Republic and Northern Ireland will eventually be reunited, predicts Enda Kenny

MakeEmLaugh · 15-10-2012 6:36pm

dlofnep wrote: »

Reunification is a long-term goal, and would require support from both Ireland and indeed Britain to make it function, with some compromises to certain issues.

I could see the process working as follows.

Ireland would have two devolved parliaments. One in the north (potentially including the other 3 counties of Ulster - and one in the south.) This would ensure that Unionists would still have a say at local/regional issues, and wouldn't feel overwhelmed by the other 'side'. They could still ensure their culture and so forth is preserved and receives fair funding regionally. A national Government could have it's parliament in a generally neutral town or city. It wouldn't necessarily have to be in Dublin. The national parliament would manage issues of national security, economic issues, trade, public relations, defence, etc... All the other local/regional issues could be ironed out in the devolved parliaments.

You've basically described Republican Sinn Féin's outline for a united Ireland, as detailed in their Éire Nua document:

"The system outlined here envisions a federation of the four provinces of Ireland under the co-ordination of a national parliament, with powers devolved through regional administrative councils to local bodies, so that at all levels citizens may have an effective voice in their own governance.

Decentralised local government will be fundamental to the new system.

The four traditional provinces -- Ulster, Munster, Leinster, and Connacht -- have emerged as definite regions within the island of Ireland, with distinctive characteristics. Irish people in any region will be found to have a natural affinity -- in culture, sport and economic interest -- with those of their own province and county.

Uniting the historic province of Ulster will help eliminate the sectarian divisions of the past and realise the full potential for development of separated counties -- especially Donegal, Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh, Cavan, and Monaghan.

It is proposed that -- to signify the beginning of a new era and the unity of the country around its geographic centre -- Athlone be made the capital city of the New Ireland."

dlofnep · 15-10-2012 7:02pm

No, I haven't. Republican Sinn Féin support a violent campaign, that would rid the British presence in Ireland. I support a peaceful campaign that seeks to listen to all communities involved. I only support two regional parliaments, not provincial parliaments. I have detailed some compromises that could be entertained - RSF do not contain the word compromise in their vocabulary. I'm a realist, not a dreamer. I'm putting forward what I feel is the best solution, that will have the greatest success of achieving unification while preserving independence.

15-10-2012 7:10pm

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Was Enda just playing lip-service to Americans, some of whom spent millions of dollars funding groups whose raison d'être was the reunification of Ireland? Or does he genuinely want Northern Ireland to be merged with the rest of the island?

He genuinely wants unification.;)

Iwasfrozen · 15-10-2012 7:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

He genuinely wants unification.;)

How do you know?

An Coilean · 15-10-2012 8:17pm

Godge wrote: »

If I believe that 100 per cent of nationalists want a united Ireland and would vote tomorrow for a united Ireland, then I would have to believe that only about 20% of the population, North and South, are nationalists.

That may well be true in the North, but that 20% would be the hard core of the nationalist movement, many others outside this section may not believe that Reunification is the best move right now, but would like to see reunification at some point and would like to see moves in that direction.

With questions like the ones used on Unification its fairly easy to scew the results, If you asked people in the north if they wanted Unification taken off the tabel and never be available as an option, you would likely get a similar low percentage in favor.

Mannix1888 · 15-10-2012 8:58pm

Enda Kenny is gearing up for 2016 with statements like this. When the centenary of 1916 arrives he's going to have to have some relevant vocabulary to come up with and he's going to have to get used to saying it too.

Can'tseeme · 16-10-2012 10:19am

As a Irish Republican from Belfast I can assure that Nationalists and Republicans across the North want to see an end to partition. But they won't vote for unification if the proposals put forward don't add up. If the Republican and Nationalist parties of Ireland, map out the path forward to ending partition which makes economic and political sense, there would be no problems getting a yes vote in the North from Nationalists.

Eggy Baby! · 16-10-2012 4:33pm

Was thinking about a potential reunification earlier.

Would we, the ROI, possibly have to indulge in a counter-insurgency? There will of course be the UDF etc. who will attempt to violently oppose reunification because there's always one.

Even if there is a unification through referendum, these armed groups have never respected democratic will so what's stopping them from starting a violent secessionist movement?

Perhaps a joint Irish-UK counter-insurgency?

(Not doomsdaying here, just posing a worrying question)

walshb · 16-10-2012 4:36pm

I do not believe it will happen anytime soon (20-30 years). I am just happy that at the moment the North of Ireland has relative stability and peace. I think that is something to be really proud of. The hate still exists, and will exist for many generations to come, but the killing has stopped.

Crooked Jack · 16-10-2012 4:52pm

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Was thinking about a potential reunification earlier.

