nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

British Strategic interest in Northern Ireland

Ffff221

I seen on sky news last night how the current UK PM has been breaking a long standing policy of claiming there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland but this PM has made it clear that that couldn't be further from the truth.

It got me wondering what exactly is the strategic interest in Northern Ireland?

I always believed until the last year or two that the UK had no interest in Northern Ireland and would get rid of it the first chance they got but I was mainly thinking economically and not about the wider picture that there are probably tons of strategic and beneficial reasons to keeping Northern Ireland.

It's mainly propaganda from the troubles to prevent terrorism why a lot of us believe there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Montage of Feck

Mind the gap.

Ffff221

When it comes to the border North or South we don't really have any say in it we are at the mercy of her majesty.

alchemist33

The UK gets 78% of its union jack flags from NI. Take that away and the UK economy is f*cked during a world cup.

[Deleted User]

From a strategic POV I’d say getting rid of it solves a few headaches, you lose the disaffected Catholics. Conversely for the Republic taking it gives you a big one, you get the unionists.

Kermit.de.frog

Brits gonna brit

Ffff221

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

From a strategic POV I’d say getting rid of it solves a few headaches, you lose the disaffected Catholics. Conversely for the Republic taking it gives you a big one, you get the unionists.

The point is the benefits of Northern Ireland outweigh the negatives to the British as the PM has made quiet clear recently.

mickuhaha

There are 14 British oversea territories. If they start giving up on the local ones there is no hope for the ones overseas.

Conall Cernach

From a military point of view they have RAF Aldergrove (or whatever it's called now) and the Foyle estuary and Belfast port.

Ffff221

Conall Cernach wrote: »

From a military point of view they have RAF Aldergrove (or whatever it's called now) and the Foyle estuary and Belfast port.

I also heard a few times Northern Ireland is where they keep their nuclear weapons I don't know how true that is but it's a pretty good idea from their point of view.

It's pretty s*** for us though.

Conall Cernach

Ffff221 wrote: »

I also heard a few times Northern Ireland is where they keep their nuclear weapons I don't know how true that is but it's a pretty good idea from their point of view.

It's pretty s*** for us though.

There are officially no nuclear weapons anywhere in Ireland. The Brits have their big nuclear submarine facilities in Scotland.

Mullaghteelin

mickuhaha wrote: »

There are 14 British oversea territories. If they start giving up on the local ones there is no hope for the ones overseas.

In fairness, even if they wanted to dump the likes of Gibraltar, The Falklands or Tristian de Cunha, the inhbitants of such places tend to be as pro-Britiain as the Unionists themselves. The inconvenient legacy of planting settlers around the world in centuries past.

Ffff221

Mullaghteelin wrote: »

In fairness, even if they wanted to dump the likes of Gibraltar, The Falklands or Tristian de Cunha, the inhbitants of such places tend to be as pro-Britiain as the Unionists themselves. The inconvenient legacy of planting settlers around the world in centuries past.

Pretty sure it's the opposite of inconvenient to them allowing them to easily hold onto overseas territory which would have otherwise been lost.

FromADistance

Ffff221 wrote: »

I seen on sky news last night how the current UK PM has been breaking a long standing policy of claiming there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland but this PM has made it clear that that couldn't be further from the truth.

It got me wondering what exactly is the strategic interest in Northern Ireland?

I always believed until the last year or two that the UK had no interest in Northern Ireland and would get rid of it the first chance they got but I was mainly thinking economically and not about the wider picture that there are probably tons of strategic and beneficial reasons to keeping Northern Ireland.

It's mainly propaganda from the troubles to prevent terrorism why a lot of us believe there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland.

P1ssing off the EU is the UK's new strategic interest in NI. The average British person couldn't give a sh1t about NI.

Feisar

FromADistance wrote: »

P1ssing off the EU is the UK's new strategic interest in NI. The average British person couldn't give a sh1t about NI.

The average British person wonders what the Irish do be fighting about. That includes Unionists.

Ffff221

FromADistance wrote: »

P1ssing off the EU is the UK's new strategic interest in NI. The average British person couldn't give a sh1t about NI.

The average British person barely knows Ireland exists it's irrelevant what the average British person thinks

saabsaab

Extract from IT it shows that the UK has never stated they have no strategic interest in spite of what was inferred from their statement.

