Albert Reynolds on the decommissioning process

Former Irish Taoiseach Albert Reynolds was one of the architects of the peace process. He joined us for a live forum and answered a selection of your questions.

To watch coverage of the forum, select the link below:

  56k  

---

The IRA has announced that it has begun decommissioning its arsenal of weapons. The widely-anticipated move follows demands for disarmament from the unionist community in Northern Ireland for many years.

But only in recent years has the IRA begun considering giving up its terrorist activities to become more involved in pursuing a mainstream political solution to the situation in Northern Ireland.

One of the first political leaders to encourage the organisation along this road to peace was former Irish Prime Minister, Albert Reynolds.

Mr Reynolds is one of the architects of the Irish peace process. During his time as Taoiseach he convinced the then UK Prime Minister John Major to engage in finding a solution to a problem that had dogged successive British governments for decades.

His government engaged with republicans and others to encourage paramilitaries to give up the gun and achieve their aims through politics.

What does the IRA statement on decommissioning mean for Northern Ireland after decades of sectarian violence? Can a move on arms by the IRA renew the path to a lasting peace in the province? What next for the Northern Ireland peace process?

---

Transcript:

Newshost:
I'm Jane Peel, welcome to the BBC News Online's Forum. And today we're going to be discussing the decision by the IRA to disarm - the historic decision announced yesterday that many people thought would never happen. And to discuss that and to reply to your e-mails we've got Albert Reynolds, one of the main architects of the peace programme. He signed the Downing Street Declaration with John Major back in 1993 and was quoted as saying, as long ago as 1994, that he believed the war was over.

Mr Reynolds welcome and thank you for joining us. We've got a number of questions that people want to put to you, the first one I've got here is from Ed who is a Briton living in Italy and he says, perhaps the crux of it, did you ever think that you would see this in your lifetime?

Albert Reynolds:
Yeah, I was optimistic that I would, I said so in 1994, you've just quoted it, that once the Provisional IRA had agreed to come into a cease fire, to a full cessation of violence, that once we could hold that for a period, a short enough period, to prove to the loyalists that it was for real then I was optimistic that once they came into the peace process that they would stay in it and it took longer than I thought but nevertheless we got that historical decision yesterday. And I think this closes a chapter of violence in Irish history and opens a new chapter to rebuild Ireland in a peaceful manner in a fair and equitable society.

Newshost:
Of course there have been, as you said, many setbacks and it's taken perhaps longer than you anticipated. When did you think that this was really the moment that you've been waiting for - I mean did you believe as soon as Gerry Adams said those words a few days ago that this was really it?

Albert Reynolds:
Well I had known for about three weeks, behind the scenes, that the process to arrive at this decision was underway and that the search for an agreement and for support for us had been going on for some time. So when I saw Gerry Adams make his statement on television then I realised, yes it was it. And once I had seen, even the day before, that Martin McGuinness had left to go to the United States I suspected that the same procedure adopted by the Republican movement in 1994, when the cease fire was announced at the end of August, then at that stage they sent the former Commander in Chief of the IRA to the United States to explain the change of policy and the change of direction I saw the same procedures being implemented for this big decision, this historical decision, and I said so two days before that.

Newshost:
Of course not everybody is going to be as glad as you and many other people are that this has actually happened and we have a question here from Tony in Australia who says: "While I consider this is a giant step forward for the greater good what do you say to the many republicans who see this as a form of surrender or a weakening of our hand in the bid for a united Ireland?"

Albert Reynolds:
Well I can understand the mindset of some hard line republicans and indeed some people who are republicans all their life but what I have to say to them is this - it's what I said to the republican leadership back in 1992 when I became Irish Prime Minister - was that we had witnessed 30 years of non stop violence, with over 3,000 people dead and about 40,000 people injured and the cause of republicanism had not been advanced one iota. And the basis for the Downing Street declaration was to set down the principles on which everybody could move forward and to put in place a strategy of non violence to replace the strategy of violence and to demonstrate through the republican leadership that politics could deliver far more to their cause than violence ever could because everybody had seen the violence campaign as having failed, the British Army had admitted that they couldn't defeat the IRA and vice versa too. So, in my view and my judgement at the time I changed the policy of the Irish government to open communications, indirectly at first, with the republican leadership and by lifting the ban on their interviews on the national radio and television, by giving them a commitment to parole their political prisoners and many other aspects of equality that they wanted - fair treatment for everybody and an equal share out of the privileges of government - that it wasn't all going to be one way as it had been since partition was installed in the 1920s.

