Irlandinitiative Heidelberg - International News: 10.01. to 25.05.2003

The announcement by British Prime Minister Tony Blair of a judicial inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly this week - to be headed up by Lord Hutton of Bresagh - has provided the requisite pause or, more accurately, a desperately needed breathing space, for Blair, Alasdair Campbell and the British Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon.

However, Hutton's appointment, to those who know of his previous dealings in relation to the Six Counties, is likely to raise further questions over what is already a very murky and puzzling ordeal.

Hoon is the man many believe is responsible for organising what one report called a "media strategy" for slipping Dr Kelly's name into the public domain. As Blair has consistently demonstrated during his tour of the Far East, the prospective inquiry allows him and his ministers to simply refuse to answer the difficult questions being thrown at them.

On the question of the inquiry itself, the British government has already tried to limit its scope to the immediate circumstances of Dr Kelly's death, rather than looking into the bigger issue of how the British parliament was duped into agreeing to the invasion of Iraq. Whether it succeeds remains to be seen, but the judge chosen to head the inquiry will be a familiar name to many in the Six Counties as a man with some form, particularly in respect of defending the interests of government.

72-year-old Lord Hutton of Bresagh was, in his former incarnation as Sir Brian Hutton, a high court judge from 1979 until 1988, when he became the Lord Chief Justice of the Six Counties. He was also the legal advisor to the Ministry of Home Affairs under the old Stormont government and, in that role, acted for the British government when it was called before the European Court of Human Rights, accused of the inhuman and degrading treatment of internees. In 1986 he acquitted the RUC police officer who killed Sean Downes with a plastic bullet fired at point blank range.

In 1999 Hutton, now a law lord, became involved in a case brought by two lawyers, Seamus Treacey and Barry MacDonald - both of whom currently represent the families of the Bloody Sunday victims at the Saville inquiry. Treacey and MacDonald mounted a legal objection to the requirement for all newly appointed QCs to make an oath of loyalty to the British monarch. Hutton wrote to the then British Attorney General, warning that, "If you decide to remove the requirement for a declaration it will appear that you are - being influenced by political pressure to alter the procedure relating to an office which links Northern Ireland with the Crown". Justice Kerr dismissed the case made by Treacey and MacDonald, citing Hutton's comments in his judgement.

Also in 1999, Hutton was one of the law lords who ruled that the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet should receive immunity from arrest and extradition for crimes against humanity. During the case, Hutton criticised one of his fellow judges on the case, Lord Hoffman, for not declaring his links with Amnesty International.

Hutton was also involved in the case of David Shayler, the former MI5 agent. He and his colleagues ruled against Shayler's argument that he was acting in the public interest when he exposed the illegal activities of British intelligence forces, including collusion. Shayler was later jailed.

Sunday, 25 May, 2003

British role in Northern Ireland is a model for disaster

By Tom Hayden - author and former California state senator

There they were on global television, George Bush and Tony Blair, celebrating victory in Iraq and citing Northern Ireland as an example of their benign achievements. To anyone with an Irish consciousness, it was a deja vu of empires lost and found.

To the American television audience, for whom history seems either sanitary or deleted, the British presented themselves as having a superior sophistication for winning hearts and minds.

As of this writing (April 17, nearly Easter), there is still no potable water in Basra. Instead of cheering Iraqis, the Shiite population seems a bit cold. Have patience, we are advised, it will take time for these Shiites to warm up after Saddam's chilling rule. Line them up, give out candy to the children, keep promising the food and water, and tolerate a bit of looting which, after all is to be expected in the first phase of untidy freedom.

Repeatedly we've been told the British Army has gained its experience on the streets of Northern Ireland. Not once on American television has this master narrative been questioned.

Let's leave aside the question of why the British were booted out of Basra in 1932, and examine the value of this "experience" in Northern Ireland.

If the experience in question is operating a counter-insurgency war, that would fortify the Irish Republican Army's contention that the British military does not withdraw from places like South Armagh because it is using the area as a training camp for future Basras.

If the experience in question is that of a dirty war of agents and proxies, the Stevens Report issued this April should be required reading for Iraq watchers. Sir John Stevens' interim findings point to British collusion in dozens of loyalist paramilitary murders in Northern Ireland, including that of human rights lawyer Patrick Finucane in 1989. The Northern Ireland conflict, according to Stevens, was needlessly prolonged by a secret core of "out of control" officers who ratcheted up the "hatred and bitterness" between Catholics and Protestants. These were state-sanctioned assassinations of "a lot of innocent people". As the respected Financial Times summarized, "Loyalist assassination squads were used by a secretive unit of the British state to target Roman Catholics during Margaret Thatcher's war on IRA terrorism during the 1980s and early 1990s".

If the experience in question is how to master and justify deceit through public policy, the expert would be Brigadier Frank Kitson, who pioneered the techniques in Kenya before implementing them in Northern Ireland. In his classic book Low Intensity Operations (1973), Kitson recommended blatantly that "the law should be used as just another weapon in the government's arsenal, and in this case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public".

If the experience in question is conflict resolution, however, the role of the British in Northern Ireland is a model for disaster. The British forces spent 30 years trying unsuccessfully to crush the IRA, isolate republicans from nationalists, inflate a moderate centrist coalition, create free elections and all the while maintain UK control. If Bush and Blair expected to declare victory in Northern Ireland at their Belfast press conference, they were still blinded by arrogant prejudice.

The British once again has assumed the imperial right to suspend elections in Northern Ireland because their preferred candidates might not win. Their Unionist allies now want to kick Sinn Fein out of government by a majority vote, instead of weighted voting, if there is so much as a riot in Belfast.

Is that the kind of governing process envisioned for Iraq?

Lines drawn by the British empire imposed almost a century ago divided the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Does anyone believe they will be unified in a new, independent Iraq without US-UK control?

Blair now is lauding the Royal Ulster Constabulary as having "the particular skills to rebuild law and order in Iraq". (Northern Ireland News, April 16, 03). Meanwhile, the Sunday Independent (among other media) is blasting Blair for not being as tough on Sinn Fein as Bush has been on Saddam. In a front-page column, Eoghan Harris wants the Bush hawks to replace the State Department doves in the Irish peace process. "Iraq, like Ireland, is much safer in the hands of hawks with moral clarity than doves who want to do business with despots. If Bush wants the IRA to deliver (on decommissioning), he should recall Richard Haas and send in Richard Perle".

Turns out that Eoghan Harris, proud of having "said goodbye to socialism", is an "embedded" consultant on television communication techniques to the man Richard Perle, among others, wants to install as the Pentagon's very own president in Baghdad, Ahmad Chalabi.

What goes around comes around. Just as the sun never sets on certain empires.

Friday, 11 April, 2003

They'll kiss Irish tots as they bomb Iraqi cots

By Jude Collins, Irish News

They used to marvel at Bill Clinton’s ability to compartentalise the different things in his life. While under terrible stress in one area (all those Monica Lewinsky charges, or the Whitewater affair) he would appear in public, chair meetings, handle official duties with smiling ease. Masterly stuff.

Well step back Bill, here comes George. There Bill Clinton’s successor was on Monday, just off the plane, plucking not one but two children from the crowd, holding them lovingly in the crook of his arm. And while Mr Bush twinkled and savoured that camera moment at Aldergrove, other children of the same age in Baghdad were suffering the consequences of his commands. The lucky ones were lying wounded in hospitals; the unlucky ones – and there were lots – were lying in their graves. What a feat of compartmentalisation by the Bush man! Tens all round.

Not that Tony Blair was short on chutzpah either. When Bush arrived at Hillsborough Castle, he shook hands with Blair and said something complimentary about the place. And Blair smiled back – did you see him? – with that look of boyish modesty he does so well. Shucks, George, it’s just my other little island – kinda nice in parts, dontcha think?

Of course these occasions bring out the worst in many of us. Malcolm Muggeridge said it best: “In most people, veneration for power exists quite irrespective of who exercises it.” Some media sources almost suffered twisted blood over the past week. On the one hand, they wanted to dance all over Sinn Féin, for being against the Iraq war and yet meeting with the man who had launched it. On the other hand, their natural instinct in the presence of power was to tug the forelock until it touched the red carpet. They did a bit of both, but mainly the grovelling thing.

So was Bush welcome? No, insofar as he came here to confer with Blair about an illegal, cruel and highly dangerous war. If there hadn’t been a war in Iraq and if his best buddy in that war hadn’t been Tony Blair, Bush would no more have considered flying to Hillsborough than he’d have considered phoning Michael Moore to come round for a few jars. The 3,000 demonstrators at Hillsborough spoke for the majority of the Irish people on Monday evening there should have been no war in our name, and no war council in our country.

But – and this is where it gets slightly complex, and where the twisted blood hacks get the veneration staggers – if Bush and Blair were here to help push all signatories of the Good Friday Agreement into doing what they signed up to in 1998, then the majority of the Irish people welcomed the presence of both men. For months now, whether for selfish political reasons or otherwise, Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern have been pushing hard to get our peace process rolling again. The presence of Bush’s shoulder at the wheel, while fraught with irony, may just have made that vital difference.

So will the combined efforts of the three men restart the engine? There’s a good chance it may. Republicans have made it clear to the point of tedium that they’re committed to the political path. The IRA is not going to go back to war and the leaders of unionism know this. So the question is not will republican paramilitaries say the war is over/ stand down/ disband/ decommission or hop over any of the other pointless hurdles that unionism keeps erecting. The question is, will unionist leaders finally have the courage and will and skill to tell their people that the time has come. Not for taking yet another mad rush out of office or up the Never-Never cul-de-sac, but for taking the hand of friendship that has been extended by republicans and nationalists for near on 10 years now.

This is your moment, David. Do the right thing.

Friday, 11 April, 2003

False prophesy from the US

By Irelandclick.com

It is useful to remember at this time that United States governments have done very little for us or our peace process.

American people and some American politicians did a great deal, often sacrificing their own money, their own comfort and sometimes their own freedom for us.

American governments and their supporters were different. For many years it was considered politically correct to praise people like the Kennedy, Foley, Moynihan, Carey group until we realised that they gained more politically from their Irish connection than the Irish ever got from being associated with them.

The one American President who tried to make a difference and succeeded was Clinton. The rest were either indifferent or unable. American people are very different from American administrations – and the present situation makes it more and more necessary for us to recognise it.

The US State Department constantly opposed any real democratic progress here. Irish diplomatic representatives of both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael/Labour encouraged them to oppose almost every move made for a democratic solution, including an unremitting refusal of help for cruelly treated prisoners.

It was the hard-earned dollars and hard-won leisure hours of Americans with consciences who helped us and many other people in need of help. So now when we are approaching a period of self-determination we can afford to be realistic. We need not allow our respect for American people to seduce us into an acceptance of an American president.

He did nothing for us and has done a lot of damage in the world – the appalling deaths of so many in Iraq and elsewhere will be proof of how good his warlords are at the job he has assigned to them.