'The article incorrectly quotes the declaration as saying "that Britain has no 'selfish, strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland'." Note the comma between "selfish" and "strategic" in the version carried in the article. The original, on the other hand, states that the British Government has "no selfish strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland". While for some the inclusion, or otherwise, of a comma between the words "selfish" and "strategic" may represent a mere quibble over grammar, in real terms its absence in the original confers a radically different meaning to the sentence. In short, with a comma the British Government has no strategic interest in Northern Ireland; without a comma it has no "selfish [my emphasis] strategic interest". In diplomatic and political language such differences are of profound significance'

Zebra3

Mullaghteelin wrote: »

In fairness, even if they wanted to dump the likes of Gibraltar, The Falklands or Tristian de Cunha, the inhbitants of such places tend to be as pro-Britiain as the Unionists themselves. The inconvenient legacy of planting settlers around the world in centuries past.

Strategic military bases wrapped up in the appearance of civilian territories.

They didn’t give a toss about the people in Diego Garcia and their democratic viewpoint.

Wonder what skin colour they had(n’t).

FromADistance

Feisar wrote: »

The average British person wonders what the Irish do be fighting about. That includes Unionists.

Looking forward to a United Ireland some day. You know, the country that the British stole all those years ago. Good day to you... don't bother replying, I have no time for your nonsense.

FromADistance

Ffff221 wrote: »

The average British person barely knows Ireland exists it's irrelevant what the average British person thinks

Well we know all that... the sad part of this is that the British Government continue to push the rhetoric that the North is an important part of the union. L O ****ING L.

Capt'n Midnight

mickuhaha wrote: »

There are 14 British oversea territories. If they start giving up on the local ones there is no hope for the ones overseas.

A lot of the overseas territories are loosing out because of restricted EU access and the UK has done nothing for them. EU action on tax havens will impact them in the future.

Gibraltar is now in Schengen and the Spanish are enforcing it at the airport.

The Falklands are getting hit by EU tariffs of 6-8% on seafood. For meat it's 42%. They should be fine. EU exports only made up 70% of GDP. And after 20 years of talks Mercosur, the South American trade bloc was setup and guess who isn't a member ?

The only reason Tristan da Cunha can export lobster to the EU tariff free is because of an EU-US trade deal. The UK did nothing.

Lobsters on the flag.

This from 2017 shows just how many OT's were getting substantial aid from the EU.
AFAIK Westminster hasn't matched this since.

Capt'n Midnight

How long does anyone here think the UK will continue to spend £10Bn a year on NI if Scotland gets Independence ?

FromADistance

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

A lot of the overseas territories are loosing out because of restricted EU access and the UK has done nothing for them. EU action on tax havens will impact them in the future.

Gibraltar is now in Schengen and the Spanish are enforcing it at the airport.

The Falklands are getting hit by EU tariffs of 6-8% on seafood. For meat it's 42%. They should be fine. EU exports only made up 70% of GDP. And after 20 years of talks Mercosur, the South American trade bloc was setup and guess who isn't a member ?

The only reason Tristan da Cunha can export lobster to the EU tariff free is because of an EU-US trade deal. The UK did nothing.

Lobsters on the flag.

This from 2017 shows just how many OT's were getting substantial aid from the EU.
AFAIK Westminster hasn't matched this since.

I have a small violin when it comes to the British... The British are not a race to be admired... more tolerated.

Ffff221

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How long does anyone here think the UK will continue to spend £10Bn a year on NI if Scotland gets Independence ?

Forever.

Edgware

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How long does anyone here think the UK will continue to spend £10Bn a year on NI if Scotland gets Independence ?

"If". A better bet than "when"

Hyperbollix

If populist nationalism is to be the new vote getting fad of modern right wing parties which are lurching further right all the time, then I'd say the British very much have a strategic interest in NI.

Rees Mogg on Twitter the other day: "Northern Ireland is as British as Somerset"
We may laugh, but this kind of nonsense plays very well with both the Telegraph reading, tweed wearing elite and the bacon sambo scoffing Sun reader in England.

cgcsb

Well a century ago the treaty ports in the free state and the ship building industry was important to the UK for security reasons. Since the 1950s there has been no real interest aside from saving face. They wouldn't want the world seeing them lose territory so close to home. Also loyalism remained powerful until the 21st century so pulling out suddenly would have created a lot of nastiness on their doorstep. Now with Brexit we see NI becoming an active pain in the ass for England, so I'm sure they're plotting behind the scenes to get rid.

At this present time we see loyalism is neutered. The Irish sea border was testament to that and the British government are taking notes. All they'll do is spray paint some walls. They have the GFA so they can dump the region soon enough, they just two things to keep up appearances:

A reason to hold a referendum, which may come in the form of SF becoming the largest party in 2022.