So to them I would say - Look your cause has been much farther advanced by coming into the democratic process, which I hoped it would, I think we've demonstrated that it can and I believe that with the cross-border institutions, with the response now from the British government to reduce their military presence in places like West Tyrone and South Armagh, I think that people will begin to see that they have much more to gain from this process than they would ever gain by violence.

Newshost:
But of course there is still that very real threat from the dissident republicans who perhaps may use this as an opportunity for some form of backlash - do you fear that?

Albert Reynolds:
Well I think they're small enough in number but as I always said that whether it's the Republican movement or anybody else unless they have the support and comfort and cover of the people on the ground they cannot succeed to any great degree. And I think that the people of Northern Ireland and indeed from the very start, when they chased defeat they never wanted to go back, there's a democratic mandate throughout the North and South in Ireland saying they wanted to go for peace and the Good Friday Agreement and the people are supreme in democracy and I don't think that they're going to give much comfort to any dissident group who's going to upset this peace process. This is what they've been longing for, for years, they have it and they're not going to give it away easily.

Newshost:
The next question comes from Ian McGrath from Scotland. He says: "All the talk is of IRA disarmament but we haven't heard about the Unionists or other groups - are they part of this disarmament, or can they be part of this disarmament?"

Albert Reynolds:
They haven't been part of this agreement, of the Good Friday Agreement or the Belfast Agreement, they haven't been part of it. But their view has always been - and was the same expressed to me - that it was a deep rooted sense of fear in both communities, in both traditions, that the reason for keeping arms for so long was that one tradition was afraid of an attack by the other and neither had confidence in the security forces to protect them. The Loyalists would still maintain that today. They never believed then that there would be an IRA cease fire that would last, they still don't believe now that the IRA are serious about decommissioning their weapons. But when this sinks in and when it's shown to be a fact of life I think the loyalists will reflect on their position and realise that they don't have a real need or necessity for guns.

But the violence at the moment in North Belfast where schoolchildren have been threatened and their way to school has been blocked is despicable in the extreme and one would hope that now there is this gesture, the historical agreement from the IRA that they would back off and become a catalyst for the Loyalists to pull off that protest there and get in behind the peace process because the vast majority of people want peace.

Newshost:
There's an allied question to that from Adrian Somerville of Northern Ireland. He says: "Many of the loyalists groups have in fact broken their cease fires and isn't it fair actually that the onus has been placed very much on the republicans and not on the loyalists groups?" Perhaps you think it's time to put more onus on them now and to persuade them, if they can be persuaded, that they have to act too?

Albert Reynolds:
I think that the time has come and the way has been prepared and the environment has been created by the decommissioning of IRA guns and arms. I believe that now when they see that this decision has been taken, one that they never thought would be taken, I think that the pressure has to and influence has to be brought to bear on the leadership there both by the unionist community and indeed by the British government who have a role to play now in getting the other side into line in relation to moving forward the peace process and restoring the cross-border institutions and the ministers on it and indeed give the confidence to the whole process.

I said many, many times that people were talking about decommissioning and the type of decommissioning that delayed this whole process was expecting the republicans to hand over their guns in public, which they were never going to do and that's what caused the delay. I believe that it was wrong to place all the emphasis on the republican guns and not on the others as well because everything you need to do in Northern Ireland should be balanced and you have to be firm and fair to both sides. I think that the pressure should come on the loyalists now to decommission their weapons.

Newshost:
Ok, briefly on this point, Peter from Ireland says: "Some members of the RUC in border areas have recently been reported as saying they wouldn't be surprised to be serving as members of an all Ireland police force in 20 years time. Do you think this is something that could happen?"

Albert Reynolds:
I wouldn't put the time scale on it but I think it's something that will inevitably happen. I think that the demographics are changing very fast in Ireland, that the cross-border institutions when they're seen to work and can serve the best interests of both communities in Northern Ireland and indeed throughout the Ireland, that the Ireland can go forward together. And I think in time and probably maybe early in the next generation people will have an opportunity to decide where they want to be.