But there is little possibility that Bush will even begin to understand how great the damage is to his own people either. The building up of arms while millions of his own people are in poverty is the work of a dictator, not a democrat. And one of the most worrying consequences of what he has done will almost certainly be the strengthening of the argument that the European Union should now become a heavily armed super-power too.

Do we really believe that in face of the American administration's insistence that it can walk into any country anywhere and dictate the form of government and business it should have, the European Union will stand calmly by and allow it to happen in Europe?

The French? Certainly not. The Germans? Certainly not. So what will be their remedy for the growing determination of American administrations to govern the world? The obvious and traditional one: arm yourself to the nuclear teeth and become a super-power yourself. That, after all, is the lesson taught by American administrations during the phoney Cold War – and approved by most politicians and, to their shame, many church officials including Cardinal Basil Hume of London – we need a deterrent against the might of Russia.

So will Europeans come to believe that in the same way we need a deterrent against American administrations like that of Bush? Of course they will.

And then you will have what Bush and Blair and their industrial advisers seem to want, a stand-off between super-powers instead of cooperation between manageably-sized nations, which is what we wanted in the United Nations. Such a stand-off is not what we Europeans should want but if American administrations like that of the present Bush succeed, that is what we are going to get – and who will be able to resist a European "arm to the teeth to prevent aggression" argument then ?

However, Bush also fails to recognise, or perhaps even to begin to understand, that no political union is forever, not even his. The USSR broke up. The German Third Reich broke up. The British and other empires broke up. We Europeans are at this moment in unifying mode, after centuries of splitting as a way of life. We are in a movement which wants and works for union.

Nations and states ebb and flow like this, into unions and out of them again. There is no guarantee that the United States union is forever, if it is it will be the first of such unions in the history of the world to be permanent. Politicians keep unions intact as long as they can, they do not make them eternal. Which of the American states will be first to object to the squandering of their resources by a central administration in Washington which has neither the ability nor the willingness to govern for the good of all rather than the profit of some?

What causes revolution among people who are prosperous? The misuse of their tax money by an administration which is seen as wasteful and self-centred. That the United States will break apart bit by bit can be taken as certain – political unities always do eventually. It is a question of how and when.

The wantonness of Bush and his cronies will probably bring forward the time of the beginning of that break. And at least some Europeans will sigh with relief as American states more and more demand the liberty to take care of their own.

In this context we remember this – the coming together of nations and states to make power groups may well need and lead to wars of aggression, the break-up of powerful political unions may be acompanied by internal wars too.

What may bring a measure of stability is cooperation and constant adjustment of boundaries and alliances.

In such cases war may be at least containable if such a process is voluntary. War between immense power blocs is disastrous, perhaps finally so.

Bush does not realise that for some Europeans it may be a short step from forecasting the break up of his American unity to actually wishing for, and helping, it to happen.

Wednesday, 9 April, 2003

Anne Windsor (Princess Anne for royalists) on the run in Derry

By Pat Finucane Centre

Click here for photo's: http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=42043

Anne Windsor, daughter of the Queen of England, was forced to go on the run in Derry this morning. In the city to open the new library at the University of Ulster the Royal entourage were shocked to find themselves confronted with anti-war protesters carrying a large banner stating, "Save the Children of Iraq". Anne Windsor is patron of the Save the Children fund and Colonel - in-Chief of a number of British Army regiments. Protesters chanted ‘England take your princess back-save the children of Iraq’.

Heavy security surrounded the event with sharp-shooters on the roof of the new building. The security was not heavy enough however to stop a second banner getting smuggled into the Humanities and Social Science building which faces the new library. As the convoy arrived the second banner snaked its way out of a third floor window proclaiming " Books for Derry- Bombs for Baghdad." Security staff later kicked in the door of the third floor office breaking the door frame in the process. The PhD student who works in the office was then ordered to leave but refused.

As the VIP convoy left the University protesters raced to the front entrance and chased the convoy down the Rock Rd despite the best efforts of riot police who were caught off guard. The departure was less than gracious.

Tuesday, 8 April, 2003

Sectarian Attacks during Belfast Pro-war Rally

By Pat Finucane Centre

Pro-war demonstrators attacked a number of business premises and individuals during a pro-Bush and pro-war rally in Belfast city centre last night. Two Catholic pubs and a taxi company were targeted and passers-by were assaulted by a group who had marched from the loyalist Shankill area through the largely nationalist Castle St and King St area of the city. Passing vehicles were also attacked.

The 300 strong pro Bush and pro war rally had been organised by a senior member of the Unionist party, Sir John Gorman, a former British soldier. Ian Paisley, leader of the DUP, was pictured at the rally standing alongside a woman carrying a placard which bore the slogan, Bagdad, Basra, Crossmaglen? The apparent implication of the placard was to urge the British Army to ‘deal’ with republican areas of the north (Crossmaglen) in a similar way to Basra. The British Army require no such prompting since it has murdered innocent civilians here in Ireland for years and there is ample evidence that it is doing the same in Iraq.

Meanwhile a small group of loyalists, including members of the UDA, waved British flags and chanted anti-Catholic and pro war slogans on the fringes of the large anti-war protest at Hillsborough Castle organised by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the anti-war movement. There are also reports of UDA members and individuals associated with Combat 18 ‘trawling’ Belfast in cars looking for anti-war protesters who could be attacked. Combat 18 is an extreme right wing British fascist organisation with links to loyalist paramilitaries. The number 1and 8 in the alphabet refer to the initials AH or Adolf Hitler. Yesterday extreme loyalist websites were urging attacks on anti-war protesters.

Today (Tuesday) at approximately 1.45 pm riot police arrested a number of demonstrators who had sat down on one lane of the roadway outside Belfast city hall during a trade union rally against the presence of US President George Bush in Ireland. Protesters have complained about the behaviour of some of the riot police. In particular several witnesses have told the PFC that one officer dragged a young woman off the roadway by the hair. The number of the officer was 6277 according to a number of sources.

Tuesday, 8 April, 2003

Some nasty police brutality

Report from Belfast demonstration

By Steve - Indymedia Belfast
steve@gluaiseacht.org, http://ireland.indymedia.org

A protest, low four figure number, outside Belfast City Hall resulted in a number of arrests- 14 according to one senior police officer, 6 according to another, 11 at the last count of an activist doing legal support.

The protest began at about 13.30 and many people went onto the road and lay down, as a number of people dressed in white overalls and skull masks, carrying drums, arrived and began dancing in the street. There were huge numbers of mainstream media videoing, interviewing and taking pictures.

Some of the crowd remained on the footpath, while officers from Musgrave St. police station formed a line in case they attempted to join the protesters on the road- and in order to encircle the civil disobedients.

On previous occasions, the police had allowed road blocking to continue for an hour or so before moving in, but this time a very heavy prescence was deployed immediately. Cops in full riot gear formed a line in front of protesters and snatch squads began grabbing people apparently at random and dragging them away.

Several people were de-arrested, sometimes repeatedly. The police began throwing protesters they couldn't grab into the crowd behind who had linked arms and sat down.

The second time the snatch squads moved in, they were heavier, beating protesters with batons before dragging them off. They only stopped when a bag of red jam (brought for a separate street theatre action) was burst in the chaos and for a moment everyone thought it was blood.

After a tense standoff, lasting until at least 14.45, the line of riot cops moved back, to cheers. After a few minutes Caoimhe Butterly went forward to lift or move something on the ground near where the jam was spilled and two police immediately grabbed her, number 6277 dragging her by the hair.

Protesters who were snatched reported a high degree of intimidation. One who was shouting "You batoned me" was told he'd be hit again if he didn't shut up. A cop was seen drawing his baton and entering a van where arrestees were being held, but backed off after realising there were cameras on him.

Some cops became quite silly indeed, one claiming that a drumstick was a weapon, before breaking it ceremoniously and smugly throwing it on the ground like a playground bully.

After yet another tense standoff, the riot police moved off, to yet more cheers, and were replaced with the new "friendly" look PSNI. At all times the crowd remained peaceful, despite the atmosphere of fear and anger.

About 30 - 50 of the crowd moved on to Musgrave St. Police Stn to try to get information about those arrested. About 120 riot police with camera vans followed. A senior officer eventually came out and claimed not to know how many were arrested (he did venture that it was "a number"). About an hour later he revealed it was 14.

Meanwhile in Hillsborough, a mere 7 people made it through security but they managed to stage multiple die-ins in the town centre. According to people who were there, one woman was "shoved into the back of a van and driven off, we don't know where she is yet".

The BBC reported that the protest had been taken over by undesirable elements.

Tuesday, 8 April, 2003

Riot police bar protesters' way

By Suzanne Breen

Riot squad police with batons kept anti-war protesters from marching on President Bush in Hillsborough Castle, Co Down, last night. Several thousand people took part in the protest.

The vast majority marched past the spot where the main organisers, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU), had planned for the rally to be held and went further up the road to within half a mile of the village.

Some of the protesters shouted "SS RUC", "Shame! Shame!" and "Bush's boot boys!" at police.

Residents of the mainly unionist, middle-class village looked on in shock. Around 300 demonstrators remained at the platform where speakers from Sinn Féin, the SDLP, and the Women's Coalition were due to address the crowd.

Most of the protesters swept past, blowing whistles and beating drums. They were blocked from entering Hillsborough by dozens of riot police and rows of Land Rovers.

They shouted "Murderers!", "Terrorists!" and "Why don't you join the British army?" at the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Many officers were wearing balaclavas.

When a police officer attempted to address the crowd, urging them to disperse, he was drowned out by jeers and whistles.

Former civil rights leader Ms Bernadette McAliskey drew loud cheers from the crowd when she told the SDLP and Sinn Féin they shouldn't meet President Bush.

Sinn Féin chairman Mr Mitchel McLaughlin was booed when he tried to address the rally. Protesters, angry at his party's decision to meet the President, chanted "Shame!"

A man with a loud-hailer condemned the PSNI for protecting "Bombers Bush and Blair". He said the protesters were there "to show solidarity with the people of Iraq".

A west Belfast man with a flask distributed cups to his friends. "This is a Hillsborough tea-party," he said.

The crowd shouted, "George Bush we know you! Daddy was a killer too!". They sang, "We all live in a terrorist regime!" to the tune of "We all live in a yellow submarine!"

"F*** Bush" was written over most of the road signs into Hillsborough. On an estate agent's sign, advertising a luxurious new housing development, was painted "For Sale - Irish Peace Process".

Several busloads of protesters arrived from Dublin and the Border counties. One man waved a placard saying "Osama Bin Bush".

There were banners from Maynooth, Clonakilty and Donegal. Other banners said: "Brits out - of Iraq", "Irish sovereignty, Iraqi sovereignty - both violated", "Ulster Says - Not on our Turf" and "No to War Criminals in Belfast".

