Correspondence: Sinn Fein apologies
17 December 2021
Your critique of 10 December ('Sinn Fein Caught Between Bluster and Apology') hit the target well. However, the presentation of the context was weak. You say:
'The primary element in the dispute is the sensitivity of the Irish bourgeoisie in the War of Independence. Violence then was good. Violence in the north was bad, The fact that the two military ambushes were the same military tactic means its better if the issue is not discussed.'In fact, the political leaders of the bourgeoisie, most recently Varadkar have shown that they understand perfectly the difference between the two actions, that, though the tactics were the same, each was fought within a very different strategy. Narrow Water lacked the mandate from the Irish people that Kilmichael had possessed. To say this is not to turn the issue into morality but to show that such actions need popular support if they are to succeed. Stanley was not even accurate about Narrow Water bringing the Brits to the negotiating table. The H Block campaign, with its ability to elect two deputies played a far greater role.
Stanley's tweet was a piece of crude militarism: his apology a piece of cruder constitutionalism. You show this but you should have spelt it clearly.