Madam, - In his response to Dr Garret FitzGerald's letter of April 24th, Ian d'Alton (April 28th) raises a number of points of interest, one of which I crave your indulgence to answer. Mr d'Alton correctly states that the Protestant population of the 26 counties shrank by 34 per cent between 1911 and 1926, while the Catholic population declined by only 2.2 per cent.
Although some Irish Protestants were victims of a process of expulsion, coercion, and in some cases murder - acts which would have been abhorred by those who planned and executed the Easter Rising - the primary reason for this population decline can be identified with the Great War and with aggressively encouraged relocation.
The horrific slaughter of young Irish Protestant men in the first World War had a devastating and disproportionate impact on the male Protestant population of the South. This was reflected in the birth rate for decades following the war.
In addition, the Northern Ireland regime led by Sir James Craig enticed large numbers of Protestants, through the offer of government jobs and quality housing, to relocate north of the Border in an attempt to offset Catholic majorities in Border counties. This was, in effect, part of the creation of "a Protestant parliament for a Protestant people".
The strong religious, cultural and political ties which Southern Protestants had in common with the Northern majority resulted in a sizeable shift of Protestants north across the Border. It is worth noting that two Protestants who decided to stay south subsequently became presidents of Ireland. - Yours, etc,
TOM COOPER, Delaford Lawn, Dublin 16.
Madam, - It is with great concern that I reflect on the logic of argument put forward in Anthony Coughlan's letter of April 27th. Today we live in a country that is the reality of the opportunities and ideas that our forbearers sought to establish between 1913 and 1923.
Opportunities and hesitations came with independence and sovereignty, but also the establishment of a democracy of which Ireland can be proud. Irish neutrality is a well established practice that has shown we can be impartial without being indifferent. It is a characteristic that has given us a reputation for advocating diplomacy and negotiation as the better alternative to conflict and war.
We have continued to enhance the ideals of our forefathers to bring peace to the land that the people of this island inhabit. Understandably we had much to learn after our colonial disestablishment. We were left as an agrarian state with limited capacity to effect political or social change and we faced an uphill crawl as a small national market with reduced capacity to maintain our historical trading relationship with the UK.
Nobody could say that up to the 1960s, from an economic or social perspective, our management of independence was a runaway success. There were limits to Irish sovereignty. There were opportunities and choices to Independence. Ireland has not been alone in identifying the many benefits that could follow through pooling sovereignty, not least the promise of peace from neighbouring nations.
This was an important factor in the decision to apply for membership in the 1960s and accession in 1973 to what is now knows as the European Union.
After a hesitant start, Ireland has made consistent progress. It has also been manifestly successful in the sphere of economic activity. Like other fellow Europeans we have reaped a rich harvest from pooling together our wealth of experiences and knowledge. At the same time objectivity has been enabled in decision-making wherein decisions in Brussels by the Council of Ministers and European Parliament emanate from an independent commission which is politically appointed as a direct manifestation of what is politically determined shared sovereignty.
Is Mr Coughlan suggesting that there is something better or something worse in existence today for Irish Europeans and fellow EU nationals? I wonder if Mr Coughlan has considered the reality of the world we live in today.
Irish people have done well to resist contemplating an existence in isolation of the rapidly developing global environment that has come to be our world today.
Ireland is independent but we have secured the opportunity, despite our size, to be actors on the global stage as members of the EU.
Can Mr Coughlan explain why none of the 25 existing members states wants to leave, why two more, Bulgaria and Romania, are likely to join on January 1st, 2007, and why behind them is a line of at least 10 other countries which want to pool their sovereignty within the EU?
I certainly will be taking the opportunity to commemorate the achievements of our forefathers in contributing to peace on this land on May 9th, Europe Day. - Yours, etc,
RUAIRÍ QUINN TD, Chairman, European Movement Ireland, Merrion Square, Dublin 2.