Trimble's analysis precludes engagement with nationalism

IN THE space of a week the UUP leader, Mr David Trimble, has sought to patch together a personal profile for himself. In this he portrays himself, as the progressive, go getting leader who wants to grapple urgently with real issues in the North and is hampered by foot dragging on the part of everybody else.

But the gloomy negativity of his party's annual conference, and his own address as leader this weekend, suggested that the image is shadow rather than substance - the desperate throw of a politically bankrupt philosophy that is, more and more, turning in upon itself and closing off rather than opening avenues to change.

They handbagged the BBC and the other local media. They handbagged Dick Spring. They handbagged Mary Robinson. And Mr Trimble repeatedly sought to promote an analysis that would preclude any realistic engagement with republicanism or nationalism.

Instead, the construct he is in the course of devising for the future of Northern Ireland is being framed on the ancient skeleton of a purely internal solution.

The SDLP and the (Irish) Government have up to now been holding back the political talks in the hope that Sinn Fein would join in, he asserted. But, he told the BBC yesterday, the time had come for the governments and the other parties to acknowledge that there wasn't "the slightest chance" of Sinn Fein making the necessary commitments.

It was time, therefore, to get down to serious business. "We need to get clarified that there is of now a willingness on the part of the government, the SDLP - and indeed the Irish Government - to go on with the talks without Sinn Fein," he declared.

This brisk, no nonsense approach was, of course, built on the back of his assertion that it was the UUP which, a week ago, took the initiative which facilitated the advance of the Stormont talks to at last begin addressing the real issue of decommissioning.

The UUP leader may confidently estimate that this issue - with the help of the other unionist parties - will tie up the talks for a comfortably indeterminate period. So his avowed haste to move on to substantive matters will hardly be put to the test for some time.

To extend the options of stretching the interregnum, he warned that there is only a short period - perhaps a couple of months - remaining in which progress can be made "before the onset of the general election closes down the serious talking".

Unless the decommissioning issue is indeed disposed of to everybody's satisfaction at Stormont in the coming weeks, Mr Trimble's approach seems to be a formula for stalling the talks process for at least another year.

In his leadership address, there were other pointers to a reluctance to even contemplate the kind of accommodation which would be essential for an inclusive and enduring political settlement.

His argument that it is a mistake to try to find some sort of compromise between unionism and nationalism was hardly auspicious. "The thought that somehow you can compromise between nationalities is just moonshine," he commented afterwards.

The UUP leader, when challenged on this, claimed that the comment was misunderstood. He related it to the conflicting territorial claims as between unionism and nationalism, pointing out that these were incompatible.

He seemed to suggest that his party, however, was not uncompromising in relation to the matter of how Northern Ireland was to be governed in the future. In this regard he felt it would be worth going back to the positions tabled in the 1992 inter party talks which were aborted.

The 1992 talks, he asserted, "came very close to an agreement and there are matters there to which we can return".

BUT, in tune with the repeated denunciation of the Anglo Irish Agreement many UUP members who spoke at the conference, he attacked "Anglo Irishism" as being a major obstacle to progress.

The extent of Mr Trimble's future strategy, as he outlined it, seems to be to challenge Dublin to ditch any lingering ideas of bringing Sinn Fein into the equation. "Is Dublin prepared to get into serious talks with the present parties?" he asked.

It is unlikely that Mr Trimble believes, nor did he say so in so many words, that if everybody ignores they will just go away, but there was an implication that they would become somebody else's problem, presumably the security force's business once again.

The negativity of the conference extended to other areas also. The early promise of Mr Trimble's leadership, that there might be a recasting of the party's links with the Orange Order, seems to have evaporated. He was forced to admit: "We are still consulting with the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland".

The small coterie of "Young Turks" of unionism floated and socialised on the fringes, mostly disdaining the staid and predictable conference debates. There was no hint of a dawning palace revolution.

The to do over Mr Cecil Walker's candidacy in North Belfast was apparently overcome privately. Mr Walker's pre emptive strike in letting it be known that he might stand as an independent unionist in the constituency (possibly splitting the unionist vote and handing the seat to Sinn Fein) worked wonders, and it now seems no obstacle will be raised to him seeking selection again.

Delegates wanted reassurance that the bottom line of traditional unionism would not change, and that is what Mr Trimble gave them. Although there were motions urging more involvement of youth, a strengthening of research and public relations efforts nobody went home worrying about a possible radical shake up in any area.

The media, too, were treated with a contempt suitable to the view reflected in one resolution which decried the current "lamentable imbalance" in reporting. Just four chairs were provided for a press corps of at least 30 to do their balancing on.