Defying Moderation? the Transformation of Radical Irish Republicanism, 1969-2010
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The London School of Economics and Political Science Defying Moderation? The Transformation of Radical Irish Republicanism, 1969-2010 _____________________________________ Matthew Whiting A thesis submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, May 2013. DECLARATION I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 102, 663 words. ABSTRACT This thesis examines the causal pathways underpinning the moderation of radical ethno- nationalism using the case of Irish republicanism (Sinn Féin and the IRA) between 1969 and 2010. Through the application of the ‘inclusion-moderation’ framework, I argue that a strong macro-institutional framework is central to the process of moderation. Existing explanations that emphasise the role of interplay, exchange and leadership choices typically neglect the importance of this wider institutional framework in enabling and shaping the decisions made. In the case of Irish republicanism, the processes of electoral participation, bargaining to design stable democratic institutions, and securing credible guarantees to protect their interests from the United States, all combined and reinforced each other to create a scenario whereby republicans moderated. These processes hinged upon stable democratic institutions that were perceived by republicans as embodying relatively low risks for participation, providing a stable basis for future competition, and rendering the future of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom potentially uncertain. Moderation was a gradual and path-dependent process of increasing returns whereby contact with the stable institutions imposed constraints against radicalism and incentives towards moderation. Republicanism’s transformation is best understood as moving through a series of phases, beginning with absolute radicalism, moving to relative radicalism, before becoming moderate. Crucial to this process was the decision to participate in institutions, which changed and regulated their relationships with other actors, requiring them to build alliances with potential supporters and political opponents. However, moderation was a layered process with some aspects of their policies and beliefs becoming moderate while others remained radical, albeit over time their remaining radicalism became completely accommodating. This was about acquiescing to a system of political order rather than core value change. Republicans continue to assert an alternative claim to sovereignty, reject the legitimacy of British ruling institutions, and continue to assert the legitimacy of their right to armed struggle, albeit they have put the use of violence in their past. As such, rather than thinking of ethno-national radicalism as entailing value change to prove the sincerity of their moderation, it is preferable to look to the ways they demonstrated a commitment to their new moderate path, such as through the process of decommissioning, their endorsement of policing in Northern Ireland, and their response to ongoing threats of violence from former dissident comrades. In short, the inclusion-moderation theory is a powerful approach for explaining ethno-national moderation but it needs some modification for the ethno-national context. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My biggest academic debt is undoubtedly owed to Bill Kissane, who supervised this thesis. He provided expert input and advice throughout, striking an ideal balance between giving me freedom to explore my own ideas while always encouraging me to explore these in a rigorous academic fashion. I am very grateful for the interest, guidance and enthusiasm he consistently showed in my work as well as to my academic life in general. A number of other academics in the Government Department of the LSE provided me with support at various stages. Simon Hix was always available and willing to provide useful advice and support, not just for my thesis but for my academic career as a whole. Denisa Kostovicova provided valuable comments on an earlier draft of this thesis, while Jim Hughes, Chun Lin and Jonathan Hopkin also gave their support and advice along the way. Studying for a thesis can be a lonely affair, especially when it takes more than six years to complete, but I was lucky to have a wonderful cohort of friends who supported me throughout. Johannes Wolff not only helped me to get married, get a cat, and move home (twice), but he also provided great friendship, even if he did manage to finish before me. Mike Seiferling was an ideal (but dirty) flat-mate and the living embodiment of a philosopher king – many important academic debates were solved in deep intellectual discussion in our kitchen. Stefan Bauchowitz’s unwavering lack of enthusiasm