A Chara, - Andy Pollak's appeal for us to "think the unthinkable for peace" (Opinion, September 4th) has not convinced me in the slightest of the benefits of the Republic joining the Commonwealth. Apparently such a move would aid us to become less insecure about our "identity" as Irish people! What nonsense; we are amongst the most secure and self-confident of nations, and I say that with some certainty from the multicultural "capital of Europe", Brussels.
Far from the Commonwealth providing some sort of focus, Mr Pollak himself demonstrates that it has none. Its members pull in different directions on many issues, and no longer even have the common heritage of British colonialism.
The real reason why Mr Pollak would like Ireland to join the Commonwealth seems to be that he would like to impress unionists. I fail to see how this would happen. We are already members of many international bodies that include the United Kingdom: the United Nations, the European Union, the Council of Europe, and so on. Has any Unionist representative ever stated that Irish membership of the Commonwealth would ease reunification? What precise benefits does Mr Pollak see flowing from such membership?
Mr Pollak admits that the Commonwealth is no longer the "British" Commonwealth, and even that the British monarch is not ensured the role of titular head. So what exactly is the Commonwealth, and why would our membership of it impress the Unionists to the extent that they would move even one inch?
Unionism is not a flexible creed. It does not intend to agree to any diminution of its link with Britain, even if it no longer represents a majority in the North. Joining a vague and seemingly purposeless international club simply because the current head is Queen Elizabeth in the vain hope that the unionists will then agree to a diminution of their link with Britain seems to be quite illogical and unrealistic. - Is mise,
Hoeilaart, Belgium