Many of the protesters criticised the ICTU's decision to allow the SDLP and Sinn Féin to address the rally. These parties had rejected demands by the Stop the War Coalition not to meet President Bush today.

One speaker, Ms Aine Fox, told the crowd: "Shame on the SDLP, Shame on Sinn Féin, Shame on the Women's Coalition."

Mr Peter Bunting of the ICTU defended the decision to allow the parties to address the rally.

"We are a broad coalition of diverse political views. We live in the real world. The parties are meeting Bush. That's real politics and it shouldn't mean they can't speak at this demonstration."

Mr Joe Higgins TD told the crowd President Bush and Mr Blair were using the Irish peace process as an alibi to cover the "bloody slaughter" in Iraq.

Monday, 7 April, 2003

Massive security as Bush, Blair face Iraq protests

Belfast war summit overshadows Irish peace talks

By RM Distribution

A war summit at Hillsborough Castle outside Belfast this evening involving US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair is being marked by thousands of protestors from the Irish anti-war movement.

Despite the involvement of the US administration in the Irish peace process, peace activists have been appalled by the holding of the summit on Irish soil as casualties mount in the U.S.-British invasion of Iraq.

President Bush is due to fly in on his Presidential Air Force One jet to Aldegrove Airport this evening to hold a show of strength with the British Prime Minister and to discuss a possible UN role in the new US-appointed authority to take over the governance of Iraq.

People from across the country have been travelling to Hillsborough Castle outside Belfast, where Mr Bush will be staying this evening, to voice their opposition to the war and demanding that it stop.

Five thousand Irish, along with thousands of others from England and Scotland, are expected to attend the protest, which is now getting underway in Hillsborough.

The peace process in the Middle East and Ireland are also on the agenda for the talks, which will variously involve US Secretary of State Colin Powell, senior British officials, Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, and the leaders of the North's pro-Agreement political parties.

With intensive behind-the-scenes negotiations continuing, the Irish and British governments are due to unveil a 'blueprint' document for the long-awaited full implementation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement this week.

But painstaking work to reach a deal to finally end British Direct Rule of the northern Six Counties could be overshadowed in the circus-like atmosphere at Hillsborough. Extraordinary security has been out place in the small country town, which has been sealed off from the public and media for the two days of Mr Bush's visit.

While Sinn Fein regards the engagement of US Administrations in the Irish Peace Process as positive and is opposed to the regime of Saddam Hussein, the party shares the opposition of the majority of the Irish people to the war and will be conveying this to both the British Prime Minister and the US President in meetings tomorrow.

Speaking this morning on Irish radio, Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams said it was inappropriate to hold such a summit where the peace process would be addressed "in the margins".

"We would be wrong not to point it out ... the insensitivity of having a war summit, of having a war summit which then discusses peace in the margins, of having a war summit which appears to be trying to use the Irish peace process as a stage or as a prop," Mr Adams said.

"We're for peace in Ireland, we're for peace in Iraq, we're for peace in the Middle East and I certainly will look for the opportunity to convey that when I speak to Mr Bush. I have no problem meeting him of course on the issue of peace in Ireland but I do see a contradiction in both the British and US position."

Mr Adams said believed a deal could still be done on Thursday but said his party needed to be reassured that there would be no further threats from unionists to bring down the power- sharing institutions.

"Let's see in the wake of the joint declaration and any other announcement that are made by the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister what the response is," he said.

'ISSUES STILL NOT CLOSED'

Among the elements of the Good Friday Agreement still not delivered by the British government almost five years since it was signed on April 10, 1998 include the demilitarisation of border areas, significant policing and justice reform, and measures on human rights, equality and the Irish language.

The stability and integrity of the North's political institutions also remain in doubt following numerous unionist walk-outs and boycotts.

A scheduled assembly election on May 29 means the time available for a deal to be reached has all but run to allow the institutions to be restored before the contentious Protestant marches of the summer.

Sinn Fein Chairperson Mitchel McLaughlin said it was too early to be optimistic about efforts to secure the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.

"I would not use the word optimism at this stage,"the Foyle Assembly member said. "However our negotiators remain very focused and very determined. Their focus has been on the outstanding issues from the March talks in Hillsborough.

"Quite clearly there remains issues which we have not as yet been able to close but it is very much a work in progress."

Mr McLaughlin will address a peace rally outside Hillsborough this evening.

The leader of the nationalist SDLP Mark Durkan also expressed disquiet about the war summit in Belfast being combined with discussions on the Irish peace process.

However, Mr Durkan confirmed that he would be leading his party into the round table discussion with US President George Bush, British Prime Minister Mr Tony Blair and the Taoiseach Mr Ahern on the peace process tomorrow.

Mr Durkan said: "What I'm uneasy about is this mixed summit - co-locating discussions about the war in Iraq with discussions about our peace process.... I am determined to take part in whatever talks there are about our situation but I'm not going to be dishonest or hypocritical enough to pretend that I do not have misgivings about the circumstances in which they are taking place," Mr Durkan said.

Ulster Unionists, meanwhile, were said to be considering a pro-war rally to demonstrate their loyalty to the British military.

"I think we can take a degree of pride that the leaders of the coalition that are seeking to liberate Iraq have decided to have their summit meeting here in Belfast," said UUP leader David Trimble. "I am sure they will receive a warm welcome from the people here."

Sunday, 6 April, 2003

Sinn Fein in Bush blockade

Sinn Fein activists will participate in an anti-war blockade at Hillsborough Castle this week in a bid to prevent Northern Ireland political leaders meeting US President George Bush.

The blockade is due to start tomorrow and will run into Tuesday.

Sinn Fein chairman Mitchel McLaughlin says the party will attend the protest.

"The engagement by the US in the peace process has been positive but we totally oppose the invasion of Iraq and we will convey our position to the British and US governments during our talks on Tuesday."

Paul O`Connor of the Pat Finucane Centre in Londonderry, which is normally broadly supportive of Sinn Fein, told the Sunday Tribune said they would be doing their best to ensure nationalist leaders did not attend the Bush meeting.

"Gerry Adams and Mark Durkan aren`t going to want to arrive on the back of a huge PSNI baton charge," he said.

"If they insist on attending this meeting, we will do our damnedest to ensure they can`t get there."

Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams said on Friday that he welcomed the news that George Bush was coming to Belfast for talks on Northern Ireland, the Mddle East and Iraq.

Saturday, 5 April, 2003

Bush running scared of anti-war movement

By Suzanne Breen

Stringent security arrangements are being put in place for Mr Bush's visit to the North. It is understood members of the US intelligence services have been in the North for several days making arrangements.

The large security apparatus in place in the North means a high-security visit by the US president is not as problematic as it would be in Britain.

There is intense speculation it will be Hillsborough Castle, Co Down, and that the president will spend Monday night there. President Clinton stayed in the Europa Hotel during a visit to the North but sources said this would be a huge security risk now.

US military aircraft have already landed at RAF Aldergrove.

Peace activists in the North have said Mr Bush is meeting Mr Blair in the North because he is "running scared" of the anti-war movement in Britain.

Ms Goretti Horgan of the anti-war coalition in Northern Ireland said: "Bush is coming here because Northern Ireland is the only bit of UK soil where it is safe for Blair to meet him. The anti-war movement is much larger in Britain. If he went there, there would be a massive explosion of anger on the streets."

She said details of the protests would be announced over the weekend. British government sources said Mr Bush and Mr Blair would meet an undisclosed location outside Belfast.

Pro-agreement sources said by visiting the North at such a significant time for the peace process, Mr Bush could receive valuable PR as a "man of peace". They said substantial pressure would be put on the Ulster Unionists and Sinn Fein to agree a deal.

Mr Oisín Kehoe of the anti-war coalition said: "It is outrageous Blair should presume to invite Bush here to pose as a man of peace. It would be even more disgusting if local leaders, who have claimed to be opposed to this imperial war, meet Bush and help him to be pictured as a man of peace.

"It would be collusion in Bush's war. We call in particular, on members of the SDLP and Sinn Fein, to tell their leaders now in loud, clear terms they must shun this man of violence during his visit."

The Green Party in the North also called for demonstrations against Mr Bush.

Saturday, 5 April, 2003

Protests over Bush NI visit

By BBC-News

Craigavon Bridge in Londonderry has been blocked by about 150 people protesting against the planned visit by George Bush to Northern Ireland. They were removed by police as they stopped traffic on the main route across the River Foyle into the city centre.

The US president will fly into the province on Monday for talks with Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The meeting will also cover the peace processes in the Middle East and Northern Ireland.

Irish premier Bertie Ahern is expected to join the talks on Northern Ireland, as are the leadership of the pro-Good Friday Agreement parties.

Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams said he was "pleased" by the news of the meeting at Hillsborough Castle, County Down, but the SDLP said it was "perturbed".

SDLP leader Mark Durkan said: "Hillsborough is being used for meetings to plan the further prosecution of the war in Iraq as well as to hold separate discussions on our own situation.

"I cannot disguise my personal unhappiness at this, given my own opposition to this war and my concern for the integrity of our own peace process."

Post-war Iraq administration

Ulster Unionist leader David Trimble urged Mr Bush and Mr Blair not to give "mixed messages which would only give succour to Irish republicans".

Anti-war protesters in Ireland are organising buses to stage a demonstration in Belfast to coincide with the talks.

Spokesman Richard Boyd Barrett said: "How can Bush come to Ireland talking about peace while his army is subjecting the people of Baghdad to a medieval siege with 21st century weaponry?"

The meeting is the third summit between Mr Bush and Mr Blair in recent weeks.

They met in the Azores ahead of the outbreak of war in Iraq, and Mr Blair travelled to the US for talks at Camp David last week.

At a time when some are accusing the president and the prime minister of being warmongers, it is obviously helpful for both leaders to stress their support for peace

Downing Street said the two previous meetings had been "very helpful in the development of our strategy on the military, diplomatic and humanitarian fronts". The men are expected to discuss the administration plans for post-war Iraq, which is a point of disagreement for the US and UK.

The UK has been pushing for the United Nations to be in charge of running the country, while the US has said it wants to retain control.

America's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, said on Friday the US and its war allies had given "life and blood" to the Iraq war, so the coalition "would have the leading role".

'Important week'

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the trip's primary focus would be Iraq.

"They will talk about the humanitarian relief efforts. They will talk about reconstruction. They will talk about the role of the United Nations."

Another of the summit's aims will be to kickstart the Northern Ireland peace process, ahead of the fifth anniversary of the signing of the Good Friday peace agreement.

Mr Blair and Mr Ahern are due to set out new proposals for a "make or break" implementation agreement later in the week.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "It is an important week in the Northern Ireland peace process.

"It will be useful to get the US president's support for our efforts to encourage the leaders to the acts of completion the prime minister has outlined."

Northern Ireland was an example "of how peace can be taken forward in seemingly impossible situations", he said.

Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2920819.stm

Friday, 21 March, 2003

Sinn Fein addresses in Dail (Irish Parliament) debate on Iraq war

By RM Distribution

The following speeches were made by Sinn Fein TDs in parliament during the debate on the war in Iraq on Thursday.

Speech by Caoimhghin O Caolain TD

It is a sad day. We meet against the backdrop of war unleashed and its, as yet, unknown consequences. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs seek to defend the indefensible. I appeal to those in the ranks of Fianna Fail for whom this motion is a clear betrayal of fundamental principles to take courage from the lead of those Labour Members of Parliament in Britain who stood against their party leader's position and intent. I urge them to vote today with their conscience.

No argument of principle has been advanced by the Government, least of all by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to justify the continued provision of Shannon to the US military machine now at war with Iraq.

We are offered instead the entirely disingenuous argument that stopovers and overflights by US military aircraft have always been facilitated. The Taoiseach even cited use of landing facilities by US military planes during the Vietnam War. Has he made any judgement of the rights or wrongs of that facilitation? Has he given our role at that time any assessment in the light of all we now know of that appalling war in South-East Asia? Does the Taoiseach believe that Ireland's facilitation of the US military machine during the Vietnam war, when chemical weapons such as Agent Orange and napalm were unleashed on the civilian population of that country, was right or wrong? It is conservatively estimated that over 2 million people died in that war. This is hardly a glorious precedent to cite in again justifying Ireland's facilitation of the US military on route to war.

The Taoiseach has also attempted to create a smokescreen by stating that France and Germany, which are opposed to the US-British axis of war, are facilitating overflights and landings. These countries are members of the NATO military alliance - this State is not. Austria is a neutral state and it will not allow overflights. According to the Taoiseach - it is repeatedly affirmed - we have a policy of military neutrality. What exactly does that mean?

The Government has repeatedly reiterated its commitment to Resolution 1441. However, when the United States and Britain effectively tore up that resolution this Government just sat and watched. This is a continuation of the pathetic and shameful stance of the Irish Government, which has squandered a real opportunity to assert the independence and integrity of small nations, and which, in its position on the UN Security Council, wasted a trust placed in it by small and neutral countries. It sided instead with the powerful - with might - and ignored the wishes of the Irish people and its duty to play a pivotal role for dialogue, negotiation and peace on the international stage.

Has our history, distant and contemporary, taught this Government anything? Does the Taoiseach believe that this war is about freeing the Iraqi people? If so, he clearly knows little of the history of Iraq and the Middle East. In his address this morning, the Taoiseach stated that: "The provision of facilities does not make Ireland a member of a military coalition nor does anybody regard us as such."

The Taoiseach emphasised the final point. I counter that claim and say that the Taoiseach is wrong. I quote from President Bush's war declaration when he stated: "More than 35 countries are giving crucial support, from the use of naval and air bases to help with intelligence and logistics to the deployment of combat units. Every nation in this coalition has chosen to bear the duty and share the honour of serving in our common defence."

The Taoiseach's claim that nobody views us as such clearly holds no weight when President Bush himself affirms that the Government's participation and support puts it firmly among those in the coalition. I urge support for the amendments as tabled by my colleagues in the House.

Speech by Aengus O Snodaigh TD

With this motion the Government is committing itself to supporting and facilitating an unjust and illegal war. It is an act of moral and political cowardice destroying the last semblance of this State's policy of neutrality, and for what? A few crooked dollars or perhaps even the promise of those dollars.

In selling its soul, the Government must accept the responsibility that goes with this act of war against the Iraqi people. The Government must accept that it has become culpable in the deaths of Iraqi children, women and hundreds of thousands of other uninvolved civilians who will be part of the US and British war's collateral damage.

The Government's actions, in allowing nearly 50,000 US troops and their munitions onto Irish soil or across our airspace, is not only an act of war but it is in total contravention of the Hague Convention respecting the rights and duty of neutral states.

On that issue, I fail to understand the logic behind the Taoiseach's statement that to withdraw these facilities even at this late stage would be regarded as a hostile act. How can it be a hostile act if, for once, Ireland proclaims its policy of neutrality? How can it be a hostile act for us to carry out our duty as a State as per Article 5 of the Hague Convention or for Ireland to ask the US, and the other belligerents, to respect our neutrality and act in accordance with Article 2 of the convention?

For the benefit of the Deputies opposite who may not have read that document, or even understood it, it states: "Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of either munitions of war or supplies across the territory of a neutral power".

I also draw the attention of the Minister and the Deputies opposite to Article 10 which states: "The fact of a neutral power resisting, even by force, attempts to violate its neutrality cannot be regarded as a hostile act". It is strange that Austria, Switzerland or other neutral states have not been labelled hostile for doing what this State should have done but, unlike this Government, they are not crawlers. Their Governments have a backbone and they are willing to act in accordance with their neutral policy.

I urge the Deputies on the opposite side of the House to stand up and be counted, oppose Ireland becoming complicit in this war, destabilising this region and undermining the United Nations. I urge the Minister and the Taoiseach to come clean about the sleeveen deal he has agreed with the axis of war. How was his backing for war bought? What promises did he get, and what grovelling will he have to do in the future for those promises to be delivered?

Wednesday-Friday, 19-21 March, 2003

Neutrality becomes Irish casualty of Iraq war

U.S. refuelling, overflights linked to investment

By RM Distribution

A historic shift in Irish foreign affairs policy has seen the country move away from its support of the UN in favour of an unspoken alliance with the US and Britain.

On Thursday, the governing Fianna Fail/Progressive Democrats coalition won a debate by 77 votes to 60 on a motion that will allow Shannon Airport and Irish airspace to continue to be used by US military forces despite the lack of a UN mandate for its war on Iraq.

The vote has all but ended the government's pretensions to neutrality and claims by Irish Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, that the use of Shannon was in support of a possible UN-mandated action.

Their was little attempt to disguise the move as anything other than self-serving and tawdry. In their speeches, leading Government figures repeatedly emphasised that Ireland's national interest was best served by allowing the Americans to continue to use refuelling facilities at Shannon and made no reference to the need to depose Saddam Hussein.

Ahern specifically stated that it was in Ireland's selfish economic interest to continue to provide support for the war and not to engage in a "hostile" action against the US.

However, the Irish government has continued to insist that the move does not affect their view of Irish neutrality, which they see as a policy of national self-interest rather than one of military non-alignment.

"Hard choices must be made," Irish foreign affairs Minister Brian Cowan. He defined Irish neutrality thus: "the core of our neutrality ... lies in independence of judgment - in being able to make up our own minds about what is right for Ireland. That is the question facing all of us."

He insisted that "a very complex set of circumstances" pertained, including "the value of international friendships and the expectations that come with those friendships".

The motion was passed despite a united opposition. A handful of Fine Gael TDs and one Labour party TD did not vote or were absent.

A constitutional challange to the government's position is likely, despite the claim of the Attorney General that the opening of facilities at Shannon Airport to the US does nor constitute "participation in a war" within the meaning of Article 28 of the Irish Constitution.

Article 29 of the Constitution also forbids the Irish government from breaching international law. Taoiseach Bertie Ahern insisted that, regardless of the legality of the conflict in Iraq, "there is no generally recognised principle of international law that would require Ireland to now withdraw those permissions and facilities".

He also pointed to the use by the US of Shannon in the US war on Vietnam as a precedent for its use in the current conflict.

OPPOSITION ANGER

Fine Gael accused the Government of "collaboration" in the invasion of Iraq by allowing the use of Shannon while at the same time insisting it is not participating in the war.

The party's leader, Mr Enda Kenny, said that the Government "cannot uphold the primacy and legitimacy of the United Nations and agree to provide facilities in a war it has not mandated".

Shannon Airport's future "will not be built on a war economy" and the last time a war contributed to its economy was 12 years ago, Mr Kenny said. Shannon would be "a hell of a sight better off" if the Government implemented its spatial strategy and regional development plans and put a decent package in place for Shannon, which had been let down over the years by the government.

"We are not the 52nd state of the US. We are a free nation and as a free nation with high educational standards, a strong work ethic, and a favourable investment climate, we have attracted the best US corporations to set up here and will continue to do so without tainting our foreign policy and our international stance by a cap-tipping fearfulness that expression of difference might spell an end to such investment."

'OPPORTUNITY SQUANDERED'

Sinn Fein's Caoimhghin O Caolain called on the Taoiseach to explain exactly the meaning of his stated policy of military neutrality.

He said the Irish Government had "squandered a real opportunity to assert the independence and integrity of small nations, and which, in its position on the UN Security Council, wasted a trust placed in it by small and neutral countries.

"It sided instead with the powerful - with might - and ignored the wishes of the Irish people and its duty to play a pivotal role for dialogue, negotiation and peace on the international stage."

Sinn Fein spokesperson on International Affairs, Aengus O Snodaigh TD said that the Government was "supporting and facilitating an unjust and illegal war".

It was an act of "moral and political cowardice" for which the Government was "selling its soul" for a few "crooked dollars", he said.

Poimting to the Hague Convention on war, O Snodaigh said he failed to understand the logic behind the Taoiseach's statement that to withdraw these facilities even at this late stage would be regarded as a hostile act.

"It is strange that Austria, Switzerland or other neutral states have not been labelled hostile for doing what this State should have done but, unlike this Government, they are not crawlers. Their Governments have a backbone and they are willing to act in accordance with their neutral policy.

"I urge the Deputies on the opposite side of the House to stand up and be counted, oppose Ireland becoming complicit in this war, destabilising this region and undermining the United Nations. I urge the Minister and the Taoiseach to come clean about the sleeveen deal he has agreed with the axis of war. How was his backing for war bought? What promises did he get, and what grovelling will he have to do in the future for those promises to be delivered?"

Wednesday, 19 March, 2003

Bloody Sunday Para leads troops into battle

By Pat Finucane Centre

As British troops prepare to invade Iraq it is only appropriate to remind PFC subscribers of some aspects of the career of the most senior British military officer in command of British forces in the Gulf, General Sir Mike Jackson.

According to Jackson’s written statement to the Bloody Sunday Tribunal:

He attended Sandhurst Military Academy in 1962/63 and joined the Intelligence Corps in 1963. Later he was seconded to the Parachute Regiment which he then joined on a permanent basis in late 1970. Jackson was then posted to the notorious Palace Barracks in Holywood Co Down, centre of numerous allegations of torture of internees after the introduction of internment in August 1971. Jackson took over as Adjutant of the 1st Battalion of the Parachute Regiment in the Spring/Summer of 1971.

According to the Sunday Times of 17 October 1971,

Internees were "…flown by helicopter to an unknown destination-in fact, Palace Barracks. During the period of their interrogation, they were continuously hooded, barefoot, dressed only in an over large boiler suit, and spreadeagled against a wall-leaning on their fingertips like the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle. The only sound that filled the room was a high pitched throb, which the detainees usually liken to an air compressor. The noise literally drove them out of their minds…"

The Sunday Times went on to claim that the "interrogation at Palace Barracks was organised, as far as we were able to ascertain, by men from the Joint Services Interrogation Centre. The actual questioning appears to have been carried out by members of the RUC Special Branch."

