Mr Blair is right to demand IRA deeds as well as words
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Gerry Adams, the leader of the political wing of the IRA, does a nice line in sarcasm. In response to the three questions put by Tony Blair to the IRA last week, he had one question for the Prime Minister. Just which part of "no activities" was it that Mr Blair did not understand? The IRA leadership, he said, "is determined that there would be no activities that would undermine in any way the peace process or the Good Friday Agreement".
His demeanour of frustration, being forced to clarify his clarification of an IRA statement that he insisted was clear in the first place, was convincing. But it does not withstand examination. The part of "no activities" that no one outside the closed ranks of republicanism understands is the gap between Mr Adams' words and the reality.
The IRA has proclaimed its support for the peace process since the Good Friday Agreement was signed five years ago. All the time, legs have been broken, guns have been run, Colombian terrorists have been trained, lists of prison officers have been stolen and weapons have been retained.
Mr Adams' words are the right words, but Mr Blair's questions were essentially about how the unionist majority in Northern Ireland could trust the IRA to deliver on them. One of his questions was whether the Sinn Fein leadership was speaking for the IRA. On the face of them, Mr Adams' words could be merely descriptive. He could be saying what he thinks the IRA's position is.
The best test of the IRA's sincerity would be for it to cease the activities listed by Mr Blair and Bertie Ahern, the Irish prime minister, as incompatible with the Good Friday Agreement. But unionists, and the rest of the world, would need time to be sure that they really had ceased. In the absence of greater openness about how precisely Mr Adams expects the "determination" of the IRA's leadership to be carried out, waiting is the only option.
Given also that the pro-Agreement republicans want the Assembly elections more than pro-Agreement unionists do, it makes sense to use them as leverage over Mr Adams.
Mr Blair was right, therefore, to postpone the elections until such time as republican words and actions converge.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments