Compromise between SF and DUP was never on cards

If, for example, I say that Sinn Fein collapsed the Executive in January 2017 – which they did – they respond that they had no choice, because they were no longer willing to tolerate the ‘status quo’ (even though Foster and McGuinness had signed off a joint article in November 2016 in which the ‘status quo’ problem wasn’t even mentioned).

Let’s be honest, if Foster had agreed to stand aside in December 2016 while a means of investigating RHI was sorted out, then there’d probably still be an Executive and we wouldn’t have had a snap Assembly election.

If I accuse the DUP of having made a gargantuan dog’s dinner over the Irish language issue during the last negotiations – which they did – they respond that it’s entirely the fault of Sinn Fein for making it a red line (even though the DUP always knew it was a red line and clearly discussed ways of dealing with it.) And again, let’s be honest, an Irish language act wasn’t exactly a major issue, let alone a red line one, when the DUP and Sinn Fein created their ‘ourselves alone’ Executive in May 2016.

I can understand why members of both parties are keen to insist that the blame for failure lies, mostly, with the other; but the fact remains that both are net contributors to the present difficulties. Yet it’s also worth mentioning that none of this should come as any surprise: and that’s because it is now almost impossible to avoid the conclusion that it is not, in fact, possible to establish an institution in which unionism and republicanism can work together in common cause.

That’s because the fixed point of difference between them – the Union versus Irish unity – can never be resolved. That fixed point scuppered Sunningdale and the Anglo-Irish Agreement and seems, now, to have scuppered the Good Friday Agreement, too.

That Sinn Fein want a united Ireland is not surprising. As Gerry Adams said 20 years ago: “The agreement is not a peace settlement, nor does it purport to be one. It is not a settlement, but is a basis for advancement. It marks the beginning of a transitional period towards Irish unification.”

Indeed, 20 years ago today a statement from PIRA argued that the agreement fell short of being a ‘solid basis for a lasting settlement’.

That the DUP supports the Union is not surprising, either. As Ian Paisley noted in 1998: “According to the agreement, the uncertainty of the status of NI is the premium issue. The British government has decided to play on the fact that the status of NI is alterable and Ulster’s Britishness can be abandoned. Once a simple majority of the people want a change in the status of NI, then that change can only be in one direction and for one option – that of a sovereign united Ireland. The wish for Irish unity will immediately be accommodated.”

Those positions were outlined in 1998, a decade before the 2007 deal which saw the DUP and Sinn Fein take up the roles of first and deputy first ministers. And while they may have agreed to work together – which was a huge surprise at the time – their original positions didn’t change. For both of them the constitutional issue still eclipses and predominates every other issue. It is not – and cannot be – about making Northern Ireland work in a collective interest, because the collective interests of their parties are not, cannot and will not be the same. Everything they do is geared towards an end which is the exact opposite of the end desired by the other: or, as Newton put it, ‘each action has an equal and opposite reaction’.

Trying to blame them for doing what they’re doing (even though what they’re doing is fuelling electoral/political/social polarisation) is pointless; and it’s pointless because both of them are expanding their electoral base. Increasing numbers of people are supporting both parties, even though they must know that the consequence of that support is the cementing of impasse and toxicity. And that’s because, as I’ve argued in previous columns, increasing numbers of voters have also accepted that the ‘hope’ of 1998 has exploded into dust.

The only way in which a stable, consensual, genuinely power-sharing deal could be struck between the DUP and Sinn Fein is if they were able to agree to ‘park’ the constitutional issue. That’s not happening. It wasn’t even possible 20 years ago, when the ‘moderate’ UUP and SDLP were the lead parties. Even rebooting the Executive as a multi-party entity wouldn’t solve the problem, because the UUP and SDLP are mostly slightly smudged mirror images of the big-two, while Alliance’s agnosticism on the Union seems to favour Sinn Fein’s position (although, in fairness to Alliance, I’m not sure it should be assumed, as some do, that they are deliberately anti-unionist).

Anyway, back to the beginning. We are where we are because of the ‘fixed point’ impasse between the DUP and Sinn Fein. Neither of them, as it happens, is being dishonest (although they accuse each other of telling whoppers) in terms of their respective goals. Their positions are perfectly clear and obviously endorsed by a substantial majority of their respective communities. The problem, of course, is that theirs is a relationship in which compromise can never be a long-term winner. And, for the life of me, I can’t see a solution to the problem.