BELFAST — TOMMY MCKEARNEY, a native of Moy, County Tyrone, is a former republican prisoner and one of the founding members of the Irish Republican Writers Group (IRWG). He currently works with Expac — the ex-prisoners' assistance committee — in County Monaghan. In March, the IRWG published the first issue of its quarterly journal, Fourthwrite.
The following interview was conducted by US-based Ireland solidarity activist STUART ROSS.
Can you give me a bit of background on the IRWG? How did it come about? How did Fourthwrite come about?
For many years there has been a number of left-leaning republicans (myself included) in Ireland who believed that the Sinn Fein party strategy was flawed. They argued that the Sinn Fein policy is in essence one of parliamentary reform and that such a tactic is incapable of transforming what is essentially the undemocratic entity that is the Northern Ireland state. These radical republicans, nevertheless, also believe that it is equally mistaken to promote blind militarism as an alternative to reformism.
Based on this analysis, the radicals decided that it is of the utmost importance to encourage and facilitate the creation of a new republican platform in Ireland. However their experience of a tendency towards elitism and authoritarianism within republicanism led the radicals to the conclusion that it is essential to have the widest possible participation in the formation of any new program in order that politics come from the people and not just directed at them. Hence the establishment of the IRWG and the launch of the magazine Fourthwrite.
Danny Morrison, Sinn Fein's former publicity director (1981-1990), reviewed the first issue of Fourthwrite in West Belfast's Andersonstown News (March 13). In that review, Morrison wrote: "... many of the articles and analyses in the new magazine have been written by deeply committed republicans who fought and suffered for their convictions, and whose families also suffered. The magazine cannot be ignored — but neither are its views to be specially weighted because of the people from whom they originate. That their opinions might be thoroughly outnumbered by the diametrically opposed views of other ex-lifers, ex-blanketmen or ex-hunger strikers, in support of Sinn Fein policy, does not invalidate the arguments expressed in Fourthwrite. Everyone else might be wrong."
Morrison singles out the ex-prisoner community — a community that is a very important part of the Sinn Fein constituency. In your work with ex-prisoners, do you find a strong support for Sinn Fein's peace strategy amongst "ex-lifers, ex-blanketmen or ex-hunger strikers"?
Your question raises a number of points. First is the identification by Danny Morrison of the ex-prisoner community. Significantly, Danny Morrison fears that our opinions might be "specially weighted because of the people from whom they originate". He views our impact through its emotional content and not its logical power. In many ways this allows him (and his colleagues in Sinn Fein) to evade the issues and concentrate on personalities. This is quite a common tactic used by Sinn Fein and it illustrates our point that open debate and intellectual analysis are of crucial importance and that options should not be decided as a result of sound-bites and half-truths.
The second point is that the "peace process" and the "political process" are not identical. After 30 years of brutal and desperately unequal war with a powerful enemy, the vast majority of republicans — including "ex-lifers, ex-blanketmen or ex-hunger strikers" — are content to have an end to war and conflict and the suffering and death that it brings in its wake. One should not confuse this as support for the political process.
It is only necessary to look back to the short-lived campaign organised by the Sinn Fein party in order to demand the restoration of the Stormont Assembly after [British Secretary of state] Peter Mandelson had suspended it. The party leaders tried to mobilise street demonstrations in support of their demands but their efforts were derisively unsupported.
In truth, there is little enthusiasm for the new Sinn Fein strategy at ground level. There is instead, a weary acceptance. In this respect, ex-prisoners are no different to the rest of the republican community — they share the views and hopes of their friends and neighbours.
In the first issue of Fourthwrite, you noted that "Irish republicanism at its best has been radical, democratic and revolutionary". Where did that vision go astray? What now differentiates Sinn Fein from the SDLP [Social-Democratic and Labour Party] or Fianna Fail?