Would we, the ROI, possibly have to indulge in a counter-insurgency? There will of course be the UDF etc. who will attempt to violently oppose reunification because there's always one.

Even if there is a unification through referendum, these armed groups have never respected democratic will so what's stopping them from starting a violent secessionist movement?

Perhaps a joint Irish-UK counter-insurgency?

(Not doomsdaying here, just posing a worrying question)

UDF? Hmm, anyway, without the British State to give them information, weapons, instructions and build their bombs for them I wouldn't be too worried about loyalist paramilitaries.
Only widescale unionist opposition would cause a problem but given the current set up if widescale unionist opposition exists then there wont be a move towards reunification.

dlofnep · 16-10-2012 6:07pm

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Was thinking about a potential reunification earlier.

Would we, the ROI, possibly have to indulge in a counter-insurgency? There will of course be the UDF etc. who will attempt to violently oppose reunification because there's always one.

Even if there is a unification through referendum, these armed groups have never respected democratic will so what's stopping them from starting a violent secessionist movement?

Perhaps a joint Irish-UK counter-insurgency?

(Not doomsdaying here, just posing a worrying question)

It's a valid point - and the British state would absolutely have to assist in any transition, over a medium-term period (10 years I have proposed) - during which, there would be joint control over the territory until it has been fully facilitated.

MakeEmLaugh · 16-10-2012 6:37pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

UDF? Hmm, anyway...

The UDF (Ulster Defence Force) was an elite squad within the Ulster Defence Assocation, groomed by Andy Tyrie and John McMichael. Its motto was "Sans Peur" ("Without fear") as opposed to the UDA's motto, "Quis Separabit?" ("Who will set us apart?").

Crooked Jack · 16-10-2012 7:45pm

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

The UDF (Ulster Defence Force) was an elite squad within the Ulster Defence Assocation, groomed by Andy Tyrie and John McMichael. Its motto was "Sans Peur" ("Without fear") as opposed to the UDA's motto, "Quis Separabit?" ("Who will set us apart?").

Your username is well chosen

Maura74 · 16-10-2012 8:35pm

Scotland will have referendum next year whether they want to stay with England. I think Scotland will join the Euro if they part form the rest of the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19946156

gallag · 16-10-2012 8:53pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

UDF? Hmm, anyway, without the British State to give them information, weapons, instructions and build their bombs for them I wouldn't be too worried about loyalist paramilitaries.
Only widescale unionist opposition would cause a problem but given the current set up if widescale unionist opposition exists then there wont be a move towards reunification.

So you believe the loyalist paramilitary forces could not mirror the role the Ira played. What if loyalists started a boming campaign of civilian and economic targets like the ira did, could the Irish economy support a new "troubles"

An Coilean · 16-10-2012 9:16pm

gallag wrote: »

So you believe the loyalist paramilitary forces could not mirror the role the Ira played. What if loyalists started a boming campaign of civilian and economic targets like the ira did, could the Irish economy support a new "troubles"

It's very unlikely they could mirror the role the IRA played without significant support within the Unionist population, at least as strong as the IRA gained after Bloody sunday, the question is where would that support for a return to violence come from?
We can see today how limited and ineffective the remenants of the IRA have become when starved of community support for their actions.
Could Loyalist Paramilitaries function better without community support, its quite unlikely.

There may be atempts by extreamist factions to start a seperatist campaign of violence,but there is no reason to assume that it would be anything more than the current attempts by the RIRA/CIRA/I cant believe its not the IRA factions in the absence of support for a return to violence within Unionist communities.

gallag · 16-10-2012 9:33pm

An Coilean wrote: »

It's very unlikely they could mirror the role the IRA played without significant support within the Unionist population, at least as strong as the IRA gained after Bloody sunday, the question is where would that support for a return to violence come from?
We can see today how limited and ineffective the remenants of the IRA have become when starved of community support for their actions.
Could Loyalist Paramilitaries function better without community support, its quite unlikely.

There may be atempts by extreamist factions to start a seperatist campaign of violence,but there is no reason to assume that it would be anything more than the current attempts by the RIRA/CIRA/I cant believe its not the IRA factions in the absence of support for a return to violence within Unionist communities.

But still, and I realise I could be more eloquent here, a few arseholes with some semtex could do a lot of damage. I also think you might be underestimating the loyalist/unionist community's determination to remain British and their hate for all things Irish. Don't be fooled into thinking this will just be a rabble of fools falling from the bars, many years of military, think UDR, RUC and army service experience would be there.

I think it is more likely Ireland's security budget would need bolstered.

whitelines · 16-10-2012 10:29pm

dlofnep wrote: »

It's a valid point - and the British state would absolutely have to assist in any transition, over a medium-term period (10 years I have proposed) - during which, there would be joint control over the territory until it has been fully facilitated.