I was only reading the other night, the night when I was expecting this decision to be announced, that Winston Churchill even suggested, way back in the '20s, that it should be a regional parliament in Northern Ireland but it should be subservient to Dublin and have their own autonomy in the North but Dublin, instead of London, should be the chief parliament. And you know if him and people like him were thinking about that in the '20s then I believe it's a reality for the future whenever it happens.

Newshost:
Well what about this for the future then, Andrew of Northern Ireland asks whether you think a political solution can realistically bring about a united Ireland or do you think that's forever gone and Northern Ireland will ultimately end up becoming perhaps an independent state?

Albert Reynolds:
I don't think it's viable as an independent state, I think that was looked at and examined in the past. Dr Paisley and his party had that as party policy for a long time but I don't think the reality was there and I'm quite certain it couldn't survive as an economic entity. In fact it couldn't survive the way it is without huge subsidies from London. So that part of the question is not a reality.

In relation to - is a united Ireland gone or what the future's going to be - it's left open to the people to decide, it's the people that are going to decide what type of government they want in future and indeed as the Downing Street Declaration set out in '93, when John Major and I published it, and it came through into the framework document, which became the agenda for the Belfast Agreement, it has been recognised that yes any changes will have to be with the consent - the principle of consent is paramount - the consent on one side applies to also consent on the other, so that if in time that there is a national majority people are going to have to decide what type of government and are they going to be governed from Dublin or are they going to be governed from London but it's a choice for the people, their decision and who knows what decision they will make in the future. It will all depend on how well they develop this process from here on in and then everybody will see that it's a better future in Ireland for everybody to be governed from Ireland than from London.

Newshost:
Rory Campbell from London wants to know whether you think that Sinn Fein may well in 10 years or perhaps sooner become a member of a coalition government in the Republic?

Albert Reynolds:
They might even become, now that their arms are being decommissioned, they might even become a part of a coalition in Dublin much earlier than 10 years although they may not accept it, their long time political strategy may well be to stand off until they build the strength of their party. And certainly yesterday's decision will certainly be a test for them in the next election - there's talk of them getting maybe four or five or six seats at the moment and if they were to get some kind of a number like that they could be certainly in the running if they choose to go into coalition, it could be certainly there for consideration after the next election.

Undoubtedly now that they've chosen the political path and they have endorsed it with getting rid of their arms undoubtedly they're in for the long haul of politics and people will decide their future as well as everyone else's.

Newshost:
That may partly answer the next question from Gerard Patrick Ward who says: "Do you think that Sinn Fein could now replace the SDLP as the main nationalist party in the North and make serious inroads in gaining extra seats in the next election in the Republic?" I mean clearly you think - you suggested from what you just said that could be the case.

Albert Reynolds:
It certainly could be the case. In Northern Ireland the last election results showed that Sinn Fein had passed out the SDLP. There's not much between them there at the moment. The SDLP are changing their leadership - John Hume and Seamus Mallon are stepping aside and letting younger people come in - their party has been reorganised and revamped and now that the arms issue has been dealt with by the IRA, Sinn Fein definitely will have a stronger hand in future elections in Northern Ireland. And it may well be that this is part of the consideration of making the decision at this time because if the peace process was to collapse this week, as was clearly on the cards and they didn't want that, but if the worse should happen, the fact that they had made this decision would certainly give them an added advantage going into another election in Northern Ireland. So that may well have been part of the consideration too.

Newshost:
We're rapidly running out of time so one very last question from Peter Volford. If I can ask you to be brief. He says: "If you were to compile a simple and practical checklist which precisely indicates whether the peace process is going alright, what items would you include in that list?" And perhaps a very short list from you if I may ask.

Albert Reynolds:
Well both governments have come a long way since we published the Downing Street declaration between the two governments in December '93, document produced, Belfast Agreement worked out, institutions set up to cross-border, which was a big step forward, Unionists sitting in government for a period, which in turn Sinn Fein, having accepted to go into government in Northern Ireland and indeed to participate in the parliament here in Dublin. All of those are huge changes from what it was and people thought they'd never - that's part of the checklist.

The other checklist, of course, will be what happens from here on in. We want to see the end of violence in Ireland, we want to see the end of bombs in Irish politics and we want to see everybody work for a new society - that'll be the new checklist going forward from here on in and I think that's where the people want it to go and in any democracy people win.