Stalemate on North after London talks

British prime minister Tony Blair is facing prolonged stalemate in Northern Ireland, as DUP leader the Rev Ian Paisley and Sinn…

British prime minister Tony Blair is facing prolonged stalemate in Northern Ireland, as DUP leader the Rev Ian Paisley and Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams join a battle of wills over the future of the Belfast Agreement.

The stage for a trial of unionist and republican negotiating strength was set yesterday during an afternoon of Downing Street talks, in which Mr Blair allegedly failed to inquire about the state of the reported internal republican debate on the future of the Provisional IRA.

Asked about Mr Adams's assertion that this issue was not raised during his meeting with Mr Blair, the prime minister's spokesman said: "This was a meeting with the president of Sinn Féin."

Dr Paisley emerged from his talks with Mr Blair declaring the Good Friday accord dead, while appearing to close the door to future powersharing with Sinn Féin and signalling a fresh assault on one of the agreement's key provisions.

READ MORE

Demanding "a new beginning", Dr Paisley said it was "not necessary" for government in Northern Ireland to work by way of an executive headed by co-equal first and deputy first ministers. And the DUP leader seemed to imply some British government interest in giving the suspended Stormont Assembly a scrutiny role in relation to direct rule ministers.

Mr Adams dismissed this proposal, saying it "doesn't make any sense whatsoever", while insisting the Belfast Agreement remained "the template" for future political development. At the same time the Sinn Féin leader also raised the stakes, warning that a DUP refusal to honour the partnership provisions of the international treaty would represent "a huge challenge" for Mr Blair and Taoiseach Bertie Ahern.

The view in some quarters in Whitehall last night was that the day's events amounted to "preliminary skirmishing while we wait for the IRA".

However, Dr Paisley's rhetoric was consistent with the private views of usually reliable DUP sources, who told The Irish Times a powersharing deal enabling the DUP leader to serve out the final stage of his career as first minister "isn't going to happen". And while his comments yesterday did not amount to a "never" verdict, Dr Paisley did appear to raise the bar higher for republicans with an implicit demand for IRA disbandment.

Downing Street was comforted by Dr Paisley's continued support for the prime minister's original "acts of completion" terms as providing what he called the necessary "sure foundation" for an agreement.

Asserting there could be no return to the start/stop life of the Assembly, Dr Paisley demanded: " decommissioning, verifiable decommissioning, decommissioning that people knew had taken place, they saw the evidence . . . And, secondly, the eradication of the criminality that is going on in our country."

However, he went beyond the British and Irish governments in demanding IRA disbandment. Claiming that Mr Adams had said the IRA "will never be disbanded", he said: "If that's his view then that's it." Asked if he could foresee the day when his party would share power with Sinn Féin, the DUP leader replied: "No, I do not see it because I do not trust them, and the people do not trust them. They've had their chance and they have failed."

At an earlier press conference in Westminster, Mr Adams said: "Ian Paisley has the ability to be the first minister. He needs to know that the only way he's going to be first minister is with a Sinn Féin deputy first minister."

When that was subsequently put to him, Dr Paisley replied: "He's living in the old days of the agreement. We must have a new beginning . . . I do not think I would take second place to a Sinn Féiner any day."

Mr Adams said there was "no timescale" for the completion of the republican movement's internal discussion about his call on the IRA to commit itself to exclusively political means. And he advised journalists that anyone "who would nod and wink at you" about that internal debate, or its direction, "doesn't know what they are talking about".

Mr Adams suggested the status quo and direct rule would not prove acceptable even from a unionist point of view.