A trial separation, not a divorce

ONLY the most naive would miss the strong element of electioneering in the assault on Sinn Fein, the IRA and the continuing republican strategy of the ballot box and the bullet by Mr John Hume.

Ahead of the Westminster election, Mr Hume undoubtedly is playing hardball. As he admitted in the opening paragraph of his Irish News article, reprinted here, the North is facing its most "critical election" since the beginning of the Troubles 29 years ago.

It follows that the SDLP is also facing a critical election. Party politics is about party self-preservation, and it further follows that this is a major test of the party leader. He must prove that his political antennae are as acute as ever. The buck stops with him. He gambled in his relationship with Mr Adams and is prepared to gamble with him again - but for now he must regain the electoral ground lost to Sinn Fein.

There can be no doubting that the anger and frustration directed against Sinn Fein and the IRA in the article is fuelled by a genuine feeling of indignation and betrayal. The strength of the article, the power of the words, is telling. It seems unfeigned. Part of that anger and frustration is determined by the acknowledgment by both the SDLP and Sinn Fein that if there were a pact the political landscape would be transformed radically. It would mean that nationalists could win six, and possibly seven or even eight, of the North's 18 Westminster seats.

It would additionally mean that half the geographical area of the North - to the west and the south - would be in the hands of nationalists. Between them, the SDLP and Sinn Fein could take seats in Fermanagh, Tyrone, and much of Derry, Armagh and Down.

The reality, though, always was - and Sinn Fein is aware of this, despite its repeated calls for a pact - that in the absence of an IRA ceasefire, there could be no election deal between the two parties.

MR HUME strenuously argues that not only was Canary Wharf and the IRA violence that followed "an obscene and murderous outrage", but that it was a "disastrous political miscalculation".

It was a betrayal of all those people - SDLP supporters, the Irish Government, the US administration - who had tried to help republicans move away from war. According to Mr Hume, republicans are now preparing to intimidate SDLP supporters, steal party votes, and "cast us aside, using any means, fair or foul". Mr Hume must stop that happening for the sake of his party and his own standing. Indeed, he was warned by senior party - colleagues when he set off on his two-step with Mr Adams that too close a Hume-Adams liaison would be electorally damaging for the SDLP

Which is precisely what happened in the forum elections of last May. While the SDLP vote generally held up on a percentage basis, Sinn Fein dramatically closed the gap between the two parties.

Whereas the SDLP polled 184,445 votes in the general election five years ago, in the forum election the party's vote dropped to 160,786. Sinn Fein, on the other hand, saw its vote surge from 78,000 in 1992 to 116,000 in May, a massive 50 per cent increase.

The results were particularly galling for SDLP activists in Mid-Ulster and Fermanagh-South Tyrone, where the SDLP had patiently and painstakingly attained an electoral advantage over Sinn Fein, and where it seriously threatened Rev William McCrea and Mr Ken Maginnis respectively. In one fell swoop that advantage was obliterated.

Even in constituencies like Mr Seamus Mallon's Newry and Armagh, and Mr Hume's own Foyle constituency, Sinn Fein made gains on the SDLP. Most aggravating was West Belfast, where the SDLP vote collapsed, making it increasingly difficult for Dr Joe Hendron to hold his seat against Mr Adams.

A number of Mr Hume's colleagues privately argued that in light of the threat from Sinn Fein, he should give extra attention to the more mundane matter of consolidating the party's electoral base.

DURING the forum election campaign it was reported here and elsewhere that SDLP voters were saying they would cast their preferences for Sinn Fein.

This switching of allegiance, it was stated, was a message to the British government and the unionist parties that they had thrown away the opportunity for peace by rebuffing the opportunities provided by the original IRA ceasefire.

It was predicted then, and Mr Hume repeated it in his article, that these votes - many of them middle class - would revert to the SDLP.

That is the difficult challenge. Has Mr Hume correctly gauged the nationalist mood? Can the SDLP now bring back its faithful or is that lost vote still so incensed with what they view as British government perfidy and unionist intransigence - particularly after Drumcree - that it will remain with Sinn Fein.

Mr Martin McGuinness of Sinn Fein claims the SDLP is now running scared, hence Mr Hume's full-frontal assault: he thinks otherwise. It will take the forthcoming Westminster election to determine who is right.

In the meantime, Mr Hume will likely put the Hume-Adams relationship on hold until after the election. He remains convinced that contact with Mr Adams could help achieve an IRA ceasefire and lead to a political settlement. As recently as last Friday, he insisted he still accepts the Sinn Fein leader's bona fides.

Mr Hume's onslaught on Sinn Fein probably signals more of a pragmatic trial separation, triggered by electoral dictates, than an actual divorce from Mr Adams.