Unionists raise the stakes in debate on weapons

THE Stormont inter party talks are moving into another "critical" phase

THE Stormont inter party talks are moving into another "critical" phase. In submissions tabled in the past few days, all three unionist parties have raised the stakes in the continuing debate about decommissioning paramilitary weapons.

Theirs is a direct, and entirely predictable, response to the continuing speculation about a second IRA ceasefire. Last night some senior unionists were prepared to suggest there might be no talks process for Sinn Fein to join, should the republicans lay down their arms a second time.

We are not at that point yet. Mr David Trimble, the Ulster Unionist leader, yesterday told the BBC's On The Record programme he would continue his effort to persuade the British government that meaningful talks could, and should, proceed without Sinn Fein.

But sources close to Mr Trimble fear he has not persuaded Mr Major and Sir Patrick Mayhew to raise the entry conditions for Mr Gerry Adams and company.

READ MORE

The UUP leader said suggestions that Sinn Fein might meet the necessary terms, demonstrating a commitment to exclusively peaceful methods, flew "in the face of the reality". However, he declined to say he had no confidence in Sir Patrick, contenting himself with: "We disagree with his approach. We think he has got his priorities wrong."

And Mr Trimble resisted invitations to speculate on the circumstances in which the UUP might join Labour in a "confidence" vote in the Commons, seeking to force the Conservatives from office. Significantly perhaps, in a separate section of the same programme, Mr Trimble's deputy, Mr John Taylor, appeared less reticent.

Mr Trimble would be reluctant to concede he has lost the argument with the British government. Moreover, for all his amazement at Sir Patrick's public response to Mr Martin McGuinness last Friday, it is not clear yet that London believes a second ceasefire, on acceptable terms, is on offer.

Sources here insist the latest peace overtures are being treated with "healthy scepticism". No significance is attached to the fact that there have been no bombs since Lisburn. The authorities have no doubt, from the evidence on the ground, that further high profile attacks have been planned. And ministers and officials have distinctly mixed feelings about the Irish assessment that the republicans are supposed to go either way.

According to one source: "We have no difficulty translating that into a threat, if we don't get our way, we're ready to bomb you."

Some unionists believe the inherent contradictions in the developing situation will ultimately thwart the peace bid and guarantee an effective stalemate until the other side of a general election.

And there is some willingness, for the moment to believe that British responsiveness may be largely a matter of catering to public perceptions and international (American) opinion.

But should that assessment prove to be wrong, the price of a second ceasefire seems clear: Sir Patrick would have to agree Sinn Fein's automatic entry to an inclusive political process consequent upon the cessation and acceptance of the Mitchell principles.

It is against that possibility that the unionist parties are now converging on an agreed approach to the decommissioning issue.

From the extracts of the SDLP analysis, it is clear that the broad nationalist view is that voluntary decommissioning, if it is ever to happen, will only occur in the context of inclusive negotiations and political progress across a whole range of issues identified by the Mitchell Report.

That is the view of the Government, most recently outlined at Stormont by the Minister for Justice, Mrs Owen. And, from his statement of October 30th it remains too the position of Sir Patrick and of the British government.

Both governments are committed to proceed with enabling legislation to provide the machinery and immunities required for a decommissioning process.

In the talks they have been urging the appointment of a committee of the plenary to prepare the way for the post legislative appointment of an Independent Verification Commission.

The unionists object to this, seeing it as Mr Dick Spring's original "fourth strand" of the talks, and want the Commission appointed and in place ahead of legislation. Despite this tussle, hope had persisted that the parties would reach "sufficient consensus" to establish the mechanism and proceed to the substantive three stranded negotiations.

However, those hopes have been knocked by reports that the UUP has tabled decommissioning proposals broadly similar to those of the DUP and of Mr Robert McCartney's UK Unionist Party.

The Irish Times understands that the UUP plan, tabled last week, echoes the demand for the start of decommissioning before Sinn Fein can be admitted to substantive negotiations.

That amounts in effect to the reinstatement of the so called "Washington 3" pre condition, and places them on a direct collision course with the Irish, SDLP and, crucially, the British government.

Some unionists last night suggested this need not, in itself, mean the end of the talks process at Stormont. One favoured proceeding into the three strands, without agreement on decommissioning, leaving the disarmament demands on the table simply to be activated if and when Sinn Fein was admitted.

However, some UUP sources thought this unlikely. In any event, republicans are manifestly not going to join a decommissioning conference, and the SDLP has had constant doubt about its role in a process paralysed by that issue.