Chris Donnelly: Irish unity offers the best route to reconciliation and stability.
By any objective analysis, it is the conduct of unionism’s political leadership which continues to cause the greatest source of political and community upheaval.
Tánaiste Dick Spring and Secretary of State Tom King (centre) look on as Margaret Thatcher and Garrett Fitzgerald sign the Anglo-Irish Agreement 40 years ago in November 1985
By Chris Donnelly
November 17, 2025 at 6:00am GMT
During her inauguration speech last week, the new Uachtarán na hÉireann, Catherine Connolly, appropriately referenced Article 3 of the Irish Constitution and its explicit commitment on behalf of the Irish people to work towards a united Ireland, consistent with the principle of consent as enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement.
As conversations continue and indeed expand on the prospect of Irish unification, it has become obvious that we need a cold, hard public discussion on how media framing, north and south, continues to betray a residual bias in favour of the unionist position, in spite of the change that has dropped slowly yet decisively over the past 30 years.
As I outlined in my last column, it is apparent in the manner in which the permanent veto against a Catholic ever becoming the British head of state is not deemed an issue worthy of discussion – and certainly of no significance regarding the constitutional position – yet sectarian comments attributed to online trolls during the Irish presidential campaign were elevated to a matter which allegedly indicated how unionists would not be welcome in a united Ireland.
At no point during coverage of the decision by the DUP to not attend the presidential inauguration in Dublin were senior DUP politicians challenged about what message their non-attendance sent to ordinary nationalists regarding respect for their identity and community whilst continuing to live in the United Kingdom today.
It is apparent in the oft-cited expectation that Irish unity must lead to a change of the national flag and national anthem, yet no such measures would even be countenanced regarding the union flag and God Save The King in order to maintain the union at present.
That is not to say such changes are not without merit and serious consideration by nationalists, but rather as an act of generosity as opposed to an expectation rooted in an unwarranted sense of entitlement.
It is apparent in the fact that no nationalist would consider compelling a unionist TD to swear an oath of loyalty to the Irish Republic in order to simply attend the Dáil in a united Ireland, yet nationalist MPs wishing to attend Westminster today continue to be publicly humiliated by swearing an oath of loyalty to the British monarch, without ever meriting discussion on the message that is sent to the Irish nationalist population in this place.
In an exchange with the presenter during the most recent episode of the BBC NI Borderlands podcast series, an interviewee commented regarding the prospect of a united Ireland that “you need to unite Belfast first”.
That is, of course, utter nonsense.
The city’s sectarian divisions have been evident and resulted in sporadic episodes of violence for more than 150 years. At no point has the fact that these have always happened whilst the city was under British jurisdiction meant that the existing constitutional status of the north of Ireland has been deemed null and void.
The very fact the continuation of the north of Ireland as a part of the United Kingdom has abjectly failed to both decisively address matters of reconciliation and to provide a stable political environment only adds credence to the belief that only Irish unity can provide a framework within which communities can better be reconciled and political stability achieved over time.
By any objective analysis, it is the conduct of unionism’s political leadership which continues to cause the greatest source of political and community upheaval.
The former tánaiste Dick Spring foolishly commented in 1993 that unionists should have the freedom to “withhold their consent” from constitutional change “unless and until they are persuaded by democratic means only”.
The context of his speech was amidst a particularly dreadful spate of killings across the north of Ireland and as background talks were clearly intensifying to clear a path to ceasefires that would come the following summer.
But it was careless talk nonetheless as it supported the undemocratic notion that unionism in itself had a veto on constitutional change, an affirmation (even if unintentional) of the Orange card manufactured and sustained by British brute force throughout centuries of Irish history to the detriment of all calling this place home.
As if to prove that some people never learn, the one-time Labour Party leader resurfaced last week to declare that Ireland was not “ready” for a unification referendum.
Instead, Mr Spring suggested it would be better for the north to simply “develop relationships with the south, economic relationships in particular”.