for life was always inspirational and his friendship is greatly appreciated. José Javier Olivas was the social glue that held us all together, while David Marshall was a pillar of support and always on hand with his ready wit. Uli Theuerkauf has been a fantastic colleague to work with and will be much missed when I leave. Others who have kept me sane throughout with advice and friendship at various stages of my time at the LSE are Anar Ahmadov, Guy Burton, Micheál Ó’Keeffe, Nick Vivyan, and Eric Woods. Without support from my family I would certainly not have been able to start, let alone complete, this PhD. I couldn’t ask for a better sister than Sinéad and her love and support has been hugely important throughout, as has that of Niall, Orla, Cillian and Jonathan. Zeynep is entirely wonderful and stupendously clever, and provided feedback on all my work, always making it better. I love her very much and she is undoubtedly the best thing that ever happened to me. I’m also hugely lucky that Elif came into my life and she has brought more laughter and enjoyment (and a decided lack of political science) than I ever imagined. My mum and dad encouraged me all through my time at university (all 12 years of it!), always helping me to pursue my academic ambitions. They supported me financially, but much more importantly, emotionally too, unconditionally believing in what I was doing. I could never repay all that they have done for me and I will always appreciate their love and support enormously. CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures List of Abbreviations 1 The Transformation of Irish Republicanism as a Form of 1 Moderation 2 The Ethno-National Challenge to Existing Theories of 27 Moderation 3 Radical and Moderate Irish Republicanism, 1916-1937 and 1969- 45 2010 4 Electoralism, Strategic Participation, and Inexorable Moderation 76 5 Democratisation and Reining in Radical Republicanism 110 6 Irish-America and the International Dimension to Republican 148 Moderation 7 Reimagining Ethno-National Moderation – Lessons from Irish 180 Republicanism 8 Conclusion 210 Appendix 228 Bibliography 232 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1 The Variables Explaining the Process of Moderation in this 16 Study Table 2 Protestant vs. Catholic Unemployment Rates and Catholic 121 Unemployment Differentials Table 3 The Percentage of Catholics Composing Selected 122 Employment Groups Fig. 1 The Number of Deaths Caused by the IRA Compared 93 Against the Percentage Vote Share of Sinn Féin Fig. 2 The Changing Policy Position of Irish Republicanism Along 100 a ‘Revolutionary-Reformist’ Dimension and the Number of Deaths Caused by the IRA Fig. 3 The Changing Anti-System Position of Irish Republicanism 199 Fig. 4 Variables to Explore the Extension of this Conceptual 225 Framework ABBREVIATIONS ANIA Americans for a New Ireland Agenda AIA Anglo-Irish Agreement (1985) AP An Phoblacht (The Republic) DUP Democratic Unionist Party IICD Independent International Commission on Decommissioning INC Irish National Caucus IPP Irish Parliamentary Party IRA Irish Republican Army MP Member of Parliament (UK) NA National Archives, UK NAI National Archives of Ireland NORAID Irish Northern Aid Committee PRONI Public Records Office of Northern Ireland PSNI Police Service of Northern Ireland RN Republican News RUC Royal Ulster Constabulary SDLP Social Democratic and Labour Party TD Teachta Dála (Member of Parliament in Ireland) UUP Ulster Unionist Party 8 CHAPTER 1 THE TRANSFORMATION OF IRISH REPUBLICANISM AS A FORM OF MODERATION ____________________________________________________________________ Two contrasting speeches, both assessments of republicanism1 by British Prime Ministers but made 25 years apart, highlight the scope of the transformation it has undergone. On the 12th October 1984, Margaret Thatcher, surrounded by security officers, declared to the Conservative Party faithful ‘This government will not weaken. This nation will meet that challenge. Democracy will prevail’. The challenge she was referring to was that posed by the Irish Republican Army’s (IRA) armed campaign and Sinn Féin’s anti-system politics, groups she clearly viewed as posing an anti-democratic challenge to the legitimate existing political order. The reason for a particularly visible security presence that day was that she was speaking just hours after the IRA had come close to assassinating her at the Grand Hotel in Brighton during a Conservative Party Annual Conference. Some days later, Thatcher reiterated this same sentiment, stating that ‘all attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail’ and she viewed the bombing as an attempt to ‘destroy the fundamental freedom that is the birth-right of every British citizen: freedom, justice and democracy’.2 By 2010, a British Prime Minister was making a very different speech.