And of course a referendum result in favour of a UI. Could the UK manipulate the result of this ref? Either through their control of the media or some more insidious rigging? I wouldn't put it past them. Also keep in mind how hard they've been driving over NI unionists wants and likes of late.

Unifying Ireland could be a turbulent few years if the German example is anything to go by.

Ffff221

cgcsb wrote: »

Well a century ago the treaty ports in the free state and the ship building industry was important to the UK for security reasons. Since the 1950s there has been no real interest aside from saving face. They wouldn't want the world seeing them lose territory so close to home. Also loyalism remained powerful until the 21st century so pulling out suddenly would have created a lot of nastiness on their doorstep. Now with Brexit we see NI becoming an active pain in the ass for England, so I'm sure they're plotting behind the scenes to get rid.

At this present time we see loyalism is neutered. The Irish sea border was testament to that and the British government are taking notes. All they'll do is spray paint some walls. They have the GFA so they can dump the region soon enough, they just two things to keep up appearances:

A reason to hold a referendum, which may come in the form of SF becoming the largest party in 2022.

And of course a referendum result in favour of a UI. Could the UK manipulate the result of this ref? Either through their control of the media or some more insidious rigging? I wouldn't put it past them. Also keep in mind how hard they've been driving over NI unionists wants and likes of late.

Unifying Ireland could be a turbulent few years if the German example is anything to go by.

If it is important enough to them then MI5 would certainly start a propaganda campaign to sway the vote.

From Downing Street, Prime Minister Edward Heath also called for unattributable propaganda. He had been fully briefed that officials, including Norman Reddaway, now overseeing all cultural and information work at the Foreign Office, were working "overtly and covertly to blacken the IRA" by placing propaganda into the British Press.

Ffff221

Just how far MI5 will go in relation to the Dublin Monaghan bombings At the time of the bombings, Colin Wallace was a
top British Intelligence Corps officer and a psychological warfare specialist at the British Army's Northern Ireland headquarters. Since his resignation in 1975, he has exposed scandals involving the security forces, including state collusion with loyalists and most famous of all he exposed the kincora boys scandal years before anyone else even mentioned it, He gave evidence to the Barron Inquiry

In an August 1975 letter to Tony Stoughton, chief of the British Army Information Service in Northern Ireland, Wallace writes:

There is good evidence the Dublin bombings in May last year were a reprisal for the Irish government's role in bringing about the [power sharing] Executive. According to one of Craig's people [Craig Smellie, the top MI6 officer in Northern Ireland], most of those involved – the Youngs, the Jacksons, Mulholland, Hanna, Kerr and McConnell – were working closely with [Special Branch] and [Military Intelligence] at that time. Craig's people believe the sectarian assassinations were designed to destroy Rees's attempts to negotiate a ceasefire, and the targets were identified for both sides by [Intelligence/Special Branch]. They also believe some very senior RUC officers were involved with this group. In short, it would appear that loyalist paramilitaries and [Intelligence/Special Branch] members have formed some sort of pseudo gangs in an attempt to fight a war of attrition against the IRA by getting paramilitaries on both sides to kill each other and at the same time prevent any future political initiative.

In a further letter of September 1975, Wallace wrote that MI5 was backing a group of UVF hardliners who opposed the UVF's move toward politics. He added:

I believe most of the sectarian violence generated during the later part of the year was caused by some of the new [Intelligence] people deliberately stirring up the conflict. As you know, we have never been allowed to target the breakaway UVF, nor the UFF, during the past year. Yet they have killed more people than the IRA!

Nqp15hhu

Ffff221 wrote: »

I seen on sky news last night how the current UK PM has been breaking a long standing policy of claiming there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland but this PM has made it clear that that couldn't be further from the truth.

It got me wondering what exactly is the strategic interest in Northern Ireland?

I always believed until the last year or two that the UK had no interest in Northern Ireland and would get rid of it the first chance they got but I was mainly thinking economically and not about the wider picture that there are probably tons of strategic and beneficial reasons to keeping Northern Ireland.

It's mainly propaganda from the troubles to prevent terrorism why a lot of us believe there is no strategic interest in Northern Ireland.

It's up to the people here in Northern Ireland. Nobody else, including the United States Congress and the EU will determine our destiny.

Nqp15hhu

Ffff221 wrote: »

I also heard a few times Northern Ireland is where they keep their nuclear weapons I don't know how true that is but it's a pretty good idea from their point of view.

It's pretty s*** for us though.

The Nuclear weapons are held in Scotland, though not too far from Northern Ireland. I am sure the Submarines pass the waters of Northern Ireland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNB_Clyde