As the DUP’s non-attendance at Catherine Connolly’s inauguration illustrates, opposing partnership and greater co-operation is a central tenet of political unionism’s strategy.
It is also why Emma Little-Pengelly had the temerity to believe she should vocally oppose the notion of Irish citizens in the north being able to vote in future Irish presidential elections.
Only those blinded by ignorance, naivete or a lack of genuine experience of northern affairs would maintain that propping up a unionist veto or setting wildly unrealistic demands as a condition for Irish unity are appropriate at this time.
The problems besetting this society will not disappear in advance of Irish unity.
Enduring reconciliation and political stability will best be served by constitutional change. The sooner that is realised, the better.
If you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article and would like to submit a Letter to the Editor to be considered for publication
Unionists should learn the lessons from history and the AIA – The Irish News view
The Anglo-Irish Agreement is signed in 1985 at Hillsborough Castle by then prime minister Margaret Thatcher and taoiseach Garret FitzGerald
By The Irish News
November 17, 2025 at 6:00am GMT
The Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA), which was signed 40 years ago at the weekend by British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and taoiseach Garret FitzGerald, was a major development in its own right, with two direct consequences which were arguably of greater significance.
They were that it paved the way for the Good Friday Agreement 13 years later, and also that it demonstrated starkly how placing faith in the British government brings even more risks for unionists than it does for nationalists.
The AIA established an intergovernmental conference which was headed by the north’s secretary of state, Tom King, and the Irish foreign minister, Peter Barry, with the British government officially accepting for the first time that it was prepared to facilitate a united Ireland if it was backed by a majority of voters.
Closer cooperation between Dublin and London, and a full acceptance of democratic principles on both sides, during a period of appalling violence across the board, should have been regarded as a positive development but unionist leaders were beside themselves with anger.
They portrayed the AIA as a shocking betrayal, but they consistently failed to acknowledge that they had entirely failed to anticipate the scale of the accord which was ratified in a ceremony at Hillsborough Castle, with James Molyneaux, the then Ulster Unionist leader, among those who were convinced that a new political initiative involving all-Ireland links was simply not going to happen.
When the AIA was nonetheless unveiled, there was also a completely misplaced belief among many unionists that they could force its abandonment by staging a repeat of the Ulster Workers Council strike which had brought down the first power-sharing executive in 1974.
The Ulster Says No campaign did bring large numbers on to the streets, starting with a massive rally at Belfast City Hall eight days after the Hillsborough ceremony, but it failed to shake the resolve of Downing Street, and it ultimately faded away as the violence surrounding the subsequent protests alienated many mainstream unionists.
Unionists failed to learn the lessons of history when in the post-Brexit period they enthusiastically supported another Conservative prime minister, Boris Johnson, in 2019, only to find that he deceived them over the Northern Ireland Protocol and the subsequent Windsor Framework.
It is verging on the astonishing that some senior unionists are now openly expressing admiration for Nigel Farage, and hoping that his Reform party heads the next British administration, even though he is at least as unreliable a figure as Mr Johnson.
The message for unionists should be that their best interests lie in working closely with nationalists at Stormont rather than engaging again in the kind of fundamental misjudgements which surrounded both Brexit and the AIA.
If you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article and would like to submit a Letter to the Editor to be considered for publication
I have been lucky in my life to have the opportunity to work with dedicated, thoughtful, and driven activists. Men and women who endured hardship, loss, and imprisonment. Experiences that would have broken most people. They continue to work day in and day out to build a new and united Ireland.
I am sure you have met similar people in your life. Those who struggled for change, respect, and justice, or to keep their families afloat and their heads above water. The true heroes in our lives.
When times were tough, a colleague would remind us that we were engaged in “struggle”, and it was called that because it was hard work! Nothing of value ever comes easy. It is the nature of struggle that we face hardships and setbacks which must be overcome. Motivation is maintained by keeping one eye on the present, one on the goal, and remembering to celebrate small victories along the way.
