Ulster has political seasons as well as those related to the climate. We are in the “marching season”, a period when sectarian loyalties are placed on parade and compromise is especially difficult. While it is possible that the IRA might issue a statement as to its intentions in the next few weeks, July and August would not be the best months in which to explore the possibilities that any fresh initiative might offer. The most plausible moment for worthwhile political bargaining to begin again will be after the summer.
This is implicitly acknowledged by Peter Hain, the Northern Ireland Secretary, in his interview with The Times today. Mr Hain has held back from public comment since he unexpectedly acquired his new portfolio and that was a sage decision. There is no other Cabinet portfolio in which the most minor slip of the tongue can have the most profound consequences. Mr Hain’s predecessor, Paul Murphy, became an acclaimed and popular Secretary of State on the basis of his reputation as “ a good listener”. British politicians do not travel far in Northern Ireland if they try to cultivate an image as “a good talker”. Ulster does not want for those with the gift of the gab.
Mr Hain maintains a vigorous optimism which will doubtless attract some cynicism. His position, nevertheless, is not unreasonable. Ulster’s politics might well be polarised between the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Fein, but of itself that is no disaster. A political deal in the Province that could conceivably stick would have to be, as Mr Hain says, one that could be embraced by Gerry Adams and the Rev. Ian Paisley. Any understanding that either man opposed would eventually become untenable.
If the political dimension is to become viable, then Mr Adams and the IRA have to offer a dramatic innovation. In theory, at least, the IRA is now discussing a proposal made by the Sinn Fein president at the outset of the general election campaign that it should move to another “mode” — a codeword for formally recognising that the armed struggle is no longer required or relevant and that republicanism in Northern Ireland can become an exclusively electoral movement. As Mr Adams has asked the IRA for an answer, it would be staggering if a response did not arrive shortly and an even greater shock if it were not broadly in line with what the Sinn Fein hierarchy has requested.
What not only the DUP but all those interested in Ulster’s future will look for is the scope of any IRA declaration. It would not be difficult for that body to disengage from terrorism as it used to be understood; in the post September 11, 2001, world the IRA would be insane to cling to the strategies of the 1970s and 1980s. The critical issue for 2005 and beyond — and here Mr Hain has to be supremely tough — is whether the republicans appreciate that organised and semi-organised crime, not least of the kind on show in last December’s Northern Bank robbery, must also be beyond the Pale. If the IRA realises it must change, then Mr Hain can make a difference. If not, he will have a frustrating tenure.