Editorials lean heavily, but not solely, on Sinn Fein, IRA

By Ray O’Hanlon

Irish-American organizations have expressed frustration at a recent series of newspaper editorials in the U.S. and Canada that, they feel, have placed undue emphasis on the failure of the IRA to begin decommissioning arms and not enough attention on other vital issues, such as reform of the RUC and British demilitarization in the North

Since mid-June there has been a steady flow of editorials in leading North American newspapers, beginning with an editorial in the Christian Science Monitor, which, on June 14, urged "a clear step toward disarmament" by the Provisional IRA beyond the "few arms-dump inspections" that had been allowed to date. The paper also urged reform of the RUC, which, it stated, had been "long dominated by Protestants."

Some days later, on June 23, and as Ulster Unionist Party leader David Trimble’s resignation as Northern Ireland first minister loomed ever larger, the Washington Times took up the theme of disarmament, though it urged the disarming of "Ulster paramilitaries" of every stripe, not just the IRA but also "pro-British militants."

The New York Times, however, reserved its most pointed barb for the Provos in an editorial carried the same day. "The Irish Republican Army must begin to give up its arms," the paper stated bluntly in its opening salvo.

Again on the same day, The Toronto Globe and Mail ran an editorial headlined "Will the IRA relent?" After weaving through the various issues, the Globe and Mail sounded a pessimistic closing note: "Northern Ireland’s republican leaders would do well to make at least a token gesture of disarmament."

A few days later, the Baltimore Sun told its readers that the Good Friday accord was likely to collapse if the IRA did not begin disarming. But the Sun also managed to include both the UDA and "Real IRA" in its rogues gallery of armed paramilitaries.

A day later, Long Island-based Newsday urged the various governments to lean on the IRA and Sinn Féin "to get rid of all armaments." There was no mention of loyalist arms, the RUC or the British military presence, though the editorial did cite the "provocative" marching season as a particular problem while urging President Bush to take a more direct role in the search for a settlement.

The Boston Globe followed 24 hours later with an editorial headed "Farewell to arms." The Globe took the view that the IRA was composed of "brutal, implacable men," although it followed up by stating that "Protestant gunmen are equally pitiless." Still, according to the Globe, these "unionist terrorists hold the moral high ground as long as the IRA refuses to disarm."

The Washington Post was up next with the view that the peace process was reaching another danger point and that "this time the fault lies mainly with the Irish Republican Army for failing to disarm." What followed was a reasonable and reasoned argument in favor of the Provos disarming, although the Post skipped lightly over the other burning issues and stated that the RUC was already "a reformed police force."

On the same day, the San Francisco Chronicle cut to the chase with an editorial headed "Turn in the guns" and an opening volley that said, "Peace in Northern Ireland is at a critical crossroad because of the political swagger of the Irish Republican Army."

In the wake of Trimble’s July 1 resignation, the editorial ink continued to flow though not with quite as much emphasis of the failures of the IRA and Sinn Féin.

The Chicago Tribune decided it was time for both the IRA and Protestant paramilitaries to turn in their weapons. But the Tribune, under an "Ulster on the edge" headline, also took an intemperate swipe at Northern Ireland voters. A lot of them, the paper concluded, had recently said in effect: "Peace? Who needs it?"

The Philadelphia Inquirer contrasted the patriotic celebrations surrounding July 4 with Northern Ireland’s July marching season, a time of year where "only jeering and brick-throwing would be considered a triumph of civility."

The Inquirer turned its eye on the Provos and their guns but only after a "meanwhile." IRA weapons would have to be destroyed and, turning in Semtex, a weapon of offense as opposed to defense, would be an excellent start, the paper decided. But it finished up on a more expanded note: "Protestants must share the police force equally with Catholics. The British must begin removing their onerous surveillance towers."

In a similar vein, The Montreal Gazette drew a link between specifically IRA decommissioning and other initiatives. A gesture from the IRA could be matched by a gesture from London that might show that "it is prepared to satisfy nationalist complaints about the overwhelmingly Protestant police force."

However, the Houston Chronicle, in a July 6 leader, returned to blaming the IRA for the current crisis.

Under the headline "IRA to blame: Peace of nation sacrificed to radical political hopes," the Chronicle said that it was well past time for the IRA to honor its commitment to the terms of the Good Friday accord. This would entail "surrendering its weapons" and "ceasing its pointless churning of the ‘troubles’ that plague Northern Ireland."

The Christian Science Monitor published its second editorial in less than a month, this one on July 6, and the primary focus was also the Provisionals and Sinn Féin. The failure of the IRA to disarm was, according the Monitor, "the primary issue threatening to shatter the accord."

The Albany Times Union took a different tack, however, breaking away from the emphasis on decommissioning, most especially by the IRA.

The paper did consider calls for the IRA to disarm coming from Trimble, Bertie Ahern and others as being entirely reasonable.

But it quickly threw into the mix the twin issues of demilitarization and the integration of the RUC. It then added a Trimble twist.

"The IRA’s guns are not the only obstacle to the continuation of Ulster’s peace and power sharing. They might not even be the biggest one. What about, for instance, the resigning-and-reappearing act of Mr. Trimble? How does that move Ireland ahead generally, or the IRA and Sinn Fein specifically, toward disarmament?"

On Sunday, July 8, the Toronto Star took the position that Protestants were "understandably frustrated" with the IRA’s "refusal to disarm" but the paper also accused Trimble of indulging in "dangerous brinkmanship" by resigning.

In the context of disarming, the Star referred to both the IRA and "main Protestant militias." The editorial also criticized Gerry Adams for failing to urge the IRA to disarm, a failure that "undermined" the Good Friday accord.

At the same time, the Star made the point that the IRA deserved credit for honoring its cease-fire, the vote for power sharing and for opening its arms caches to inspection. These were the "truest tests of sincerity."

"But the time has come to go further," the editorial concluded.