Adams retreats into republican rhetoric

GERRY Adams has stepped back into the safety of impenetrable republican rhetoric in advance of the Northern elections.

Writing in today's Irish Times, the Sinn Fein president seeks admission to all party talks on June 10th gas a right, rather than as a consequence of an IRA ceasefire.

Sinn Fein is, he says, prepared to take risks for peace. But there is little evidence of that in the contents of the republican stall set out before the May 30th contest. And there is no hint of last week's offer to meet John Major "half way".

The "big problem" identified by Mr Adams is the blocking of Sinn Fein from participation in all party talks on June 10th by the British and Irish governments, because of the breakdown of the IRA ceasefire. "If we are to live together in peace we must make space for each other," he writes. "If we are to have proper peace talks, then all the parties must be invited."

No indication there that Mr Adams will take the initiative and seek a renewal of the IRA ceasefire. The furthest he goes is to note that John Major's article in The Irish Times represented "a shift in rhetoric" and that both John Bruton and Dick Spring had been positive in their recent statements.

As for the Mitchell Report and decommissioning, he says Sinn Fein has always taken a very positive and constructive attitude to the Mitchell body, to its report and, to its principles.

Its view is quite straightforward if the British, the loyalists and the unionists - with their history of repression and oppression - could sign up to it, then so could Sinn Fein.

BUT there is no reference to "parallel decommissioning" in Mr Adams's contribution. Instead, there is a statement of purpose. "Real all party talks," Mr Adams says, "must bring about substantive and significant changes in constitutional and political matters in securing democratic rights and equality for all citizens and in bringing about a total demilitarisation of the situation."

As attitudes hardened across the political spectrum in Northern Ireland, Dick Spring and Paddy Mayhew wrestled with the details of all party talks procedures in London. The task was to ensure that when the issue of arms decommissioning came to be discussed, agreement could be reached on how Senator Mitchell's recommendations on decommissioning could be taken forward, without blocking the negotiations.

The other matter of contention concerns the possible roles of Mr Mitchell and his two colleagues, Gen de Chastelain and Mr Holkeri, in the talks process and on the decommissioning and disposal of weapons.

Matters are so politically sensitive in the Northern Ireland election climate that before Mr Spring set foot in London the shutters were already coming down. There was speculation that, even if agreement was reached between the two governments, there would be no formal announcement of the details.

It didn't come to that. They hit gridlock.

In spite of John Bruton's hopeful statement of Tuesday that the two governments were "close enough to agreement", harsh reality intervened. With Mr Major down to a majority of one in the House of Commons and under pressure - not only from unionists but from his own backbenchers - scope for movement was tightly circumscribed.

But movement was one only item on Mr Spring's agenda as he sought to underpin the Taoiseach's declaration that "decommissioning will happen in practice only if there is progress made on political matters".

In that regard, Mr Bruton had praised the Mitchell Report as subtle, intelligent and balanced. Apart from the question of decommissioning, the report had addressed the issues of prisoners, policing, punishment beatings and a range of confidence building measures which would facilitate negotiations.

THOSE matters will not be resolved easily or early in all party talks. In fact, do not really fit within that framework. Mr Spring argued the need for a separate structure, involving outside personnel, during his hours of tough talking with Sir Patrick.

They did not reach agreement. And, in the circumstances, they did the sensible thing - setting up another meeting for next week, when the heat will have gone out of the Northern elections. If differences - still separate the two governments - after that meeting, it is possible that Mr Bruton and Mr Major will attempt to resolve them.

Whatever about continuing inter government friction, it is clear that George Mitchell, his colleagues and their report have a creative and enterprising role to play in future Anglo Irish affairs.