IRA & Sinn Fein Are Separate Organizations Part II

V. The IRA Does Not Control Sinn Féin

When pressed, some of those who consider "SF/IRA" a "paramilitary conspiracy" will concede that Sinn Féin does not control the IRA. Instead, they imagine the reverse; namely that Sinn Féin politicians are controlled by powerful IRA "Godfathers". In this paradigm, ruthless and hateful IRA "thugs" are thought to terrorize Nationalist housing estates, controlling all who live there through intimidation and the threat or actuality of violent reprisals. Some Unionist and Conservative politicians occasionally attempt to portray these "mobsters" as a sort of privileged group, living high on protection schemes and drug money. More often, however, Unionists suggest only that the so-called "SF/IRA thugs" are simply misguided, and/or immoral egotists with no respect for human lives other than their own. Unionists support this theory by routinely misinterpreting certain facts and jumping to false conclusions consistent with their prejudices against Republicans. This includes the fact that gangs of unidentified people maim or kill dozens of people each year in Republican (and Loyalist) neighborhoods. Regardless of the lack of any evidentiary trail, or, for that matter, any criminal investigation, it has become almost customary for the bulk of the newsmedia to automatically blame essentially all such cruelties that occur in Republican neighborhoods upon the nebulous and non-existent "SF/IRA". It also includes the fact that a 1977 document states the IRA's aspiration that: "Sinn Féin should come under Army organizers at all levels…. Sinn Féin should be re-educated and have a big role to play in publicity and propaganda…" (Coogan, 1996;208). As this document suggests, it is very likely that the IRA attempted to exert considerable influence over Sinn Féin during at least part of the 1970s. However, largely due to political successes enjoyed by Sinn Féin after the 1981 election to Parliament of Bobby Sands, it is also probable that such influence has greatly diminished. There are several further reasons to reach this conclusion.

First of all, it is clear in recent years that the IRA has not been sufficiently powerful to prevent Sinn Féin from evolving new political strategies that are substantially contrary to IRA dogma. For example, by signing the Good Friday Agreement, Sinn Féin accepted a deal that included a provision that the British occupied six counties of Ireland would remain under a form of British control until such time as a majority of the voters of that gerrymandered region decided otherwise. As part of that same deal, Sinn Féin also agreed to participate in a partitionist Assembly. Both of these provisions are universally seen as anathema to fundamental IRA doctrine. If hypothetical IRA "Godfathers" really had the power to control Sinn Féin, it seems unlikely that they would have allowed such heretical action.

Secondly, consider that the long-term ability of mobsters to control people and force them to do what they otherwise would not do is common primarily in countries where the government is relatively powerless against the mobsters. Generally, the governments of such countries are either poor in relationship to the wealth of the mobsters, and/or the governments lack sufficiently draconian legal and law enforcement tools with which to successfully prosecute and contain the mobsters. However, such has not been the case in the six counties of British occupied northern Ireland. That part of Ireland presently has three times as many police per capita as any part of Britain and over ten times as many soldiers per capita as well. Under its many variations of "emergency" legislation since 1922, people suspected of crimes against the state (often called "terrorism" in Britain even when no civilians are affected) have been easily imprisoned for long periods, often with little evidence and/or no jury trial. Thus, for Mafia-like mobsters to have operated successfully in the six counties, they must either have taken extraordinary precautions to remain completely unknown, and/or they must have operated with the consent/collusion of state law enforcement authorities. Clearly the latter (collusion with the state) is not possible for any so-called mobsters firmly of the Republican persuasion. And the former (powerful but unknown "Godfathers") would seem to be impossible given the relatively small size of the six counties and the many intelligence resources available to British agencies.

