David enjoyed the Mo Mowlam biopic Channel 4 showed on Sunday; I wish I could say the same but am not surprised that I can't. (You can watch it here, incidentally.) Yes, Julie Walters was just as excellent as one imagined her to be and, yes, it's carping to complain about what wasn't in the film (though an acknowledgement that the Peace Process didn't start on May 2nd 1997 would have been usefu) and it can't be terribly surprising that the movie gives the impression that the Peace Process was somehow Mowlam's own possession.
Despite that I thought the film was, in terms of the politics of the matter, quietly devastating. For it showed the limits of Mowlam's approach to politics most effectively: brilliant on the PR side of the equation, hopeless on the detail and equally flawed in terms of judgement. The film also provided a portrait of political vanity that, while intended to be sympathetic, reminded one that more than anything else, power deludes. (Mowlam apparently believed she could succeed Blair...)
David Trimble* was traduced but the film-makers also, unintentionally I think, showed why he was right not to trust Mowlam and, thus, why, in the end, she failed. The film suggested that her inability to empathise with Unionism - Just look at these ghastly proddy bigots I have to deal with! - was the reaction, indeed the only attitude, any right-thinking person could have. Unionists, in this telling of the story, were the only obstacle to "peace" and all their concerns were trivial, petty and foolish things that no sensible observer could possibly take seriously.
And in one sense, that was the case. If getting a deal was more important than the detail of the deal then Unionist intransigence was a bigger problem than the repeated bad faith demonstrated by Sinn Fein and the IRA. By the time the Mitchell negotiations began, the government position had essentially become Get a Deal, Any Deal. London wasn't going to walk away and the Republican movement knew this and had a much stronger negotiating position because of it.
The British government's stance wasn't necessarily deplorable; indeed it was perfectly justifiable. In many ways the situation we've reached now - despite all the problems that remain - is a great improvement on some, perhaps many, of the alternatives one can imagine. Half a loaf of peace is better than no loaf.
Nevertheless, if you had told the British and Irish governments in 1993 that the process would end with Sinn Fein and the DUP running Northern Ireland I doubt that you'd have had a Downing Street Declaration to sign in the first place. This isn't where it was supposed to end up.
But we reached this point because, at least in part, London helped hollow out the centre-ground. When that collapsed the extremes were gifted power. It's tempting to suppose that this was always going to happen. But it wasn't.
The ambiguities in the Good Friday Agreement didn't help. Nor did the fact that Mowlam seemed to have no interest in actually enforcing the rules Sinn Fein had signed up to play by. That meant decommissioning - a core principle - was punted down the road time and time again. With terrible consequences. Terrible that is, if you think a government of murderers and bigots is a disappointing end to the process. Of course, if the process is all that matters then that doesn't matter much.
The fundamental weakness of the Peace Process still lies in each side's estimation of the value of what it gave up and its parallel unwillingness to concede that the other side gave anything substantial up at all. For Republicans embracing the principle of consent over-turned eighty years of Republican orthodoxy. Recognising that Northern Ireland existed was a bigger step even than putting the guns away. But it was a psychological step that, to Unionist eyes, simply recognised the reality on the ground. Nor could silencing the guns much impress Unionists who never thought they should have been fired in the first place.
The tragedy of Unionism was its lack of confidence. Philosophically and substantively, it prevailed. That's why Trimble was able to sign up and proclaim, correctly, that the Union was safe. But this was, in some ways, an abstract victory. The concrete signs and symbols of victory all seemed to benefit the terrorists, not the mainstream centre. Prisoner releases and the disbandment of the RUC were tough pills to swallow - and made tougher still by the failure to move quickly on decommissioning. The kind of things that made the news every night were Unionist defeats and Republican victories. The longer this went on - the longer the arms werent put away - the weaker the UUP and the SDLP became. Sinn Fein and the IRA were prepared for a Long Game; London was not.
Looking back on it all, one wouldn't want to return to the 1980s but equally one ought not to forget that this great process has been less brilliant than is sometimes allowed. Not a disaster exactly but far from a total success either. Time - and the next generation of political leaders on all sides - may cause one to revisit and rethink this conclusion but for now at least, I wonder what might have happened had Peter Mandelson been posted to Northern Ireland in 1997. Perhaps it might have been harder to reach a deal but perhaps any deal that was reached might have been a better one.
