ALEX KANE: Old pals’ act is out of the question
THERE are moments when I have to bang my head against a wall or table just to reassure myself that I haven’t been transported to some sort of parallel universe where nonsense is the currency of political debate and hypocrisy the only vehicle for political promotion.
It happened again earlier this week when I heard Martin McGuinness’ comment: “I’ve made it clear that the visit of Queen Elizabeth of Britain to the south was something that we looked at with considerable interest.
“I think the fact that she was prepared to recognise the importance of the Irish language, that she was prepared to stand in a very dignified way to honour those patriots who struggled in 1916 to bring about a free and independent 32-county Irish Republic, that made an impact upon me.
“So that’s an issue that I will ponder, and I wouldn’t rule anything out.”
Go on, read that again. The man who was intimately involved with a terrorist organisation that killed and maimed Her Majesty’s citizens and security forces; that came close on two occasions to assassinating her prime ministers; and that favoured the bloody dismemberment of the country of which she is head of state, says that he still has some difficulties about meeting and greeting her!
Has anyone thought about Her Majesty in all of this? I’m sure the prospect of meeting Martin McGuinness and shaking a hand that has given the thumbs-up to some pretty nasty stuff in the past few decades is one that doesn’t fill her with much enthusiasm.
A bit like finding herself stuck beside Robert Mugabe at a dinner celebrating democracy and human rights progress within the Commonwealth.
Or almost as surreal as the sight of Mr McGuinness at St James’s Palace last week to promote Northern Ireland: yes, the same Northern Ireland the IRA did so much to deter investors and tourists from for so long and the same Northern Ireland that Mr McGuinness wants to detach from the UK and bundle into a banana republic that has very few bananas left.
Anyway, having banged my head a few more times and realised that this is as good as it gets, it made me wonder if it is possible for a unionist – or even someone from the wider pro-Union family – to actually like Martin McGuinness. But before you start coming up with your own answers to that question let me set down a rule: this has nothing to do with how he presents himself or how good a job he does as deputy First Minister. No, my question is more blunt than that: is it possible for someone from the unionist community to like a man who was involved with the IRA and who still justifies a terror campaign that did so much political, physical and psychological damage to unionists, individually and collectively?
In other words, could any unionist reading this piece ever imagine a time in which they could look upon Martin McGuinness as a friend? Imagine a time when they could go fishing with him, or share the quiet companionship of a pint and chat about the family?
Imagine a time when they could look at him and not wonder how heavily he was involved with terrorism or whether he ever approved murder or torture? Imagine a time when they could stop wondering if murderers still walk free (or even sit in the Assembly) because he has not told the truth about them?
Imagine a time when they could rid themselves of all of those questions, forgive him and embrace him as a trusted, be-seen-in-public-together friend?
The general unionist reaction to the Rev David Latimer’s praise of McGuinness at Sinn Fein’s conference in the Waterfront Hall last autumn suggests that he represents a very small minority (it may be as small as a handful) who could ever describe McGuinness as “my friend”.
Now, for reasons that have never really been clear to me (and maybe it has something to do with a religious background that allows him more scope for forgiveness), Mr Latimer was able to see McGuinness as just another human being.
Yet it struck me that the invitation to address Sinn Fein was an exploitation of that friendship rather than a celebration of it. And I’m not saying that as a criticism of Mr Latimer: I’m simply making an observation as someone who was at the conference and who watched the reaction of the audience.
Does it matter that the overwhelming majority of unionists would never be able to regard McGuinness as a friend?
Indeed, does it matter that the overwhelming majority of republicans would never be able to regard some unionists or loyalists as friends? I’m not sure. Since our government is based on mandatory coalition it probably doesn’t matter all that much, because Sinn Fein and Unionists will always be in government, irrespective of how they view each other.
Yet what about the long-term and the building of a shared future? It doesn’t really matter how many shared future strategies you put in place, let alone how much legislative support you prop them up with.
If a majority of people on both sides can’t cross the bridges and genuine friendships ‘across the divide’ don’t become the norm, then a shared future and shared society cannot happen.
You cannot construct a shared future while the heart of government remains locked down in mutual veto and you cannot build a shared society while electoral politics is still dominated by parties whose past and future remain rooted in pre-Agreeement conflict.
Since I asked the question earlier, let me answer it. No, I cannot imagine a time when I would ever be friends with someone like Martin McGuinness. I cannot imagine a time when I could forgive what the IRA did to people I knew and cared about. I cannot imagine a time when I would even want to say: “This is my friend Martin.”
I cannot even imagine a time when I could say that having Sinn Fein in my government is a good thing rather than a shrug-of-the-shoulders unpleasant reality.
Oddest of all, though – because I don’t entirely understand it myself-– I give those answers with a certain amount of satisfaction rather than any hint of regret.
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Belfast
Thursday 24 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 12 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 7 mph
Wind direction: South east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 12 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 18 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 7 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
Alex. Kane
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 at 03:26 PMHi Topperharvey: I'm not sure why you seem so certain that "Ulster people were moving on from the past." There is---after almost 14 years of the Agreement---no consensus on a shared future. The electorate has endorsed an Executive carve-up between the DUP and SF, parties which rely on mutal veto and have contradictory interpretations of the Agreement. And the Maze future is still causing problems. My question about McGuinness is, I think, a relevant one: until we reach a time when unionists can think of SF without also thinking of theIRA and nationalistscan think of unionism without thinking of B SpecialsRUCgerrymandering etc etc then for so long will it be difficult to escape from the past. It's not about dragging anything up, it's about honestly addressing the problems we still face. Regards. Alex.
Topperharvey
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 at 11:12 AMAlex you didn't mention Tony Blair and how he has become a ambassador for peace! Iraq springs to mind. The slaughter and indeed torture of Iraqis and the thousands of deaths - innocent men woman and children. Why single out one man when there is far worse people in our own unionist community. I actually thought Ulster people were moving on from the past but people like you seem to delight in dragging it up
Alex. Kane
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 at 10:08 AMMorning belfastview: I mentioned in the article that the question applies to both sides of thecommunity. Also, since the electorate aremade up of ordinary people then the question matters to them too; because if they, individually, find ithard to cross bridges then they will continue to vote for parties rooted in the past. Regards. Alex.
belfastview
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:58 PM1. There were terrorists on both sides. Are we anti terrorism or just certain terrorism? 2. It only really matters who the electorate like?
seamus11
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 05:53 PMAlex not a hard question to answer when most of his own don`t even trust him never mind like him.
Alex. Kane
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 09:27 AMMorning ardens: "acceptable" is not the same as being "liked". My point wasn't about the political necessity for Robinson or anyone else to have to share the OFMDFM with McGuinness, it was about whether it was possible for most unionists to ever form a genuine friendship with McGuinness or someone with his terrorist background. Regards. Alex.
ardens
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 07:42 AMEvidently he is very acceptable to Peter Robinson and the DUP.
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.