Madam, - I congratulate Dick Keane (September 29th) on his correct identification of the true impediment to lasting harmony in Northern Ireland: the unrelenting persistence, among nationalists of all hues, with the goal of a "united Ireland".
This ambition, predicated on a naïve belief that the political union of all inhabitants of the island must be in the best interest of all, inevitably offends those who do not share that conviction. In addition, it acts as a bulwark against the development of neighbourly relations free from the twin spectres of mistrust and fear.
Is it not screamingly obvious that the real dread of those who doubt the totality of the recent decommissioning exercise - apart from the untrustworthiness of militant republicanism in the past - is that the prospect is now clear for the unwelcome tapis of a "united Ireland" being vaunted as a routine of political discourse?
Against this backdrop, how can those who cherish the union of Northern Ireland with Great Britain not fear lest otherwise plausible initiatives on cross-Border co-operation be but a thinly concealed veneer for the sneaking, insistent agenda of constitutional unity?
Only by firm renunciation of territorial incentive can the process of cross-community harmony be nurtured and brought to bloom.
Ideally, should the issue of constitutional unity ever become a live one, it is for the people of Northern Ireland to seek and the people of this State to consider. In its time (should that time ever be), the prospect of unity should be a logical and credible objective, and not the crude result of a tribal breeding race or the outcome of manipulative politicking.
In order to promote the prospect of active engagement between disparate communities, nationalism should take the bold step of dismissing the notion that the continuance of Northern Ireland represents "unfinished business" from 1921 and accept the incontestable tenet that the only way forward is forward.
Relations of good neighbourliness between the peoples of both states on this island is a sound point from which to start - and itself a most worthwhile ambition. - Yours, etc,
ALBERT POWER, Castle Court, Killiney Hill Road, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Dick Keane avoids the core of the Northern problem by the use of the term "two distinct and separate tribes". Ireland is not a tribal society, but a modern capitalist one; the issue is whether there are one or two nations on this island. If we accept that the Northern loyalists comprise a nation, then the solution we must work towards is clear: some type of federal Ireland where loyalists are guaranteed national and cultural autonomy. This was the old, pre-Adams Sinn Féin strategy and is approximately what is now being attempted by Mr Adams, the SDLP, Mr Ahern and, we might even argue, by Tony Blair.
But it will not do. Northern loyalists are not a nation. They do not wish to be a nation and those who make that claim on their behalf ignore an indispensable component of all legitimate nationalisms: after all other criteria of language, culture, common history, etc are fulfilled, nationhood must subjectively be desired by the majority of that population, or at least by a significant minority capable of becoming a majority in time. That will never happen and Mr Keane is correct in his description of the loyalist mindset: "the basic primeval fear of being taken over by us. . .so they lash out at anything and everything in a desperate cry for help".
But help to do what? In the recent riots they did not directly look for anything for themselves; essentially they demanded discrimination be reinstated against the nationalists to satisfy their supremacism. At grassroots level loyalist sectarianism is now worse than ever - a non-sectarian support for the Northern Ireland football team (even against England!) such as we saw in the 1986 Spain World Cup campaign is now impossible. This is a hopelessly reactionary mindset which can be defeated only by a refusal to compromise with it because it reads as weakness and so the spirit of "no surrender" revives. Some middle-class UUP unionists would like to compromise to get a bit of the Celtic tiger. But I see none on the scene who will impose modernism. Until these realities are grasped - and a united Ireland is the only possible context for doing so - then the annual fest of reaction typified by the loyalist marching season will continue. - Yours, etc,
GERRY DOWNING, Cricklewood, London NW2.
Madam, - Can anyone figure out why Sinn Féin used young boys to parade with imitation guns at its recent rally in Dublin city centre? It was totally insensitive at a time when the IRA was about to disarm and everyone was looking forward to a future of peace without murder and mayhem.
In furthering its aims Sinn Féin has never been too concerned about what others thought or believed in. Power was the ultimate aphrodisiac. But has the party learned anything from history? The last time we saw boys used in warfare in this part of the world was when we saw newsreel pictures of Adolf Hitler complimenting the Hitler Youth on fighting for the Fatherland as Germany faced defeat in the second World War. Shortly after that, the war was over.
Is using young boys, albeit with imitation guns, a subtle way for Sinn Féin leaders to tell us that the war is really over? Or have they, once again, shot themselves in the foot? - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN M. REDMOND, Hazelbrook Road, Dublin 6W.