Part of the openDemocracy Network

Power2010

Breaking the monopoly of the professional politician: Guy Aitchison's idea for popular forums in Parliament
 

When you're in a hole, stop digging: Pam Giddy's advice to MPs who still don't get it
 

Ending the divine right of political parties: Steve Hawkins makes a radical suggestion
 

Les Miserables and Power 2010: John Jackson diagnoses the political class's selective crisis-mongering
 

A call to oD readers: Helena Kennedy calls on oD readers to support Power2010
 

More in this series

Submit your idea for the Power 2010 pledge.

The British Crisis

Do the public really want to change ‘the system’?: Stuart Wilks-Heeg presents polling evidence
 

Don't trust MPs' constitutional poker: Guy Aitchison supports the call for a citizens' convention
 

Brown's 'National Council for Democratic Renewal': Anthony Barnett on the Prime Minister's desperate proposal
 

More in this series

Navigation

delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo | technorati | diigolet

Syndicate content

Army parade highlights Belfast's divide

Tom Griffin, 30 - 10 - 2008
delicious | digg | reddit | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo | technorati | diigolet

Tom Griffin (London, OK): Ever since the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, Northern Ireland's peace settlement has been based on the idea of parity of esteem between unionists and nationalists. It's a principle which has often sat uncomfortably alongside the reality that the institutions of one community are also those of the state.

The  dilemma is well illustrated by the latest parade controversy which concerns, not the Orange Order or the Royal Black Preceptory, but a regiment of the British Army.

The Royal Irish Regiment is due to hold a homecoming parade for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. A Sinn Fein counter-demonstration is also planned.

Gordon Brown has backed the parade, telling the Commons: "the troops in our armed forces deserve the support of every community from which they come. Where there have been parades in the different cities and towns of this country, not only have they been peaceful but large numbers of people have turned out because they want to give support to our troops and show them that they have the confidence of the British people. I want that to be a feature of our life in every part of the United Kingdom for many years to come."

In contrast Gerry Adams has expressed his "serious concern at the failure of British Secretary of State Shaun Woodward to recognise the provocation offered by the British Army military parade in Belfast City centre".

An equally sharp division of views is evident among the commentators. Brian Feeney of the Irish News argues that "major cities across Britain have deemed it too controversial to have parades and the soldiers really are ‘their’ soldiers instead of being identified with one community." On the other hand, Alex Kane of the Belfast Newsletter suggests that Sinn Fein's "approach to next Sunday's Homecoming Parade is calibrated to no higher purpose than that of offending the pro-Union community."

One thing most would agree on. The row will do nothing to help resolve the ongoing crisis in Northern Ireland's devolved executive.

Update: Patrick Corrigan points us to Belfast and Beyond's take on the weekend's events.

This article adheres to the openDemocracy.net principles.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

o'neill (not verified) said:

Mon, 2008-11-03 06:15

"SF should be ashamed of itself. This is a day for today's British army, not the one of the past."

In a democracy they have the right to protest as long as if they remain within the law and quite often (as in this case) allowing them to exercise that right can have indirect beneficial effects for the wider community.

Despite all the hype they only managed to pull a couple of thousand onto the streets- there were also more than a few Dublin and ROI accents in evidence, their waning power to mobilise their communal powerbase was all too evident. In contrast well over 30,000 cheered the RIR home and apart from one or two minor isolated incidents, it was a peaceful and enjoyable day out for the vast majority. But this whole episode has proven that the Executive is far, far away from being able to be trusted to operate "policing and justice" devolved from Westminster- the likes of Gerry Kelly were proving once again, but this time to a much wider audience, that they are mere-rabble rousers, not the statesmen they would like to paint themselves to be.

ManxUnionist said:

Sun, 2008-11-02 13:59

SF should be ashamed of itself. This is a day for today's British army, not the one of the past. And this doesn't even celebrate their work in the NI, but their service in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The purpose of the parade is to fete men and women that served their countries (both Kingdom and Repubic) to fight for a cause greater than themselves.

In America, regardless of how one views the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, the common decency exists to give the soldiers their dues and celebrate their achievements.

It is absolutely sickening. Give the soldiers their day.

o'neill (not verified) said:

Sat, 2008-11-01 11:51

"Brian Feeney of the Irish News argues that "major cities across Britain have deemed it too controversial to have parades and the soldiers really are ‘their’ soldiers instead of being identified with one community.""

Inconvenient fact for Brian is that 25% of those participating in the Homecoming on Sunday will be actually from the Republic- which "community" would he say they belong to, I wonder?

And as Patrick points out in own blog, the "flypast" has now been cancelled and the parade itself greatly downscaled.

PCorrigan (not verified) said:

Fri, 2008-10-31 02:14

Have added my thoughts over at Belfast and Beyond, where I agree with the notion that these parades aren't really triumphalist - how can they be when, despite the MoD's marching band and military flypast, there's simply no triumph to celebrate?

Gabangel said:

Fri, 2008-10-31 01:02

It's about two interpretations of Irish history, isn't it? For Ulster unionists, who are British nationalists, the British Army is their army and can do no wrong. For Irish nationalists, the British Army was historically the bulwark of the British Empire in Ireland and further afield, and therefore not their army.

 

The Good Friday Agreement incorporated the principle of "parity of esteem" for British nationalism and Irish nationalism in Northern Ireland. Unfortunately they are incompatible nationalisms, since one is an imperial-derived one and the other is a reactive anti-imperial construct. 

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><b> <i> <br> <p> <div> <img> <map>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.
More information about formatting options

Books from Amazon

They say about OK

"the ever-stimulating OpenDemocracy"
Ekklesia

"See OurKingdom to keep up"
South Belfast Diary

"...an essential guide to understanding the dynamic constitutional situation..."
Peter Oborne

"...becoming a daily read for me."
Iain Dale

"To make sense of it all, check out OurKingdom..."
Matthew d'Ancona

"Worth a look...it is, however, recommended by Matthew d'Ancona."
The Wardman Wire

"Fast becoming the best political website around"
Tom Waterhouse, CEP

"...attracting energy from a range of contributors."
thenextwave

"...looks very promising..."
The England Project

"The excellent new OurKingdom blog from OpenDemocracy..."
The Green Ribbon

"On the internet, I keep in touch with openDemocracy, a website on global current affairs, and its useful offshoot, OurKingdom"
Andreas Whittam-Smith

"thanks to the fine folk at OurKingdom, (who manage to communicate a variety of perspectives in the way that only a decent group blog can)"
Nostalgia For the Future