Dr John Coulter ✒ Sinn Fein ‘plays’ at democracy, but couldn’t ‘do’ democracy if it emerged as largest Assembly party and took the First Minister’s post. In this scenario, Unionism should call Sinn Fein’s bluff and take the deputy’s post.  The TPQ Monday contentious political commentator  sets out the case why.

If the opinion polls are correct, the May 5 election will return Sinn Fein as the largest Assembly party, allowing the republican movement’s mouthpiece to lay claim to the First Minister’s post.

Even though it is a joint position with the deputy First Minister, there can be no doubting that Sinn Fein will try and wangle a position akin to the Dail in Dublin where the Taoiseach, or Prime Minister, is ranked higher than the Tanaiste (deputy Prime Minister).

Of course, the key question is - will (whichever Unionist party finishes in second place to republicanism) the DUP, UUP or TUV have the courage to nominate for deputy First Minister.

Likewise, Unionism will be trying to undo the results of the three past elections where, as an ideology, it has been left in a minority position in Northern Ireland.

At present, the DUP and TUV are saying they will not nominate for the post of deputy First Minister should Sinn Fein end up with the largest number of MLAs; the UUP is hedging its bets at the moment.

However, in a worst case scenario that Unionism - after 5 May - cannot claim to be the leading ideology in Northern Ireland, the leading Unionist party should have the courage to nominate for deputy First Minister.

As policy stands, Unionism will be letting Sinn Fein off the hook politically again by handing the republican movement yet another propaganda coup.

This situation would allow republicans and nationalists to chant - look at those bigoted Unionists again, not recognising the democratic wishes of the electorate by refusing to accept the result and nominate a deputy!

But Sinn Fein has one serious Achilles heel - it has no proven track record as a competent and mature party of government. And the one occasion it did have power and influence on the island of Ireland, it sparked the bloodbath known as the Irish Civil War in the 1920s in which republican butchered republican in a manner which made the notorious Black and Tans appear like a well-disciplined military unit.

Formed in 1905 (the same year as the Ulster Unionist Council), Sinn Fein had its biggest electoral breakthrough in the Westminster General Election of 1918 after the end of Great War when it took 70 of the 105 House of Commons seats available for Ireland, then entirely under British rule.

But instead of using that mandate for serious negotiations with the British Government for some kind of dominion status for Ireland, Sinn Fein gave the green light to the War of Independence with the British the following year.

And no sooner had Sinn Fein got the Anglo-Irish Treaty, than the party split into the pro and anti-Treaty factions. The bottom line for Sinn Fein is - Sinn Fein doesn’t do democracy!

Like some kind of historic mummy’s boy, Sinn Fein has never been able to break its coat strings from taking orders from the IRA’s ruling Army Council. There is no way Sinn Fein is going to cross swords with that Army Council and risk another republican feud.

Since its inception, Sinn Fein has always operated as either a party of protest, or an apologist for the terror campaigns by the various IRAs over the generations, or both - but never as a credible, democratic and mature party of government.

Until the hunger strikes of 1980 and 1981, Sinn Fein was nothing more than an ageing fan club for the failed 1916 Dublin Rising, or pathetically defending the murder of security forces and innocent civilians during the Troubles.

It took the republican movement’s deliberate sacrificing of 10 hunger strikers - starting with Bobby Sands - to propel Sinn Fein into serious electoral politics.

Even in the current Irish Republic, bitter rivals Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil joined forces to keep Sinn Fein out of the Dublin coalition government following the last Dail General Election.

In Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein collapsed the power-sharing Executive for three years in 2017 and it was only the crisis posed by the pandemic which brought the Executive back.

The DUP then collapsed the Executive again earlier this year over the Northern Ireland Protocol. Unionists would argue - who can work with Sinn Fein?

If Unionism was to take the deputy First Minister’s post in the event of a Stormont Sinn Fein victory, it would place the republican party in a political position it has never been in its history since 1918 - in government as the leading ‘partner’.

Sinn Fein would have to ditch its Marxist-Leninist political policies in favour of a workable cross-community manifesto which Unionists could work with. This would inevitably put a strain on Sinn Fein’s close relationship with the IRA’s Army Council.

In this context, at what point does the IRA’s ruling Army Council take the view - ‘enough of this democracy lark! Collapse the entire Assembly again!’

As Sinn Fein does not take its seats in the Commons, perhaps a period of Direct Rule from Westminster would reduce the republican movement to the political backwoods and herald in an era of constitutional nationalism which Unionism could competently work with as in 1998 with the first Assembly mandate between the UUP and SDLP.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online

Unionism Should Take Deputy First Minister’s Post If Shinners Win!

Dr John Coulter ✒ Sinn Fein ‘plays’ at democracy, but couldn’t ‘do’ democracy if it emerged as largest Assembly party and took the First Minister’s post. In this scenario, Unionism should call Sinn Fein’s bluff and take the deputy’s post.  The TPQ Monday contentious political commentator  sets out the case why.