If I might answer the last part of your question first — there is little difference in terms of policy and principle between Sinn Fein, the SDLP and Fianna Fail. What differences exist are more a matter of presentation, style and location of support than anything of real substance. Even references to the differences in the class make-up of their respective support bases are something of an illusion. There is a similarity here perhaps to the differing support bases for Ted Kennedy and Jesse Jackson in the US. Different yes, but ultimately all heading in the same direction.
Where the whole thing went wrong requires almost a book rather than a short answer. However, at the risk of being too brief, I would say that broadly speaking there are three main reasons: ambivalence in republicanism as a universal philosophy, the corrupting influence of Irish nationalism on Irish republicanism and specific contemporary factors.
Republicanism, Irish republicanism included, has often been radical, democratic and revolutionary. The problem is that as a universal philosophy it has not always tightly defined its understanding of these aspects or insisted on how these points are to be interpreted. In the 18th century for example, the republicanism of George Washington was radical, democratic and revolutionary. It was, objectively speaking, a tremendous step forward for human liberty at the time and set a platform upon which others have been able to build ever since. Yet the first election in Washington's republic denied the vote to black Americans, native Americans, Spanish Americans and female Americans.
Establishing an Irish republic has long depended on breaking the political connection with Britain. As a consequence of that and the inherent ambivalence within republicanism, Irish nationalism has always been able to have an influence on Irish republicanism. Nationalism is, by its nature, often given over to the cultural, tribal, insular parts of life. When these influences gain the upper hand within republicanism, it becomes possible to define success in terms of a series of concessions made to the tribe, party, community etc., rather than in terms of achievement for a philosophy or indeed the people as a whole.
When the two features outlined above are factored into the situation existing in the north of Ireland in the middle/late 1980s, it is possible to understand how an opportunistic and uninspired Republican leadership would abandon principle and opt for the less demanding course of parliamentary reformism. In the past, burned-out Irish republicans have often followed this path rather than attempt to construct a different, more radical/revolutionary approach to the attainment of the long held objective. In this respect, [Gerry] Adams and [Martin] McGuinness are no different to many others.
You've opened the pages of Fourthwrite to members of the pro-unionist community. What is your assessment of the recent political changes within unionism/loyalism? With an on-going loyalist feud and Willie McCrea's recent electoral victory, its difficult to see any positive change. Have politics within the pro-union community really changed that much?
As you have pointed out, unionism in some respects, has not changed at all. The loyalist feud and the Antrim by-election do indeed point to the unmovable side of the unionist constituency. Paradoxically though, it is this intransigence that is a major weakness in unionism.
A sufficiently large percentage of unionism is incapable of recognising that a change to consensus government is essential, if Northern Ireland is to survive in the long term. When this is coupled with the fact that there is no longer an economic rationale for either Protestant unionism or Ulster unionism, the underpinning logic and the underlying structure of the six-county Northern Irish state is removed.
The state is therefore inherently unstable. At the same time, it must also be undermined and removed. It is not enough to wait passively for it to wither away, as the Adams-McGuinness Sinn Fein party strategy advocates.
Thinking unionism — and it does exist — must therefore be confronted with the reality of their situation and encouraged to participate in a productive dialogue about a new Irish order rather than wallow in the old unionist position. This, and the need to remind republicans that 20% of the population cannot simply be ignored, is the reasoning behind our encouragement of pro-union participation in our magazine.
And what of the younger generation of republican activists? Are you encouraged by what you see and hear?
So long as we are talking about young republicans and not confining our examination to Ogra Sinn Fein [Sinn Fein Youth — the youth wing of the party], then I am encouraged by their progress overall. In the long run, Irish republicanism has never been disappointed in the youth of this country. If conditions are correct and are cultivated and if the proper means are used to effect change, the young people will carry out the necessary tasks.
[Abridged from Fourthwrite, Issue no.1, Spring 2000. Copies of the magazine may be obtained by writing to: Fourthwrite, PO BOX 31, Belfast, Ireland BT127EE. It is also on-line at:<http://rwg.phoblacht.net/>.]