Analysis: Ulster Says NO to Haass

Posted by Jim on January 18, 2014

 

 By Gerry Adams (for Leargas)

 

 

The Good Friday Agreement marked a historic shift in politics on the

island of Ireland and put in place a firm foundation from which it is

possible to continue building the peace process. For the first time

since partition, almost 100 years ago, there is an international

agreement involving the Irish and British governments, as well as

nationalist, republican and unionist parties on a way forward. This

includes power sharing political institutions which have the support of

the overwhelming majority of citizens.

 

The GFA tackles constitutional issues, political and institutional

matters, policing, weapons, justice and equality, and more. Subsequent

agreements at St. Andrews and Hillsborough built on this progress.

 

However, not all aspects of the Good Friday Agreement have been

implemented and outstanding issues like flags and emblems; the legacy of

the past; parades; equality and the status of the Irish language, as

well as culture and identity issues have continued to bedevil the

process.

 

This time last year Belfast witnessed rioting as loyalists attacked the

PSNI, the nationalist Short Strand area; and held illegal demonstrations

demanding the right to fly the Union flag whenever and wherever they

wanted. This issue and protests over orange parades have placed a

significant strain at times on the political institutions.

 

For that reason and because all of these difficult issues are not going

to go away the First and Deputy First Ministers – Peter Robinson and

Martin McGuinness – invited U.S. diplomats Richard Haass and Meghan O

Sullivan to come to the north and to chair an All Party Group to

‘consider and make recommendations on matters including parades and

protests; flags, symbols, emblems and related matters; and the Past’.

 

Just before Christmas the negotiations entered an intense phase. The

Sinn Fein Ard Chomhairle met on December 23rd and authorised our talk’s

team to conclude an agreement with the other parties to be considered by

a subsequent meeting of the Ard Chomhairle. In the last plenary

session, in the early hours of Christmas Eve morning, the Sinn Fein

negotiators told the other delegates that ‘we believe there is the basis

for an agreement on the mechanisms proposed to deal with the three

issues under consideration.’

 

But despite a succession of amended draft proposals from the two US

Diplomats the talks failed to reach agreement. There was a real sense

of public disappointment at that outcome, which Sinn Fein shared.

Progress had been made and the Sinn Fein negotiating team believed that

agreement could be reached.

 

Unionists indicated that they had serious problems with important parts

of the proposals.

 

However, Richard Haass and Meghan O Sullivan agreed to return for one

last push between Christmas and New Year. The negotiations recommenced

only to conclude after 5 am on December 31st without agreement. By that

stage we had reached the seventh draft of the Haass proposals. Some in

the media interpreted this as an abject failure. It wasn’t. The process

has not concluded.

 

The Haass proposals have now to be brought to each of the five party

leaderships by their negotiating teams. It is up to those leaderships to

decide whether the proposals offer another step forward and what should

happen next.

 

In my view significant progress was made and in particular on two of the

three issues – Parades, Select Commemorations and Protests; and

Contending with the Past and the proposals produced by Dr Haass and

Meghan O’Sullivan do provide the basis for an agreement.

 

Of course, like every negotiation the document that has been produced is

a compromise position. Sinn Fein would like to have seen some aspects

strengthened and improved further. However agreement on everything was

not possible. This is particularly the case on the Flags issue. Like

others we have little confidence that the proposed Commission on

Identity, Culture and Tradition will resolve these issues. We

nevertheless welcome the potential of this process for further

mainstreaming parity of esteem and equality.

 

I was also disappointed that issues like Acht Na Gaeilge and the

development at Maze/Long Kesh which were part of previous agreements,

were not advanced. They remain to be resolved in the time ahead. These

issues are not going away. Much more work is required on parity of

esteem, equality and respect for all cultures and identities.

 

Sinn Fein has consistently advocated direct meaningful dialogue as the

best means of resolving the few remaining parading disputes. In the

absence of dialogue or a failure to reach agreement over contentious

parades there is an obvious requirement for a robust regulatory body.

The proposals contained in the Haass paper meet that demand.

 

And over a decade ago Sinn Fein proposed the establishment of an

Independent International Truth Commission. In our view that remains the

best option. But a basis for compromise on this issue has been proposed.

That is what the majority of our people want. Closure for victims and

survivors is the real benchmark against which this proposition will in

time be judged.

 

It is a fact that the issues of parades, flags and emblems and the

legacy of the past cannot be ignored. They are too important. There is

an onus on the Irish and British governments and all of the parties to

maintain the momentum that was created in recent weeks and to build on

the progress achieved.

 

To this end I called for all of the parties not to fudge their response

to the Haass proposals. I called for clear statements of support.

Regrettably the Ulster Unionist Party and the DUP have decided not to

support the proposals. The difference between these two parties is

purely tactical. The DUP said more work needed to be done to the

proposals and called for an all-party working group to be established

while the Ulster Unionist Party has rejected the Haass proposals as

neither ‘viable or acceptable’. Two slightly different ways of Ulster

Saying No! With Peter Robinson taking a slightly more nuanced position

than Michael Nesbitt. Beag an difir.

 

Irish Republicans have stretched ourselves in the negotiations and we

are up for the challenge the Haass proposals contain. The Sinn Fein Ard

Chomhairle of the Party will meet this Saturday to review the outcome of

the talks process, and agree our response.

 

This is a time for political leaders to lead. Unionist leaders are

failing their constituents and ignoring the clear desire by the vast

majority of citizens who want to see agreement on these outstanding

issues.

 

The Haass paper can aid this project. I would urge anyone interested in

the future to access it online, and read and consider the proposals it

contains.

 

* The proposals are online at http://northernireland.gov.uk/haass.pdf