A new RIRA campaign?

[Papa C.]

With these two attacks on British forces in the past few days I must ask the question, what exactly do the RIRA expect to achieve from, what would seem to be, a new armed campaign, if it is a new campaign?

In 1969 there was huge civil unrest and the conditions seemed to be right at the time but today's campaign seems to be out of nowhere. The conditions have been the same for the last 10 years.

At a time when people like Comrade Foster and the IRSP are doing great work with loyalist groups, you have to wonder if a possible RIRA campaign is going to threaten that.

I think the best step forward is by following Comrade Foster's path and try to unite the communities under one banner, the people's banner.

I don't mean to jump on the British/Irish band wagon of calling these people terrorists, murders with little or no support because it is the British Government presence that gives these people the right to fight back and legitimises their actions against MILITARY AND GOVERNMENT targets. If the Government want to stop these attacks and take away their legitimacy they must leave the north, otherwise attacks against military targets can't be called terrorist only rebellion.

The British and Irish media are going on calling these British soldiers '2 Young Boys' but the truth is that they were part of an occupying force and were neutralised by an army made up of working people. If the Germans were occupying Britain today and a British army killed 2 German soldiers I think the world would be rejoicing and not calling the British terrorists.

Right now I think a broad front is needed between Irish Republican, Socialist and even loyalist or ulster scotts organisations with an opposition to the British Government (much like the organisation David Ervine seemed to be trying to create before his untimely death), educating the people to the point that they realise that everything they watch on television is controlled by Governments and private enterprise with a vested interest.

I am not so sure that this campaign (if it is a new campaign) will bring us closer to a Workers' Republic or even a united capitalist Ireland.

What are people's opinions here?

[Stallit 2 de Halfo]

I think people are too quick to 'call' the RIRA's and (now) CIRA's intentions on this. They are not stupid. They know they wont force the Brits out by force.

At the moment we still dont know their strategy, or really why they did it. We can see at least some of the outcomes, many of which are positive, and could have been predictable, from these attacks. It has put occupation on the map once more, weakened the PSNI's and BA's morale, boosted the RIRA and given them publicity. Attacks like these help shape popular consciousness.

In reflection though I think the attacks are counterprductive. Ireland is faced with an economic crisis, and the potential for unity and common ground between the catholic and protestant working class should be exploited politically. This is an opportunity for the ideas of socialism to spread while sectarianism is at a low.

If the republican analysis is correct, then Britain, when faced with a challenge, will stir up sectarianism to divide the working class anyway. But sure why do that when we have the oul RIRA stirring it up for them...

Armed action, or in particular armed struggle, should be used when the British state is openly whipping it up and committing injustices in the eyes of the populace. This has not happened and I think these attacks serve the interests of Britain - which makes me think a little that maybe they have some involvement.

Attacks on BA bases are just fine in my book. Its understandable, and even applaudable. They are military targets after all. I would like to see more of it actually. But when Pizza delivery men and soft targets like PSNI are targeted there's nothing heroic about it - its petty.

And at the very least they could have apologised for killing the Pizza man instead of trying to justify it. Your looking at tens of thousands of civilians involved directly, and indirectly, in serving the BA in the North. Calling these people legitimate targets is terrorism in my book.

[dangeresque]

Mar 10, 2009 8:16:17 GMT Papa C. said:

With these two attacks on British forces in the past few days I must ask the question, what exactly do the RIRA expect to achieve from, what would seem to be, a new armed campaign, if it is a new campaign?

it seems their goal is in creating a crisis in Stormont to bring it down. and i'd say they have a fair chance of achieving that goal.

also, I agree with nearly everything Stallit2dH just said, so I'm going to be lazy and say I agree rather than try to formulate the same argument.

this is an interesting piece, I think:

A dissident campaign could topple the Assembly


By Malachi O'Doherty
BELFAST TELEGRAPH Monday, 9 March 2009
Now we are in trouble. The problems that lie in front of us following the murders in
Massereene should be clear enough but perhaps aren't.





If this is the beginning of a reenergised campaign by republican militants, then
there are basic lessons from past experience that need to be borne in mind.

This can bring down the Assembly.

