Sir, - Your Editorial (October 29th), "Time to move on in the North", recognises the part played by Mr Trimble "in pursuit of . . . IRA decommissioning" and continues, "he can claim just credit for the progress that has now been achieved". You also indicate a certain disquiet that two UUP Assembly members might vote against his nomination as First Minister.
Many moderate unionists share your concern, and hope that he will be re-elected.
While welcoming the IRA move as of "profound significance", Mr Trimble is also on record as acknowledging that "there is a natural concern that this start to decommissioning continues as part of a process". He has done his best to allay fears over this, but has not been helped by the fact that the IICD considered "it would not further the process of putting all arms beyond use were we to provide further details of this event".
Although Mr Trimble and his ministers were satisfied by the explanations given to them by Gen de Chastelain, some doubters have not yet been. A significant factor for pro-agreement unionists reading the May 2000 statement by the IRA was that the process would be initiated "in such a way as to . . . ensure maximum public confidence". While not underestimating the difficulties for republicans, less delay and a little more clarity would have helped build unionist confidence.
I have noted elsewhere (Intertwined Roots - An Ulster-Scot Perspective) that in February 2000, the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister were both stressing the need for clarity - even if they have been rather coy about it since then! Lack of clarity, though it may facilitate initial or superficial agreement in principle, does nothing to diminish distrust. It merely bypasses the issues and undermines the potential for progress at a later stage. - Yours, etc.,
W.A. Hanna, Belfast 10.