On October 24 1971 the Sunday Times carried a further story on the allegations that torture was widespread at Palace Barracks. The story claimed the "British Army’s involvement seems to go beyond simply being the centre’s landlord." Soldiers were involved in the actual torture of detainees according to witnesses. In response 425 Catholic priests, 80% of the clergy working in the North, released an unprecedented statement condemning the "brutality, physical and mental torture and psychological pressures inflicted on men" arrested during the internment swoops. The priests went on to single out the "barbarities…still being inflicted on innocent people…at Palace Military Barracks, Holywood…"

In 1978 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the so-called five techniques used in interrogation, usually by RUC Special Branch officers trained by the British Army, constituted inhumane and degrading treatment in breach of Article 3. There is no evidence to suggest that Mike Jackson was involved in the torture practised at Palace Barracks. He was a senior officer there at the time the torture occurred.

Bloody Sunday

On January 30 1972, Bloody Sunday, Jackson describes his own role as that of a ‘gofer’ for the Para commander on the ground, Lt Col Derek Wilford. "I was one of the group of people around Derek Wilford and that is where my memory properly kicks in." Jackson describes moving into Rossville St and having the impression of "coming under fire." In his statement to the present inquiry Jackson claims that the Support Company "had become involved in a firefight." He adds, "I have absolutely no reason to suppose that any of 1PARA would have been using their weapons had there not been incoming rounds." Extraordinarily Jackson maintains that, though surrounded by soldiers apparently coming under fire, he "… did not see any soldiers firing their weapons."

Following the murder of 14 men and boys and the attempted murder of many more Jackson admits that he would have been "involved in the administration of the statement taking exercise." In anticipation of the overwhelming evidence that there was then a cover-up Jackson states that, "…there is absolutely no question of briefing soldiers as to what they should say. Such a suggestion is absolutely outrageous." Indeed.

Within hours of Bloody Sunday the British Army put out a statement claiming that a number of the victims were on the wanted list, others had been carrying weapons while yet others had nail bombs. General Sir Mike Jackson, Commander of British forces in the Gulf, was the Unit Press Officer in Derry that day though the statement was released at a more senior level within the chain of command.

Official documents supplied to the Tribunal quote Jackson as describing the Parachute Regiment’s activities on the day as ‘first rate’. Other comments attributed to Jackson that suggest that the Paras should go in "hard and ready" and "inflict casualties" give a "misleading impression" according to his recent statement. Jackson’s recollections of the events of Bloody Sunday will come under close scrutiny when he gives evidence to the Saville Tribunal

More recently Jackson was the most senior British Army officer sitting on the Army Board which ruled that the two soldiers convicted of the murder of 18 year old Peter Mc Bride were fit to continue serving in the British Army. They also are now serving in the Gulf.

Monday-Tuesday, 17-18 March, 2003

Ahern aligns with Bush, Blair in Iraq war

Dail recalled for debate on neutrality

By RM Distribution

Irish neutrality could be finally scrapped this week as the Dublin government appears ready to support the US/British war against Iraq without a mandate from the United Nations.

In a radical departure for Irish foreign policy, the increasingly presidential Irish Prime Minister, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, is ready to position the 26 Counties as one of the 'Atlantic' powers in the growing international crisis.

The Dublin government is expected to allow the United States to use Irish airports and airspace and will defend its decision by emphasising Irish loyalty to Washington and London over Paris and Berlin.

A debate in the Dublin parliament tomorrow [Thursday] could see strong attacks on the coalition government, which is under immense pressure over its involvement in the Middle East war.

The wording of the parliamentary motion has not yet been finalised, but it is expected to play down the significance of the policy shift and not formally abandon neutrality. The motion, which is being prepared by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, will regret the failure of the United Nations to reach a common position on the crisis.

A number of backbenches in the governing Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrat parties are reserving their position until they see the wording of the motion, which is being prepared by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen.

Sinn Fein spokesperson on International Affairs Aengus O Snodaigh TD asked all parties to allow a free vote on the issue.

He accused the government of being "in hiding" as government ministers refused to comment over the issue while they remained abroad on St Patrick's Day duties. He also said he had received information to indicate that Baldonnel Aerodrome near Dublin was also being used by the US military as a staging-post in the war on Iraq beyond the admitted use of Shannon Airport in the west of Ireland.

"We need to establish the full extent of this government's neutrality violations through full public disclosure, not ad-hoc information squeezed out of a secretive Government. What we need is a public audit on the state of Irish neutrality," Mr O Snodaigh said.

Welcoming the recall of the Dail for a debate on the war, Mr O Snodaigh said it was "nonetheless regrettable that the Taoiseach has only now at this very late stage afforded the elected representatives of the people a proper opportunity to debate the issue.

"Ireland through the use of Shannon Airport and Baldonnel Aerodrome have been complicit in the build up to this war without even the fig leaf of a UN mandate and in direct contravention of our duties as a neutral state. And because of Bertie Ahern's disregard for the views of the people and the absolute arrogance of his Government Ireland will be partially responsible for the untold suffering that will be visited upon the civilian population of Iraq over the coming weeks.

"In many ways this debate has come too late as the bulk of the weapons of war have already arrived at their destination. However if the Taoiseach has any credibility at all left he must allow his party a free vote on the issue -- indeed I would call on all parties to allow for a free vote so that the Taoiseach can be left in no doubt as to the feelings of the people of this state as represented by their public representatives regardless of party affiliation."

Thursday, 27 February, 2003

British collusion Brigadier posted to the Gulf

By Laura Friel

In the late 1980's and 1990's, Kerr was the commanding officer of the Force Research Unit, one of the most secret units within the British army. During this period the British government reorganised, rearmed and redeployed unionist paramilitaries (in the North of Ireland). Behind the smokescreen of taking the war to the IRA' the British state colluded in the murder and attempted murder of unarmed republicans, political activists, their families, catholic civilians and even defence lawyers, Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson. The complete cynicism with which the British state is prepared to operate is clear by this final irony. It is believed that Kerr's role in the Gulf will involve the post war prosecution of key members of Saddam's regime for crimes against humanity.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair was recently described by one of his own backbench MP's as the true heir to Margaret Thatcher. Diane Abbot was commenting on her party leader's enthusiasm for America's pending imperialist adventure in the Middle East but this week's events concerning Britain's dirty war in Ireland gives substance to Abbot's words beyond the original observation.

In the late 20th Century, as the then British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher personally presided over the activities of one of the most secret units within the British army. Through the operation of the covert Force Research Unit the British state engaged in one of the most serious crimes of any body politic, commissioning the murder of citizens within its own jurisdiction.

According to former FRU operatives all details of the covert unit's activities, including assassinations, were passed to Margaret Thatcher and the British Cabinet during her premiership. Amongst around 200 people believed to have been killed as a direct result of British collusion with loyalist paramilitaries is Belfast defence lawyer Pat Finucane.

In the early 21st Century the current British Prime Minister Tony Blair has presided over the ensuing cover up. Instead of pursuing a clear break with a discredited past, rather than signalling a new beginning, Tony Blair has chosen to carry the mantle of a former Tory Prime Minister and utilise rather than dismantle some of the most dangerous, anti democratic forces within the British state.

Last week London Metropolitan police chief John Stevens announced that he was preparing papers for the Director of Public Prosecution regarding Brigadier Kerr and up to 20 former and serving RUC/PSNI officers and British soldiers concerning evidence of collusion in the killing of Irish citizens in the north.

But even as he announced the pending prosecution cases Stevens knew it would be unlikely to be brought to trail. He had played his part, (14 years of so called investigations and not a single successful prosecution) Stevens told the media but it would be up to the DPP and Attorney General to decide whether to charge Brigadier Kerr and the others.

In the event the British Ministry of Defence decided to thwart even the pretence of due process by posting the Brigadier to the Middle East within days of Stevens' announcement. Until recently Kerr had been serving in one of the most senior diplomatic roles available to a serving British soldier as the British government's military attache in Beijing.

With predictable arrogance a spokesperson from the British MOD dismissed criticism about the posting. "As far as I'm concerned Brigadier Kerr is a senior serving officer and he will be deployed as we see fit," he said.

Shifting responsibility for the decision back to John Stevens, the MOD spokesperson continued, "we do not see how is current posting is relevant to the Stevens inquiry. It would only be relevant if the police had said that Brigadier Kerr should remain in the country. That wasn't said."

"This posting makes Kerr untouchable," a senior military source told a Scottish newspaper, "He is not going to be dragged away from essential war work in an operational theatre to talk to the police or prosecutors. Kerr has landed on his feet with this posting. It shows that the whole of the Stevens inquiry is nothing but a whitewash. He is never is going to end up in a court of law."

"This posting keeps him safe and protects those in the army who are above him, and those politicians who were in power when the FRU was carrying on these activities in Ulster, from ever having to answer nasty questions that might arise through him being arrested or charged," said the British military source.

At the height of the collusion controversy, in the late 1980's and 1990's, Kerr was the commanding officer of the Force Research Unit, one of the most secret units within the British army. During this period the British government reorganised, rearmed and redeployed unionist paramilitaries. Through a network of agents, Gordon Kerr and his FRU operatives, selected targets, provided intelligence and organised assassinations.

Behind the smokescreen of taking the war to the IRA' the British state colluded in the murder and attempted murder of unarmed republicans, political activists, the families, including children and pensioners, of known republicans and Sinn Fein politicians, catholic civilians and even defence lawyers, Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson.

Kerr's ruthless methods extended even beyond those who the British state identified as its enemies. An illustration of the depths to which Kerr was prepared to descend is the killing of Margaret Perry. A FRU agent working within the IRA believed a girl with whom he was having a relationship had discovered he was working as an informer.

Fearing exposure Greg Burns contacted his FRU handlers and informed them his position, and that of two close associates also acting as informers, had been compromised. FRU agents are promised eresettlement' packages if their cover is blown but Kerr refused and instructed Burns to get himself out of the mess.

The refusal meant only one thing and Kerr was aware that Burns' next move would be to murder Margaret Perry. Burns' associates Aidan Starrs and Johnny Dignam, lured Margaret into travelling across the border to evisit' her lover who had checked himself into a hospital. Margaret Perry was driven to a forest where she was strangled and beaten to death. Her body was discovered in June 1992. Burns, Starr and Dignam were executed by the IRA a short time later.

Last December Kerr was interviewed by the Stevens team inquiry into the killing of Belfast defence lawyer Pat Finucane. Following the interview Stevens indicated that he had gathered significant evidence to charge Kerr along with others. But even before Kerr's posting to the Gulf few believed he would ever be brought to trail.

"This latest development shows clearly that the [British] government not only supports Kerr but will protect him should he need protection from possible prosecution," said Pat Finucane's son Michael.

