Opinion

ANALYSIS: The leadership and willingness to compromise that forged peace 20 years ago has clearly been lacking

DUP negotiator Simon Hamilton faces the media after his party leader pulled the plug on the talks process. Picture by Michael Cooper/PA Wire
DUP negotiator Simon Hamilton faces the media after his party leader pulled the plug on the talks process. Picture by Michael Cooper/PA Wire DUP negotiator Simon Hamilton faces the media after his party leader pulled the plug on the talks process. Picture by Michael Cooper/PA Wire

FOR months the DUP has been saying that it was ready to restore the institutions without delay yet when it came to the crunch and agreement looked in sight, Arlene Foster effectively pulled the plug on the entire process.

With her previous statements on an Irish language act she had clearly painted herself into a corner but even if the former first minister had been willing to concede ground, elements within her party wouldn't let her.

In recent weeks we've been hearing that there was the outline of a deal and certainly the taoiseach and prime minister believed agreement was near when they arrived in Belfast on Monday. It quickly became apparent that their optimism was misplaced but hope remained that matters could be sorted by the end of the week.

Now we are in a situation as bleak as any faced since the intitutions collapsed 13 months ago.

Because manoeuvrings in this process have been so tightly guarded we may never find out where exactly the pressure point lay.

Was it around the Irish language act or did it come down to a lack of commitment from Sinn Féin to sustain the institutions? There was always a suspicion that the final deal would be lopsided and offer more to nationalists than it would give to unionists, though this has more to do with a failure to implement previous commitments rather than any inevitable slide towards Irish unity.

As he deputised for an absent DUP leader at Stormont yesterday, Simon Hamilton's assertion that republicans showed a lack of respect for unionists and Britishness sounded more like deflective rhetoric than pin-pointing a red line that his party could not cross.

Portraying Sinn Féin as unreasonable appears designed to mask divisions within the DUP ranks and quell unease among unionism's grassroots.

It's hard to believe Sinn Féin is shedding too many tears but nobody is likely to regard the political uncertainty ushered in by Mrs Foster's statement as a positive development. Michelle O'Niell laid blame for failing to close the deal firmly at the DUP's door and given the mood of recent days it's hard to argue with her.

Although the DUP is ostensibly happier than the other parties with direct rule overseen by a Tory government that relies on its support for survival, that arrangement is fragile and could collapse at any time.

Meanwhile, nationalists will not accept the imposition of direct rule without any input from Dublin and the manner in which the talks concluded, coupled with Brexit, means they'll likely find a sympathetic ear south of the border.

When the smoke clears and the recrimination dies down, questions inevitably will be asked about Arlene Foster's judgment and her leadership qualities.

It appears no effort was made to prepare unionism for concessions and instead she created an Irish language bogeyman that may haunt the former first minister for years to come.

For the foreseeable future Mrs Foster will be the leader without office, becoming increasingly irrelevant as her MPs steal the limelight and make the possibility of compromise more distant.

It now looks inevitable that the anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement will pass with the institutions mothballed and the possibility of devolution remote. The kind of leadership and willingness to compromise that helped forge peace 20 years ago has clearly been lacking and the optimism that greeted the accord has all but disappeared.