Letters to PN, Aug/Sept 1996

It is now a condition of progress [in Northern Ireland] that public opinion in Britain has to move. The tiny groups that have been active since 1988 remain tiny, albeit influential. We are long familiar with campaigns on the national scale. We now need one over Northern Ireland. Its basis will be the familiar one - local groups everywhere, but this time with active support from members of the vast numbers here who are of Irish descent. While international help is indispensable, we need not wait for it to happen from above. We have a long history of creating our own Internationals. At present we have an informal network operating between London, Belfast, Derry, New York, Washington, Brussels and Dublin.

For a settlement to be possible at least two more changes are called for. Firstly, an end to blatant Protestant bigotry. If that means the replacement of present leaders then so be it. This is a matter that Protestant opinion has to settle for itself, internally. Secondly, a pledge by the British government that when an agreed settlement is up and working and seen to be so, the British army (having no strategic role in Ireland and being no longer required as police back-up) can and will be withdrawn. This will, incidentally, meet the central case of the IRA and be their political undoing.

There is, overall, a need for a new political sophistication. The Troubles are not going to be resolved in isolation. There is also the matter of Scotland, Wales, and the English city and county regions. A most likely form for the future is that of a new Britannic Confederation (proposed 30 years ago by Gwynfor Evans of Plaid Cymru) securing massive autonomies for all parts of the British Isles including Eire, while maintaining confederal unity as part of a new Europe of the Regions. We no longer need out-of-date petty nationalisms (all our peoples are inextricably mixed-up anyway) but we do need the big idea.

Peter Cadogan, London

***Britain should decommission its own weapons

If the troops were withdrawn from Northern Ireland, Sinn Fin and the IRA might have an easier time starting a second ceasefire, and possibly putting decommissioning on the table. And what about Britain's nuclear weapons, which are considerably more ferocious than the last twenty-five years in Northern Ireland?

Malcolm Samuel, Co Galway, Ireland

***Peace means secular schools*

How can British and Irish religious leaders and politicians publicly wring their hands and regret the latest displays of distrust, bigotry and violence when they, themselves, perpetuate it via our schools?

A quarter of a century ago, as a 10-year old immigrant from Asia, I started at a Protestant school in Northern Ireland. For seven years I was taught bigotry on a grand scale, through a conniving culture of omission and suspicion, backed by selective, slanted lessons in history, geography and religion. What a waste! Integration via educational separation is a non-starter. Plain and simply, it's illogical. Dear churchmen and politicians, please examine your own hands for blood. Then unite and demand the abolition of religion in schools and an end to all forms of sectarian education, before thinking of washing - in 25 years' time.

Barry N Johnston, Cheshire

***All-Ireland economic plan needed*

I fully support Milan Rai's letter about Northern Ireland (May 1996) where he says that there should be "no preconditions for talks", (ie decommissioning of arms) but question his assertion that there should be "no predetermined outcome". Instead I believe it is essential for the British government to set the agenda by proposing an All-Ireland Economic Plan, a plan that could include human rights and anti-discrimination issues, generously financed by an Irish peace dividend. If such a plan were to be placed on the table it would then give the lead to which all parties could respond constructively. This plan would create a win/win solution for everyone, so essential if "face" is to be saved by the IRA and Loyalists. But to hope that a solution may be forthcoming based on a "no predetermined outcome" seems to me a recipe for continued division and possible conflict.

Ted Dunn, Essex

***Get rid of state and abolish frontiers*

I was interested in the articles and letters on Northern Ireland (May 1996), but felt them somewhat naive. I see a parallel between what has happened in Northern Ireland and what was recently happening in Palestine. I note that after killing large numbers of Lebanese civilians an "acceptable" peace treaty has now been negotiated.

When the IRA offered a cease-fire the British state which had been calling for an end to the hostilities for so long immediately started to prevaricate. The IRA had not surrendered but merely offered a truce. Yet the British state acted as if the IRA had surrendered and demanded they hand in all their weapons. What would be the anarchist solution? Getting rid of nation states and abolishing frontiers. Is this so naive? State nationalism is simply not working.

Peter Neville, Middlesex

***Paying tribute to women who risk death for truth and justice

I recently had the good fortune to attend a presentation by Zainap Gachaeva (the Union of North Caucasian Women) and Ella Poliakova (Soldiers' Mothers Organisation of St Petersburg) who came to Britain as part of their European awareness-raising tour. Ella and Zainap, along with others, gain access to Chechen villages as soon after an attack as posssible and gather photographic and video footage, and collect witness statements of the attack. They also inform Russian families of their rights with regards to conscription. Unfortunately, many regard the work of these women as subversive - Zainap's flat in Moscow was recently broken into by the secret police, documents taken and her husband arrested because of her work.

