................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
MICHAEL ANCRAM INTERVIEW
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 9.6.96
................................................................................
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Michael Ancram, John Bruton the Irish
Prime Minister told me on this programme in February that holding elections in
Northern Ireland would be to pour petrol on the fire. He was right wasn't he
because Northern Ireland is now even more polarised than it was before and
therefore agreement even less likely?
MICHAEL ANCRAM: I don't think it is more polarised. I
think we saw during the election the positions being stated as they've been
stated certainly to me in the time I've been here by the various Parties. What
was important about the elections was that having looked for ways of bringing
all Parties round the table for a very long time and failing to find those ways
- for the reasons you know as well as I do - the elections did provide that
gateway. And, in fact, if you look at the result of the elections, all
Parties took part in them. We have a broad range of representation coming to
these negotiations. I think the elections have actually proved very sanitary
in that respect and I'm looking forward to the mandate created by those
elections to carry forward now into the negotiations.
HUMPHRYS: But what happened was the Nationalist
community backed Sinn Fein to a greater extent than they had before and the
more hardline Unionists backed Ian Paisley to a greater extent than they had
done before. That's polarisation.
ANCRAM: Well, that's also democracy and I don't
think..
HUMPHRYS: I don't dispute that.
ANCRAM: Well when we're looking at a democratic
process - which these negotiations essentially are - I think that elections
into them, to create the mandates within them, is actually also very healthy
and very sanitary. What is important is that sixty-five per cent of the
people of Northern Ireland voted for their politicians to go into talks and to
talk to each other. And it is that impetus - and I think it's very important,
the day before these negotiations start, to underline that - that impetus which
is coming from the people of Northern Ireland that I think gives these
negotiations a chance of succeeding.
HUMPHRYS: And that's precisely the point isn't it
because sixteen per cent of them very nearly voted for Sinn Fein to go into
those talks. Now, it's going to be that much more difficult therefore, is it
not, for you to turn Sinn Fein away at the door tomorrow lunchtime?
ANCRAM: Well we hope that Sinn Fein can come
into these talks. But, in order to do so - as both Governments made clear - in
the communique on the 28 February in order to participate in these negotiations
we have to see a restoration of the ceasefire of 1994. Sinn Fein was
eligible to come into these negotiations on the 8th February before the
ceasefire was reached. They withdrew that eligibility from themselves. It is
for them and the IRA now to restore it. I think, equally though, it is
important to remember that if they're not there, the talks will go on because
after all we'll have eighty-five per cent of the people of Northern Ireland
represented in those talks and a majority of both communities and it would be
totally wrong to allow one small part of the democratic process to hold the
rest to ransom by the threat of resumed violence, if they don't achieve their
political purposes.
HUMPHRYS: If the IRA resumes that ceasefire at
five to two, or five seconds to two, tomorrow afternoon, will you open the door
to Sinn Fein?
ANCRAM: Before an invitation can be given, we
have to be satisified that there has been an unequivocal restoration of the
ceasefire of August 1994. Now I'm not going to predict or speculate on what
those words have to be. What that means is you can't have a ceasefire which is
contingent or qualified or by the nature of it temporary. If there is an
unequivocal restoration then they can be invited to talks but once they are-
are invited they have to go through what every other participant will have to
go through, which is the signing up to what have become known as the Six
Mitchell Principles which the Governments and all the other Parties will be
required as well to do because that's the signing up, if you like, for the
democratic process which these negotiations are.
HUMPHRYS: But you talk about being satisfied: if
they produce the kind of statement which they produced in August of 1994, you
said that you wanted a permanent end to hostilities. They never included the
word permanent. If they produce that kind of statement, will you then say:
Yes, Sinn Fein can come in?
ANCRAM: What we're asking them to do as we've
said, is to unequivocally restore the ceasefire of August 1994 and that is an
order to restore the eligibility which they have removed from themselves by
breaching the ceasefire and by the bomb that went off in London and killed two
innocent people and the response of Sinn Fein to that. So, it's a restoring of
a position that was there for them previously and they-they know what that
requires.
HUMPHRYS: Right, so all they have to do is to say,
the status quo, that is to say the status quo as it applied before February has
returned. We are now in the position that we were in in August, the end of
August 1994, and then they can walk into the talks.
ANCRAM: We have to be satisfied before an
invitation is issued that, if you like, the situation which existed from August
1994 until the 9th February has been restored. That's what an unequivocal
restoration of that ceasefire means.
HUMPHRYS: And if the talks begin without them but
at some time in the next week or the next month. If they do that, the talks
are open to them again?
ANCRAM The talks would then then be open to
them again. They would have to be invited to the talks. They would have to
sign up to the Mitchell principles of democracy and they could not expect those
talks to be stopped and rewound to the beginning, because the train would have
begun to move and they would have to join it at whatever position the train
would have reached at that stage.
HUMPHRYS: But you do seem to be suggesting that in
some way, the Government has to verify this ceasefire. I mean how do you do
that? You couldn't quite do that in '94, could you? You accepted that there
was going to be a ceasefire. Now, how do you do it?
ANCRAM: You have to look at whatever is said in
the light of circumstances to be satisfied that it is an unequivocal
restoration and we have to obviously consult also with the Irish Government,
who with us declared on the 28th February that so long as there wasn't that
unequivocal restoration Sinn Fein could not participate in the negotiations. I
don't think it would be wise to go into exact words, or anything else, at the
moment. What we are doing is making quite clear that the position that
existed before the 9th February has to be restored.
