from Ireland, Britain and the rest of Europe. Despite attempts to sidetrack the main issue, the Irish Republican representatives managed to highlight their proposal for a new Ireland. They emphasized that their proposals were not definitive or exclusive of other proposals. They also stated that the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom would be incorporated in the domestic law of the new Ireland and indicated that the new Ireland would be a complete break with the past.

Due to the ongoing success and growing interest in the Eire Nua program the Dublin government became fearful of its own position of privilege and power and acted against the Republican movement by banning Sinn Fein spokespersons from radio and television. The result was that while the BBC, UTV and other major European networks carried the press conference live, Irish radio and television downplayed the event, thus depriving the Irish people of the opportunity to judge for themselves the merits of the Eire Nua program. Gradually the noose of censorship was tightened and in 1976, Conor Cruise O'Brien made censorship official government policy.

The media in the United States also applied censorship when on a coast-to-coast television discussion among Unionists, Nationalists and Republicans, broadcast from Boston, John Hume advocated and managed to have Ruairi O'Bradaigh's Eire Nua proposals deleted from the program. However, on returning to Ireland, O'Bradaigh stated that during a chance meeting with Mr. Gerry L'Estrange, a member of the 26-County Parliament, who declared that "nobody could take away from your regional government policy, it is very progressive"



UNIONISTS' REACTION TO ÉIRE NUA

During the bilateral talks between the IRA and the British government in 1972, the late Daithi.O'Conaill presented William Whitelaw with a copy of the Eire Nua program. This action by O'Conaill left no doubt as to whether or not the British government was aware of the Irish Republican Movement's intent regarding the Irish question. However, they refused to give the Movement credit for having put forward a sound political solution to the Irish question. The talks themselves ended in failure.

Despite official censorship in the 26-county state, a Council was successfully set up in Munster to promote Dail Mumhan followed by a similar Council in Leinster. In 1973, a Council of Ireland was launched and a number of meetings were held in Athlone to promote the program. Representatives from the four provinces attended the Athlone meetings. During the same period a number of meetings were held throughout Ireland where leaders of the Republican movement discussed the Eire Nua policy with prominent members of the pro-British Loyalist and Unionist parties

At a seminar held in Galway in 1974, Frank McManus M.P. speaking of Eire Nua, stated "there was nothing as powerful as an idea whose time has come" and "the only criticism that can be made of Eire Nua, was the source from where it came and that was not a valid criticism"

In the summer of 1974, during the taping of a UTV talk show Sammy Smith of the UDA expressed his concern to Ruairi O'Bradaigh about the changing population (the lower ratio of Protestants to Catholics) in a nine-county new Ulster. Such a comment by a hard-line Loyalist leader, albeit negative, represented fresh thinking on the part of some leaders of the ultra hard-line Loyalist community. More discussions took place with the Rev. Eric Gallagher, a leading Methodist Minister who stated that political scientists in leading universities had analyzed Eire Nua and found no fault with its systems of checks and balances.

In 1976, the Rev. Billy Arklow, who later became Dean of St. Andrews Cathedral in Belfast, arranged for O'Bradaigh to make a twenty-minute presentation of Eire Nua at Queen's University in Belfast, to an assemblage that included leaders of the Protestant community. The presentation was well received as demonstrated by the number and types of questions asked. Harry Murray, Chairman of the Ulster Workers Council, had commented that the Eire Nua program was similar to the Australian system, which is a federation of states that seemed to work well.



THE UNDERMINING OF ÉIRE NUA

The steady growth of Eire Nua in the mid-seventies was led by the Irish Republican Movement and endorsed by the IRA. This did not deter' pro-British Loyalists and Unionists from becoming involved in direct discussions on the Eire Nua federal policy with leading Irish Republicans, most notably the late Daithi O'Conaill and Ruairi O'Bradaigh.

In 1974, Desmond Boal added his voice to the growing Loyalist opinion favoring Eire Nua. Boal, who was secretary to Ian Paisley, published a statement favoring a two-state federal solution, comprising the 26-county and the 6-county states. While the Republican leadership realized that it was a major step forward to have Loyalists and Unionists come out in favor of British disengagement and a federal solution of sorts, they felt that the two-state federation would not work as they would be eternally at logger- heads i.e. Czechoslovakia. However, discussions continued with Boal and others until the collapse of the Power Sharing Executive.

The large number of publications of that era indicates that the Irish people recognized that there was a solution and that the Eire Nua federal policy was their first choice. Amongst the most prominent publications were, Towards a Greater Ulster, Ireland as a Whole, Take the Faeroes for Example, The Third Republic, A New Nationalism - Desmond Fennell; Ulster the Future - Frank McManus M.P; Shaping a New Society - Emmet O'Connell; Our People our Future - Ruairi O'Bradaigh.

However, there were undercurrents developing within the Irish Republican Movement due to the influx of newcomers, especially in the North. Emerging from these would be the men and women who would lead the blanket protest and give their lives on hunger strike and wage an all-out war for a united Ireland. However, there were also those with personal agendas who viewed the situation as an opportune moment to take control of the Irish Republican movement. These opportunists, aware that the Republican leadership of the day was highly respected because of Eire Nua, campaigned for their gradual removal by undermining Eire Nua.

