We can't afford to abandon Northern Ireland

 Ian Paisley's categorical statement on Monday 16 January that there will no power sharing administration est...ablished in Northern Ireland for the foreseeable future was as depressing as it was inevitable.
The Unionist political parties have only ever moved under intense pressure, and then belatedly and reluctantly, dragging their heels and desperately looking for excuses to undermine the project.
That has been especially the history of the Good Friday Agreement, and while Sinn Féin might argue that “the two Government's must make it clear that there is no other show in town” – to quote party vice president Pat Doherty – the reality is that there is no pressure being brought to bear on unionism: all the pressure is on the Republicans to make further concessions on policing and mollifying Unionist opposition.
What Sinn Féin cannot face up to is that the Good Friday Agreement is vital for their desires to play an executive role in Irish politics – at least until they win enough electoral support in the South to claim Government posts here. It is not vital for the Government.
Bertie Ahern's current business trip to India is especially significant in that he has brought Northern business interests along with him as part of the 100-company strong attached to the Government trip. It is a clear – and strong – message that playing ball with Dublin is in the best interests of Northern business, who can never expect anything like the same attention and consideration from a British Government.
It is also a move that by-passes rather than confronts the problem of partition. And in that sense it is fully in tune with Fianna Fáil's real interests vis-à-vis the North. For what Fianna Fáil wants is a harmonious settlement that takes away the sectarian character of the North, allows Catholics and nationalists to play a part there without upsetting the Orange base of the statelet, and frees everybody up for cooperation that doesn't involve sharing power and the perks of office with Northern Protestants (or indeed Northern Catholics).
It is not a purely Fianna Fáil position, of course. The release of cabinet papers at the beginning of this year and last have shown clearly that in the early seventies the Wilson Labour Government was seriously contemplating a British withdrawal from Ireland. This caused panic in Dublin government and civil service circles who strained with all their might to sabotage Wilson's plans.
And in case Wilson might have imagined that the then Fine Gael government might have represented an isolated position, the historian Ronan Fanning – in his commentaries on the papers – has revealed that Garret FitzGerald brought Jack Lynch along to a special dinner with Britain's Jim Callaghan to present the British with a united front. Callaghan, it is said, reassured them that the tide was turning against Wilson's suggestion.
What is most interesting about this is that there has been practically no discussion of the point, and certainly no condemnation of what surely constitutes treason on the part of the politicians and civil servants involved.
Look, first of all, at the democratic point. Articles Two and Three of the Constitution were still in place then, and the Supreme Court subsequently held that these articles imposed a “constitutional imperative” on the government to advance Irish reunification.  FitzGerald, Lynch and Demot Nally all clearly subverted their own Constitution.
Secondly, no political party ever went before the Irish people at election time seeking a mandate for this policy of not pursuing reunification. Whether it was right or wrong, it clearly had no democratic basis, but I listened in vain for the expected shrieks of hysteria of our modern anti-subversives about this. And if that were the position adopted then, how much more so is it now when “respectable” journalists fall over themselves to attack Irish nationalism and the desire for unity.
Paisley is no fool. He can read these realities as well as the next man, and he knows that no matter what Dublin says it doesn't really want Sinn Féin in government when there are other options to pursue.
Of course, Paisley's own option of excluding Sinn Féin is too crude and blatant, and Dublin cannot go along with that; but it would if it could.
Does all of this matter?  So what if unity is abandoned as a viable objective?
I think that there are three reasons why it does matter.
First of all, in a genuinely democratic state, major policy choices of this kind are presented clearly to the electorate who then decide upon them. But Fianna Fáil will neither discuss its methodology for unity nor will it publicly move away from the policy before the electorate. Dishonesty of that kind is damaging to real democracy.
Secondly, what sort of a slavish subservient nation would we be if we were willing to abandon our brothers and sisters in the North?  
For no matter how much the West Brits might wish it otherwise, we are part of one nation, and the majority of that nation still wants to see a separate, united independent state even if a growing minority doesn't agree.
And thirdly, a nation that lacks the courage to advance its own rights cannot sustain itself if difficult times return. A united Ireland would be immeasurably stronger economically and socially, and the Good Friday agreement does still remain the best option for advancing along the way to reunification.
But unless it becomes an electoral issue, or unless Sinn Féin win enough votes and seats to make ignoring them impossible, don't expect too much from Bertie Ahern, Michael McDowell et al. In fact don't expect anything from them at all!
Eoin Ó Murchú is the Eagraí Polaitíochta of RTÉ Raidió na Gaeltachta. He is writing here in a personal capacity.