Moderate, sensible, cautionary voices from Irish nationalism and Ulster Unionism are rare enough. But they are still out there. In the past month I have been reading or listening to four of them: a former Tánaiste, a Southern Protestant, a Northern Orangeman and a distinguished international academic.
There is a lot I disagree with Michael McDowell on (particularly on refugees and migration). But he often talks sense when it comes to the North. He was writing in the Irish Times earlier this month about most voters in the Republic wanting “Northern institutions to bed down rather than polarise the North with a Border poll for which there is no likelihood of a majority [for unity] for a decade at least.
“Rekindling smouldering constitutional and sectarian questions in Northern Ireland at this point is counter-productive; slow and steady reconciliation and positive mutual engagement in the North is what is needed by both parts of the island.”1
Ian D’Alton, a historian and member of the Southern Protestant community, had an interesting letter in that paper last month.2 “They still don’t get it,” he wrote. “Northern unionists don’t want Irish unity. It’s not transactional; it’s existential. They do not envisage themselves, ever, as citizens of an Irish republic. And the likes of Leo Varadkar’s call for all-island ‘unity’ as an objective of all political parties will do nothing to change unionists’ minds. It will be as successful as the Anti-Partition League which tried this tack between 1945 and 1958.
“Indeed, it is likely to increase further the sense of siege and cultural colonisation already provoked by the promotion of ‘Irishness’ in Northern Ireland, principally through the language…To get a flavour of what this means for unionists, try turning it around. How would we in the South feel if Northern unionists aggressively started and funded a campaign for the Republic to rejoin the United Kingdom?
“Things should take their course. It may seem boring and agonisingly slow. But for the foreseeable future there will be no Border poll. Despite the demographics, there’s still a sizeable majority for Northern Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom. All we can usefully do is to dial down the rhetoric and excited talk of imminent unity.”
He then quoted Bolton Waller, Anglican cleric and moderate nationalist, who a hundred years ago made a submission to the Boundary Commission. He argued that three things had to happen to allow the island to find peace with itself: “a customs union which would mitigate the worst economic effects of the Border; the satisfaction of legitimate grievances of the minorities, north and south; and cooperation between the two jurisdictions.”
D’Alton says it took until the 1990s for these “three conditions to be met even in part” [although I would argue that the Good Friday Agreement and pre-Brexit joint membership of the European Union by the UK and Ireland largely satisfied all of them]. He concluded that “we still do not have the sort of Ireland that Waller imagined it could be if they had been met in full. And until we do, ‘unity’ as an objective rather than an aspiration is a dangerous chimaera that will only entrench attitudes on both sides.”
‘Choyaa’ is the pen name of a straight-talking Fermanagh Orangeman who often contributes to the widely-read Slugger O’Toole website. In his latest contribution,3 he was critical of the apparent priority of many unionists of opposing an Irish language nursery and primary school in East Belfast. “In light of this narrow focus, it is little wonder that many are turning away from unionism. My own journey as a Unionist has been exhausting and frustrating, witnessing a series of humiliations and yielding little in return, leaving me to question whether this movement is – or ever can be – fit for purpose.”
He bemoaned the growing sense of isolation that many Unionists in Fermanagh and other parts of the west of Northern Ireland feel. This was particularly evident during July’s Westminster election. The Ulster Unionist Party locally “expressed its reluctance to continue being the standard-bearer for unionism in the west, stating this would be their last attempt if they lost, as the seat would no longer be winnable. The towel was well and truly thrown in before the polls had opened. Eastern Unionists appear to agree with the UUP’s assessment and have now deemed Fermanagh South Tyrone unwinnable, adding it to a growing list that includes West Tyrone, Mid Ulster, North Belfast, South Belfast, South Down, and, undoubtedly, East Londonderry will soon join this list. For a movement that often regurgitates the mantra of ‘no surrender,’ Unionism is very quick to declare seats as being unwinnable once they’re lost.
“There is a growing sense among Unionists that, outside of areas like Lagan Valley, East Belfast, Bangor, Donaghadee, Ballymena, and Newtownards, the rest of Northern Ireland is of little concern to the main parties. On election night, the DUP candidate for West Tyrone, Tom Buchanan, was notably mentioned by a BBC reporter as “feeling confident.” However, this confidence was only in retaining second place in West Tyrone – a rather dismal position, being 16,000 votes behind Sinn Féin and just 973 votes ahead of the SDLP. In 2001, the UUP held this seat, but today Unionism’s goal in the region has been reduced to merely clinging to a distant second place and even that looks precarious.”
‘Choyaa’ said Mike Nesbitt had returned as UUP leader “seemingly by default, with all other alternatives exhausted…However, the party remains as divided and directionless as ever, unsure whether it wants to be liberal or conservative, a softer version of the DUP, or a moderate alternative like the Alliance Party.”
Turning to the DUP, he said one of the few bright spots for Unionism in the Westminister election had been “Gavin Robinson’s comfortable return as MP for East Belfast, triumphing over a formidable opponent in Naomi Long and despite facing two additional unionist challengers. Robinson benefits from significant goodwill, partly due to the circumstances in which he assumed leadership within the DUP, and his personal popularity often extends beyond that of the party itself. However, this goodwill is not indefinite. To maintain and expand support, Robinson will need to be seen as a reformer, bringing change across the board within the DUP…Currently the DUP is synonymous with religious fundamentalism, incompetence, scandal, and corruption, and these negative associations are unlikely to fade without significant reform…The DUP must overhaul its internal processes, leadership, advisors and engage with a broad section of the public if it wishes to survive politically.”