"I have no confidence in John Stevens' investigation ever producing a successful prosecution, certainly not against a [British] army brigadier," said Michael, now a Dublin solicitor.

"The circumstances surrounding the murder of my father clearly show British army and British government collusion in the murder. It is clear that this policy of collusion continues even to this day, except that instead of colluding with loyalists, the British army and government are colluding with each other to ensure that the matter stays covered up."

The complete cynicism with which the British state is prepared to operate is clear by this final irony. It is believed that Kerr's role in the Gulf will involve the post war prosecution of key members of Saddam's regime for crimes against humanity. Tony Blair, Maggie Thatcher, it seems a British Prime Minister is a British Prime Minister is a British Prime Minister.

Tuesday, 18 February, 2003

Blair's popularity plummets

By Alan Travis and Ian Black in Brussels, Guardian/UK

The rift between Tony Blair and the British public over war against Iraq is today confirmed by an opinion poll which shows for the first time that a clear majority of British voters now oppose a military attack.

The survey, taken over the weekend, reveals that Mr Blair has sustained significant political damage from the debate over Iraq. His personal rating has dropped through the floor to minus 20 points, the lowest level since the petrol crisis two and a half years ago.

This month's Guardian/ICM* poll also shows that at least one person from 1.25 million households in Britain went on Saturday's anti-war march in London, confirming estimates that between one million and two million people went on the march.

The poll shows it is the prime minister's personal standing rather than the Labour party which has suffered the wrath of anti-war voters. Labour's standing is down four points from 43% last month to 39% this month but the government still maintains a healthy eight-point lead over the Conservatives.

Opposition to the war has risen five points in the past month to 52%, with support for the war falling to 29%, the lowest level since the Guardian's tracker poll started last August.

Opposition is much stronger among women than men, with 59% of women saying they disapprove of a military attack on Iraq. Half of Conservative voters now clearly oppose the war but more Labour voters - 44% - still say they approve of military action than the 38% who are opposed.

Mr Blair faced further difficulties at the EU emergency summit in Brussels last night when Jacques Chirac insisted that France would veto a second UN resolution to explicitly authorize military action.

"There is no need for a second resolution today, which France would have no choice but to oppose," Mr Chirac said.

Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, appeared to be moving to the government's fallback position by repeating that though a new UN resolution was desirable, 1441 "gives us the authority we need".

Mr Blair, evidently irritated by France, Germany and others seeking to drag the process out, stuck to his guns, saying: "I think most people understand... if that [disarming] cannot be done peacefully, it must be done by force. That's why we require a timetable."

Earlier yesterday Mr Straw told the BBC that the government had to "take account of public opinion" and said that if a large part of the population opposes military action, it would be "very difficult indeed in those circumstances".

Later, his mood appeared to have hardened. "I don't think all the people on that demonstration - unquestionably the largest we've seen in my lifetime in the UK - would say that they represented alone British public opinion, but they certainly represented a very important element of it.

"But talking to people I know on that demonstration, some said to me that they were opposed to military action in any circumstances, others said they were worried about military action being taken prematurely but accept that military action may be necessary as a last resort - and that is the position of the British government."

In the French capital, meanwhile, a new poll showed that French public opinion had hardened against going to war. Eighty-seven percent were against military action, up from 77% six weeks ago, the Ipsos agency found in a poll for France 2 television conducted on Saturday.

* ICM interviewed 1,003 adults between February 14 and 16. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results weighted to the profile of all adults.

Sunday, 16 February, 2003

Millions give dramatic rebuff to US war plans

By Agence France Press

Weekend protests worldwide by millions of anti-war activists delivered a stinging rebuke to Washington and its allies on their hard-line advance towards war.

The unprecedented wave of demonstrations, involving eight million to 11.5 million people, according to various estimates, further clouded US war plans a day after they suffered a diplomatic setback at the United Nations.

Significantly, some of the biggest rallies were held in countries which have strongly supported the pledge by US President George W. Bush to use force if necessary to strip Iraq of suspected weapons of mass destruction.

In Sydney Sunday, Prime Minister John Howard was greeted upon his return from a nine-day trip that took him to the United States and Britain by the largest anti-war demonstration ever seen in Australia.

An estimated 250,000 people filled the streets of the antipodean nation's largest city, following on from demonstrations that began Friday in Melbourne and cropped up from Brisbane to Canberra.

A crowd estimated by organizers to be three million-strong marched through Rome to condemn Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's backing of Washington. More than five million people turned out in separate demonstrations in Spain, protest leaders said.

Even Britain, the staunchest US ally, saw at least 750,000 people tramp through London in the country's biggest protest ever to give their government's stance the thumbs down. Organizers put the figure at more than two million.

"If we don't stand up and say no to Bush, he thinks he can do what he likes because he's got the most powerful military and economy in the world," said Nick Lobnitz, a 24-year-old Briton.

Demonstrators turned out in droves Saturday in New York, where organizers expected more than 100,000 people as the focal point of the largest display so far of US public opposition to an attack on Iraq.

The White House, which appears to have been rattled by the surge in resistance to its calls for quick military action, was low key in its response to Saturday's massive display of pacifist feeling.

"The president is a strong advocate of freedom and democracy, and one of the democratic values that we hold dear is the right of the people to peaceably assemble to express their views," said Jeanie Mamo, a spokeswoman.

Mamo also stressed that Bush views the military option in Iraq "as a last resort. He still hopes for a peaceful resolution, and that is up to (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein."

There were other signs the US march toward war was losing steam, at least for the moment, after most members of the UN Security Council urged Friday that UN weapons inspectors be given more time to do their work in Iraq.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair sounded a conciliatory note Saturday after a relatively upbeat report issued by chief UN arms inspector Hans Blix on Iraqi cooperation in his search for chemical and biological arms.

"There will be more time given to inspections," and Blix will report back to the Security Council on February 28, Blair told a Labour Party conference in Scotland. But he added the crisis cannot be allowed to drag on forever.

A senior diplomat at the United Nations in New York said an early Security Council vote on a resolution to authorize the use of force against Iraq looked unlikely after Friday's show of support for more inspections.

The diplomat, who asked not to be named, acknowledged the anti-war camp was likely to gain more support at an open council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, when non-members will be allowed to take the floor.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and the president of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, also voiced their support for UN weapons inspectors to continue their work in Iraq.

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who backed Bush in the war in Afghanistan, told him by telephone Friday that a strike against Iraq is "not a good option," officials in Islamabad said Saturday.

From Baghdad, papal envoy Cardinal Roger Etchegaray told Italian television after a two-hour meeting with Saddam that the Iraqi leader felt "more relieved" after Friday's report by the UN disarmament inspectors.

"He is doing everything to avoid war," said Etchegaray, who brought Saddam a personal message from Pope John Paul II. "He is the first to be concerned. He is the first to be mobilizing all his energies to avoid war."

Saddam's deputy prime minister Tareq Aziz, a Christian, spent Saturday morning in Assisi praying at the tomb of St Francis as part of a peace ceremony organized by an Italian Catholic Foundation outside the anti-war march.

Arab foreign ministers met in Cairo to discuss the crisis. Egypt said an extraordinary Arab summit on Iraq and the Palestinian question would be held at the Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh in the week beginning February 22.

The United States has already deployed some 150,000 troops in the Gulf region in anticipation of a move against Iraq but is still trying to win the approval of Turkey to use its soil to mount a northern front.

Turkey is seeking NATO's assistance to prepare for possible reprisals by Iraq. But France, Belgium and Germany sparked a crisis within the alliance by blocking such help until the issue of a war against Baghdad was decided.

Diplomats in Brussels said NATO ambassadors should reach a compromise in the dispute by Tuesday.

Saturday, 15 February, 2003

The Case Against War

Tales to Frighten Children

By Robert Fisk, www.counterpunch.org

In the end, I think we are just tired of being lied to. Tired of being talked down to, of being bombarded with Second World War jingoism and scare stories and false information and student essays dressed up as "intelligence". We are sick of being insulted by little men, by Tony Blair and Jack Straw and the likes of George Bush and his cabal of neo-conservative henchmen who have plotted for years to change the map of the Middle East to their advantage.

No wonder, then, that Hans Blix's blunt refutation of America's "intelligence" at the UN yesterday warmed so many hearts. Suddenly, the Hans Blixes of this world could show up the Americans for the untrustworthy "allies" they have become.

The British don't like Hussein any more than they liked Nasser. But millions of Britons remember, as Blair does not, the Second World War; they are not conned by childish parables of Hitler, Churchill, Chamberlain and appeasement. They do not like being lectured and whined at by men whose experience of war is Hollywood and television.

Still less do they wish to embark on endless wars with a Texas governor-executioner who dodged the Vietnam draft and who, with his oil buddies, is now sending America's poor to destroy a Muslim nation that has nothing at all to do with the crimes against humanity of 11 September. Jack Straw, the public school Trot-turned-warrior, ignores all this, with Blair. He brays at us about the dangers of nuclear weapons that Iraq does not have, of the torture and aggression of a dictatorship that America and Britain sustained when Saddam was "one of ours". But he and Blair cannot discuss the dark political agenda behind George Bush's government, nor the "sinister men" (the words of a very senior UN official) around the President.

Those who oppose war are not cowards. Brits rather like fighting; they've biffed Arabs, Afghans, Muslims, Nazis, Italian Fascists and Japanese imperialists for generations, Iraqis included--though we play down the RAF's use of gas on Kurdish rebels in the 1930s. But when the British are asked to go to war, patriotism is not enough. Faced with the horror stories, Britons--and many Americans--are a lot braver than Blair and Bush. They do not like, as Thomas More told Cromwell in A Man for All Seasons, tales to frighten children.

Perhaps Henry VIII's exasperation in that play better expresses the British view of Blair and Bush: "Do they take me for a simpleton?" The British, like other Europeans, are an educated people. Ironically, their opposition to this obscene war may make them feel more, not less, European.

Palestine has much to do with it. Brits have no love for Arabs but they smell injustice fast enough and are outraged at the colonial war being used to crush the Palestinians by a nation that is now in effect running US policy in the Middle East. We are told that our invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict--a burning, fearsome wound to which Bush devoted just 18 words in his meretricious State of the Union speech--but even Blair can't get away with that one; hence his "conference" for Palestinian reform at which the Palestinians had to take part via video-link because Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, refused to let them travel to London.

So much for Blair's influence over Washington--the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, "regretted" that he couldn't persuade Sharon to change his mind. But at least one has to acknowledge that Sharon--war criminal though he may be for the 1982 Sabra and Chatila massacres--treated Blair with the contempt he deserves. Nor can the Americans hide the link between Iraq and Israel and Palestine. In his devious address to the UN Security Council last week, Powell linked the three when he complained that Hamas, whose suicide bombings so cruelly afflict Israelis, keeps an office in Baghdad.