Thirdly, in the glass-house political environment of the six counties, it would be extremely foolhardy for any so-called "Godfather" to use Mafia-like intimidation or other coercive means to attempt to force Sinn Féin politicians to support political resolutions which Sinn Féin constituents themselves would not freely support. With so much public attention focussed upon them, Sinn Féin politicians are unlikely candidates for bribery, blackmail or any other form of coercion. That is, they would not be able to long sustain any political position that was not truly that of their constituents without some reporter revealing that curious inconsistency and then following its trail to the proverbial armed fortress mansion of the supposedly all-powerful "Godfather".

In the minds of many Unionists, the supposed coercive power of IRA gunmen and/or "Godfathers" is not limited to imagined control of Sinn Féin. Senior Ulster Unionist Michael McGimpsey recently said that the mere possession of weaponry by "SF/IRA" is " the antithesis of commitment to democracy" (BBC News, "Take guns out of politics - Blair" January 11, 1999). Through frequent such statements, Unionists regularly attempt to convince the world that the weapons-possessing IRA is sufficiently influential to coerce not only Sinn Féin but also all of the new governmental groups set forth in the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) to adopt undemocratic policies. This is the root of their argument against allowing Sinn Féin its rightful seats on the new Executive until such time as the IRA has weakened and/or humbled itself by decommissioning some or all of its weapons. The illogic of this argument is staggering. If the weapons-possessing IRA were as influential as these Unionists contend, why then hasn't the IRA been able to force Unionist politicians to take the most basic step of GFA power-sharing, the step of welcoming Sinn Féin onto the new Ministerial Council?

No, whatever the situation may have been over twenty years ago when the armed struggle was perceived as a terrible necessity by most Republicans, logical analysis strongly suggests that IRA "Godfathers" cannot be in control of today's Sinn Féin, presently the third largest political party in Ireland. Indeed, any detailed review of Sinn Féin's activities will reveal that it is presently controlled instead by the concerns of its voters and by its elected Ard Comhairle (executive). Whatever romantic appeal the "Godfather" theory may have for those who still promote it, the fact is that it simply doesn't fit the current realities of life in either part of Ireland, and hence, cannot improve our understanding of the presently existing relationship of Sinn Féin and the IRA.

VI. Suppose Sinn Féin and the IRA Are "Inextricably Linked" - What Then?

We have already shown that the notion that Sinn Féin officials actually function in dual roles in the IRA is extremely improbable. For those same reasons of security and avoiding public embarrassment, it is very unlikely that Sinn Féin Ard Chomhairle and IRA Army Council electors are all the same people. Thus, the leaderships of the IRA and Sinn Féin must be accountable to different groups of individuals. Granted, there is possibly some overlap in electors, and, potentially, in some degree of honorary leadership. However, history clearly shows that there is not always enough overlap to insure that either organization fully controls the other.

According to British newsmedia, recent IRA Chiefs of Staff have been private individuals named "Slab" Murphy, and Brian Keenan. Neither of these individuals has ever served on Sinn Féin's elected Ard Chomhairle (Executive). However, some newsmedia have also claimed that both Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness serve on the IRA Army Council. Even if this is true (a big if, considering the risks involved, as well as their denials), it does not provide sufficient overlap for either organization to control the other. The Sinn Féin Ard Chomhairle has many other strong members (Caoimhghín O Caolain, Mitchell McLaughlin, Rita O Hare, Alex Maskey, Jim Gibney, Lucilita Bhreatnach, Joe Cahill, Pat Doherty, Dessie Macken, Pamela Kane, Sean McManus, Dodie McGuinness, Francie Molloy, and Pat Treanor). Of all these, only Joe Cahill has ever been thought to have served at some time on the IRA Army Council.

In many ways, however, it is clearly true that Sinn Féin and the IRA are linked, perhaps even "inextricably" linked, in the sense that some of their links can never be undone. It bears repeating that both organizations have common goals and share many common heroes and many of their members grew up in the same oppressed neighborhoods. In fact, it is clear that there are many actual kinship bonds between members of the IRA and officials of Sinn Féin. And, of course, as has been acknowledged, some Sinn Féin officials were formerly IRA volunteers, or else fought side by side with them in certain defensive circumstances. And, at the grassroots, a substantial number of people support both Sinn Féin and the IRA. On all of those accounts, there are links, many of them intrinsically "inextricable".