He gave the example of the party’s failure to discipline Ian Paisley Junior. Ultimately voters in North Antrim grew tired of the repeated controversies he was involved in and voted to remove him. “Gone are the days when scandals can be brushed under the carpet or dismissed with sentiments like ‘Ian will be Ian’. Similarly the loss of South Antrim was down to Paul Girvan’s invisibility both in the constituency and at Westminster. The historical sex abuse charges Jeffrey Donaldson faces “cast a long shadow over both the DUP and Unionism more broadly. The DUP will struggle to distance itself from this, and Donaldson’s legacy will likely affect the party for some time to come.”
“Compounding the individual issues within constituencies is the fact that the DUP faces a profound trust deficit. A spate of scandals over the years has exhausted the public and it’s always a case of when and not if the next one will appear. Its inability to acknowledge its mistakes – particularly in the handling of Brexit – and its persistent tendency to shift blame onto others only serves to further alienate voters. The party needs to take responsibility for its failures, clearly outline how it plans to address the significant challenges facing Northern Ireland, and present a cohesive vision that people can support. The DUP cannot expect other Unionists to rally behind it while it appears directionless and perpetually in crisis mode. The lack of new talent coming into the party should also raise alarm bells.”
‘Choyaa’ then turned to the strange prominence of the unelected young loyalist agitator Jamie Bryson. “While I don’t seek to deny Jamie Bryson his right to free speech, I have serious concerns about the platform he enjoys, particularly the disproportionate airtime on the BBC, the connections he maintains within various Unionist parties, and the damage he inflicts on unionism. His tweets and messages seem solely aimed at causing division, attacking individuals, and contradicting almost every topic he touches upon. Bryson continually attacks the violent wings of republicanism, yet is happy to defend loyalist paramilitaries, even appearing on the BBC defending the East Belfast UVF.
“Unionists, myself included, are guilty of allowing Jamie Bryson unlimited airtime to promote his views as if they represent mainstream unionism. In doing so, we have allowed unionism to be mocked, derided, and caricatured, and frankly, we deserve nothing else. Unionism urgently needs new representatives across all media platforms, including TV, radio, newspapers, and online forums.
“The lack of civic unionist forums in Northern Ireland to discuss and collaborate on unionist concerns remains a glaring issue. While a few small online groups exist, they lack real-world engagement and have little presence. In contrast, the nationalist camp boasts multiple groups, widespread engagement, and numerous forums dedicated to furthering their cause. Unionism is poorly organised at the grassroots level, evident in the absence of clear leadership among loyalists, who are instead represented by figures like Jamie Bryson and the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC). The LCC itself is extremely controversial. Its goal was to transition loyalist paramilitaries away from violence, but with these groups still active, it is clear the LCC is failing.
“Unionism, and by extension loyalism, has become obsessed with what it opposes, pouring the majority of its energy into resistance. Rarely, if ever, is a positive case put forward for the Union, leaving opponents to easily point out that there is none. Unionists oppose the Irish language school but do little to address the significant educational underachievement within Unionist communities. They heavily criticise IRA commemorations; yet this criticism is undermined when the same Unionists (including politicians) attend loyalist paramilitary parades or negotiate policies with active paramilitary groups. They oppose people like Leo Varadkar advocating for Irish unification but fail to present a counter-case for the Union. Unionists oppose unification while, ironically, doing everything possible to make it possible. Unionism must start driving forward messages and initiatives of its own rather than latching onto everything it opposes, which usually ends up being implemented anyway. Unionism is truly in a sorry state, and whilst I am not currently on a constitutional road to Damascus, Unionism is doing everything possible to change that.”
Finally, a few words from Professor (and Dame) Louise Richardson, who after Mary Robinson is probably the most distinguished Irishwoman in the world today. This renowned expert on terrorism and international relations (who is a fluent Irish speaker) has been successively vice-chancellor of St Andrews University in Scotland; the first female vice-chancellor of Oxford University, and president of the Carnegie philanthropic corporation in New York. I heard her speak at an ARINS (Analysing and Researching Ireland North and South) event in the Royal Irish Academy earlier this month on Britishness and Irishness. I asked her to comment on the contradiction between the instinctive anti-Britishness still felt by large numbers people in the South (which she admitted she shared as a young person) at a time when we are trying to attract Northern Unionists, that instinctively and passionately pro-British community, into a united Ireland.
She said because Irish unity is “not a realistic proposition” currently, we haven’t had to face up to the difficult “trade offs” that will eventually be needed if it is ever to come about. She pointed to the example of Irish neutrality. What will be the trade off to bring that part of Ireland which is currently within NATO into a currently neutral Irish state?
1 ‘Sinn Fein’s leaders like puppets for unseen controllers’, 23 October
2 ‘Varadkar should dial down talk of unity’, Letters to the Editor, 27 September
3 ‘Unfit for Purpose? Unionism’s struggle for relevance in modern Northern Ireland’, 29 September
Andy Pollak retired as founding director of the Centre for Cross Border Studies in July 2013 after 14 years. He is a former religious affairs correspondent, education correspondent, assistant news editor and Belfast reporter with the Irish Times.
Discover more from Slugger O’Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