It is good to hear the first ministers asserting emphatically that it must not be
allowed to, but they know their history better than most. No power sharing
government has ever functioned here against the backdrop of an ongoing republican
campaign. The SDLP calculated that it could not share power with Unionists at a time
when it would have been answerable for security measures against the IRA and its
support base in the Catholic community.

Sinn Fein may be in a better position for a time, but another lesson is that these
things get worse before they get better.

There is no precedent of a paramilitary organisation in Northern Ireland being put
out of business by the state through policing and security measures.

Suddenly people are talking as if this is a feasible option. Well, it has never
happened before.

What tends to happen is that the measures taken by the state are turned to the
advantage of the paramilitaries. Strong arm measures are condemned as oppression and
harassment. How much strong action is Sinn Fein likely to sanction, when Alex
Maskey, a security spokesman and a member of the Policing Board was ranting at the
recent Ard Fheis about the injustice of stop and search measures, directed against
dissident republicans?

A crucial demand of Sinn Fein, and a condition of their participation in the
Executive, is early devolution of policing and justice.

The murders complicate this in several ways, not least perhaps in that Sinn Fein
might want powers over policing in the hopes of curtailing aggressive and covert
action against the dissidents, or that Unionists, suspecting as much, will now feel
more inclined to push devolution further back.

Another lesson is that while most of us are appalled by the murders, some will be
impressed. The dissidents will be seen in some quarters as having upped their game
and made themselves credible militants.

This can attract new members.

The man behind the eight ball today is Martin McGuinness. Those who carried out
these murders knew that he was their real target. Their job is to make his job
impossible.

McGuinness, like many others, was probably waiting for the first success of the
dissidents to be the murder of a Catholic police officer. That would have been more
manageable than this, for the whole Catholic community would have swung round
unambiguously. This is much more difficult for him. This touches his republican
funny bone.

McGuinness has a limited amount of leeway, so long as this doesn't get worse.

He is already taking care to explain — in his convoluted phrasing — that he has no
choice but to call for people to help the police, and that doesn't sound like
enthusiasm; it sounds like conceding that normal civil responsibility is an onerous
political duty.

A key question is whether the dissidents are within reach of significant goals, and
are brought closer to them by these murders. We have to sensibly conclude that they
are and not try to wish that thought away or to smother clear headed debate with
moralising.

Those of us who remember the Troubles will recognise the tone of unction in the
statements of condemnation of the Massereene murders. They will be wincing at the
prospect of well intentioned people making things worse. Secretary of State Shaun
Woodward's appraisal of the soldiers killed as fine young men who wanted to save
lives serving in Afghanistan may have been perfectly true. But, if not, it makes no
difference to the ghastliness of their murder and the scale of the political
problems created by this ambush.

It does, however, have the potential to rattle a republican culture which doesn't
want to see endorsement of the army's role in Afghanistan as part of the moral
package it has bought into through the peace process.

In fact, to many it will smack of lines being drawn between those who revere that
role and those who want to murder soldiers. It would be better to focus on the
politics of Northern Ireland and leave Afghanistan out of it.

Woodward will achieve nothing by sounding off plummily as if he thinks he only needs
to be heard in the Home Counties.

Does Woodward know, for instance, the resonance of the word ‘criminal' in republican
culture? Yet he uses the word so often you would think he was deliberately trying to
echo Margaret Thatcher in his taunting of the dissidents.

These are hard times and a lot of people are going to have to try and think a little
more like their old enemies if we are to get through them.

[RedFlag32]

I disagree with Dangeresque on this point. I dont think the R/CIRA are capable of bringing stormont down. Unionism knows it has main stream republicanism in the bag, they wont rock the boat. SF wont jump ship either because they have a solid mandate.

[Papa C.]

Mar 16, 2009 17:55:18 GMT RedFlag32 said:

I disagree with Dangeresque on this point.

not often you hear that ;D

I know what you mean though. Attacks like these seem to give Unionists (such as the DUP & Sinn Fein) the space to put up a united front against physical force Republicanism which they have been doing.

I do think that eventually they could possibly bring down the assembly though. It would be a way for the DUP to use SF by blaming them as the 'opposition' parties often do. If they are clutching at straws, looking for somewhere to place blame and appease 'hardcore' unionists they may resort to this action. Much like the relationship between FF and FG. Even when the country is plunged into deep recession, when FF ask for help, FG come out with the 'it's not our problem, sort it out yourself or put us in power' line.

