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

MakeEmLaugh

From TheJournal.ie, 13th October 2012.

by Gavan Reilly

TAOISEACH ENDA KENNY has predicted that the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland will eventually form a unified single state – though he does not anticipate it happening in the near future.

Speaking at a question-and-answer session in Cleveland, where he is promoting investment in Ireland, Kenny said he believed a unification of the two countries would happen ‘one day’.

This would require a referendum to be approved in both countries, under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, and was not likely to happen in the near future.

Cleveland.com says he told guests: “The priority is keeping peace on the streets.”

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?

smcgiff

Looks like he forgot to mention the most likely reunification scenario - the ROI rejoining the UK

Defiler Of The Coffin

smcgiff wrote: »

Looks like he forgot to mention the most likely reunification scenario - the ROI rejoining the UK

Not a chance. Unionism in the south is virtually non-existent.

woodoo

It will happen eventually i think. But its a really long time away.

dlofnep

I'm a Republican, and obviously this is something I aspire to see. I acknowledge however that it won't happen in the very near future. I do think it's inevitable at some point however. The economics of both states will need to improve, and cross-border co-operation will need to increase more and more, until it's united in most matters - all but in name.

I remember a Unionist poster posting on here a while back, stating that the southern state was built up to be a boogey man for him until he moved to Dublin - which eventually wiped out any negative notions he had. I think many Unionists have an unfair perception of the south, and don't understand that the majority of people have zero ill-will towards them. Unfortunately, knuckle-draggers are often see as the epitome of 'Irishness'.

More cross-community work, more respect of each other's culture and views... More cross-border operations, bodies, etc...

woodoo

I wonder how long it will take for Kieth to come in under a fake name to tell us all it will never happen.

Chuck Stone

I believe it will happen but it's difficult to predict when. One thing is for sure - it will have to come with a big economic dividend for the north and that is at least a generation away.

smcgiff wrote: »

Looks like he forgot to mention the most likely reunification scenario - the ROI rejoining the UK

After Hours >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

thebman

smcgiff wrote: »

Looks like he forgot to mention the most likely reunification scenario - the ROI rejoining the UK

Yet to explain why it is more likely.

Presumably because you have no evidence...

getzls

woodoo wrote: »

I wonder how long it will take for Kieth to come in under a fake name to tell us all it will never happen.

Won't happen in my life time, and you spell my name Keith, not Kieth.:cool:

Terrontress

Given enough time an

smcgiff

thebman wrote: »

Yet to explain why it is more likely.

Presumably because you have no evidence...

Seriously?

I agree there is little active unionism in the ROI, but there is far from enough Nationalism in NI to support reunification with the south. There is strategic voting by catholics for the SDLP and SF to better their community, but they'd run a mile if there was a vote on whether to unite with the ROI politically. Economically the ROI is in a very bad condition. NI's economy is very much supported by GB, and the vast majority in the north will not upset the apple cart.

I presume everyone interested enough in this thread are aware of the polls in the north re constitutional preferences.

Enda is a politician - he said something he thought would be popular.

I don't think the island of ireland is likely to join the uk, but north south union is even less likely. The partition of ireland is coming up to its first century - it's bedded in.

What would be the point, in the end? So that the whole island can now air their complaints to the same place?

I would imagine that if the question of reunification were to come up in the future that Northern Irish people might consider themselves to be more "Northern Irish" than "Irish" and vie for independence themselves. Northern Irish nationalists, wouldn't that be a good one

woodoo

smcgiff wrote: »

I agree there is little active unionism in the ROI, but there is far from enough Nationalism in NI to support reunification with the south. There is strategic voting by catholics for the SDLP and SF to better their community, but they'd run a mile if there was a vote on whether to unite with the ROI politically. Economically the ROI is in a very bad condition. NI's economy is very much supported by GB, and the vast majority in the north will not upset the apple cart.

I completely understand the northern nationalists not being interested in a united Ireland at the min. We have nothing to offer them. But i think that will change someday.

dulpit

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?

Nothing story is nothing. I think most people recognise that at some stage in the (long-distant) future, Ireland will probably be re-united in some way or another. My reading of this is that Enda shares this belief, but it wasn't him saying he wanted this/etc.

chughes

I live in the Republic but if I was living in the North and from a Nationalist background I would seriously have to consider my voting options if there was to be a referendum on reunification.

The Republic is going to have to pay dearly for the foreseeable future because of mismanagement of the economy so would I as a Northerner want to impose a huge financial burden on myself?

I'm not sure if it would be an easy choice to make.

mike65

Always knew that Enda was a unionist.............and good night!

househero

figures

chughes wrote: »

I live in the Republic but if I was living in the North and from a Nationalist background I would seriously have to consider my voting options if there was to be a referendum on reunification.

The Republic is going to have to pay dearly for the foreseeable future because of mismanagement of the economy so would I as a Northerner want to impose a huge financial burden on myself?

I'm not sure if it would be an easy choice to make.

hahahahhaHahah

Your kidding right. The UK has been bankrupt since the 50s, joker.

UK national debt 143% of GDP including all financial sector intervention (e.g. Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds, just like Ireland's bailout of its crap banks), the Net debt was £2311.6 billion (147.3 per cent of GDP. This is known as the unadjusted measure of public sector net debt.)

Ireland's unadjusted measure of national debt is 104% (104.8% to be exact)

Please compare apples to apples.


We need the UK gov to seriously invest in the north to boost their pay to match the rich south with large infrastructure investment, like when Hong Kong was given back. There is oil off the coast of Ireland (north) we will not let the English government 'Scotland us' and steal our oil.

