THE collapse last Friday evening of the 18 month long IRA cessation was a tragic development. It need not have happened. It was not inevitable. The tragic reality is that the potential for a negotiated peace settlement created 18 months ago was not grasped.

It was the absence of negotiations - and the consequent failure to address and resolve the causes of conflict which made the re occurence of conflict inevitable.

It is essential that this point is clearly understood, otherwise we re left with nothing other than the conclusion that interminable conflict itself is inevitable. That is clearly an unthinkable and incorrect conclusion.

The people of this island do have he ability to come to an agreed and democratic accommodation. The vehicle for this is democratic and inclusive dialogue and negotiations. The absence of democratic negotiations, despite the commitments given by the two governments prior to the IRA cessation, and since, most notably in the November communique led to the present breakdown.

The basis, therefore, for rebuilding the IRA cessation and the peace process itself must be an adherence to this principle of inclusion and dialogue and the honouring of the commitments which led in the first place to the IRA decision 18 months ago.

The IRA cessation was, itself, the culmination of a long process of dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion aimed at identifying a method of resolving the conflict and building a lasting political settlement.

The Irish Government of that time, Sinn Fein, the SDLP and key elements of Irish America were all agreed that inclusive negotiation, without preconditions or vetoes, is the only way to resolve the conflict and secure a lasting peace. It was agreed that peace could be achieved only by replacing the failed political structures with a new political arrangement on the island, based on democratic principles of agreement band consent.

There was an intensive and unprecedented dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion in its broadest sense, a dialogue which required courage, imagination and a new approach on all sides, not least on the part of the then Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, and the SDLP leader John Hume, who, despite intense opposition, turned their backs on the failed policies of isolation and took the risk required in the building of the Irish peace process.

Against this background of intense dialogue, the British and Irish governments agreed the text of the Downing Street declaration. Despite our profound reservations about the overall content of this document and our publicly stated disagreement with many elements of it, the declaration did contain a clear commitment by the British and Irish governments to initiate inclusive dialogue as the means to a new political settlement among the Irish people and, furthermore, the British government also gave a commitment that it would encourage, facilitate and enable this agreement.

These commitments, which marked an important shift in the British position, were repeated frequently over the ensuing nine months.

With a clear commitment by all the major Irish nationalist parties proactively to pursue a new, negotiated and democratic political arrangement, and a public commitment by the British government to convene with the Irish Government the necessary peace talks to achieve this agreement, the Sinn Fein leadership gave an assessment to the IRA leadership of the prospects for a lasting political settlement. It was on the basis of clearly stated commitments and agreements that the IRA announced a complete cessation of military operations on August 31st, 1994.

That was 18 months ago. The commitments given then have not been honoured. In 18 months there has not been one word of negotiation.

The injustices and inequalities which led to conflict have not been addressed. On the contrary, the British government blocked the commencement of round table negotiations by erecting, unilaterally, new and previously unmentioned preconditions to Sinn Fein's participation in all party peace talks.

In the 18 months of the IRA cessation, the British government stalled the commencement of all party peace talks time and time again. The unilateral dumping of the Mitchell report, and the introduction of a unionist proposal for a six county election, placed an unbearable strain on the peace process. Sinn Fein warned repeatedly of the dangers. Our warnings were treated as threats when they were intended to alert those responsible that the peace process needed to be consolidated and built upon.

The stalling, the negativity, the introduction of new preconditions, was steadily undermining the position of those, myself included who had argued that a viable peaceful way forward could be constructed.

Those who had moved with scepticism, but with courage, to enhance the prospects for a negotiated settlement were confronted with a political vacuum and a British government which wedded itself, for narrow party political reasons, to an intransigent unionist leadership.

Against this background and with consternation I, and those who had worked to put this peace process together, watched as Private Lee Clegg was released and then promoted, as David Trimble and Ian Paisley marched through the nationalist community in Garvaghy Road, as Irish prisoners were mistreated in English jails, as plastic bullets were fired at peaceful demonstrators, as nationalist homes continued to be wrecked in RUC raids. And, most fundamentally, we pointed out, with a growing sense of desperation, that there could be no negotiated peace without peace negotiations; that without peace talks there was no peace process.

Now, because our warnings were not heeded, it is not only disappointing but alarming that the Irish Government appears to have abandoned, in a knee jerk reaction to the events of last Friday, the very principle of inclusive dialogue on which this peace process was constructed. The readoption of the policies of isolation and marginalisation, which for 25 years fanned the conflict, and the policies of the Taoiseach send out a disturbing signal.

Attempts to isolate Sinn Fein, failed in the past. The Taoiseach knows that our party is committed to dialogue, that we are not involved in armed actions and that we have a democratic mandate.

What of those whom we represent? Are they to be discriminated against by the Irish Government in a crude attempt by that government to pressurise an organisation for which Sinn Fein and our electorate have no responsibility or control?

The Taoiseach also knows that I have honoured every commitment I made. He knew how fragile the peace process was. All of us have to reflect on our stewardship of the peace process. Mr Bruton must reflect, as I must, on the lessons of the last 18 months.

One thing is clear. It is not possible to make peace in Ireland unless the British government wants to make peace also. It is also very important that the Taoiseach's unilateral decision to refuse to accord Sinn Fein our democratic rights is set aside so that we can all find ways through dialogue to rescue the peace process.

IT WAS the adoption of a new approach based on dialogue by the then Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, which helped to persuade the IRA to end its campaign 18 months ago. It was the British government's adherence to the failed policies of isolation and marginalisation, despite the IRA cessation, which inexorably undermined the entire basis of the peace process.

I have already said that all of us who made genuine efforts to build a lasting peace must keep our nerve and redouble our efforts to salvage the peace process. It is simply not good enough to walk away from a peace process which took so long and so much effort to build.

The last 18 months spent in a political vacuum made the task of restoring the IRA cessation a difficult one. Commitments, broken in the past, may not be enough. Real political progress in the form of real political negotiations is necessary.

The difficulties which we face are already immense. They will be all the more so if the Irish Government locks Sinn Fein and our electorate out of the democratic dialogue to which we, and our electorate, have a democratic right.

Other more successful peace processes also suffered setbacks. In South Africa and the Middle East, if the political leaders had refused to talk because of the breakdowns of their processes, then they would not have achieved as much as they have. On the contrary, rather than stopping dialogue, leaders in these conflicts were spurred into intensifying their efforts.

All of us have an obligation to redouble our efforts in the search for a peace settlement. Sinn Fein policy is based on the need for negotiations as the only means to settle conflict. Dialogue is the only way forward. The alternative is unthinkable.