If the opinion polls are correct, the May 5 election will return Sinn Fein as the largest Assembly party, allowing the republican movement’s mouthpiece to lay claim to the First Minister’s post.

Even though it is a joint position with the deputy First Minister, there can be no doubting that Sinn Fein will try and wangle a position akin to the Dail in Dublin where the Taoiseach, or Prime Minister, is ranked higher than the Tanaiste (deputy Prime Minister).

Of course, the key question is - will (whichever Unionist party finishes in second place to republicanism) the DUP, UUP or TUV have the courage to nominate for deputy First Minister.

Likewise, Unionism will be trying to undo the results of the three past elections where, as an ideology, it has been left in a minority position in Northern Ireland.

At present, the DUP and TUV are saying they will not nominate for the post of deputy First Minister should Sinn Fein end up with the largest number of MLAs; the UUP is hedging its bets at the moment.

However, in a worst case scenario that Unionism - after 5 May - cannot claim to be the leading ideology in Northern Ireland, the leading Unionist party should have the courage to nominate for deputy First Minister.

As policy stands, Unionism will be letting Sinn Fein off the hook politically again by handing the republican movement yet another propaganda coup.

This situation would allow republicans and nationalists to chant - look at those bigoted Unionists again, not recognising the democratic wishes of the electorate by refusing to accept the result and nominate a deputy!

But Sinn Fein has one serious Achilles heel - it has no proven track record as a competent and mature party of government. And the one occasion it did have power and influence on the island of Ireland, it sparked the bloodbath known as the Irish Civil War in the 1920s in which republican butchered republican in a manner which made the notorious Black and Tans appear like a well-disciplined military unit.

Formed in 1905 (the same year as the Ulster Unionist Council), Sinn Fein had its biggest electoral breakthrough in the Westminster General Election of 1918 after the end of Great War when it took 70 of the 105 House of Commons seats available for Ireland, then entirely under British rule.

But instead of using that mandate for serious negotiations with the British Government for some kind of dominion status for Ireland, Sinn Fein gave the green light to the War of Independence with the British the following year.

And no sooner had Sinn Fein got the Anglo-Irish Treaty, than the party split into the pro and anti-Treaty factions. The bottom line for Sinn Fein is - Sinn Fein doesn’t do democracy!

Like some kind of historic mummy’s boy, Sinn Fein has never been able to break its coat strings from taking orders from the IRA’s ruling Army Council. There is no way Sinn Fein is going to cross swords with that Army Council and risk another republican feud.

Since its inception, Sinn Fein has always operated as either a party of protest, or an apologist for the terror campaigns by the various IRAs over the generations, or both - but never as a credible, democratic and mature party of government.

Until the hunger strikes of 1980 and 1981, Sinn Fein was nothing more than an ageing fan club for the failed 1916 Dublin Rising, or pathetically defending the murder of security forces and innocent civilians during the Troubles.

It took the republican movement’s deliberate sacrificing of 10 hunger strikers - starting with Bobby Sands - to propel Sinn Fein into serious electoral politics.

Even in the current Irish Republic, bitter rivals Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil joined forces to keep Sinn Fein out of the Dublin coalition government following the last Dail General Election.

In Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein collapsed the power-sharing Executive for three years in 2017 and it was only the crisis posed by the pandemic which brought the Executive back.

The DUP then collapsed the Executive again earlier this year over the Northern Ireland Protocol. Unionists would argue - who can work with Sinn Fein?

If Unionism was to take the deputy First Minister’s post in the event of a Stormont Sinn Fein victory, it would place the republican party in a political position it has never been in its history since 1918 - in government as the leading ‘partner’.

Sinn Fein would have to ditch its Marxist-Leninist political policies in favour of a workable cross-community manifesto which Unionists could work with. This would inevitably put a strain on Sinn Fein’s close relationship with the IRA’s Army Council.

In this context, at what point does the IRA’s ruling Army Council take the view - ‘enough of this democracy lark! Collapse the entire Assembly again!’

As Sinn Fein does not take its seats in the Commons, perhaps a period of Direct Rule from Westminster would reduce the republican movement to the political backwoods and herald in an era of constitutional nationalism which Unionism could competently work with as in 1998 with the first Assembly mandate between the UUP and SDLP.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online

13 comments:

  1. I have many political disagreements with Sinn Fein, very many, but taking lessons in democracy from the DUP is not one of them. Unionism misruled the six-counties for fifty years, it was the most, in fact only, undemocratic component of the UK, insofar as liberal democracy goes. Something, one party rule, I am sure the DUP would love to see a return to.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Sinn Fein would have to ditch its Marxist-Leninist political policies" They would gain some in the first place.