The north being reunited will appear much more realistic on the back of Scotland reclaiming their independence. We will be reunited in our lifetimes. Giving the northerners more money will solve a lot of their social issues.

poeticseraphim

I would not be in favour of it....we cannot offer the north what the UK can. And the rep for me is the 26 counties. And the nationalists actually want to remain i the UK by a majority. People prefer a status quo over uncertainty. It is never going to happen.

Kenny is an idiot.

dulpit

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Kenny is an idiot.

As far as I can tell Kenny was stating what he believes will happen at some stage, not his preference...

golden lane

history is a series of unrelated events........that have very strong affects on each other..

maybe such an event will take place, and england will dissolve the union......

i believe that the uk (england) will be out of the eu within eight years........

Gurgle

I think ultimately we will see reunification, but not until we reach a point when nobody cares.
Of course most people don't really care now and the difference in standard of living / lifestyle between Ireland and the UK is pretty minimal, so it might not be that far away.

golden lane

Gurgle wrote: »

I think ultimately we will see reunification, but not until we reach a point when nobody cares.
Of course most people don't really care now and the difference in standard of living / lifestyle between Ireland and the UK is pretty minimal, so it might not be that far away.

well, in england at this present time.....nobody cares.

all this talk about standards of living etc......will not even enter into the equasion........

burgermasters

smcgiff wrote: »

Seriously?

I agree there is little active unionism in the ROI, but there is far from enough Nationalism in NI to support reunification with the south. There is strategic voting by catholics for the SDLP and SF to better their community, but they'd run a mile if there was a vote on whether to unite with the ROI politically. Economically the ROI is in a very bad condition. NI's economy is very much supported by GB, and the vast majority in the north will not upset the apple cart.

I presume everyone interested enough in this thread are aware of the polls in the north re constitutional preferences.

Enda is a politician - he said something he thought would be popular.

I don't think the island of ireland is likely to join the uk, but north south union is even less likely. The partition of ireland is coming up to its first century - it's bedded in.

It may happen sooner than we all think? NI is an economic burden to GB and always has been! they were drained of cash sending troops all through the troubles because from the 50's on it became mandatory to be sent for a tour of duty in the north for british soldiers, England do not want the north or the hassle that comes with it but they wont be seen just handing it over because according to them we are terrorists and murderers witch is sad tbh but none the less the queen visiting and all that i think is the start of it, relations are on the rise between our two nations and when a lot more trust is built up? thats when it will happen;)

walrusgumble

smcgiff wrote: »

Looks like he forgot to mention the most likely reunification scenario - the ROI rejoining the UK

In your dreams.

walrusgumble

Defiler Of The Coffin wrote: »

Not a chance. Unionism in the south is virtually non-existent.

True, but by Joe, they make a hell of a lot of noise on threads like this.

walrusgumble

househero wrote: »

figures

hahahahhaHahah

Your kidding right. The UK has been bankrupt since the 50s, joker.

UK national debt 143% of GDP including all financial sector intervention (e.g. Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds, just like Ireland's bailout of its crap banks), the Net debt was £2311.6 billion (147.3 per cent of GDP. This is known as the unadjusted measure of public sector net debt.)

Ireland's unadjusted measure of national debt is 104% (104.8% to be exact)

Please compare apples to apples.


We need the UK gov to seriously invest in the north to boost their pay to match the rich south with large infrastructure investment, like when Hong Kong was given back. There is oil off the coast of Ireland (north) we will not let the English government 'Scotland us' and steal our oil.

The north being reunited will appear much more realistic on the back of Scotland reclaiming their independence. We will be reunited in our lifetimes. Giving the northerners more money will solve a lot of their social issues.

Jesus, Nordies would believe in any auld guff

newmug

Why did the OP get a yellow card

Nodin

newmug wrote: »

Why did the OP get a yellow card

.....because originally they'd just added the article and made no comment themselves.

Crooked Jack

poeticseraphim wrote: »

I would not be in favour of it....we cannot offer the north what the UK can. And the rep for me is the 26 counties. And the nationalists actually want to remain i the UK by a majority. People prefer a status quo over uncertainty. It is never going to happen.

Kenny is an idiot.

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.

Godge

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.

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.

dlofnep

People seem to be under the impression that reunification is a short-term goal. It's never a short-term thing, and shouldn't be thought of as a short-term thing. Economic issues are never long-term, so they are ultimately irrelevant. The economics of Ireland and Britain will strengthen again in time.

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 (Such as maintaining the ability to hold a British passport for Unionists). I don't really think being part of the Commonwealth (as often as it is suggested as a compromise) is actually something Unionists give a toss about in any meaningful way.

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.

The transition would have to be supported by Britain. Perhaps a 10 year transitional period, where both Britain and Ireland engage in dual-governance of the north and work very strongly together. Open dialogue during this period would be critically important.

So what sort of compromises could we expect to make?

Ireland and Britain could engage in a loosely-affiliated political union (Think EU-lite). Such a union might focus on trade, education, sporting games, cultural ties, and perhaps the economic stability of both nations. Common defence might also be part of the solution, but Ireland would absolutely need to maintain a neutral position with respect to war. Ireland would not be part of the UK, it would be it's own individual nation. Inter-governmental affairs would be worked out a much more efficient and fair way than the EU, but ultimately - a sort of EU-lite model as I previously mentioned could be the foundation for the political affiliation. (Notice I said affiliation, rather than union. That's critically important in order for it to work)

What would this do for Unionists? It would give them the assurance that they still maintain their cultural links with Britain, but also strengthen their links with the Irish nation.

Such a plan would need to be given seriously thought, and the specifics down to the finest detail would need to be ironed out.

MakeEmLaugh

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

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.

MakeEmLaugh

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

Deleted User wrote: »

He genuinely wants unification.;)

How do you know?

An Coilean

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

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

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!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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!

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

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.