Just as he told us about the mysterious al-Qa'ida men who support violence in Chechnya and in the "Pankisi gorge". This was America's way of giving Vladimir Putin a free hand again in his campaign of rape and murder against the Chechens, just as Bush's odd remark to the UN General Assembly last 12 September about the need to protect Iraq's Turkomans only becomes clear when one realises that Turkomans make up two thirds of the population of Kirkuk, one of Iraq's largest oil fields.

The men driving Bush to war are mostly former or still active pro-Israeli lobbyists. For years, they have advocated destroying the most powerful Arab nation. Richard Perle, one of Bush's most influential advisers, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton and Donald Rumsfeld were all campaigning for the overthrow of Iraq long before George W Bush was elected--if he was elected--US President. And they weren't doing so for the benefit of Americans or Britons. A 1996 report, A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm ( http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm ) called for war on Iraq. It was written not for the US but for the incoming Israeli Likud prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and produced by a group headed by--yes, Richard Perle. The destruction of Iraq will, of course, protect Israel's monopoly of nuclear weapons and allow it to defeat the Palestinians and impose whatever colonial settlement Sharon has in store.

Although Bush and Blair dare not discuss this with us--a war for Israel is not going to have our boys lining up at the recruiting offices--Jewish American leaders talk about the advantages of an Iraqi war with enthusiasm. Indeed, those very courageous Jewish American groups who so bravely oppose this madness have been the first to point out how pro-Israeli organisations foresee Iraq not only as a new source of oil but of water, too; why should canals not link the Tigris river to the parched Levant? No wonder, then, that any discussion of this topic must be censored, as Professor Eliot Cohen, of Johns Hopkins University, tried to do in the Wall Street Journal the day after Powell's UN speech. Cohen suggested that European nations' objections to the war might--yet again--be ascribed to "anti-Semitism of a type long thought dead in the West, a loathing that ascribes to Jews a malignant intent." This nonsense, it must be said, is opposed by many Israeli intellectuals who, like Uri Avnery, argue that an Iraq war will leave Israel with even more Arab enemies, especially if Iraq attacks Israel and Sharon then joins the US battle against the Arabs.

The slur of "anti-Semitism" also lies behind Rumsfeld's snotty remarks about "old Europe". He was talking about the "old" Germany of Nazism and the "old" France of collaboration. But the France and Germany that oppose this war are the "new" Europe, the continent which refuses, ever again, to slaughter the innocent. It is Rumsfeld and Bush who represent the "old" America; not the "new" America of freedom, the America of F D Roosevelt. Rumsfeld and Bush symbolise the old America that killed its native Indians and embarked on imperial adventures. It is "old" America we are being asked to fight for--linked to a new form of colonialism--an America that first threatens the United Nations with irrelevancy and then does the same to Nato. This is not the last chance for the UN, nor for Nato. But it may well be the last chance for America to be taken seriously by her friends as well as her enemies.

In these last days of peace the British should not be tripped by the oh-so-sought-after second UN resolution. UN permission for America's war will not make the war legitimate; it merely proves that the Council can be controlled with bribes, threats or abstentions. It was the Soviet Union's abstention, after all, which allowed America to fight the savage Korean war under the UN flag. And we should not doubt that--after a quick US military conquest of Iraq and providing 'they" die more than we die--there will be plenty of anti-war protesters who will claim they were pro-war all along. The first pictures of "liberated" Baghdad will show Iraqi children making victory signs to American tank crews. But the real cruelty and cynicism of this conflict will become evident as soon as the "war" ends, when our colonial occupation of a Muslim nation for the US and Israel begins.

There lies the rub. Bush calls Sharon a "man of peace". But Sharon fears he may yet face trial over Sabra and Chatila, which is why Israel has just withdrawn its ambassador to Belgium. I'd like to see Saddam in the same court. And Rifaat Assad for his 1982 massacre in the Syrian city of Hama. And all the torturers of Israel and the Arab dictatorships.

Israeli and US ambitions in the region are now entwined, almost synonymous. This war is about oil and regional control. It is being cheer-led by a draft-dodger who is treacherously telling us that this is part of an eternal war against "terror". And the British and most Europeans don't believe him. It's not that Britons wouldn't fight for America. They just don't want to fight for Bush or his friends. And if that includes the Prime Minister, they don't want to fight for Blair either.

Friday-Sunday, 14-16 February, 2003

100,000 in Irish appeal for peace

By RM Distribution

In a compelling message to Irish Prime Minister, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, some 100,000 people brought Dublin to a standstill on Saturday in a massive demonstration against war in Iraq. Thousands more gathered in Belfast in an international day of protest against the looming conflict.

In one of the biggest marches ever seen in Dublin, the demonstration brought together almost every shade of political opinion -- from committed anti-war activists to ordinary families from all over the country to march for peace and support Ireland's policy of military neutrality.

Speaking at the rally in Dublin, Sinn Fein spokesperson on International Affairs Aengus O Snodaigh TD said it was one of the largest rallies he had seen since the 1980s Hunger Strike protests. He said it sent "a very clear message" to the government that it was not acting in the name of the Irish people by allowing Shannon Airport in the west of Ireland to be used in the build up to war in the Middle East.

According to the latest opinion poll, a clear majority of Irish people do not support the use of Shannon Airport by the US military even if the UN Security Council approves a second mandate giving formal authority for war.

Deputy O Snodaigh said his party would put the Dublin government "to the test" next week when Sinn Fein brings a Bill before the Leinster House parliament to affirm neutrality in the Irish constitution.

"Let us be clear about what is a happening here. This Government's complicity in this war drive is illegal. It is against domestic and international law. It is against the wishes of the majority of Irish people, whom you represent here today. We will make them accountable.

"Sinn Fein has been pro-active in demanding an end to this duplicity and will continue to do so. We have been pro-active on the streets in anti-war mobilising, and in Leinster House where we have consistently tackled the government on this issue since last September.

"We need the Government to state their position clearly. Their evasiveness and duplicity is not acceptable."

Amid many demands by many speakers for the Dublin government to end the use of Shannon by foreign warplanes, Roger Cole, chairman of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance, said there was a clear message for the Taoiseach: "Get the airplanes out of Shannon. We want them out now and we want a statement from the Government in response to this march. Either the planes go or Bertie Ahern goes."

The first protesters left Parnell Square 30 minutes later than planned at 2.30pm. But by the time the first protesters had gathered around Iveagh House, the headquarters of the Department of Foreign Affairs, there were still many thousands who had not left Parnell Square on the northside of the city.

Meanwhile, the Irish government has come under heavy pressure from the British government to completely abandon Irish neutrality and support the war on Iraq at a crucial meeting of the European Union on Monday.

A spokesman for the Minister for Foreign Affairs could not say what Ireland would do at tomorrow's meeting, but stressed that the government's priority was "successful disarmament of Iraq, preferably without war, and through the Security Council".

O Snodaigh called on the Taoiseach to state Ireland's opposition clearly on Monday at the EU meeting, to reflect the reality of Irish opinion shown on Saturday.

"We want him to reflect the Irish view that a war on Iraq is neither justified or acceptable.

"It is to Ireland's shame that this government - who fought for the right to be on the United Nations Security Council, who said they would represent the interests of small nations there - failed to use this position to strongly oppose war. Instead they have left the initiative to France, Germany, Russia, and others.

"Let us clear about consequences of war. The humanitarian and global stability stakes are too high. Since the last Gulf war sanctions have killed more people in Iraq, innocent men, women and children, than all uses of weapons of mass destruction ever did.

"There are alternatives to war. Sinn Fein believes strongly, based on our own experience, that peaceful resolutions to conflict can only come through dialogue and negotiation. We are saying let the UN inspectors continue with they work which they have said is making progress. We are demanding No war on Iraq."

Among the thousands taking part were Tadgh O'Toole, 12, from Irishtown, Dublin, who marched with his father Shane. He said: "I'm here because war is pointless. War does not solve anything. I don't want people to die."

Sisters Antoinette Uzell and Debra Magee were among many parents who brought their children. Ms Uzell said: "I like America, I just don't agree with this war. I'm marching for the women in Baghdad and the children who just want to do their shopping without being bombed."

Wednesday-Friday, 5-7 February, 2003

Irish councils pass anti-war motions

By RM Distribution

Dublin City Council has joined local councils in Derry, Galway and Sligo that have passed anti-war motions in the last few weeks.

On Monday night, Dublin City Council unanimously adopted a Sinn Fein motion at its meeting on Monday night calling for support for the anti-war rally on 15 February.

Councillor Larry O'Toole, who proposed the motion, said: "I am delighted not just that the motion passed, but that it passed with the support of all groups and parties on City Council. This kind of cross-party support for the anti-war movement is a sign of the growing numbers of Irish people who are taking a stand against the war. 58 American cities have also passed anti-war motions and the numbers there, and here, are set to grow."

Not all local governmennt councils in Ireland have taken the same view, hoewever. Clonakilty Town Council this week refused to support a similar motion for peace.

On Thursday morning, a delegation of Sinn Fein parliamentarians led by the party's group Caoimhghin O Caolain TD handed in letters to both the US and British embassies in Ballsbridge calling on both countries to pull back from engaging in a war on Iraq. The letter also expressed Sinn Fein's view that the UN inspectors should be allowed to continue with their work and that they provided the best opportunity to rid Iraq of any alleged weapons of mass destruction.

The letter to the US Embassy states, "As Irish elected representatives we feel it is our duty to appeal, through you, to the United States Government, to heed the voices of concern in our country and in countries throughout the world at this time of international crisis.

It goes on to say that "it is universally agreed that military attack would have catastrophic consequences not only in Iraq itself but throughout the Middle East and worldwide. The innocent civilian population of Iraq will suffer most."

Calling for the UN weapon inspectors to be allowed more time the letter states, "the issue of weapons of mass destruction allegedly held by Iraq is currently being dealt with in a most comprehensive manner under the auspices of the United Nations, a process which has the full support of UN members. That process should be allowed to continue, as it is the best guarantee that if the alleged weapons exist then they will be found."

Before concluding the letter says that Sinn Fein "appreciates the very constructive role this and previous US Administrations have played in the Irish peace process - it is because of our belief in dialogue and negotiation to achieve the peaceful resolution of conflicts that we are making this appeal to your Government." It was signed by Sinn Fein's five TDs.

Monday-Tuesday, 3-4 February, 2003

Irish army deployed after protestors enter airport

Warplanes now protected by Irish soldiers

By RM Distribution

Five members of a US-based pacifist religious movement have provoked a backlash from an Irish government keen to sustain a US military support facility despite Ireland's official policy of neutrality.

On Monday, five members of the `Catholic Worker' movement cut their way into Shannon Airport in the west of Ireland and attempted to disarm a US warplane. According to independent reports, the peace activists poured blood on the runway, where they then constructed a shrine to Iraqi children who have died as a result of war or sanctions.