    We are now witnessing the last gasps of Unionism as a political force. If it were not to nominate in the event of SF gaining the required number of seats then it really would be a case of Unionism signing its own death warrant. Stormont is the only place were it has any sort of relevance. Those votes in Westminster are now toothless now that normal working majority. The irony of this is that it was Unionism inability to adapt and change to social attitudes which brought about it’s downfall. Throw in it’s support for Brext, when the clear majority were in favour Remain, and a very long time in front of a very large number is required to figure out its next move.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sinn Fein don't have any "Marxist Leninist policies". In fact their formers President, Mr Gerry Adams, once boasted not having "a Marxist about the place". Mary Lou McDonald is certainly no Marxist, "labourist"
    maybe, but certainly no Marxist, else I've read the wrong ideology. There is no mention of bank nationalisation, or common ownership of the means of production in SFs manifesto. Neither do we hear of the legalised theft of workers by employers via the wages/money trick. Not a word from SF about wages and surplus value from SF. No, they are no Marxists, in fact they do not even mention the 32 county democratic socialist republic, once so cherrished, any more.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  4. Funny, I would have thought the Achilles Heel for Sinn Fein would have been taking up the position as head of a political entity they professed to want to destroy. How they sell that to their own supporters, particularly of my vintage, would be a political spin so fast it could churn milk.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thats the problem with Sinn Fein, they metamorph with the wind. I remember they once held the "32 county democratic socialist republic" as their aim. It is now over two decades since those imortal words were uttered, us in the IRSP at the time never did believe them. APRN, their paper, in their US edition, tended to not mention this ill defined "socialist republic". I remember at the time talking to some Sinn Fein rank and file party activists who I thought were in the wrong party, as we swallowed a few pints in Fat Harrys! The Adams leadership were about as committed to socialism as is Kier Starmer in the British Labour Party today.

    They joined the bourgeois culture club back in 1998 and have climbed the greasy pole of that club. Many of their membership of today will have heard nothing of the mythical, in Sinn Feins case, "socialist republic" as the party pay lip service to a "new republic", and even that is, according to Ms. O'Neill, taking second place to other policies. Now, a lot of good people sacrificed a lot, including the ultimate, in persuit of the once popular "socialist republic" which may be a warning for future generations! Sinn Fein remind me in many ways of the British Labour Party since they dropped clause IV, which was a commitment to socialism at least on paper. Like Sinn Feins "socialist republic" clause IV no longer exists and the Brit Labour Party is, like Sinn Fein (P) in name only.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That ship of SF socialism has long since sailed Caoimhin, sank alongside its republican ship. SF is a constitutional nationalist party with everything that goes with it. We can debate whether that is a good or bad thing but it is hard to see it as anything else.

      Delete
    2. Caoimhin

      Clause 4 was drawn up at a time of real militarisation of British society. Attlee's government was also ushered in an era of militarised mobilisation which were ideal conditions for top-down nationalisation of industries and cradle to grave health and social welfare services.

      Clause 4 fulfilled a rallying function for the British labour movement at a particular moment. What is needed now is a similarly snappy statement of labour aims and values for the very different era of the early 21st century.

      Delete
  6. But a constitutional nationalist party run by a secretive, unaccountable clique; with access to millions of pounds of money and still with more than the whiff or cordite and hurley stick. None of which applied to the SDLP.

    SF's rhetorical commitment to socialism was only ever a strategic, performative tactic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry,

      It's still amazing to me that no Unionist asks questions of where the RM funds have ended up. In Ed's Secret History of the IRA he points out that there was a portfolio of several hundred million sterling and an operation cost of over a million a year. To the best of my knowledge this didn't filter to the rank and file after the ceasefire, and definitely not to those who did hard time in Long Kesh, so where did it go?

      Delete
    2. Steve R

      That is a question that genuinely constitutional parties in the Republic and the SDLP and Alliance in NI should also be asking.

      Delete
    3. It is virtually impossible for a party the size of SF to be run by a cabal in Belfast. The Workers Party found that out. The bigger SF grows the harder it becomes to run it along the lines suggested by Barry.
      It ends up the cabal is forced onto the backfoot and has to fight for influence. The IRA still exists but like Group B has been diminishing in significance.
      The thing about SF is that it is so like the other parties not unlike them as suggested by Barry. That view was long promoted by Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. It was more heat than light.

      Delete
    4. Stevie/Barry,

      Simply follow the money. A quick search will show that in 2008 when financial markets collapsed the RM lost close to $160 million in the US and around the same amount in Europe through front companies.... It's as uncomplicated as that.

      Delete
  7. I agree Anthony, from a republican point of view on the surface it is a bad thing. However, on closer examination, is it better not to have parties, any of them, who are not what they initially appear to be not to be considered republican and accepted as constitutional nationnalists? Sinn Fein (P), not to be confused with Sinn Fein (R), could be described as fifth columnists as they continue masquerading as republicans, let alone socialits when, in fact, they are neither. I remember many years ago Gerry Adams, among his outlandish comments, stated "Fianna Fail are our first cousins"(APRN). I even question their position on imperialism, I'm not sure they have one. I still, in all probability naively, hope if they get into government they might deliver on their promises of a nationalised, single tier health service. Don't laugh😄😇

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete