British ‘rigid inflexibility’ and interference partly to blame for Civil War, says Taoiseach

British interference had a significant impact in events that led to the Irish Civil War, Taoiseach Micheál Martin has stated.

Speaking at the opening in University College Cork (UCC) of the Irish Civil War National Conference, Mr Martin said the war could have been avoided if the British government had given its Irish counterpart a “free hand to find a shared route forward”.

It was noteworthy, he continued, that the only offer of assistance made by the British when the Provisional Irish government was set up in January 1922 was the offer of weapons and ammunition to deal with the anti-Treaty rebels who were occupying the Four Courts. The shelling of the Four Courts on June 28th, 1922 using borrowed British guns began the Civil War.

The Civil War could have been avoided, he continued, if the British government had accepted the draft constitution submitted by Michael Collins for its consideration.

My neighbour’s cat is using my herb garden as his litter tray. What can I do?

---

‘We don’t speak, we don’t eat, we don’t do anything together’: Inside an Irish divorce court

---

Bambie Thug: ‘I fully support anyone boycotting Eurovision’

---

Bryan Dobson: ‘Retirement could be a terrible shock to the system – or not, who knows!’

---

Collins hoped that the draft constitution would bridge the difference between the pro and anti-Treaty sides.

It was rejected by British prime minister David Lloyd George on the basis that it did not contain the oath of allegiance as outlined in the Anglo-Irish Treaty and did not contain a guarantee, as the British government saw it, that all those who participating in the Irish government would accept the Treaty.

Mr Martin said the election pact between the pro- and anti-Treaty Sinn Féin sides before the Irish general election of June 1922 was not a breach of the Treaty, as the British government had claimed.

He added: “Constant interference and inflexibility from London was central to the fact that nothing came of these efforts. The implied and open threats made to the provisional government directly escalated division — and reinforced the views of those who questioned the good faith of London.

“If it is true that Irish divisions arose from an outsized focus on the impact of the crown and empire on Irish self-determination, then it must also be understood that it was London’s inflexible insistence on its interpretation of these provisions which gave them their importance.

“How different could things have been if Collins’s draft constitution had been supported rather than vetoed by London? Instead what emerged was another example of rigid inflexibility.”

Mr Martin said the war needed to be seen as having occurred in two different phases. The first, a conventional battle between opposing forces, lasted two months and ended in decisive victory for the pro-Treaty forces.

The second was the one in which “restraint was removed and the participants began to more uniformly see each other as enemies. It was a period when we began to see the dehumanising stereotypes so often used against the Irish in history including during the War of Independence.”.

The Taoiseach suggested that not enough has been done to examine the new powers introduced in September 1922 which allowed for the execution of anti-Treaty forces. Some 81 were executed between November 1922 and May 1923.

He described the executions without trial of Dick Barrett, Liam Mellows, Rory O’Connor and Joe McKelvey in December 1922 as “manifestly illegal and it damaged the standing and authority of the new State”.

He added: “The powers taken by the new State and the scale of the executions which it carried out went beyond those of the British state during the War of Independence or to those seen in comparable civil wars.

“I think it is perfectly reasonable to question the place of these executions in achieving security for the new State. This also includes other actions like Ballyseedy and the great cruelty seen in many localities. No positive cause was served by the murder of Noel Lemass in a manner so brutal that the coroner was shocked almost into silence.

“I think we need to find a way of talking about our State formation while admitting the radicalising and destructive impact of such actions.”

Mr Martin acknowledged there had been atrocities carried out too by the anti-Treaty side, and the murder of TD Seán Hales in December 1922, which precipitated the executions of the four men, had been one of them.

Though the Civil War was bloody, the Taoiseach concluded by stating it did not stop the Irish State emerging as a “modern, centrist democracy” and no party advocating violence got more than 4 per cent of vote after 1923.

At the conference, more than 130 expert speakers will examine all aspects of the Irish Civil War (1922-1923) over the course of four days.

It is one of the key events of the remembrance of the Civil War and is being funded by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media.

The Minister with responsibility for commemorations, Catherine Martin, said she was committed to ensuring that the Civil War is remembered in a “respectful, sensitive, authentic and inclusive manner”.

The conference will be held on the University College Cork campus and will comprise papers and plenary lectures examining topics such as international comparisons with the Irish experience of civil war; military strategies and conflict; civilian trauma and memory.

The impact of the Military Service Pensions Collection and the Beyond 2022: Ireland’s Virtual Record Treasury research project will also be examined.

Dr Maurice Manning, the chair of the Expert Advisory Group on Centenary Commemorations, said the detailed programme will ensure that all aspects of the period will be subject to the “rigorous academic scrutiny that is necessary as part of any meaningful commemoration”.