Why would the rump of The UK bother? They might just say "you wanted NI - you've got it, it's your baby now - cheerio"

Eggy Baby! · 16-10-2012 10:29pm

dlofnep wrote: »

It's a valid point - and the British state would absolutely have to assist in any transition, over a medium-term period (10 years I have proposed) - during which, there would be joint control over the territory until it has been fully facilitated.

The idea of a counter-insurgency campaign in my country is definitely not an appealing prospect to me.

Even if we had British help.

An Coilean · 16-10-2012 10:33pm

gallag wrote: »

But still, and I realise I could be more eloquent here, a few arseholes with some semtex could do a lot of damage. I also think you might be underestimating the loyalist/unionist community's determination to remain British and their hate for all things Irish. Don't be fooled into thinking this will just be a rabble of fools falling from the bars, many years of military, think UDR, RUC and army service experience would be there.

I think it is more likely Ireland's security budget would need bolstered.

True, But again, disident republicen groups have plenty of semtex. And most of their leadership have plenty of exdperience of the IRA when it was at its height. Yet they lack the community support to carry out any kind of sustained campaign. The population do not want a return to violence, The disidents know they would quickly loose any support they have if they carried out attacks like were common in the 70's, Omagh was very nearly a death blow for the dissident movement.

The North was ready to erupt into violence in the 60's and Bloody Sunday was the spark that unleashed it. There are many reasons for this, and for why IRA were as strong as they were during the troubles, the Nationalist community had many greviances and suffered much descrimination, it was never simply about partition.
That is not the North today, In the case of a UI comming about through peaceful means, the place of Unionists in the new state would have to be negioated between both governments, along with the leading Unionist parties.
As long as the average Unionist feels they can make a life for themselves in the new state, while they might not be happy with the constitutional situation, they will not support violence.

In the absence of such support, it is very unlikely that Extreamist Loyalists will have any more success in starting a new troubles than the dissidents are.

Of course the security budget would need to increase, every budget would need to increase, you are dealing with a larger population in the case of a United Ireland. Reviniue would also increase, though there would need to be a period of adjustment to sort out the cost of duplication north and south.

To the person who asked why would the UK help with this period of adjustment, Ireland is one of their Major trading partners, and a United Ireland even more so, it is very much in their interest to ensure it is stable and successful.

whitelines · 16-10-2012 10:37pm

Look, there's actually no problem here. Get the support of 60/70% of NI's Unionist community for Irish unity and there'll be no problems regarding Loyalist violence. Sometimes I think certain types would welcome conflict with Unionism rather than adopting a sophisticated persuasive approach.

An Coilean · 16-10-2012 10:41pm

whitelines wrote: »

Look, there's actually no problem here. Get the support of 60/70% of NI's Unionist community for Irish unity and there'll be no problems regarding Loyalist violence. Sometimes I think certain types would welcome conflict with Unionism rather than adopting a sophisticated persuasive approach.

I dont get this, you don't need 60-70% of the Unionist population, just 50-60% of the total population.
Firstly if you convince a Unionist to support a United Ireland they are no longer a Unionist.
Secondly the Unionist community have no right to veto the will of the majority. I can see nothing desirable in suggesting that one community has the right to decide the future of Northern Ireland, that is for the Majority of the population to decide, regardless of their decission.

whitelines · 16-10-2012 10:47pm

An Coilean wrote: »

I dont get this, you don't need 60-70% of the Unionist population, just 50-60% of the total population.
Firstly if you convince a Unionist to support a United Ireland they are no longer a Unionist.
Secondly the Unionist community have no right to veto the will of the majority. I can see nothing desirable in suggesting that one community has the right to decide the future of Northern Ireland, that is for the Majority of the population to decide, regardless of their decission.

I see where you're coming from, but I was looking at the issue of Loyalist violence as raised by another poster. To be sure of no violence I suspect 50%+1 might not be adequate.

An Coilean · 16-10-2012 10:51pm

whitelines wrote: »

I see where you're coming from, but I was looking at the issue of Loyalist violence as raised by another poster. To be sure of no violence I suspect 50%+1 might not be adequate.

No, Nor is a vote likely to be held if there is a likelyhood of it returning a 50% +1 result either way, neither side wants that.

You can never insure there will be no violence, thatis no reason to deny the legimiate will of the majority.

whitelines · 16-10-2012 11:07pm

An Coilean wrote: »

No, Nor is a vote likely to be held if there is a likelyhood of it returning a 50% +1 result either way, neither side wants that.

You can never insure there will be no violence, thatis no reason to deny the legimiate will of the majority.

It depends on whether you're looking to build something successful rather than just uphold an abstract principle. Everyone looks at these things differently I suppose.

MakeEmLaugh · 17-10-2012 12:17am

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Your username is well chosen

It's nice to know my fact-quoting amuses you, particularly since you hadn't heard of the UDF, but felt authoritative on the subject of loyalist paramilitaries. :rolleyes:

Mick Collins · 17-10-2012 2:56am

I sincerely hope you can get a united Ireland sooner than later. However, from my experience reading posts in different forums about the topic, I've found so many bitter, hardline divisions among the different groups on how to get there and what type of state to have once there that I'm not really very optimistic. And no one feels like compromising...

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Kenny is an idiot.

True. Even more after i heard his stupid speech at Beal na mBlath last August! Clown.

Gurgle wrote: »

I think ultimately we will see reunification, but. not until we reach a point when nobody cares.

Again, you'll be surprised to see how many people care

Crooked Jack wrote: »

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. 100 per cent of nationalists want a united Ireland. If someone is in favour of the union with Britain then they are not a nationalist.

Dead right you are

An Coilean wrote: »

True, But again, disident republicen groups have plenty of semtex. And most of their leadership have plenty of exdperience of the IRA when it was at its height. Yet they lack the community support to carry out any kind of sustained campaign. The population do not want a return to violence, The disidents know they would quickly loose any support they have if they carried out attacks like were common in the 70's, Omagh was very nearly a death blow for the dissident movement.

I agree on the support thing, but again, all you need is a group of "illuminated" people to think they are correct and the majority is not to disrupt everything and bring mayhem. And there is more than one example in your history to prove that!

I think the referendum in Scotland will, one way or another, prove to be a good case study scenario. "Stepping stones", as one of your wise men once said

Crooked Jack · 17-10-2012 9:30am

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

It's nice to know my fact-quoting amuses you, particularly since you hadn't heard of the UDF, but felt authoritative on the subject of loyalist paramilitaries. :rolleyes:

Which facts would these be? That loyalists had anything approaching an "elite force." I also doubt lack of knowledge on the UDF impinges on my ability to speak authoritatively on loyalist paramilitarism.
A quick search reveals them to be little more than a tiny group within a group and one mainly concerned with training. They don't even warrant a single mention in Lost Lives.
But hey, if knowledge of obscure delusional (they had some fairly grand ideas about themselves from what I can see) loyalist groups makes you feel all superior then you go right ahead using the rolleyes thing

Crooked Jack · 17-10-2012 9:43am

gallag wrote: »

So you believe the loyalist paramilitary forces could not mirror the role the Ira played. What if loyalists started a boming campaign of civilian and economic targets like the ira did, could the Irish economy support a new "troubles"

I absolutely believe there is no way in hell loyalists could launch a campaign like that carried out by the IRA.
Even with the weight of the british state behind them they achieved little more than hobbling of their bar stools to go and murder a random catholic (killing dozens of protestants they believed to be catholics along the way.)
Their bombs were notoriously crude and unreliable devices (with the exception of those built for them by the brits) and they displayed little to no tactical thinking ability.
As has been stated already the current set up ensures that there wont be a move towards a united Ireland without the support of the majority so the notion that these jokers could even portray themselves as some sort of defenders or freedom fighters is laughable.
True, they may continue to exist within their own areas but with the support of the british state removed I cant see them being anything other than drug dealers giving themselves rather grandiose titles like brigadier or commander.

gallag · 17-10-2012 10:11am

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I absolutely believe there is no way in hell loyalists could launch a campaign like that carried out by the IRA.
Even with the weight of the british state behind them they achieved little more than hobbling of their bar stools to go and murder a random catholic (killing dozens of protestants they believed to be catholics along the way.)
Their bombs were notoriously crude and unreliable devices (with the exception of those built for them by the brits) and they displayed little to no tactical thinking ability.
As has been stated already the current set up ensures that there wont be a move towards a united Ireland without the support of the majority so the notion that these jokers could even portray themselves as some sort of defenders or freedom fighters is laughable.
True, they may continue to exist within their own areas but with the support of the british state removed I cant see them being anything other than drug dealers giving themselves rather grandiose titles like brigadier or commander.

So what makes the Ira more superior, just a better class of people? Higher average IQ? Yout probably won't like this but loyalists are every bit as capable as nationalists are at destruction, they held a mainly defensive role I.e check points to housing estates etc because even though the ira did not have the majority support, they went on a campaign of terror killing mostly civilian and economic targets. If the role changes then the loyalists will be planting bombs in busy high streets in Dublin and the loyalists will take up the mirror role of romanticizing their actions as honourable freedom fighters, Mabey if they kill enough someday someone will even think they are elite solders and their enemy are all bar stool falling idiots.

Republic and Northern Ireland will eventually be reunited, predicts Enda Kenny

Comments