*Trimble, though his story doesn't have the emotional pull of Mowlam's, would be a fascinating subject for a biopic. Prickly, difficult, thin-skinned, hot-tempered yet analytical, a little pompous, thrawn but, above all, couragous and far-sighted, he's an awkward, interesting politician and, it might also be noted, one of the few who really suffered as a result of the vital role he played in delivering the agreement.
Filed under: Britain (737 more articles) , Ireland (194 more articles) , Mandelson (11 more articles) , Northern Ireland (41 more articles) , Sinn Fein (11 more articles) , Ulster (48 more articles)
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (6)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Andrew Sullivan
Ben Smith
Charles Crawford
Chris Dillow
Claudia Massie
Dan Drezner
Daniel Larison
Dave Weigel
Ezra Klein
French Politics
Global Guerrilas (John Robb)
Henry Porter
James Fallows
Julian Sanchez
Kerry Howley
Kevin Drum
League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Marc Ambinder
Matt Zeitlin
Matthew Yglesias
Megan McArdle
More than Mind Games
Mr Eugenides
Norm Geras
Our Kingdom
Outside the Beltway
Radley Balko
Reason: Hit&Run
Rod Dreher
Samizdata
Scottish Unionist
SNP Tactical Voting
The American Scene
The Plank
Tim Worstall
Toby Harnden
Will Wilkinson
Charlotte Gore
Iain Martin
Hopi Sen
Liberal Vision
Left Back in the Changing Room
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
tommyt
February 2nd, 2010 12:35pm Report this commentWhat a load of unadulterated nonsense.
Was the film good or bad ? you cant decide, perhaps it was good by accident !
Has the peace process to date been good or bad ? - you're unsure.
Have unionists been badly treated ? Yes of course, you say.
Have republicans been let off lightly ? Undoubtedly, you bluster.
Who is the martyr here ? Why David Trimble of course - Hmmm.
The principle of consen was at th heart of the agreement, you know democracy and that, so if SF & DUP happen to win elections it is childish to suggest that this in some way dilutes the devolution settlement - in point of fact until Paisley chucked it the co-alition was working much better than anyone could have hoped.
Back to consent then, the unionists/UK govt in persuadin teh Irish govt to drop their teritorial claim on teh North have enshrined forever that NI will be part of the union until the people of the six counties vote against it. It will not be negotiated nor bombed away from GB - that was never entirely clear, even under Thatcher. That is a huge concession by the Irish govt supported by SF & SDLP.
As to your point on disarmament - the unionists were dancing on the head of a pin to come up with reasons not to follow through on what they agreed, it took three reports from a neutral body - each saying that IRA had disarmed - before the unionists budged. YOu will also note that the last major unionist paramilitary organisation only completed disarmament last month ! 11 years on from the agreement to do so.
Whether by luck or good judgement the good friday agreement has proven to be largely effective over the past decade or so. The only reason its at crisis point now is because of continued intransigence, personal problems & splits in the movement - all of which reside on the unionist side of the fence.
Fergus Pickering
February 2nd, 2010 12:56pm Report this commentMo was uselss, self-regarding vacuous. Much like the rest of them, wouldn't you say? Of course the character played by Julie Walters was quite different.
Bloody Bill Brock
February 2nd, 2010 2:10pm Report this commentLabour luvies playing Labour luvies, what did you expect the truth?
Edward
February 2nd, 2010 2:36pm Report this commentAlex addresses this subject occasionally, but it's hard to see exactly what kind of better deal there could have been in the context. One can't help the impression that he sees Unionist concessions as a problem rather than a necessary step towards a state in which Catholics no longer felt discriminated against - as if the SDLP or indeed anyone outside the IRA had never had a problem with the old RUC.
Craig Strachan
February 2nd, 2010 6:02pm Report this commentIn 1997 David Trimble gave a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York that basically laid out the shape of the Agreement that was to follow the next year. A measure of Trimble's negotiating success, surely? But it was never really seen as such by his own side, in large part because of the machinations of Jeffrey Donaldson.
A Jeffrey Donaldson biopic would be a short: Jeffrey is born...Jeffrey commences to be a dick...er...that's all.
Snowman
February 2nd, 2010 7:36pm Report this commentwould find it hard to warm up to any of the Labour wimin even if we were cremated together.
Back to top