They then began to attack the runway, hammering on its edge with a mallet, before approaching the hanger where a US Navy plane is being repaired. They painted "Pit stop of death" on the hanger's roller door, and began to dismantle the US warplane, which was already under repair after its nose-cone was damaged by a protestor in a similar incident last week.

The five activists -- who hail from Ireland, the U.S., Australia and Scotland -- were then arrested by Garda police. They refused to co-operate with bail conditions, and instead initiated a fast for peace with a call for mass nonviolent resistance.

The Catholic Worker movement was founded by Dorothy Day in New York City in 1933 and acts of nonviolent disarmament have been led by radical priests Fr. Philip and Daniel Berrigan in the U.S. since the 1980s. They have previously attempted to disarm nuclear and conventional weapon systems around thw world, and have communities in 185 countries.

Reports of a Garda police officer being assaulted or overpowered, repeated in a courtroom bail hearing, was refuted by the protestors themselves. Ciaron O'Reilly, one of the Catholic Worker activists arrested, said that they had indeed met met a Garda who, rather than being overpowered, had been reassured by the protestors after he had become distressed by the security breach and the potential impact on his career prospects.

But the incident, the third and most serious of its kind, brought a furious reaction from the Irish government and led to the deployment of Irish soldiers to guard the warplanes using Shannon Airport. This in turn led to further criticism of the Dublin government's attitude to Ireland's traditional neutrality.

Sinn Fein spokesperson on International Affairs Aengus O Snodaigh TD described the deployment as an act of "intimidation" against anti-war protestors and neutrality supporters.

Speaking at a press conference organised by Ogra Shinn Fein, O Snodaigh TD also said that the anger of the Dublin government and other conservative parties at the peace campaigners was misplaced.

After the Irish Green Party described Monday's protest as 'regrettable', O Snodaigh said "the real wrong" was that the Irish government was pursuing a policy "against the wishes of the people of this state and in violation of the Constitution and the laws of this land."

"It is a policy that the Taoiseach himself acknowledges is all about money and not principle," O Snodaigh said, referring to the seven-figure sum which Irish airport operator Aer Rianta earns from servicing US military planes.

Speaking on Irish radio, the Irish Minister of Transport Seamus Brennan again on Tuesday sought to justify the controversial policy on economic grounds. He insisted that the money received was "an economic lifeline" for the country and its operation should not be interrupted.

Following the latest protest, one major carrier of US troops has now temporarily switched its refueling stops to Frankfurt Airport in Germany. For many, however, their money is not the issue.

"Irish neutrality, and an independent foreign policy are being exchanged for 40% of the business of Shannon Airport," O Snodaigh complained.

Commenting further on the fact that the Irish government is today considering new legislation under which yesterday's protesters could be charged as 'terrorists', the Dublin South Central TD went on to say, "Sinn Fein will be opposing the new Terrorist Offences Bill as a draconian piece of legislation that is being rushed through the Dail with undue haste."

Meanwhile, Aer Rianta is to seek an injunction in the High Court tomorrow restricting those at the peace camp from trespassing on airport property.

Camp organisers said they would be resisting the bid to move them. Spokesman Ed Horgan said they would be challenging Aer Rianta's claim that it owns the land on which they are camped.

However, the Peace Camp is now being dismantled in any event amid complaints by activists that it had become a "media circus". A spokesperson said it will take them a day or two to dismantle all of the tents and caravans on the site.

Friday, 10 January, 2003

Council to Vote on Anti-War Motion

By Derry Journal

Derry City Council is set to join the rising tide of anti-war opinion when it debates a motion voicing opposition to plans for a US and UK-led war on Iraq.

The local government body will join a swelling body of antiwar opinion sweeping Europe and England, Asia and America.

Preparations for a second war in the Gulf - reportedly scheduled for the second half of February - are now at an advanced stage.

Councillors on the Sinn FÈin bench on Derry City Council are preparing a motion to declare Derry's opposition to an invasion of Iraq.

Derry Sinn FÈin Colr. Gerry MacLochlainn, speaking ahead of taking the motion to Council, said: "There is massive concern nationally and internationally about what appears to be a headlong rush towards war against Iraq. That has been reflected in the growing global anti war movement.

"It is in support of that movement that Sinn FÈin is bringing this motion to Derry City Council. It is important that we make our voice heard against war and it would be a boost for anti war campaigners across Ireland if Derry City Council added its voice to the growing demands for the military build up in the Gulf to end."

Colr. MacLochlainn added: "I am confident that Derry City Council will add its voice against a second Gulf War, given that the SDLP leadership have already stated that they can see no justification for war."

The motion, which will be debated on Tuesday evening, reads: "That Derry City Council opposes the drive towards war on the Iraqi people, a war that now appears imminent.

"We call on both US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to reverse their military build-up in the region so as to allow the UN arms inspectors to carry out the job they were mandated to do.

"We call on the Dublin Government to cease the practise of allowing US military personnel to land and refuel at Shannon Airport. This is in direct contradiction to their stated policy of remaining neutral at a time of international conflict.

"We call on all those involved to co-operate fully with the United Nations so as to avoid a war, which will further destabilise the Middle East."

Meanwhile local firm Raytheon is to become a focus for protest over the annual Bloody Sunday commemorative weekend.

A spokesman for the Foyle Ethical Investment Campaign said: "There can be no greater epitaph for the Bloody Sunday victims than the ongoing struggle for democracy - both locally and globally.

"We at FEIC believe it is time for local politicians to do some straight talking about the alleged assurances they have received from Raytheon about the nature of their activities in this city.

"On Thursday next week, from 12 midday to 12 midnight we'll be conducting a vigil at Guildhall Square. Citizens will be invited to sign a letter addressed to local politicians, asking that they place on the record the nature, extent and content of assurances they have received from Raytheon executives.

"Backroom promises to politicians that no defence work is to be undertaken in Derry is not sufficient; Raytheon's comments to the press here in the city and in Boston flatly contradict any assurances they have given to local politicians," the FEIC spokesman said.

Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Maguire is one of the first to sign a letter, to be sent to local political leaders, highlighting the presence in Derry of the largest arms manufacturer in the west. In a statement of support for FEIC's campaign she said: "I fully support this campaign as I believe we, the people, must receive public assurances by Raytheon Executives and local politicians that only civil production will be undertaken at their Derry plant.

"In our efforts to stop the development of the arms trade, we need transparency and accountability from all parties involved, and it is our democratic right to receive this.

"February 13th will be the 12th anniversary of the US bombing of Ameriya aid raid shelter in Baghdad. I visited this shelter and learned that over 500 mostly women and children died in this shelter. I also learned that the plans which bombed the shelter, were guided by software manufactured by Raytheon.

"In Derry, and Ireland (where the arms manufacturing companies are beginning to get established, it is important that we set clear rules to see that economic development is ethically based, and we do not get sucked into the arms industry," Ms. Maguire said.

Thursday-Saturday, 16-18 January, 2003

Major anti-war protest at Shannon airport

www.refuelingpeace.org

By RM Distribution

Thousands of protesters marched in Shannon on Saturday to demonstrate against the impending war on Iraq and the use of Shannon Airport in the west of Ireland in the military build-up.As military transports continued to fly into the airport on their way to the Gulf, the biggest anti-war protest to date took place. Its organisers claimed the presence of such a large crowd was due to growing concern and anger over the military use of the airport despite Irish neutrality. The junior minister at the Department of Justice, Willie O'Dea, has claimed there is "nothing new, secret, furtive or conspiratorial" about what was happening at the airport.

Deputy O'Dea pointed out that Foreign Affairs Minister Brian Cowen had made it clear that U.S. troop carriers with personal side arms on board "must request ministerial permission to land in this country".

Joining a strong turnout of Sinn Fein activists at the aiport demo, North Kerry TD Martin Ferris called for an immediate end to the use of Irish airports, airspace, or seaports for war preparation by foreign powers. Speaking from Shannon, Deputy Ferris said: "I came here today to stand in solidarity with the protesters who have been taking part in the 'Peace Camp'. The courageous and selfless actions of these people stands in stark contrast to the lies and actions of the Irish government.

"It is time that the government listened to the people and stop allowing Irish airports, airspace, or seaports to be used for war preparation by foreign powers."

The pressure may be working. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Brian Cowen has yielded to demand for a parlimanetary debate on the use of Shannon airport -- but only if a war with Iraq breaks out.

In a weekend interview, Mr Cowen asserted the Dublin government's belief that a US-led assault against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime must hinge on a fresh UN Security Council resolution.

Mr Cowen claimed Ireland's neutrality related mainly meant that the country would not join a mutual defence pacts. "We're not neutral, and have never been neutral, in relation to advancing UN resolutions," he said. "We believe in the pursuance of solutions consistent with international law."

"It's not the case that Ireland does not have a view," he added. "Ireland has a very strong view in relation to international relations. We regard the UN as a cornerstone of the maintenance of international order and security."

Friday-Sunday, 24-26 January, 2003

Neutrality blow as Iraq war arms pass through Shannon

By RM Distribution

The Irish government has controversially granted permission for the transport "munitions of war" through Shannon Airport on civilian aircraft, according to reports today.

The Irish Department of Transport -- which governs civil aviation -- has confirmed that permission had been granted last week to several US commercial airlines which are ferrying thousands of troops to the Middle East.

The Minister for Transport, Seamus Brennan, signed the relevant direction last week. No announcement was made by the Department of Transport.

Ireland is a neutral country, although this has been routinely ignored by the Dublin government in recent months as the build up to war on Iraq continues.

Following admissions that the aircraft were carrying weapons, the Department of Transport wrote to the US carriers indicating that they had to obtain permission if they wished to transport arms. Carrying weapons without permission was illegal, although several members of the government, including Tanaiste Mary Harney, claimed that no illegalities were occurring.

On receipt of the Department of Transport's letters, the US carriers immediately sought permission to carry arms. Last week, the minister exempted the airlines from its provisions.

Sinn Fein spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, Aengus O Snodaigh has described the actions as a "corruption of the democratic will of the Irish people" and "an act of political and moral cowardice".

Speaking after it emerged that the Minister had only this week authorised the transportation of the munitions, Deputy O Snodaigh said:

"It's becoming very clear that Irish laws were systematically broken with the connivance of the Government during the weeks and months prior to Seamus Brennan giving this authorisation. That he did so in secret without any publicity or fanfare or without the approval of the Dail is a clear indication that this Government is out of step with the electorate on this very important issue.

"The Governments position on allowing Shannon Airport to be used by the US military in preparing for war on Iraq is a corruption of the democratic will of the Irish people. The prostitution of our neutrality by Bertie Ahern, Brian Cowen and now Seamus Brennan makes it obvious that those who voted Yes during the Nice Treaty referendum on the basis that neutrality would be protected were conned on a large scale.

"This move by the Fianna Fail/PD coalition is a dishonest act of political and moral cowardice that clearly goes against the wishes of the majority of Irish people and must be reversed."