Re: Good Friday Agreement

[Philip Ferguson <PLF13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Keaney wrote:

> To go back to McAnulty's analysis, his final paragraph, which jars with what
> precedes it, is in fact spot on in its identification of more trouble for
> the British. As I have argued repeatedly here, all it would take to remind
> British state and capital why it is desirable, as MI6 have apparently seen
> it, to reach a settlement, is a well placed device or two in the docklands
> or some other strategic location calculated to cause as much economic
> disruption as possible. That was the lesson of the 1990s, when the military
> stalemate was becoming too costly for both sides. Given the general
> reorientation of the British state towards Europe, it also made sense to
> recognise that the strategic importance of Northern Ireland was no longer
> significant enough to justify the expense of maintaining a status quo that
> had long outlived its usefulness. Why cling on to a relic of the past, when
> the prizes elsewhere are so potentially great? Thus the GFA and the winding
> down of key elements of the ancien regime, e.g. UDR, RUC, and now even the
> Royal Irish Regiment. Progress along this path is not likely to be
> unidirectional, and setbacks, particularly intentional ones by revanchist
> elements within and close to the state, should be expected. But until I see
> a well-reasoned objective analysis, written from a British (rather than a NI
> Unionist) perspective, which can explain to me why, in the year 2003, the
> British state should be so interested in clinging on to Northern Ireland,
> conceiving of it as a key asset regardless of the evolving international
> situation and all that this entails, then I think that it is reasonable to
> assume that, given all the evidence that I have presented, the presently
> hegemonic fraction of British state and capital is committed to an eventual
> clean exit, barring any insurmountable sabotage from within and overwhelming
> pressure from without (the Bush administration).


Yes, I think this is really very, very important.

As Michael notes, there will be setbacks and zig-zags and so on, but
this is the general direction.

The one thing the Brits need to do is just ensure they have 'safe hands'
to pass the rulership into.  M16 are probably smart enough to realise
that the SF leadership are now pretty safe.

Philip Ferguson