At the 1980 Sinn Fein Ard-Feis the Belfast leadership, along with branches in Dublin, moved to have the term federalism removed from Sinn Fein policy and replaced with the term maximum decentralization. Daithi O'Conaill later resigned from Sinn Fein, having become the first victim of political cleansing. Daithi later returned as Vice-President of the newly formed Republican Sinn Fein and authored Towards a Peaceful Ireland and Eire Nua - A New Democracy, the updated version of Eire Nua, prior to his untimely death in 1991.



THE REBIRTH OF ÉIRE NUA

To recap, the late Daithi O’Conaill, one of the leading military strategists and political visionaries of seventies founded Eire Nua. Along with Ruairi O'Bradaigh, President of Republican Sinn Fein, Daithi opened a dialogue with leaders of Loyalist groups in the occupied six counties. Many meetings were held during the Eire Nua promotional campaign of the seventies, but personal ambitions within the Republican movement and opposition from the proponents of the status quo seemed to have buried Eire Nua. In the meantime, we have been dealt initiatives, super initiatives, and now hyper initiatives by the governments in London and Dublin.

The saying that nothing good comes easy can be applied to Eire Nua as it makes a slow comeback, spearheaded by Republican Sinn Fein in Ireland. Again we see a growing awareness of Eire Nua, manifested by more meetings and media attention. Since then a number of significant events have attested to its rebirth. In December 7th 1993 a press conference was held in Belfast to launch the new bilingual Eire Nua program. At the press conference, Ruari O'Bradaigh, in a message to the Unionists, said: that in the context of an English public undertaking to withdraw, the Ulster identity is a legitimate identity which can find expression in a nine-county Ulster parliament with strong local government. The position of each of the four provinces would be entrenched in a new Federal Ireland in a written constitution with complete separation of church and state and a pluralist society. Channel Four and Sky news in Britain reported covered the press conference as did the Irish Times and Belfast Telegraph.

In June of 2000 Bertie Ahern, the 26-county Prime Minister ‘damned the Eire Nua program with faint praise’ by stating that while Eire Nua had its merits those who promoted it ie; Republican Sinn Fein were suspect because they did not engage in the ‘peace process'. Ruairi O’Bradaigh replied by stating that the British had no problem sitting down to discuss the Eire Nua peace plan at the height of the war in the 70's.



- Article is from by Cumann na Saoirse Náisúnta's website.

National Irish Freedom Committee
Cumann Na Saoirse Naisiunta
http://www.irishfreedom.net/

by Patrick Wed Jul 27, 2005 22:29

It should be remembered that the Eire Nua documents are not closed. That is to say that they are up-dated as times change and imput/ideas are always welcome. I am glad to see it being discussed here. I would hope all people regardless of political affiliation would just take the time to learn about it. As was written earlier it is all about giving everyday people people power in their own communities. Along with Saol Nua, it provides for a indepentant 32 county Republic based on true democracy for a non-aligned nuetral Ireland that enviromentally aware. The only people who could be against it are those it threatens..the status quo and big business.

by smelly troll Thu Jul 28, 2005 09:03

controversial maybe but most people in the republic do not care about the north

by Nordie Thu Jul 28, 2005 11:29

...like we need a united Ireland.

by tom Thu Jul 28, 2005 14:10

If I had an imput into Eire Nua it would be this.In a future Irish republic , the nine counties of Ulster would be officially designated a Scots /Irish province . Along the lines of Bosnia being designated a Muslim nation (not state) in the former Yugoslavia.

by AE Thu Apr 20, 2006 20:07

Is exactly why the Republic of Ireland would happily live without the North...your tolerance deficiency.

Best wishes,
AE

by Barry Thu Apr 20, 2006 22:19

I could live with that , as long as nobody tried to make ke speak in that funny accent and call it a language . Or maybe even talking in that accent and calling it a language could be quite fun .

by blaise Fri Apr 21, 2006 04:54

remarks from Celtic tigers like 'who needs the North' and 'leave the Welfare state where it is' are eerily reminescent of our previous colonial landlords, the British, who used to say 'why are we wasting our time with these ingrates?' The North is part of Ireland and should be recovered for the nation of Irish people. These are our people, funny accents and all, and we welcome them as brothers. The settlers are free to stay and assimilate. They've been here for decades, anyway, but they must know they are in Ireland and all that British crap they espouse should be kept to themselves. They can set up a travelling circus to showcase their pathetic marches if they wish. We're a forgiving nation, I think, and as long as they don't cause trouble they can have their little shows for posterity's sake. Cool it tigers - be prepared to share your newfound wealth with the brothers from the north.

Agus fagaimid siud mar ata se

by Barry - 32csm Fri Apr 21, 2006 16:12

In order to keep the North Britian has had to continually destabilise the south . Billions of pounds sterling have been pumped into all sorts of shifty schemes from recruiting and promoting its agents in high places in the business , media , garda , army and political spheres ,. Crooked cops , crooked politicians , determining your news and current affairs output , bombing Dublin and other towns on numerous occasions to get the draconian legislation Britain wanted passed with the garda and politicians in active collusion with them - as CJ Haughy once remarked its cast a dark shadow into every corner of Irish life accross the island .

Untill Britian leaves us be we'll live in an island Britain controls from top to bottom . Forget about your neutrality your resources and your independence - you wont get it till you have national sovereignty . The treaty was a deal with the devil , there ws no independence worth speaking of , just as much autonomy as Britain could handle .