Inside Politics: Politicians of all the Dáil parties were shaken by the shameful scenes that prevented the expression of free speech in Dublin last Saturday. An obvious consequence of the riot was the direct and damaging impact it will have on the latest Anglo-Irish political initiative, writes Stephen Collins
The more shocking aspect of the riot for our political leaders was that it raised profound questions about the self-image of modern Ireland.
Only a month ago President Mary McAleese spoke proudly about the 1916 Rising, claiming it as a broad, inclusive and non-sectarian event. Last Saturday a hard-core republican element, who claim to be the political inheritors of 1916, brought thuggery and violence to the streets of Dublin in a successful effort to stop a march down O'Connell Street by unionist victims of IRA violence.
More shockingly, they spewed vicious sectarian abuse at the marchers who were to have been accompanied by six Orange bands.
Willie Frazer, the combative march organiser, hit a raw nerve later when he said that in modern multicultural Dublin it appeared that people from every background were entitled to be openly proud of their culture, except for Irish Protestants from the unionist tradition. After decades of preaching to unionists about their lack of tolerance, Dublin failed the first test of its sincerity.
Of course it was just a handful of dissident republican activists, augmented by drunken louts wearing Celtic jerseys and a mob of looters, who caused the trouble, but there is no escaping the fact that it succeeded in its objective of preventing the march. It was also the worst riot in Dublin since the attacks on the British embassy in 1981 during the hunger strikes. Almost as sinister as the riot was the growing consensus, in the days following, that the march itself was provocative and should never have been allowed.
Practical arguments like the building works on O'Connell Street, and the likelihood of a rabble emerging, were cited, but there was also an undercurrent suggesting that it was inappropriate in any case to have Orange bands parading past the GPO.
Fine Gael TD, Seymour Crawford, knocked that point on the head in a fine Dáil speech on Tuesday when he pointed out that, only last Easter, Sinn Féin "organised a march down the same street with balaclavas and all sorts of regalia showing what it stood for. Nobody passed any remarks and that march was allowed to take place. Despite all the sentiment questioning which route should have been used, it was the route that all of us have used. I perhaps more often than anyone else in the House, with farm organisations and Monaghan hospital groups, have often walked that route in protest. It is the accepted route."
The bottom line is that the accepted route for every kind of march, from the sinister to the frivolous, is not acceptable for a unionist demonstration. As Labour leader Pat Rabbitte said in the Dáil, it is hard to overstate the seriousness of the episode for our democratic society. "Those who set out to ensure that this parade did not take place were directing their hostility not just towards those who planned to march but also towards the values that all democrats hold dear - tolerance, non-sectarianism and respecting the views of others - which are values that should be the norm for anyone who considers him or herself to be a republican. The real test of our tolerance is not accepting those marches with which we agree, but accepting the right of those with whom we might disagree to parade peacefully."
Mr Rabbitte also made the pertinent point that vile sectarianism was not far below the surface in some sections of our society and was not simply confined to the Orange Order or the DUP. It had contaminated a minority of soccer supporters in this country.
"We also need to exercise caution in the way in which we plan to commemorate key events in Irish history, such as the 1916 Rising. Nothing should be done that would deepen divisions, further inflame passions or give those who caused such mayhem in Dublin further excuse to vent their sectarian hatred," he said.
In the Republic a blind eye has been turned to the antics of the admittedly small number of soccer supporters who chant IRA and sectarian slogans. At international matches the widespread booing of any Glasgow Rangers player who happens to be playing for an opposing team is regarded as a bit of harmless fun. Last weekend was a warning that the tolerance of such behaviour reflects a deeper malaise.
The riot certainly highlighted the dangers of a simplistic, triumphalist approach to the 1916 commemoration. Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, in a thoughtful speech last December, anticipated the point by accepting that there were no hierarchies of sacrifice, suffering or loss as between those who died in Dublin in 1916 or on the fields of Flanders.
"In years to come, we must also recognise, with less inhibition, the unionist contribution and tradition on this island. We need to acknowledge openly that there are also positive aspects to our long interaction with Britain. It is becoming easier to do this now, with our independence fully respected by our neighbours, and as mutual respect for both traditions grows," he said.
Unfortunately it was not as easy as the Taoiseach thought and there was no respect on the streets of Dublin last Saturday for one of the traditions he was referring to.
There was no respect either for the gardaí who bore the brunt of the violence. On one level this has handed a very obvious political weapon to the DUP, at a time when the party is being pressurised by the Irish and British governments to share power with Sinn Féin.
At a deeper level it has exposed our own complacency about modern Ireland's sophistication and tolerance.