Parties at loggerheads

Britain’s Northern Ireland secretary of state, Paul Murphy, who co-chaired the meeting with Irish Foreign Minister Brian Cowen, mentioned it as an “option.” But the crux of the matter for the Unionists was the disbandment of paramilitaries, and for nationalists of whether Unionists could be trusted to go into another power-sharing arrangement.
The Rev. Ian Paisley’s DUP agreed to sit at the review table alongside Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein because, it said, it was merely setting out its stall at the review, not in any sense negotiating, which it would only do with the British government.
The review is officially intended to fine tune the workings of the agreement, but the DUP wants to turn the talks into a full-scale renegotiation — something the SDLP and Sinn Fein are strongly resisting.
Cowen and Murphy made opening speeches about the purpose and course of the review and then invited the leaders of the party delegations to do the same.
That done, the review adjourned and will reassemble on Mondays and Tuesdays until completed.
The DUP is intending to publish its views on the talks process on Friday. A party spokesman said they would be published on Friday “for all to see.”
They are totally in line with our manifesto commitments and seven principles,” he said. “All speculation is just that.”
The DUP is refusing to take part in a power-sharing Executive with Sinn Fein, or even speak to the party, until the IRA disbands. Instead, it favors using Assembly committees to replace ministers in each department of government.
That would mean a return to majority (Unionist) rule operating in committee and Assembly decisions, something that Sinn Fein and the SDLP could never accept.
Central to the DUP’s proposals is a recommendation that power should rest with the Assembly as a whole rather than the 12 ministers who governed before power-sharing collapsed nearly 18 months ago. The proposals would block Sinn Fein from key ministerial portfolios.
The DUP’s deputy leader, Peter Robinson, angrily denied that his party was softening its position on Sinn Fein, saying: “Unlike the UUP, the DUP have not and will not budge from electoral pledges.”

Paisley, Ahern meet
The review began five days after Paisley held what he described as a “very constructive” meeting with the taoiseach in London. It was the first political meeting between the two.
Speaking afterward, Paisley said his delegation had stressed the forthcoming talks were about finding an agreement that unionists as well as nationalists could support.
“A majority of unionists will not accept the Belfast agreement,” he said. “Two thirds of Unionists voted for those who are seeking to create a new agreement that is a stable, democratic, accountable and fair.”
He said the DUP wanted “good, neighborly relations” with the Republic of Ireland, but that Dublin could have no role in the North.
Bertie Ahern described the talks as valuable.
“Obviously they have problems and obviously they have difficulties, but they certainly were very clear about their attitude that they want to do business,” he said.
Ahern stressed after the meeting that the review process was looking “at the operation of the agreement and not its fundamentals,” prompting senior Ulster Unionist Michael McGimpsey to say that the DUP’s claim to renegotiate the agreement had “fallen at the first hurdle.”
As the review got under way, the new U.S. special envoy to Northern Ireland met the political parties. Mitchell B. Reiss, who was appointed to the role last December, arrived in Belfast on Monday.
U.S. officials said Reiss, who took over from Richard Haass, will be “in a listening mode” as he meets politicians. Reiss, a political scientist, has extensive experience on nuclear disarmament in Korea.
At his inaugural press conference, Reiss said it was a learning visit and accepted it came at a frustrating period without stable, devolved government. The continuing loyalist and republican violence, he said, was a stain on Northern Ireland’s reputation and had the potential to rob people of their future.