PERSONAL COLUMN

Red hands across the sea

QUINTIN HOGG

Carson fought for an Ireland united under the Westminster Parliament. Redmond, who in August 1914, without a moment's hesita- tion, declared for Britain against Germany, fought for home rule under the British Crown. Both lost. Neither, I venture to think, would find much to rejoice about in the Ire- land of 1970. The ideals of each have been forgotten, it is to be feared irredeemably, and there is not much joy for those who love Ireland and the Irish on either side of the border. The Treaty partitioned the British Isles, partitioned Ireland, and partitioned Ulster. None of the three was—as the authors of 1066 And All That described it —`a good thing'.

For, with the greatest respect to those who have ruled in Stormont and Dublin since the treaty, neither the Republic, nor Ulster (or what is left of it after partition) has shown a spirit capable of providing a credible iden- tity for the whole island, though, again with the greatest respect to all concerned, it is pos- sible that either could have done so had either been ruled by men of greater vision and generosity.

The Catholic South has relapsed into an inward-looking and hypersensitive petty bourgeois society, lagging behind western Europe not only in material but in im- portant social and cultural standards, and alas maintaining, at least on the surface, a mean and unforgiving vindictiveness to- wards Britain and all she stands for. In doing so she thereby ignores our present interdependence, turns her back on much of the best in her past and disowns some of the noblest of her children. Unfortunately the unhappy and unnatural atmosphere also interferes with a realistic approach to the future, in which the best interests of both islands favour a partnership based on com- radeship and mutual help.

The Protestantism of the Pale was nothing if not cultured, outward looking and cos- mopolitan, even a little raffish. But this spacious outlook has failed to survive or at least to be represented adequately in the six counties of the north. Protestantism, which throughout Europe was a movement at its best associated with a noble drive for the emancipation of the human spirit, has, at its worst, developed into an ugly caricature of mediaeval bigotry, the very kind of dogmatic theological tyranny against which the best of the original reformers protested.

The paradox is that, in private conversa- tion, neither northerners nor southerners reflect the public utterances of the more ex- treme of those they return to power, with considerable consistency in the south, and montonous regularity in the north. But, if

an Englishman, whether or not he be, like myself, or, I presUme, Jim Callaghan, of

Irish extraction, tells either party the mani- fest truth about itself he is accused quite rightly of poking his nose into things which are not, or at least ought not to be, any con- cern of his, and, sometimes with less reason, of speaking about things of which he has no knowledge or comprehension.

The difficulty is that it is no longer true that the affairs of Ireland are no concern of

our. The Union Jack flies by right in the north, and British troops are deployed there on soil as much ours as if th.ty were quartered in London. The good name of Britain is sullied by what happens in Lon-

donderry and Belfast as much as it would be if it took place in Glasgow or Liverpool, as it may very well do if the present situation continues indefinitely.* The present Unionist party in Northern Ireland has manifest and obvious faults, which, as in most parliamentary parties, be- come more and more apparent the further you get from its actual leadership. But two things need to be remembered before Ulster Unionism is subjected to criticism. The first is that, although the treaty represents a com- promise desired by, literally, no one, it was a bargain, which on the whole, has succeeded in saving men's lives and in allowing both communities to live in relative peace. The second is that the bargain has been kept honourably in Britain and the north, but, at all levels, less honourably by the other parties to the agreement. Like other compromises, the treaty was a bad thing for us all. But, by and large, it has been the lesser evil. rnias worked as a second best, even though at times, as in the last war, it was to our dis- advantage, and the time is not yet come, and is not yet in sight, when its revision would be possible.

