More like this
The IRA didn’t die, it was supplanted by al-Qaeda
The 9/11 attacks gave the Irish republican movement the perfect opportunity to effortlessly insert itself into civilian life
If a week is a long time in politics, then a decade must be aeons. So it seemed to those of us who had followed Northern Irish politics during the 1970s and 80s, when, post-9/11, the archetypal terrorist became a Muslim. Or, to put it more strongly, for some people terrorist - or at any rate, terrorist sympathiser - and Islamic became synonymous.
And then, after the 7/7 London bombings, the equivalence became even more complete because these weren't just shadowy foreigners but our very own home-grown killers.
I don't want to belittle everything that Tony Blair achieved during his premiership, but for all the chest-thumping of the politicians, I don't imagine the 1998 Good Friday agreement would have held were it not for the bespoke image-change handed to Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness three years later by al-Qaeda. With such practitioners of atrocity at large in the world as well as their own sterling work on a democratic makeover - the Provisional IRA cadres began to look positively cuddly.
The Omagh killers remain unpunished, even though their identities are known
The murder of two soldiers by the Real IRA in County Antrim and now the brutal ambush and slaying of a policeman in Craigavon are revolting ways for the amnesiac British public to be reminded that we do these grotesque things indigenously quite as effectively as any immigrants - but reminded we should be.
And reminded also of what an atrocity the Real IRA's bombing of Omagh was: not just in terms of numbers, although 29 is a lot, but because the killers remain unpunished, even though we know full-well who they are.
Furthermore, if anyone needed a wake-up call from the sad delusion that British justice/policing/counter-terrorism is the finest in the world, it is that due to cock-ups and malfeasances from the individual level all the way to the very top of the RUC (now the PSNI), the relatives of the Omagh victims are having to bring a civil action against those who murdered their loved ones.
And while we're all increasing our memory power, let's take a look at some of our fundamental assumptions about the peace process in Northern Ireland, and see if they've worn the test of time.
The Real IRA are the real nutters, aren't they? Those who wouldn't accept that the armed struggle had been defeated; whereas Adams and McGuiness sought a genuine accommodation with the British state, while still holding on to the ideal of a united Ireland.
The Troubles didn’t disappear, those involved just stopped killing each other
In time - or so the Tony Blair version would go - even this ideal will become hazy and indistinct, like a production of Riverdance that you've seen half-cut in a provincial theatre, or some such Celtic twilight twaddle.
But there's nothing remotely hazy about Sinn Fein's ideals: they remain crystal clear. While on the other side of the mural-daubed wall, the Unionists democratic or otherwise cleave as strongly as ever to their bizarre notion that they are more loyal to the British monarchy than to life itself. The casus belli of the Troubles never went away; it is just that for a while they stopped killing each other so we forgot about it.
In the eight years since the attacks on the Twin Towers, there have been billions of words expended explaining the inherently violent and expansionist nature of Islam and the Muslim world; even the most dispassionate of Western liberals will, once confronted with this or that example of jihadist zeal, revert to the type who sees Islam as nothing but malevolent. It's as if we can't function without some nebulous 'other' on to which we project all our anxieties.
Once the Catholic Irish use to fit the bill but then they became too assimilated; now British Asians have taken on the role, but that can hardly last us aeons. I give it a decade, and then we're going to have to accept that people can commit terrorist atrocities regardless of race, creed or colour. Evil is an equal opportunities employer. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Are you being sarcastic? The British empire has one of the bloodiest jackets in human history from all her violent occupations of other peoples' sovereign lands. As an American of Irish descent, I suppose you wouldn't have a clue as to why my ancestors ended-up here in the 1800s; ah, take a guess! The nerve of you to talk down about the Irish is typical, I guess; Brits could never understand why these "others" were so offended by being made slaves to the occupiers in their own countries... go figure! Most of the Crown Jewels came from the spoils taken from the poor nations raped by Britain. BTW... the Balfour Declaration, thanks to Britain, has by far been the most prolonged blunder of your great nation. Hang your head in shame; you created the IRA, so stop whining.
The thrust of Mr. Self's piece seems to be that there is a large degree of equivalence, both moral and political, between the terrorists of Al Qaeda and those of the "Real IRA". While I would agree that the actions of both are reprehensible, it is facile to consider them to have the same order of political significance. The goals of the Irish terrorists are limited - to have the whole island under republican rule. Does anyone seriously think that, such a goal accomplished, they would participate in any further terrorist acts, particularly beyond Ireland? ( This is not to say that a hypothetical future Republican government might not have its hands full dealing with their latent gangsterish tendencies).
Islamic terrorism, however deluded, is clearly of a different order. Their objectives include the restoration of the Caliphate, and they consider the whole of the West as a legitimate target. Moreover, the Irish terrorists have very little support from the general public for their acts. That is not the case in regard to the jihadists. Significant elements of Islamic world, as well as in Britain and other countries, support their goals and tactics. Many more are, at the very least, ambivalent.
Symmetry is very appealing, but I cannot see it here.
Maybe Will would like to clarify his thoughts on what the cause of the Troubles really were. There was me thinking that a large part of it was born out of a civil rights movement, in a part of the United Kingdom where sectarianism was blatantly exercised by a majority who wanted to put down a minority (that suggests a large part of the reason has gone away, and will continue to do so as more generations are raised in peace). For a long time succesive British governments failed to acknowledge or deal with that problem. Ultimately the misuse of power (and in the case of the governments of the day, the absence of the appropriate use of power) was the real issue behind the Troubles, as it is in many areas of the world. Terrorism is always wrong, but it is interesting what definition people choose to attribute to it, as to me it can be performed by anyone regardless of the uniform they sport. It is the act itself which determines whether or not it is terrorism not necessarily the origin or the cause of the people performing it.
yes of course the crystal difference between Al Qaida and the IRA is that the former have no political agenda and cannot be negotiated with, whereas the IRA are exceedingly easy to satisfy - just let the British get out of a country which does not belong to them, and the problem is solved
As an Irish Catholic who lived in London throughout the 1980s I agree with the sentiment of this article - Thatcher's government demonised all Irish people for the atrocities of a few extremists. The same is happening now with British Muslims. The myopic support for US anti-terror strategies (Rendition, Guantanamo) by the Brown and Blair gang is paralleled by the disaster that was Internment. It has been estimated that this policy alone lengthened the Troubles by about 15 years, garnering support for the IRA when it was on the wane. How many British Muslims will be recruited by extremists because of British government support for these policies? Tony & Gordon should have heeded Winston, "Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."
A jumbled, barely coherent ramble from Will Self again, perhaps he should stick to things he understands and leave Irish politics alone. He seems to conflate 'British public' with Irish people, ever a problem for the British who just can't accept that Ireland is a separate nation and the Irish actually don't want to be British. I've even seen Irish literature referred to as British, and writers such as Heaney described as part of English literature. And Will's 'use to fit' [used is the past tense of use Will] conflicts with his ongoing attempt to appear very well educated with the odd drop of Latin - why casus beli, Will, what's wrong with the good old English word justification? Of course the justification hasn't gone away, the British state still occupies part of Ireland and has army bases on its soil. How about the real evil being the ability to drop high explosives on a city [such as Basra] for days non stop?