[dangeresque]

Mar 17, 2009 22:15:35 GMT Papa C. said:

Mar 16, 2009 17:55:18 GMT RedFlag32 said:

I disagree with Dangeresque on this point.

not often you hear that ;D

damn RF32 just gave me a big smack down. he was right on this one.

[thefiguresix]

Is the RIRA campaign actually based on a coherent political strategy or is it really just bitterness and bigotry. I cant help but feel that if I encountered typical street level supporters of the RIRA or CIRA, suspicious that i was a prod, that any explanation along the lines of "erm yes I am a protestant but you see Im actually a socialist with no loyality to britain, and depending on the position of any irish government and the chances of achieving a socialist state I am actually a suporter of a united ireland" would recieve the response of "he is a prod like! lets bate the shite outa 'im".
My feeling is that it is a power grab and the best way for them to shift the balance is to steal the IRAs old script and start operating all those triggers that have been built into us throughout our childhoods through the schools, political systems and our neighbourhoods. Its fascist. The one thing I always notice on discussion boards like this is that there is this frame work of wanting to move forward and trying to find ways to expand socialism across the traditional divide, but underneath it all there is always a tone of "yes! one point for us" when an event like this happens. You cant be reaching across to your working class brothers whilst getting a wee sectarian thrill by proxy thanks to the RIRA.
No one wants to say that the RIRA are wrong in any moral way, just at the most counter productive. Is there really always a side to take and shouldnt we have the maturity to look at the influences that have been pushed onto us in our upbringing and see how appropriate our responses are. The possible impact of this is far too damaging and will push the goal of working class solidarity further away. Protestants will retreat and I am sure that many protestants inching their way towards socialist activism have found these events to be a massive barrier to their involvement. You will never achieve any sort of united ireland because working class protestants will never feel welcome. You cant have a situation where if the British government, unionists or protestants stir up division it is a massively and criminally irresponsible cynical campaign and a crime against the people of ireland but when republicans do the same it is unfortunate and frustrating if still a little bit satisfying.

PS. I began posting on here some time ago but havent been on for quite a while. I hope I can learn a few things and get a bit of a reflection on my opinions once again. Im especially interested on how republican socialism plans to engage with protestant and Im always open to anyone who want to try and get new point of view or challenge mine!

[Papa C.]

Thanks for the post comrade. The board has been getting quite stagnant lately. I would love if it could spark up again.

I take your points. Although certain RIRA actions seem counter productive there are Republicans and Republican Socialists who work hard with the loyalist community (and I separate loyalists from protestants here) to try and let them see how socialism can benefit all working people. I would love to see more of this.

I have been planning to write up an outline of how a socialist society MIGHT work. I want to do this because when I was trying to learn about socialism I found it EXTREMELY hard to ascertain exactly what socialism was. In fact, I think it took me almost a year of talking to people and then I pieced it all together. How is joe soap on the street supposed to understand what we are talking about? I think that should be step one, make people understand what it is.

[thefiguresix]

I should clarify that i find this boad actually very supportive of my protestant background. Ive probably let frustration with previous encounters with republicanism spill over a bit there.

[dangeresque]

Jul 23, 2009 23:12:37 GMT thefiguresix said:

I should clarify that i find this boad actually very supportive of my protestant background. Ive probably let frustration with previous encounters with republicanism spill over a bit there.

good to see you on here.

would a goodwill gesture by the RSM help? something like wiping out the CIRA? ;D

[Papa C.]

Jul 23, 2009 23:12:37 GMT thefiguresix said:

Ive probably let frustration with previous encounters with republicanism spill over a bit there.

The problem with Republicanism is that many nationalist-types who don't understand the republican cause at all identify with Republicanism because both Republicanism and Nationalism are anti-imperialist ideologies. The problem with nationalism (much like loyalism) is that it is a reactionary ideology. Many nationalists would be happy if the Government in the south were in power up north also.

The difference between our Socialist Republicanism/ left-republicanism is that we believe that the citizenry of the country should run the country themselves without the interference of ANY Government or any body who use their wealth to buy votes, reform democracy, damage democracy or change laws.

Ps. He's talking about YOU dangeresque lol.