However, consider for a moment that you, yourself, are perhaps "inextricably linked" to other groups, including your parents, your children, your extended family, the branch of the armed forces in which you may have served, and even your wider cultural heritage. Indeed, your links to these other people and groups bear some similarity to the way that Sinn Féin is linked to the IRA. Do these links of kinship or membership, past or present, mean that you should be held responsible for anything done or not done by any or all of those groups? Do they mean that a retired WWII veteran who is now a politician should be credited or held responsible for all recent actions of his old regiment? Or do they mean, rather, that you, and the veteran, may be expected to have some influence with groups to which you have some links, under the proper circumstances?

Consider also, that none of the known linkages of Sinn Féin and the IRA include the integrated system of command and control so central to Unionism's propaganda campaign to marginalize Sinn Féin. Unionists recently put forth a Parliamentary proposal that referred to the entire Republican movement as "a cynically and centrally organized regime of increasingly brutal intimidation". Logically, as we have shown, the Republican movement cannot have such a system, even if it wanted one, because, in British occupied Ireland, there are far too many security risks to permit such an integrated system. As we have also shown, a "centrally organized regime" of Republicanism is unlikely due to its many internal disagreements over philosophy and strategy.

Unfortunately, in spite of all this, Unionist and Conservative politicians continue to exploit the sinister sounding "inextricably linked" phrase and the misleading "SF/IRA" juxtaposition to suggest that Sinn Féin should be held responsible for every alleged action or inaction of the IRA. Many of them go even further, and demand that Sinn Féin be held immediately and fully responsible for every single unproven allegation against individuals not proven, but merely alleged, to be members of the IRA. During the early part of 1998, Unionist politicians actually succeeded in getting Sinn Féin temporarily suspended from the Peace Talks on such a flimsy basis when two persons (at least one a known drug-dealer) were murdered by a person or persons unknown. Months later, it was announced that the RUC had released the individuals accused of these crimes for lack of evidence. The imagined command links between Sinn Féin and the IRA, together with Unionist pressure for a rush to judgement based solely on the word of the RUC, had been combined to the effect of threatening the entire peace process. Pardon the use of the old phrase, but it is "beyond the pale" of reason that anyone can seriously argue that so-called "inextricable linkages", whether they exist or not, are sufficient cause to penalize any political party for every unsolved crime which occurs on their home turf. And, as for "SF/IRA", the favorite straw man of the anti-Catholic Orange Order and Conservative Unionists, we have shown that it is extremely unlikely that this Unionist propaganda construct has any positive explicatory value. However, as "SF/IRA" is the nonexistent "centrally organized regime" which they most love to fight, Conservative and Unionist politicians shall undoubtedly continue to prolong the conflict by referring to it with stupefying regularity until the newsmedia, other political parties, and governments become willing to challenge them on it.

Conclusions and Recommendations:

Sinn Féin is not a sinister Mafia-like organization in command of a private army, but merely one of several Republican political parties in Ireland, with only as much influence over the volunteers of the IRA as its political successes and failures can command. Therefore, Sinn Féin cannot simply direct the IRA or any other armed group to do anything. Sinn Féin, like any other political party, can only make appeals for an end to violence, no matter what group is responsible for it, be that the RUC, the IRA, the British Army, the CAC, the Loyalists, the INLA, etc. And, similar to the way that even the British government sometimes fails to control its soldiers and militarized police, the IRA Army Council must sometimes find it difficult to control all of its volunteers. Indeed the IRA Army Council faces an additional challenge in this respect, as IRA volunteers are necessarily more self-reliant and independent than conventional soldiers.

