Eight years ago, the Downing Street declaration said there was a place in politics for all parties, including the loyalist parties and Sinn Fein who, in the context of a "permanent end to use and support for paramilitary violence", established a commitment to exclusively peaceful means in advancing its cause.
Eight years later the continued political support of Sinn Fein for the Provisional IRA has to be examined in that context. The end to Provisional violence that followed the Downing Street declaration was not "permanent". The ceasefire was formally broken at Canary Wharf in February 1996.
Informally, as well, paramilitary violence has continued to be used. Punishment beatings and shootings must be seen as coming within any realistic interpretation of the meaning of "violence". The attempted importation of arms from Florida in 1999, a number of killings, involvement this year in an arms raid in Athlone and in a massive cigarette theft in Belfast have all been credited to the Provisional IRA, an organisation that is supposed to be committed to "exclusively peaceful means".
The argument about decommissioning has to be seen against that background. In itself, decommissioning is important because the weapons could fall into the wrong hands; their very existence conveys an implicit threat and, of course, such holding of arms is illegal. A solid peace could not be built on a foundation that condoned illegality.
This latter point is particularly important for the democratic integrity of this State, which so painfully established the constitutional principle of one (democratic) authority for the holding of arms.
This concern has nothing much to do with unionists. It is a constitutive principle of our own republican state.
IT IS sometimes argued that decommissioning "never happened before" or that rust will take care of the weapons. Decommissioning is necessary, as we see in Macedonia. The appalling level of gun violence in South Africa hardly makes a reassuring case for leaving weapons lying out there. In any event, Sinn Fein and the loyalist parties agreed to it as part of a deal.
The decommissioning of IRA weapons would not be quite so important if Sinn Fein, was not still formally associated with the IRA. This is where the parallel with the 1920s breaks down. Fianna Fail, entering the Dail, had irrevocably severed its links with armed republicanism. Sinn Fein, on the other hand, entered the present Dail without doing so.
This is why it is a pity that Irish constitutional democrats have allowed decommissioning to become a unionist issue. The decommissioning of IRA weapons is a more important issue for Irish constitutional democrats than it is for unionists for three reasons.
The first reason is that our Government is a sovereign one, whereas the Northern administration is not, and an illegal army in our jurisdiction is a direct affront to our sovereignty. The second is that most of the IRA weapons are stored in our jurisdiction. The third reason is that Irish security forces are modest in comparison to the British and the proportionate military threat that IRA arms could pose to us is commensurately greater.
There is, of course, a strong temptation for Irish governments to play down the decommissioning issue. There is the worry that it will be abused by unionists who want to block change. There are concerns about the fairness or acceptability of RUC policing which leaves space for loyalist and Republican "policing" of antisocial elements.
As Taoiseach in April 1995, I said that "prior decommissioning of arms should not be allowed to stand in the way of progress towards full negotiations". But the negotiations started, were finished and, three years later, decommissioning has not even begun.
In May 2000 the IRA said it was ready to begin a process to put its weapons "completely and verifiably beyond use". Last week, 14 months later, it said it had agreed a scheme with Gen de Chastelain to do this, but no timing was given.
The difficulty is that agreeing a scheme on anything, without a timing for its implementation is a purely hypothetical exercise, a scenario rather than a solid commitment. In that sense, it does not represent much of an advance on Hillsborough in 1999 when, according to Bertie Ahern and Tony Blair, Sinn Fein acknowledged the obligation to decommission but was unable to indicate a timescale. That was over two years ago.
In other areas of national life, the state is demanding openness and accountability for events that took place 15 or 20 years ago. We affirm the supremacy of the law over all persons, however eminent they may be. We will not have a solid peace unless we apply the same standards to paramilitary organisations and their associated political parties.
I do not believe that Bertie Ahern and Brian Cowen should leave it to others to use their political authority to make the case for immediate decommissioning. There is a fundamental principle of Irish democracy at stake, which transcends any tactical or diplomatic considerations. At times in the last 10 years some of our most talented negotiators may have lost sight of this.
John Bruton TD is a former Taoiseach.