Democracy in Northern Ireland Gerry O'Shea
If we identify a functioning
democracy as a political system where the principle of majority rule prevails,
then Northern Ireland has a sad and unfortunate history.
Decades of agitation resulted in a 1914 Home
Rule Bill passing in Westminster that yielded some limited powers to a
government in Dublin. Irish nationalists celebrated this new proposal, seeing
it as a first step to a fuller system of self-rule.
However Unionists, who were
strong numerically in the province of Ulster, virulently opposed any
involvement with a Dublin government because they feared that Home Rule would
inevitably lead to Rome Rule, and they also viewed the majority Catholic culture
as inferior to what the Protestant Ascendancy had to offer.
They organized and trained a large and
determined militia and imported big quantities of arms from Germany warning the
British Government that they were willing to fight with guns and bombs any
effort to implement the Home Rule Bill passed in parliament.
They got important support
from the officer corps of the British Army, stationed in the Curragh in County
Kildare, who told Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister, that they would
refuse to obey any order to impose the new Westminster law on the rebels in the
North. This daring ultimatum, surely bordering on treason, known as the Curragh
Mutiny, never happened in any section of the British Army before or since these
officers' defiant declaration in March, 1914.
A bad start for Northern
democracy, although it should be said that the Unionists' fear that a Dublin
parliament would inevitably lead to a dominant role for the Catholic hierarchy
was fully justified when the new Free State administration took over in Dublin in 1923.
However, following the
democratic norm requiring majority agreement,
Unionists faced another major obstacle: the nationalist population of
the island opposed the idea of partitioning the country.
Furthermore, while Unionists
had identified themselves as Ulster Protestants, they decided that all nine
counties of the province might well lead to an ungovernable statelet with a
possible Catholic majority emerging. So,
they cut off three counties with strong nationalist populations: Monaghan,
Donegal and Cavan.
They wanted a cut-to-measure place where they
could command a majority that guaranteed their dominance over the other tribe, Catholics,Taigs,
who were widely despised by their Protestant neighbors as inferior people with
a backward, priest-ridden religion.
Scholars associate this kind
of territorial manipulation with crude majoritarianism where a majority in any
situation can use superior numbers to justify political decisions to benefit themselves,
without regard to wider principles of
law. This ruling protocol defined the Loyalist practice of democracy.
The story of how Unionist
parties for more than fifty years discriminated against the nationalist
population has been retold many times. Their modus operandi involved blatant
prejudice against Catholics in housing, employment, law enforcement and voting
rights. They were in a majority and in their convenient understanding of
democracy they could behave towards Catholics with impunity in ways very
similar to how whites treated blacks in the American South under Jim Crow.
Flipping ahead to the current
Brexit crisis and the June 2016 referendum throughout the United Kingdom which
resulted in a slight majority voting to leave the European Union, but the
people in Northern Ireland and Scotland cast their ballots to remain.
The Tory government in
Westminster seems headed helter-skelter for a no-deal Brexit with the full
support of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). In the May European elections
the DUP got just over 20% of the vote at the Belfast count; the other two
parties that won seats, Sinn Fein and the Alliance Party, both strongly favor
remaining part of Europe.
The bottom line from a
democratic perspective is that the clear will of the majority in Northern
Ireland is being ignored in the most important political decision in many
generations. Sinn Fein with seven elected MP's should allow these public
representatives to articulate an Irish perspective in important Westminster debates
about the future of their country.
Businesses in Northern
Ireland need to continue their easy access to the huge European market; the
option of possible new trade deals with
other countries seems far-fetched and impractical.
Farmers in all of Ireland benefit
enormously from money coming from Europe. How will the Northern farmers survive
when the loss of Brussels subsidies amounting to 70% of their income becomes
their new reality?
All parties in Northern
Ireland subscribe to the 1998 Belfast Agreement which closed the physical
infrastructure on the Irish border, ending military checkpoints and all the
paraphernalia of territorial control. To ensure that there can be no return to
the bad old days, Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, and the European
leaders agreed that the terms of a final settlement would include what they
call a backstop.
This would be a firm insurance policy, an
absolute guarantee, that there will be no change in the status quo on the Irish
border when the final exit document is signed. It means that the UK would
remain part of the European customs territory, following all their rules, until
a trade deal is agreed that must leave the present arrangements for an
unsupervised Irish Border intact.
This backstop would be a
permanent feature unless some new customs
agreement can be reached that satisfies
Europe, and they are very unlikely to sign off on any deal that doesn't have approval
from Dublin.
Consider the striking irony
in the fact that a hundred years ago the British drew a partition line through
their neighboring island at the behest of rebellious Loyalists but with no
consideration for the wishes of the majority of Irish people, who weren't even
consulted about the momentous act of dividing their country.
Today the Europeans are
standing with the Dublin Government and saying to Westminster in unambiguous
language that the backstop is non-negotiable and that, effectively, any deal
will have to have the imprimatur of the Southern government.
The DUP is stuck in the past,
still preaching old fundamentalist dogmas that do not resonate with many young
people today. In a recent survey just 26% of the people in the North described
themselves as unionists, down from 32% just one year ago. Today 50% of the
population do not see themselves as nationalist or unionist - in 1998 only one
third demurred from defining themselves in traditional tribal categories.
Meanwhile the two nationalist
parties in the North, Sinn Fein and the SDLP, are encouraging their supporters
to spell out what they mean by a united Ireland. How will people who are proud of their British
identity be treated? Would a nationalist majority use their numbers to lord it
over loyalists as happened in reverse for so many years?
The debate needs to take
place. Alliance Party supporters should be listened to carefully. A
consultative forum is called for, after the Brexit debacle ends, where the
emerging silent majority talk through the kind of new Northern Ireland that
meets the needs of people in the 21st century. This time we hope that a real
democracy will emerge.
Gerry O'Shea blogs at wemustbetalking.com
Comments
Post a Comment