But there is a third factor of more im- mediate importance, which no one can afford to ignore. If you once get rid of the reform- ing Unionist government in Stormont, there is nothing, literally nothing, which can take its place. This is the main criticism of the niggling criticism of it by the official Stor- mont opposition. It cannot be said too often that the present disorders have no longer anything to do with the pace or content of reform. Far less understandable still is the purely negative attitude of Miss Devlin and her friends, to whom the 'Green Tories' of Dublin are as much anathema as the 'Tory landlords' of Stormont. But equally, if not more, irresponsible ate the fanatics of the extreme Protestant grass roots, who some- times mouth nonsense about UDI, as if you could have Unionism without the Union, loyalty without the monarchy, or Protestants without Christianity. '

The idea that you can do away with the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, any more than the Treaty, without a bloodbath, or without a much more massive deployment of British troops, is, I believe, the purest fantasy, whether the suggestion is that power should be seized by a hardline Unionist government or taken over by Whitehall, or usurped by some Republican organisation based further south or founded on the Socialist students in Queen's University,

* In the meantime the reading public can take its choice of books. Mr Patrick Rid- dell ('Fire Over Ulster', published by Hamish Hamilton at 35s) and Mr Martin Wallace ('Drums and Guns', published by Geoffrey Chapman at 28s) are Ulstermen, and each writes from an established pos- ition. Mr Max Hastings, like myself, is English., and, though he has witnessed directly, and describes vividly (in 'Ulster 1969: published by Gollancz at 62s), some of the terrible and shameful street scenes of the past two years, probably understands the underlying problems least of the' three. There are, however, three positive and valuable factors in the present situation.

The first is that, despite Mr Wilson's not always very helpful impromptus at question time, Mr Callaghan and I have managed to maintain at least a basic agreement on essen- tials at Westminster. Either of us could have destroyed consensus politics on this issue

beyond repair and a false move by either could easily do so now. We have not chosen to do so.

The second is that, in Stormont, the re- forming wing of the Unionist party is still precariously in power, despite the lamentable, if unavoidable, fall of Terence O'Neill.

The third is that, after a shaky start, which, being a politician myself, I do not hold against him (I know too well what the pres- sures must have been) Mr Lynch has adopted a highly responsible attitude from Dublin for which we cannot be too grateful and which we can only pray continues. No one could have caused more innocent blood to be shed than the Taoiseach of the Republic. He has chosen not to do so.

On these three, rather rickety, foundations, shored up by the British troops and the reformed Ruc, the present precarious im- balance still falls short of disaster. There can be no long term answer at present which does not involve an unacceptable cost in human misery. Moreover there can be no long term answer at all which does not involve both parts of Ireland and Britain rethinking each its attitude towards the other two. Britain can make no more unilateral concessions. The possibility of a new bargain depends on others no less than ourselves.

These unstable hopes could at any moment be overthrown in any one of half a dozen different ways. If the reforming wing of the Unionist party were overthrown in Belfast, if the attitude of the Dublin government were to veer towards the encouragement of violence, if the two major parties in Britain were to come into open conflict with one another about the policy to pursue, there would be the devil to pay all round. So far this has not happened, and, if it has not happened, one lesson that the public might care to read is that professional politicians are not always the charlatans or fools they are sometimes painted to be. If things in Ireland improve, as, God willing, they will, there will be some praise due to the leaders in Belfast of the Ulster Unionist party, in Dublin to the leaders of both parties in the Dail, in Britain to the Labour and Con- servative front benches. Such praise is not often forthcoming. More often such men are described as time-servers and traitors.

If the Union be threatened at the moment, it is threatened more directly by the Pro- testant bigotry of Paisleyism and the law- lessness of the tivtz than by the violence of the IRA or the curmudgeonly unfriend- liness of the Republic. Mr Paisley and Major Bunting have succeeded in present- ing an image which no one in Britain is prepared to endorse as attractive. The ulti- mate triumph of this approach to politics and religion might one day bring about a rift between Britain and Ulster, and Mr Paisley's Republican and Catholic enemies are probably more pleased at the success of Protestant Unionists in Bannside and South Antrim than they would care to admit. In the more immediate future the presence of Mr Paisley at Stormont is to be wel- comed. If such movements exist it is well that they be represented in Parliament. Parliaments have a way of civilising much relatively unpromising material.