Thus, there is no centrally commanded Sinn Féin/IRA organization. There is not even a guarantee that the IRA itself can always fully control its volunteers. It is also fair to conclude that there is no centrally controlled "pan-nationalist conspiracy". The IRA and Sinn Féin are two of many separate (albeit "linked") Republican organizations, united in some of their goals, but divided on methodology. Sinn Féin politicians are committed to exclusively peaceful means. IRA volunteers are not, although they have observed many months of a voluntary cease-fire since 1994. The politicians do not control the volunteers, and the volunteers do not control the politicians. Since neither of these major elements of the Republican movement actually control or command the other, it is almost certain to be counterproductive to penalize either for the actions or inactions of the other.

Unfortunately, Unionist and Conservative politicians continue to pretend otherwise. In their public statements they continue to spin a nightmare world where committed peacemakers such as Gerry Adams are "fascists" commanding "private armies" of "terrorists" with "weapons of mass destruction". David Trimble and his supporters would have the public believe that the path to peace is blocked by an intransigent Sinn Féin, which has only to order the beginning of IRA decommissioning, and safe, stable decommissioning will then miraculously get under way. This fairy tale notion ignores the realities of the multi-faceted Republican movement; realities which any informed and honest intelligence analyst should be able to confirm for Tony Blair, Bertie Ahern and Bill Clinton. It is widely accepted that Unionism is not monolithic; and that in spite of its direct links with the Orange Order, the UUP should not be held accountable for that organization's actions or in-actions. Why then should Republicanism be treated as if it were a monolithic structure? Why should Sinn Féin's participation in government be conditional on actions that may or may not be done by some linked organization?

There appears to be no possibility that the Adams-McGuinness faction of the Republican movement can safely deliver token decommissioning at this time. Although they clearly have influence with the topmost level of the IRA, there is no way for either Sinn Féin or the IRA to fully control the IRA's essentially autonomous cells. In addition, it must never be ignored that Sinn Féin clearly does not control the other Republican groups (RIRA, INLA, CIRA, etc.). Primarily through the IRA, Sinn Féin does have some influence with these groups; but the longer Sinn Féin politicians are treated differently from all other elected politicians, the more Sinn Féin's influence with and through the IRA declines.

The IRA is not being intransigent. They have declared numerous unilateral cease-fires in the past 30 years, hoping to have serious peace talks begin, only to have unreasonable additional obstacles raised over and over again by the British government and Unionist politicians. The IRA says it wants peace: "We reaffirm our commitment to the establishment of a just and durable peace in Ireland." (BBC News, "IRA's New Year Message" January 7, 1999).

For a just and durable peace to become a possibility, we conclude that the political leaders of Ireland and Britain must first produce real social change through a full power sharing implementation of the GFA. It is not enough for them to merely promise or seek to initiate new arrangements upon which they might someday construct a new Ireland. It is essential that all of the promises agreed in the GFA be kept. Anything less will be another breach of trust with the Irish people.

One possible interpretation of a recent poll by the Belfast Telegraph is that up to 30% of Unionist voters may already understand that Sinn Féin must be admitted to the Executive without requiring the IRA to decommission any weapons and risk destabilizing its cease-fire. (Martina Purdy, "Peace Poll Split" Belfast Telegraph, February 9, 1999). That possibility could be the glimmer of real understanding upon which true peace may be built.

Nioclás O'Ceallaigh

Partner Independent Research Associates

Newsmedia:

Belfast Telegraph, British Broadcasting Corporation, Sunday Times

Select Bibliography:

BERESFORD, David: Ten Men Dead, 1987, HarperCollins, London.

COOGAN, Tim Pat: The IRA - A History, 1993; The Troubles - Ireland's Ordeal 1966-1996 and the Search for Peace, 1996; both Roberts Rinehart, Niwot, Colorado.

MULLEN, Don: Bloody Sunday - Massacre in Northern Ireland, 1997, Roberts Rinehart.