This week, those of us working for unity and the building of a 32-county Irish Republic had reason to celebrate: the inauguration of Catherine Connolly as Uachtarán na hÉireann (Irish President).
She was elected with a massive majority over the Irish government candidate. Sinn Féin, along with all of the opposition parties, supported her campaign.
In her inauguration speech, she reiterated the major themes of her campaign that would now be the priorities for her time in office. She sought to define a new Irish Republic of equal citizens that was united, modern, and inclusive, infused with the strength of Irish culture and experience. It was a speech for our times and stood in stark contrast to the “keep things as they are” vision of the Irish government as it lurches from crisis to crisis of its own making.
In a section on Irish Unity, she referenced Article 3 of the Constitution, which sets out the firm wish of the Irish nation to have a united Ireland and is committed to working to that end with the consent of the people north and south. Looking over her shoulder and nodding in agreement was the former leader of Fine Gael and Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar. Ministers in today’s government sat stony-faced.
The new President has an expansive view of the Irish Nation, acknowledging the role of the diaspora in sharing and celebrating Irish Culture. She recognised her own family members who had travelled home from Canada and the USA.
Irish Culture is going through a renaissance. In Ireland, our language, sports, arts, and music have never been stronger. Connolly previously shared the story of how, as an adult, she learnt Irish, and how it is central to her and the Irish identity. The promotion of the language will be a priority for her presidency.
No doubt President Connolly will face many challenges as she works alongside a government with no vision and opposing priorities and policies. But this week, we celebrate her election as we keep an eye on the bigger picture.
In the words of the new Uachtarán na hÉireann, “I believe that the President should be a unifying presence—a steady hand, yes, but also a catalyst for change reflecting our desire for a Republic that lives up to its name.”
Have a great weekend
Ciarán
Ciarán Quinn is the Sinn Féin Representative to North America
A house set ablaze in Ballymena as trouble erupted in town
Viewpoint
Wed 11 Jun 2025 at 05:00
The PSNI has been warning for months that it takes just one major incident to expose the deficit in resources to safely police Northern Ireland.
Events in Ballymena demonstrate that some policing demands simply cannot be planned for in advance.
Northern Ireland has a serious problem with violence against women and girls. That is not opinion but fact, borne out in statistics that show we have some of the worst rates of domestic abuse and femicide in Europe.
People are right to be angry when it comes to the protection of women and girls.
The issue is a societal one, a hangover from our troubled past, a symptom of a violently armed patriarchy.
Protecting women requires a shift in societal attitudes, from early years education to proper policing and justice.
It requires the promotion of positive male role models, not the Andrew Tate-style online agitators.
Two 14-year-olds have been charged, while a third is still being sought.
That the suspects are the children of migrants was revealed by court reports that confirmed that they required a Romanian interpreter.
The media is greatly restricted in what it can report in live cases, particularly those involving juveniles.
But there is no getting away from the fact that many of those who landed in Ballymena on Monday, determined to engage in violence, would not have been there only for the nationality of the suspects.
The family members who organised a protest following the weekend attack did so in good faith. But the reality is, when people are called onto the streets, the results can be unpredictable.
Within hours of the call for a peaceful protest, social media pages linked to far-right organisations were urging people to travel to the town.
The result was violence on a scale not seen there for years, with injuries to police officers and homes destroyed by fire and vandalism.
In 2018, when Britain First leader Paul Golding arrived in Ballymena making false allegations about the allocation of housing, he was sent packing by the good people of that town.
The false narrative about an ‘invasion’ of foreign migrants was, at the time, challenged by the DUP’s Paul Frew, who used facts to debunk myths.
Mr Frew produced figures from the Northern Ireland Housing Executive showing that of all the properties allocated in the preceding 12 months, 2.5% were allocated to ‘Persons from Abroad’.
Following Monday’s violence, it is for politicians to follow that lead and show leadership, to help calm rather than inflame tensions.