I found the talk extremely informative and must admit to fearing for the safety of these brave women. Then the shooting of Irish journalist Veronica Guerin appeared on our screens, and it brought home to me that no one working on the side of truth and justice is really safe. Although I knew little of Veronica's work before her tragic death, I would like to pay some respect to her life and work, and to all those we do not hear about, even when they too are killed for seeking the truth. Peace News is an obvious place to do this.

Mandy Meikle, Edinburgh

***Get `real' - smash state more gently

Oh dear! Not that awful Albert Beale confronting multinationals yet again (PN July). Come on Albert - get in touch with the "real world" and learn to be kinder to them. After so many decades of active pacifism you now have the answer from Janet Pascoe - watch your language! I now realise that my slogan "Smash The State" is far too aggressive - better hit them with a dictionary!

David Graham

***Sabotage has a longer history*

Much as I might appreciate some of the points put forward by J~rgen Johansen with reference to the issue of sabotage (Peace News, July 1996), I would however question his historical perspective.

Does not the expression ´A spanner in the works' predate 1910? Likewise, were not the Luddites engaged in sabotage during the period 1811-12?

If the question of sabotage is to be one that is to be debated by pacifists, then let us at least get our historical viewpoint right.

Sabotage should be viewed as one of many actions that might be taken by nonviolent activists. The main problem, as I see it, is to be both very clear about what the action is to comprise of, and to communicate the reasons why it has been done. Something that the Luddites were very bad at doing at the time.

Martyn Lowe

***Movement for Middle England is not fascist*

Founded in 1988, the Movement for Middle England is the newest of the English regionalist movements. It is non-party-political in an English context. At the present time it numbers less than a hundred members and sympathisers, though support is growing. It so happens that most of us have come to it from left-of-centre backgrounds, or from no politics at all. MFME tolerates a wide range of views on social issues amongst its supporters. The question for us is not to decide how society should be organised, but who should be doing the deciding.

Our movement works for the re-empowerment of ordinary people. We think three things are needed for this to be possible. First, a Europe of regions, peoples and small nations in place of centralised imperial nation-states. Second, a real participatory democracy at every level, in place of the fraud of "democratic elections". Third, a rebuilding of solidarity and community between us, from the smallest locality and affinity groups right up to our sense of identity as a people.

In the English Midlands our strategy is to encourage all questioning of existing attitudes and social structures - and to support non-destructive forms of grassroots self-organisation as peoples forums which could shadow, and one day replace, the `official' authorities which people are losing faith in. Throughout the world we support movements with similar aims to ourselves.

Our movement is totally opposed to chauvinism. It has also consistently argued that ethnic purity - if it ever existed - is not the basis on which to rebuild English culture and with it the confidence and self-esteem of ordinary people in the new England we seek. Culture is a commitment as well as a home - and commitment is a choice.

At the same time we will not ignore the deeply felt concerns of others about perceived threats to English identity and values. Our response has been, and will be, to challenge, through argument, prejudice arising from real or imagined fears, not to ostracise or scream abuse.

For this we have been attacked by some groups for being `fascist'. We are not sure what fascism means to them, but we do know what fascism is not. By definition, there is no such thing as a tolerant "fascist". While abusing, smearing and intimidating other radicals may or may not be fascist, such methods do a brilliant job in keeping radical opposition to the system we all suffer from weak and divided - as well as scaring off countless thousands who might otherwise join us in working for a better world.

Steering group of MFME, c/o 10 Bartholomew Street, Leicester LE2 1FA.

***Don't underestimate dangers of unemployment*

There is in Britain widespread indifference to the problem of massive and prolonged unemployment. This however should not apply to people dedicated to the cause of universal peace. If such people cannot see any relationship between prolonged unemployment and violence, they need to be re-educated.

In 1933 there were more than 6 million unemployed persons in Germany. Hitler said to them "Vote for me and I will give you jobs." They did vote for him and he did give them jobs - manufacturing the vast array of armaments with which to launch his invasions across Europe. This solved the unemployment problem in Germany, but at what a cost!

It might be thought that the above considerations would not apply today, but that is not true. In many parts of the world we have wars, external and internal, going on with weapons manufactured in such countries as Britain, France and several other developed nations. When a plea is made to such governments to eliminate the manufacture of arms the reply is that such action would increase unemployment.

Violence itself is often the result of prolonged unemployment. This we have seen at Brixton, Toxteth, Moss Side, Handsworth and several other places. After a fairly recent outbreak, the perpetrators openly confessed that the spark which set off the riot was boredom due to prolonged unemployment.

Thomas McGreevy, Hampshire