WeeklyWorker

20.11.1997

SSA fudges on Ireland

The Scottish Socialist Alliance’s special conference on Ireland took place last weekend. Considering the wide spectrum of views held by affiliates and individuals, the debate was always likely to be contentious. This proved to be the case.

There were five motions and two amendments on the agenda:

Motion 1, proposed by Bill Bonnar, called for the British government to declare its intention to withdraw militarily and politically; supported unconditional all-party talks; and demanded demilitarisation and a ceasefire by all parties to the conflict. It was accurately characterised by Allan Armstrong (RWT) as “soft republican”.   

Motion 2, proposed by Nick Clarke (CPGB), called for the immediate withdrawal of British troops; the release of all political prisoners; the ending of all ill-treatment and strip-searching of prisoners; and the smashing of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. This motion also stated that socialists should support those fighting to win the right to self-determination.

Motion 3 was proposed by Richie Venton (Scottish Militant Labour). This called for all-party talks, support for the ceasefire and complete demilitarisation of Northern Ireland. There was no specific reference to troop withdrawal or self determination.

Motion 4, proposed by Allan Green, was a composite agreed between the movers of motions 1 and 3. The demands were identical to SML’s motion 3. It differed from motion 1 in that any mention of British intention to withdraw was dropped.

Motion 5, proposed by Red Republicans, called for the immediate release of Roisin McAliskey from UK custody and Josephine Hayden from custody in Limerick Jail. This was passed by 50 votes to one.

The main amendment was to motion 1. This was proposed by Allan Armstrong. The purpose was to give motion 1 a stronger anti-imperialist content. The demands were similar to motion 2 and included support for the annual James Connolly march in Edinburgh.

In proposing motion 1, Bill Bonnar stressed the importance of the Irish question. He correctly criticised the old, oppportunist-dominated CPGB for having ignored it in the past. He defended a commitment to Irish republicanism and support for a united Ireland. However, both he and Allan Green then compromised by calling for support for motion 4.            

Admitting there would be attempts to call it a ‘fudge’, comrade Green defended motion 4, saying the SSA should get unity where it can. This unprincipled ‘pragmatism’ is an accommodation with SML, who imagine that British imperialism can play a role in delivering a positive solution.

CPGB members could at least agree on the first line: “As with Scotland, the Alliance supports the right of the people of Ireland to national self-determination.” However, the composite (motion 4) deleted this introduction, as well as any reference to republicanism, presumably to keep SML on board.

The CPGB offered critical support to the Red Republicans’ amendment to motion 1. While we were in agreement with all the demands, there were parts of the preamble we disagreed with. This amendment was defeated by 36 votes to 12.

The proposers of motion 1 and 3 asked for the conference to remit their documents for further discussion.

In proposing motion 2, Nick Clarke made the point that socialists and anti-imperialists in the oppressor state - ie, Britain - have a duty to demand self-determination for the Irish nation as a whole and the immediate withdrawal of British troops, while supporting those fighting for their democratic rights in whatever way they see fit.

He stated: “We support the anti-imperialist, revolutionary, democratic content of the republican struggle; we reject Sinn Fein’s political programme, which is petty bourgeois.” This does not mean the abandonment of the protestant working class to loyalism and unionism: rather the necessity to win them to the ideas of socialism, which by definition must include revolutionary republicanism. Motion 2 was defeated by 38 votes to 14.

The overall debate revealed a great deal about the opportunist politics of SML. While calling in formal terms for a “socialist united Ireland” and “working class unity”, its speakers explicitly opposed self-determination. Working class unity can only be built on a principled basis.

To equate anti-imperialist republicanism with pro-imperialist loyalist death squads, as SML does, is to fail to understand the difference between the violence of the oppressed and the violence of the oppressor. In its refusal to ‘take sides’ SML is just an apologist for British imperialism.

Mary Ward