POLITICAL COMMENTARY

Lucky old Pope

DAVID WALDER

Perhaps I should begin by saying that I have no connection with Ireland through family, residence or religion. Admittedly those who ferret through Who's Who will find that I did serve by chance in a regiment which recruits in Ulster, and which takes in a number of citizens of the Republic as well. However, my only relic of those days is a tie I sometimes wear if it happens not to clash too dramatically with my suit. Its pos- session hardly amounts to a declarable interest. I have only been to Ireland once in my life—for a holiday spent in a bi=partisan sort of way in both Ulster and Eire. The only one of my two-year-old impressions to have much political relevance is the slogan which caught my eye on a dreary wall in Belfast, `No Pope here'; under which a wag had chalked 'Lucky old Pope'.

I say all this because I have been search- ing my mind for prejudice. But the only one I find is a sneaking sympathy with the aver- age British incomprehension of things Irish.

For the last couple of weeks of course the newspapers have allowed their front pages to be monopolised; BBC and ITV have talked of little else. We have seen most of the devastated streets house by house. Nearly all the relatives of the killed and injured have been interviewed and been found, not surprisingly, to harbour resentment. 'B' Specials, of whose existence most of us had never heard a month ago, have tramped or shuffled across the screen. Mr Lynch has been seen in his snappy race-goer's hat. Major Chichester-Clark has read a speech or two with unprofessional down-cast eyes. The Prince of Wales' Own Yorkshire Regi- ment (lack of bias could hardly go further) has discarded its helmets camouflaged as for the Borneo jungle. Ian Paisley and Berna- dette Devlin, either of whom could persuade me that black was white, if only they said it was black, have both contributed their sloganised opinions.

From them we have learnt that the last two syllables in Londonderry are stressed, and gained an overall impression of strange places, curious institutions, near incompre- hensible accents and outmoded loves and hates. Thus must the inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina have appeared to the Viennese bureaucrats of the Austro-Hun- garian Empire.

Before anyone raises their eyebrows at that parallel I had better add that it was only while watching television that I realised the force of what I was taught years ago— that in the 1870s Disraeli was lukewarm about Balkan nationalism, remembering that Britain ruled Ireland. Only Gladstone with his 'mission to pacify Ireland' could afford to be consistently enthusiastic about Bul- garia as well.

For the disturbances in Ulster are a nasty reminder of a lot of history. Eliza- beth I, Oliver Cromwell at Drogheda, King Billy, Wolfe Tone and '98, the Great Hun- ger and the exodus to America, Parnell and the Land League, the Easter Rebellion and the troubles of the early '20s. Faint bat- squeaks of knowledge from the schoolroom for most Englishmen, but remembered ap- parently by Irishmen as the sources of their divisive patriotism. A few days ago an Ulster Protestant said

that the present Gm 'like all Englishmen, does not understand Ulster', and of course it is true. Equally truthfully the ordinary uncommitted Englishman when occasionally he does think about the Irish republic does not reflect upon its historical origins, but merely recollects, with a sort of puzzled wonderment, that many of its heroes in times of Britain's peril have seemed to pre- fer the cause of continental aggressors.

The psychiatrists no doubt would say that we suffer from a convenient collective amnesia with regard to our past actions, but the truth is that our historical memories are short. Those of the Irish, like the Welsh and the Scots, are correspondingly long.

For over a century the Irish problem be- devilled British politics, occupying more parliamentary time at Westminster than any other subject. Much oratory and passion was spent, many men died, and a party was split. Finally, by the treaty of December 1921, despite the complaints of the ultra- Tories, often of Irish ancestry, the British got themselves off the hook. Which of course is where they wish to remain. Since 1921 the British have experienced a surfeit of con- tests with the forces of nationalism in vari- ous forms, in India, Africa and Palestine, in Malaya, Cyprus and Arabia. Rightly or wrongly they are tired and bored. The sacred cause of 'law and order' outside this island has no appeal.

Having written that opinion I decided to test it, so I conducted a tiny opinion poll. I would not of course pretend to the expert- ise or the coverage of the commercial organisations. My sample, though small, included Catholics and Protestants as well as practitioners of the traditional English brand of Confucianism. Ages ranged from twenty to the sixties; occupations from art student to retired soldier, political allegi- ance, Labour to Conservative, though not including the left or right extremes; social class, and this I will admit as a defect, pre- dominantly middle middle class. I asked only one question — 'What do you think about the situation in Ireland?'

Frankly, the intensity of indifference (if I can put it that way) surprised me. The causes of the outbreak of violence are not even a matter of curiosity. There were no heroes nor any villains, blame was easily and sweepingly accorded to the extremes of both factions. That people had been shot in a city of the United Kingdom was regret.

table no doubt, but the Irish Channel seemed to provide sufficient insulation from any real sense of involvement. Neither the cause of Catholics demanding civil rights nor the cry of the Union Jack flying over Stormont aroused any enthusiasm. If a people conducted its politics on lines of religious differences, if it divided itself up up into 'loyalists' and 'nationalists' instead of concerning itself with prices and incomes, the cost of living and taxation, education and welfare, well, the shrugged shoulders implied, so much the worse for it. The ex- cellent, and in Irish circumstances extra-

ordinary, examples of sense and tolerance set by the shop stewards of Harland and Wolff commended itself, but got far less credit than, in context, it deserves.

Since then we have had Mr Callaghan in Ulster, shouted at and cheered by crowds

in the different areas. Adopting a serious mien, he has affirmed in the most 'flat and unequivocal' terms that the border is not an issue. He began his statement bravely by stating that he is not concerned with the past. Reasonably he ended by saying 'I can't solve your problems'. I congratulate him on his good sense; he is obviously at- tuned to the feeling of the British elector- ate. Of his effect upon the government and people of Ulster I cannot hazard a guess The past is omnipresent in Ireland and there have been many statesmen before Mr Cal- laghan just as reasonable and initially opti- mistic. I can only hope that some of his

good sense rubs off. • My mind now inevitably runs ahead to the re-assembly of parliament at West minster. Presumably, the Scarman tribunal notwithstanding, the affairs of Ulster will be the subject of full-scale debate. Assuming that everyone who wishes to catches the Speaker's eye, sadly I cannot expect a great deal from those most intimately concerned.

Miss Devlin I have read and heard, an I think I can predict what she would say she deigned to address the imperial parlia ment a second time. Ranged on the oche side are the Ulster Unionists. When Mi Devlin entered Parliament she said she wa not joining the club. Strangely enough mo of her opponents have never joined either, taking little part in debate or ques lions which do not directly concern thei own Province. Only two or three of th possess the abilities necessary to hold a divi ded House, and in such a debate to coup Miss Devlin's emotional appeal and wha ever Mr Gerry Fitt chooses to offer. For the rest, the nationally uncommitt doubtless Mr Skeffington's team will repo factually. Perhaps Mr Powell will contin his fascinating argument which concentra upon the Frenchman and the Germ arrested in Belfast. Presumably the ads cates of Scots and Welsh separatism stay silent. The right will veer' inevitab towards law and order; the left; just as p dictably, will espouse civil rights. The real interest will lie in the speech of the leaders and spokesmen of the tw parties. The task of both-will be to avoi temptation. The Tories must not seem side automatically for ,old time's sake wi any and every Unionist government at Sw mont. The Socialists-must not promise mo than they can perform to a minority for sake of their own underdog pltilosophY.

As, for once, as I trust I have sh there's not an bunce of party advantage it either way, they should both just make