THE republican movement is finding out who the real bosses are this week, as the seven strong IRA army council prepares for a return to war. The strategy of an inclusive, democratic way forward is foundering, and political leaders in Ireland, Britain and the United States stand appalled at the prospect.
Already, doors are closing on Sinn Fein as a result of the blustering threats of the IRA. Ted Kennedy, a long term supporter, turned his back on Gerry Adams in the US. Anthony Lake said the White House and fund raising would be off limits to the Sinn Fein president until the IRA ceasefire was reinstated. And Bob Dole, a presidential hopeful, attacked Bill Clinton for providing Sinn Fein with visas.
The damage goes far beyond its immediate impact on Sinn Fein and on support for republican fund raising in the US. Failure of the Hume Adams peace process may tilt the diplomatic balance back in favour of the traditional London Washington axis and weaken vital US backing for a political settlement acceptable to nationalists.
The much vaunted Hume Adams Dublin US front is crumbling before the prospect of a renewed IRA campaign. And the republican movement is itself deeply divided on tactics and strategy. Few supporters want a return to violence. And yet they are faced with a fait accompli. The initial critical response by prisoners and activists in An Phoblacht to the ending of the ceasefire has been overwhelmed by an army council interview justifying that action. The traditional discipline of the gun is being imposed.
Whatever about the internal republican struggle - which seems to have been temporarily resolved in favour of the army council the message transmitted to the public has been chilling. And it provides considerable justification for people like David Trimble who argued that, all along some republicans were determined to bomb their way to a settlement.
For those who wish to grasp at straws, there is a little hope in the fact that the An Phoblacht article represented an internal defence of an unpopular army council action and was expressed in traditional, hard line language. And the views of that one individual did not carry the formal army council imprimatur of "P. O'Neill".
Realistically, however, there seems little prospect of the Sinn Fein leadership reimposing its thinking on the army council. The Mitchell report addressed the future in unambiguous terms. The gunmen were offered oblivion in return for a staging post on the way to their ideal of a united Ireland. And we are hearing their reply.
All the elements required for a republican split are there elements going back to the foundation of the State. Political evolution has never been successfully resisted by the physical force movement. And the hybrid approach of advancing with "an Armalite in one hand and a ballot box in the other" is in the process of falling apart. Gerry Adams and his friends may try to postpone a split and shore up the edifice. But the determination of a jealous army council to wield ultimate power will eventually defeat them.
We have come, as Bertie Ahern said last week, to a parting of the ways. The republican movement could, he said, break away from the rest of nationalist Ireland and pursue its paramilitary path in isolation or it could work with others for a political settlement. He was committed to the Mitchell report.
It's important that the Fianna Fail leader should say such tough, uncompromising things at this time. And that similar harsh messages should come from the US. For in attempting to justify its breach of the ceasefire, the IRA has laid the blame on John Bruton, on John Major and on the unionists, while attempting to retain good relations with other parties. But if their "friends" are so critical of their actions, republicans can be in no doubt about the parched desert that faces them if they return to the armed struggle.
THE IRA interview left little doubt about the direction contemplated. It saw "the necessity for armed struggle" and dismissed the Mitchell report and its proposals for parallel decommissioning as "a nonsense". The IRA would not decommission its weapons "either through the front or the back door" and would "not leave nationalist areas defenceless this side of a final settlement".
The greatest threat to nationalist areas is now posed by the IRA. It is their intransigence that threatens to reactivate the loyalist murder gangs and bring army repression back to the streets. Their bellicose noises are encouraging the INLA. For what?
The nationalist community is opposed to this course of action. To quote Albert Reynolds: "Who is afraid of peace?"
The army council is clearly scared of peace and of the steps required to anchor it. Its spokesman has not only rejected the Mitchell compromise on arms decommissioning but has described the elections designed to lead Sinn Fein directly into all party talks as "a retrograde step".
John Hume's referendum proposal - designed to remove the IRA's claim to legitimacy which is rooted in 1918 and the last all Ireland elections - has been dismissed as "an unwelcome distraction". And the army council has sought a new legitimacy in "the conditions which exist within Northern Ireland".
For months, republicans have complained about the imposition of preconditions by the British government in advance of talks. And now the army council is laying down its own ground rules: "There will be no surrender of IRA weapons under any circumstances and to anyone.
It is a formula for political gridlock. Even in circumstances where the IRA renewed its ceasefire, republicans would be asked - in all party talks - to prove their commitment to the democratic process by decommissioning weapons. As Mr Ahern said: "Because of the breach of the ceasefire, decommissioning will have to come early rather than late. I think that is reasonable."
TIME is running out. Dick Spring and Sir Patrick Mayhew met yesterday in Stormont review progress in the proximity talks". David Trimble and John Taylor will visit Dublin on Monday to discuss matters with John Bruton, Mr Spring and Proinsias De Rossa. By next Wednesday, March 13th, discussion with, the parties on the form of elections and the agenda for negotiations on June 10th will come to an end.
At that stage, the two governments will review the situation and the British government will bring forward legislation on a "broadly acceptable elective process". Given that the Government agreed to a June, rather than a May, date on the basis that an index/list election system would take longer to put in place, the outcome appears clear cut. Especially as the SDLP and Sinn Fein reject the UUP model.
To facilitate and encourage Sinn Fein during this period, Fianna Fail has suggested that an extraordinary session of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation be held on March 22nd. Noel Dempsey proposed that all parties should gather in the same room to discuss the breach of the IRA ceasefire and how it might be repaired. This, he suggested, could be done "without prejudice as to whether they [the parties] wish or are willing to talk privately with each other on a bilateral basis".
The timing of the proposal and the date given for the plenary session is intriguing. By March 22nd, the nature of the path into all party talks and the agenda For negotiations should be clear. At that stage, if the struggle still continues for the soul of the republican movement, Sinn Fein may need all the encouragement it can get. {CORRECTION} 96030600004