The Fenian Way ✍ Who Are The IRA?

The question of is not an idle one, no more than the answer is obvious given the current state of claimants to the title. It is also extremely pertinent to an endeavour such as this where tangible ways forward for Irish republicanism are being explored. In any rational appraisal of the current political circumstances republicans find ourselves in, only a political and strategic alternative is open to us at this remove. To put it into a starker perspective, the long war fought by the Provisional IRA resulted in a settlement it wasn’t fighting for. A lesser war fought by any other IRA cannot undo this fact.

Can Irish republicanism plot a way forward if armed groups can act arbitrarily? Or more pointedly can an ‘IRA’ arbitrarily come into existence if seven people decide they are an ‘Army Council’? As it stands the propensity for armed republicans to have their identities expressed in an alphabet soup of IRA prefixes reflects a deeply flawed understanding of precisely what the physical force tradition actually represents.

All acts of struggle need to be justified both in terms of their general use and specific effectiveness. Acts of violence cannot fall into a generalised category in order to lend them a lazy legitimacy. The invoking of the right alone is not sufficient to justify its use. It can’t drive the ‘Brits Out’! On its own it’s a symbol of political bankruptcy. The façade that it’s a strategic attempt to disrupt the normalisation of the Six Counties runs into even more troubled waters considering the Statelet has survived after twenty-five years when violence against it, and within it, was normal itself.

The physical force tradition is, first and foremost, a political tradition. Armed insurrection, in the correct instances, were compliments to national agitation against both the fact and consequences of British occupation. A national consciousness was always in play. The United Irishmen and the ideals and support of the French Revolution. The Young Irelanders and the Repeal of the Act of Union during the famine years. The Fenian Uprising with the rights of labour and church state separation. The Easter Rising where labour, nationalism and culturalism combined when Home Rule was abandoned by Westminster. The War of Independence when a Republic functioned under the democratic guidance of Dáil Eireann.

The Irish Republican Army is the national army; the notion of there being more than one is a contradiction in terms. And being the national army its sole function is the defence of Irish sovereignty. It cannot have a ‘political wing’ representing a sectional interest, howling defunct platitudes from behind a slogan. That concept proved disastrous to the Provisional movement so where’s the logic in repeating it when history clearly shows us what is necessary to avoid it?

Irish republicans have a duty of care to armed struggle. And Irish Republicans must provide leadership on this very matter. The factional provenance, of what can only be described as armed cabals, places them outside the remit of the IRA constitution and wholly unsuited to act in its name. The consequences of acting outside that constitution are, ironically, most clearly seen by the actions of the Provisional leadership who abdicated their responsibilities under that constitution to agree a partitionist settlement. And again, where is the logic in repeating that?

Armed struggle must come under the constitutional authority of a caretaker Army Executive made up of army members who held positions of authority. That Executive should be charged with setting out the basic requirements that any armed campaign would need to satisfy if any practical semblance of legitimacy could be afforded to it.

Armed struggle cannot advance the objectives of Irish republicanism at this juncture. Arbitrary violence acting in its name, devoid of any strategic merit or constitutional legitimacy, seriously undermines the effectiveness of armed struggle if and when the juncture does arise.

Lessons should be learnt from the ending of the IRA’s Border Campaign when its leadership concluded the following:

The leadership of the Resistance Movement has ordered the termination of the Campaign of Resistance to British occupation launched on 12 December 1956. Instructions issued to Volunteers of the Active Service Units and of local Units in the occupied area have now been carried out. All arms and other matériel have been dumped and all full-time active service volunteers have been withdrawn... Foremost among the factors motivating this course of action has been the attitude of the general public whose minds have been deliberately distracted from the supreme issue facing the Irish people – the unity and freedom of Ireland. The Irish resistance movement renews its pledge of eternal hostility to the British Forces of Occupation in Ireland. It calls on the Irish people for increased support and looks forward with confidence – in co-operation with the other branches of the Republican Movement – to a period of consolidation, expansion and preparation for the final and victorious phase of the struggle for the full freedom of Ireland.

The Provisional generation have failed. What needs to be bequeathed to the next generation is a simple and clear recognition of this fact. We cannot allow a circumstance where Irish republicanism is stifled because recalcitrant elements feel it necessary to sign off futile actions with the A to Z initial of the eponymous Mr O’Neill.

⏩ The Fenian Way was a full time activist during the IRA's war against the British. 

Who Are The IRA?

The Fenian Way ✍ Who Are The IRA?

The question of is not an idle one, no more than the answer is obvious given the current state of claimants to the title. It is also extremely pertinent to an endeavour such as this where tangible ways forward for Irish republicanism are being explored. In any rational appraisal of the current political circumstances republicans find ourselves in, only a political and strategic alternative is open to us at this remove. To put it into a starker perspective, the long war fought by the Provisional IRA resulted in a settlement it wasn’t fighting for. A lesser war fought by any other IRA cannot undo this fact.

Can Irish republicanism plot a way forward if armed groups can act arbitrarily? Or more pointedly can an ‘IRA’ arbitrarily come into existence if seven people decide they are an ‘Army Council’? As it stands the propensity for armed republicans to have their identities expressed in an alphabet soup of IRA prefixes reflects a deeply flawed understanding of precisely what the physical force tradition actually represents.

