Posted on 10/25/2001 8:26:54 AM PDT by Clive
These are uncomfortable times in which to be a terrorist, and not only for those upon whom fire rains in Afghanistan. When the United States declared war on terrorism in response to the events of Sept. 11, appeasement of groups such as the Provisional Irish Republican Army was suddenly and unequivocally out of fashion.
Sinn Fein, the IRA's political front, was placed in a particularly awkward position by its own official newspaper, which used the attack on the World Trade Center as a pretext to rail against U.S. foreign policy. In an editorial, the Sinn Fein organ argued "pursuit of a militaristic and aggressive policy by U.S. governments" had contributed to "the deaths of many thousands of innocent people" in Central America and the Middle East. The editorial was an affront even to its pro-republican Irish American fundraisers and allies, still reeling from the worst single act of terrorism in history. Moreover, by mentioning Central America, the article served as a reminder of allegations the IRA has been exporting its own particular brand of terror. Just a month earlier, three alleged IRA operatives were arrested in Colombia and accused of training FARC, a Marxist terrorist group, to make bombs. The Bush administration's special envoy to Ireland warned what the three men were doing "came within the rubric of terrorism."
With its traditional base of support in the United States eroding and new opinion polls in Britain calling for the IRA to be treated just like al-Qaeda, Gerry Adams, the Sinn Fein president, began an offensive to win back support. He first reportedly put off a visit to Cuba -- which appears on the U.S. State Department's list of state sponsors of international terrorism -- to see its dictator, Fidel Castro. Next, and far more significantly, Sinn Fein announced it had asked the IRA to make a ground-breaking gesture on the decommissioning of its weapons. The IRA has now taken that step.
Though it is an initiative that Sinn Fein has self-servingly if correctly termed courageous, it is also one that, in the current context, was probably unavoidable. But that does not lessen the importance of the concession. The IRA had previously failed to meet two target dates for decommissioning, resulting in the resignation of the moderate Unionist David Trimble as First Minister of Northern Ireland, thus jeopardizing the historic 1998 Good Friday peace agreement and raising the prospect of a return to British direct rule and escalation of the sectarian violence which, despite the agreement, never entirely went away. Now, Canada's General John de Chastelain, the decommissioning chief, has confirmed "a significant event in which the IRA has put a quantity of arms completely beyond use." He described the weapons as arms, ammunition and explosives.
In a statement, the IRA said it took the step to save the peace process. It will, at least for now, achieve that result. Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, has hailed the announcement as a "very significant milestone," and paid tribute to the leadership of Mr. Adams. Mr. Trimble is expected to return to office. Some republicans have even gone so far as to suggest the IRA's bloody decades-long campaign is at an end. It is too early to draw such a conclusion. Republican and loyalist terrorists have dashed hopes for peace before.
The IRA remains armed to the teeth despite its undertaking, as do some loyalist terrorist groups, which must now be pressured to move quickly to match the IRA gesture. And the IRA must not be allowed to rest on the laurels it has won this week, but must decommission all its weapons, whether at once or in stages. Only then can the disarmament be judged permanent and sincere rather than temporary and tactical; only then will they cease to be terrorists.
Still, there is now at least some hope for peace in Northern Ireland. After Sept. 11, the ground shifted permanently for the Provisional IRA, as it has for everyone else in the Western world. No matter the motivation behind the group's recent concessions, and however reluctantly it has begun the process of decommissioning, the moves are welcome.
Play time is over. This country is serious about stamping out this plague on the world.
I have heard this statement and yet I fail to be reassured by it. It has the ring of high-purity bureaucratic double-speak. What on earth does this mean? Did they put them in a self-storage shed and fail to pay the rent?
1. On August 6 2001, the Commission reported that agreement had been reached with the IRA on a method to put IRA arms completely and verifiably beyond use. This would be done in such a way as to involve no risk to the public and avoid the possibility of misappropriation by others.
2. We have now witnessed an event - which we regard as significant - in which the IRA has put a quantity of arms completely beyond use. The material in question includes arms, ammunition and explosives.
3. We are satisfied that the arms in question have been dealt with in accordance with the scheme and regulations. We are also satisfied that it would not further the process of putting all arms beyond use were we to provide further details of this event.
4. We will continue our contact with the IRA representative in the pursuit of our mandate.
Signed - Tauno Nieminen, John de Chastelain and Andrew D Sens.
Has anyone heard from Senator Kennedy recently?
We know only too well how in the Middle East and in Central America the pursuit of a militaristic and aggressive policy by US governments and by those governments it sponsored, led to the deaths of many thousands of innocent people.
Haass kicked Adams ass and decommissioning began.
Now, let's hear the same chorus for de-commissioning from the Loyalists. Sort of sticks in your craw, doesn't it?
The IRA will not surrender there arms to the British Government, as the arms are seen as the colours of a unit.
What happens is that the arms are placed in a bunker by the IRA under the watch of the peace monitors, then concrete is poured in filling up the bunker, this will make the weapons unserviceable.
Not all the Weapons will be destroyed, many will be kept hidden, but this is a very significant and symbolic act on the path to normalising the province.
The conflict has gone from the military phase to the symbolic phase, although some breakaway units have sworn to carry on the fight.
Tony
This is probably the most accurate and logical assessment of the situation posted so far on the subject, considering some of the daft posts on the subject (US warships off the west coast of Ireland and all that!). I'm just amazed at how many people feel threatened by de-commissioning. Trust is a hard won commodity in NI and I hope your right.
Cheers Tony
Interesting article in the Irish times yesterday (25th) you might want to read (opinion pages) here. I rarely agree with him on the north, but he changes tack altogether with this one. It's about an incident involving the British army, RUC and some unsavory protesters.
Well that is a lot more reassuring than the official statement cited in the above article. Where in the public record would I find this information?
For all the Songs and the stories and the murals, and the brave words, a lot of the time it is about working class communities kicking three kinds out of each other for no other reason than they are scared of each other.
Its funny many soldiers in the British Army are like me with ancestors from Ireland, there is a great mixing of English, Irish, Welsh and Scottish.
Within a decade of the trouble ending I bet many will be wondering what it was all about.
Tony
Tony
General De Chastelain (IICD head): The three of us have witnessed an event which complies with the decommissioning legislation and regulations. We are all satisfied that the process renders the materials permanently unusable or unavailable.
David Trimble (UUP leader): You are quite satisfied with that?
De Chastelain: Yes, we would not have said so otherwise.
Trimble: Can we say that the material has been rendered permanently unavailable or unusable? There has been speculation that the dumps would be sealed with a concrete cap. Is it a cap?
De Chastelain: We are not prepared to go into methodologies but it is not a cap. That would not meet the requirements. The method used does meet the requirements.
Trimble: The material - arms etc were significant....
De Chastelain: The event is significant. Since I have been here I have seen wall murals many times which say: `Not a bullet. Not an ounce.' I can assure you there is more than a bullet and an ounce but I cannot say how much. We can say, however, that we have taken inventories and it contains a range of materials.
Trimble: Downing Street have used the term substantial.
De Chastelain: We have made it clear to O'Neill (codename used for the IRA) that a lack of transparency makes things difficult but we want to get other events and don't want to create difficulties there. We will continue our engagement with O'Neill and expect our next meeting to be soon.
Trimble: "There is the potential for difficulty if they don't continue.
De Chastelain: And we will not be here if that is the case.
Trimble: Did you take any other evidence, photographs for example?
De Chastelain: No but I can tell you that we all handled the arms and weapons to check they were genuine, we counted them and the ammunition and we weighed the explosives.
James Cooper (UUP chairman): You have used the term `further the process' in your statement, is this because you intend to take the process further?
De Chastelain: Yes. The process has now started. We expect O'Neill to assess how others now react within their organisation.
Cooper: Can we say that having had this event and hoping for another meeting that this is a beginning of an ongoing process?
De Chastelain: Yes. If O'Neill had said this was a one-off event, we would have reported that. Far from it, we were given no such indication.
Roy Beggs (UUP Westminster chief whip): I am satisfied the issue of capping has been cleared up. It is now a matter of where you place your trust.
De Chastelain: Yes."
Good luck to all - but that doesn't sound very convincing from here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.