THE Canadian equivalent of "as American as apple pie" is reported to be "as Canadian as it is possible to be in the circumstances". We pay insufficient attention to the similarity of Irish circumstances with those of other smaller states in the shadow of larger ones. Portugal/Spain, Austria/Germany, Finland/Russia are interesting analogues of Ireland Britain.
Questions of national identity are closely bound up with these comparisons. Nation building proceeded in line with state building through the last two centuries, leading to separatism, cultural essentialism and territorialism as hallmarks of national identity. In recent decades these characteristics are becoming increasingly unbundled in line with greater economic and political interdependence and integration between the most developed states.
This can be much easier to handle for smaller than larger states. Alternative, over arching regional identities, as they emerge, provide opportunities for the smaller ones to define themselves with reference to a wider setting. In the Irish case this has been most notably the case over the last generation in Ireland's membership of the European Community/ Union. It has meant, in President Robinson's words, in an interview with Le Monde on May 25th, 1992, that "we no longer only define ourselves in relation to Britain".
This is, as she put it, "very good, very liberating". It has given Irish people "a broader, more modern and more precise notion of our Irish identity", she told the paper. And she added, in her address on "Irish Identity in Europe" to the Oireachtas on July 8th of that year, that it is all the more important to provide "an articulate self definition at a time of redefinition".
These have been constant themes of her presidency. They are worth recalling during the week in which she announced her retirement. But another of her central themes, the Irish Diaspora, provides a rather different, Atlantic approach to Irish identity most notably during St Patrick's weekend. It is best understood through yet another of her themes the need to redefine centres and peripheries as part and parcel of that process.
Ireland is undoubtedly on the far western geographical periphery of the Eurasian land mass. We became accustomed during the Anglo centric period to define ourselves as peripheral in relation to Britain, and were tempted to extrapolate this state of being to Europe after 1973, substituting geographical for historical culpability, as Joe Lee put it.
But seen from the point of view of Europe's relations with North America Ireland is peripheral in neither historical nor geographical terms. Ireland's strong economic growth, growing self confidence and extraordinary development of political relations with the US in recent years coincided with Mrs Robinson's term of office. Looked at over the longer period since the 1960s it is arguably as important as that with Europe.
In that sense the Americanisation or Atlanticisation of Irish identity has been as important, as its Europeanisation in reducing Irish Anglo centricity over the last 30 years.
There are obvious differences between the two processes. Relations with the US are intergovernmental, not integrated in the fashion of the EC/EU, although given the power of the Irish American lobby in Congress and the recent access to the White House, culminating on St Patrick's Day, it is not surprising that other European states look on enviously.
During his state visit last October Dr Kohl spoke of the role Ireland could play as a kind of glue in transatlantic relations. Recent surveys of ethnic identity in the US show that people of Irish extraction are second only to people of German background there.
But the Irish Diaspora is much more powerful than the German one and has more to offer - as was, perhaps, demonstrated by the experience of the Irish EU presidency in handling the Helms Burton legislation.
Ireland is not, of course, in the NATO alliance, the main integrated mechanism straddling the Atlantic, but this does not affect its access in Washington, although it remains stronger in Congress and the White House than with the State Department.
Looking at economic relations, there has been much more US investment in Ireland than from the main continental states. It has been in more strategic, high technology industry.
As for cultural contacts, there is no doubt that linguistic and media exposure to North America is much more important than that with continental Europe. It is a mistake to posit a false dichotomy here, of course, since Ireland is exposed to a much wider process of Americanisation that affects Britain and continental Europe as a whole.
Looking at migration, tourism and personal contacts, there can be no doubt where the balance lies. It is important to remember, however, that the intensity of contacts relates directly to the intensity of emigration and that there is an important distinction between first generation Irish and the multi generational ethnic group in the US.
This point is developed by Donald Akensen in his seminal study of the Irish Diaspora*. He also points out that more that 50 per scent of those who identify themselves as of Irish background in the US are Protestant.
The moral of this story is that the escape from Anglo centricity is not at all the same as the deAnglicisation of Ireland that was central to the earlier project of cultural nationalism. Its structures have become increasingly bundled. There creation of Irish identity in relation to Europe and North America is, more correctly, about being as Irish as is possible in the circumstances of contemporary international society. It is increasingly deterritorialised and sustained by a cultural identity that is happier with multiple than with essentialist identities.
This sets the scene, of course, for a more mature relationship with Britain, based on more equal patterns of interaction. The reconstruction and modernisation of Irish identity has, indeed, gone further than that in our neighbouring island.
