Opinion

Alex Kane: Sinn Féin know there is nothing certain about a united Ireland

Alex Kane

Alex Kane

Alex Kane is an Irish News columnist and political commentator and a former director of communications for the Ulster Unionist Party.

Mary Lou McDonald's Sinn Féin is preparing activists for the possibility of a referendum on a united Ireland. Picture by Liam McBurney/PA Wire
Mary Lou McDonald's Sinn Féin is preparing activists for the possibility of a referendum on a united Ireland. Picture by Liam McBurney/PA Wire Mary Lou McDonald's Sinn Féin is preparing activists for the possibility of a referendum on a united Ireland. Picture by Liam McBurney/PA Wire

I was a panellist at last Saturday's Sinn Féin-organised United Ireland conference in Letterkenny, addressing the theme of whether a 'new' Ireland was possible.

It was a civilised, constructive discussion, although I won nobody over to my side and they failed to convert me to their way of thinking. On the way out I was stopped by a man who was, I guessed, in his mid-60s: "One thing is sure, Mr Kane, if we don't get Irish unity when the odds seem so much in our favour, then it'll be another generation before an opportunity as good as this one comes along." He paused, chuckled, looked behind him and whispered: "But don't tell Mary Lou I told you that." She wasn't there as it happens - but I took his point.

For all of their talk about shifting demographics; the impact of Brexit; the concerns of soft-n nationalists and soft-u unionists; opinion polls indicating pro-Union support hovering around the 50 per cent threshold; and the uncertainty about the border post-Brexit, Sinn Féin's leadership know that there is nothing certain about a united Ireland.

Indeed, Sinn Féin MP Elisha McCallion, a member of the panel, agreed with my view that while unity was possible, it wasn't inevitable.

And it isn't inevitable. For example, when it comes to a border poll--the only way in which Northern Ireland can choose to leave the United Kingdom--I don't see how it is possible to avoid the same poll, on the same day, in the south. The Good Friday Agreement was agreed on both sides of the border because it affected both sides of the border. The people in the Republic will want a say on whether or not they want Northern Ireland and 900,000-plus unionists as part of a 'new' Ireland. And do you know something, they may decide to pass on the offer.

Creating a new state isn't an easy thing to do. And, as we have seen with the toxicity and polarisation fuelled by the outworking of the Good Friday and St Andrews agreements, sharing a state isn't an easy thing, either. Unionism and unionist identity isn't going to disappear if a border poll goes against them. In precisely the same way that Irish nationalism didn't die in Armagh, Antrim, Fermanagh, Tyrone, Down and Londonderry when Ireland was partitioned, British nationalism isn't going to die in those six counties if partition ends. It will seek an electoral outlet and that outlet, in terms of the number of British nationalist TDs in the Dail, would have an enormous impact on politics and governance. I'm pretty sure many southerners wouldn't be keen on that particular development.

Sinn Féin have said that they would be generous and welcoming to unionists in a new Ireland; insisting that they would be mindful of the need to protect their cultural and historical traditions. Fine and dandy. But they're much more vague when it comes to how they would protect and promote the political and electoral identity of unionism in a new Ireland. Would there be a mandatory presence for unionists in government? Would unionists have a veto over any policy which they believed undermined their political/electoral identity? In what way would a 'new' Ireland create a secure, safe space for British nationalism?

It is, I think, facile to argue--as I have heard some within Sinn Féin argue--that it's relatively easy to roll two into one, particularly when it comes to health care provision. All aspects of creating a free, sovereign, independent united Ireland (and let's not forget that such a thing hasn't existed for hundreds of years; and some historians would argue that it has never existed at all) are going to be enormously difficult: and will be made much more difficult by the fact that 45 per cent plus of the electorate in Northern Ireland will have voted against unity. Under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement it is the British and Irish governments who would facilitate any decision to unite Ireland; but it is likely that the British side would come under enormous pressure from that 45 per cent. In other words, it could be a torturous, extremely lengthy process.

The real debate hasn't even begun yet. Sinn Féin's ongoing unity project is clearly important to them, because they remain, at heart, a permanently campaigning party. But the key voices in the debate have still to be heard. As far as the Irish government is concerned that voice will only be heard if they decide--particularly after a 'bad' Brexit--to put pressure on the British for a border poll. The DUP and UUP have been fairly muted on the subject so far, but I know it concerns key figures. But the very fact that the subject has become one for water-cooler conversations across Ireland and in London and Brussels has raised Sinn Féin's hopes.

But the man who spoke to me in Letterkenny on Saturday is right: if Sinn Féin don't deliver it soon, it will be a long, long time coming. Possible, yes. Inevitable, no way close at this point.