All acts of struggle need to be justified both in terms of their general use and specific effectiveness. Acts of violence cannot fall into a generalised category in order to lend them a lazy legitimacy. The invoking of the right alone is not sufficient to justify its use. It can’t drive the ‘Brits Out’! On its own it’s a symbol of political bankruptcy. The façade that it’s a strategic attempt to disrupt the normalisation of the Six Counties runs into even more troubled waters considering the Statelet has survived after twenty-five years when violence against it, and within it, was normal itself.

The physical force tradition is, first and foremost, a political tradition. Armed insurrection, in the correct instances, were compliments to national agitation against both the fact and consequences of British occupation. A national consciousness was always in play. The United Irishmen and the ideals and support of the French Revolution. The Young Irelanders and the Repeal of the Act of Union during the famine years. The Fenian Uprising with the rights of labour and church state separation. The Easter Rising where labour, nationalism and culturalism combined when Home Rule was abandoned by Westminster. The War of Independence when a Republic functioned under the democratic guidance of Dáil Eireann.

The Irish Republican Army is the national army; the notion of there being more than one is a contradiction in terms. And being the national army its sole function is the defence of Irish sovereignty. It cannot have a ‘political wing’ representing a sectional interest, howling defunct platitudes from behind a slogan. That concept proved disastrous to the Provisional movement so where’s the logic in repeating it when history clearly shows us what is necessary to avoid it?

Irish republicans have a duty of care to armed struggle. And Irish Republicans must provide leadership on this very matter. The factional provenance, of what can only be described as armed cabals, places them outside the remit of the IRA constitution and wholly unsuited to act in its name. The consequences of acting outside that constitution are, ironically, most clearly seen by the actions of the Provisional leadership who abdicated their responsibilities under that constitution to agree a partitionist settlement. And again, where is the logic in repeating that?

Armed struggle must come under the constitutional authority of a caretaker Army Executive made up of army members who held positions of authority. That Executive should be charged with setting out the basic requirements that any armed campaign would need to satisfy if any practical semblance of legitimacy could be afforded to it.

Armed struggle cannot advance the objectives of Irish republicanism at this juncture. Arbitrary violence acting in its name, devoid of any strategic merit or constitutional legitimacy, seriously undermines the effectiveness of armed struggle if and when the juncture does arise.

Lessons should be learnt from the ending of the IRA’s Border Campaign when its leadership concluded the following:

The leadership of the Resistance Movement has ordered the termination of the Campaign of Resistance to British occupation launched on 12 December 1956. Instructions issued to Volunteers of the Active Service Units and of local Units in the occupied area have now been carried out. All arms and other matériel have been dumped and all full-time active service volunteers have been withdrawn... Foremost among the factors motivating this course of action has been the attitude of the general public whose minds have been deliberately distracted from the supreme issue facing the Irish people – the unity and freedom of Ireland. The Irish resistance movement renews its pledge of eternal hostility to the British Forces of Occupation in Ireland. It calls on the Irish people for increased support and looks forward with confidence – in co-operation with the other branches of the Republican Movement – to a period of consolidation, expansion and preparation for the final and victorious phase of the struggle for the full freedom of Ireland.

The Provisional generation have failed. What needs to be bequeathed to the next generation is a simple and clear recognition of this fact. We cannot allow a circumstance where Irish republicanism is stifled because recalcitrant elements feel it necessary to sign off futile actions with the A to Z initial of the eponymous Mr O’Neill.

⏩ The Fenian Way was a full time activist during the IRA's war against the British. 

6 comments:

  1. The IRA is maybe best viewed as a tradition. How people can decommission IRA weaponry and then claim some fidelity to the IRA tradition beggars belief.
    It is a tradition best put to bed, the shelf life long since reached.
    What is happening now in the world of physical force republicanism is embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "The Irish Republican Army is the national army; the notion of there being more than one is a contradiction in terms. And being the national army its sole function is the defence of Irish sovereignty. "

    So how do you view the legitimacy of the Irish Defense Forces?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The origins of all the uprisings were borne out of the sense of resistance and desire for freedom. There have been outside influences --like the French Revolution, the American Consitution, American Civil Rights Movement etc. The late 20th century IRA then took their moral ligitamacy from the pre-amble from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly "Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,"

    The current batch of alphabet soup brigades are more posers, imposters and wannabes. They may be controlled by experienced people but not knowledgable people, they behave more like barroom brawlers than conscientious revolutionaries. They have lost the plot and their way and have done more to trash any tradition of resistance than to advance it. The current bunch disregard the writing on the wall that resort to the use of violence is strategically and morally senseless and indefencible. They have done more to benefit and enrich the Intel sector and conversely undermine or destroy the very cause they profess to be fighting for --fighting is a grossly exageration --they are more like a Pennywise entity out of a Steven King novel --periodically popping up every now and then to kill then going dormant again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Are there any respected republican thinkers or grandees that still argue for armed struggle? I know Dalton advocated for a ceasefire. Any left?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In private some might but given the risks of prosecution for advocating it, I doubt any would endorse it publicly.

      Delete
  5. The Provisionals are still on the pitch, albeit with a change of tactics, the opposition are down a couple of players and the game is entering the final phase. Open your eyes.

    ReplyDelete