HUMPHRYS: Right. But, you're saying equally
clearly that a simple statement from the IRA to the effect that there is now
another ceasefire isn't enough. There will be some process taking place
between you and the Irish Government to agree that this is a genuine ceasefire.
ANCRAM: Well, if you look at the legislation and
the ground rules which are being published, the Secretary of State is required
to make that consideration and to consult with the Irish Government. So that
has been clear for some time. But if I may say so, I mean we're looking - if
you like - at the difficulties in this process.
HUMPHRYS: Yeah well I'm going to move on, in a
moment. But, let's finish clearing up this point. In short, five seconds to
two will not gain them admission.
ANCRAM: I've said what I've said about the
ceasefire. Our need to be satisfied that it is a restoration of the ceasefire
of August 1995 and that must obviously, depend on the circumstances.
HUMPHRYS: Well now, let's look at some of the
other problems. Then we'll come to what you want to say about the possible
benefits of this process. David Trimble has said that he will challenge - he
is challenging - the Chairmanship of Senator Mitchell. Do the participants to
these talks have the right themselves to choose the Chairman?
ANCRAM: We put forward proposals on
Chairmanships. We've invited Chairmen to take part in this process. Some of
those Chairmanships, indeed, involve the British Government. Some involve both
the British and the Irish Government. The others involve the three independent
Chairmen we've brought in. What we've tried to do is to create a balanced set
of Chairmanships, which give the best chance of creating the confidence on all
sides to take the process forward. But, in the end the whole of this process -
not just procedural questions but the whole process depends on the will of
those participants who are key to it to take this process forward. And so, in
the end, they have to be satisfied. I believe that once they see what George
Mitchell and his colleagues can bring to this process and I'm pleased - I
understand David Trimble is meeting George Mitchell today or later today - I
think that they will see that we have created this balanced set of
chairmanships which they can have confidence in as well. I, certainly, have
every confidence in the integrity, the experience and the independence of all
three of those who we have been invited to take part.
HUMPHRYS: Indeed, as do many other participants to
the talks. But, not the Unionists. Now, if, in that opening session tomorrow,
at two o'clock, they get together and say: look, we want to vote on this, we
want to do something about this. We're not happy with Senator Mitchell. We
accept his good faith in all senses but we'd rather not have him chairing the
plenaries and doing all the things he's meant to do. Is it conceivable that
Senator Mitchell might have to pack his bags and go back to Washington?
ANCRAM: You're making a speculation which I
think is a dangerous speculation because as I understand it the Unionists are
meeting Senator Mitchell this afternoon and I think it's important that we let
that happen. I'm confident that once they've met him they will see - as I have
seen - the integrity and independence of mind that he will bring to the
process.
But, in this process, at all stages -
not just tomorrow - the process will move forward on the basis of consensus and
that means that we have to look for the ways that are going to create
confidence for people to say: yes, we can continue in this process, we see this
process leading in a direction which the people of Northern Ireland want, which
is why I keep on saying: if we concentrate all the time on the things that go
wrong, we lose sight of that essential impetus which was created by the
election, where sixty-five per cent of the people in Northern Ireland said to
their politicians: don't compromise your principles but get in there and talk
and negotiate and see whether you can come out with an answer.
HUMPHRYS: But technically, it is possible that
Senator Mitchell could not continue as the Chairman of these talks. That's
technically possible.
ANCRAM: Technically the talks could be brought
to an end by participants deciding they should be brought to an end. But, what
I'm saying is we have a process here which the people of Northern Ireland want
to see work, we have a set of Chairmanships which, I believe, is going to help
that process to work and I want to look at tomorrow with confidence. I want to
look at tomorrow in a constructive and positive spirit because that's what
people in Northern Ireland are asking for.
HUMPHRYS: I take that point but you talk about
tomorrow - which, of course, is the beginning of a very long road. Now,
substantive talks can't begin until there has been progress on decommissioning
on getting rid of the weapons, it's very difficult isn't it to see how you can
do that without Sinn Fein sitting at the table. They hold the weapons, after
all.
ANCRAM: Well there are others who hold the
weapons.
HUMPHRYS: But they hold most of them.
ANCRAM: ...who hold the weapons, who have
Parties, who are closely associated with them, who will be at the negotiations,
and I don't think we should lose sight of that.
HUMPHRYS: But they won't decommission without Sinn
Fein decommissioning. They've made that very clear.
ANCRAM: Yes. What essentially we've said is
that in this plenary session we have to address the Mitchell proposals on
decommissioning. And, what Mitchell said in his report was not that there
should be decommissioning before substantive negotiation, nor should there be
decommissioning after negotiations are completed, but that there should be some
decommissioning during, and that he described as a compromise. The British
Government who if you remember in January were accused of binning the Mitchell
Report have actually founded the proposals with the Irish which we put forward
for the plenary session on that compromise. And, what we're saying is that we
want to see the Parties in discussion of that approach give clear indications
that they are going to work constructively to implement those proposals and
other aspects of the Mitchell Report as well, so that we can then move that
issue into a sub-committee which can begin to work on implementing those
proposals and get on with the other negotiations alongside it.
HUMPHRYS: But commonsense tells us all that for
that process to work Sinn Fein must be involved.
ANCRAM: I've said all along I would like to see
Sinn Fein involved in these negotiations, but they exclude themselves from a
democratic process.
HUMPHRYS: And therefore put an end to that
particular process, because you cannot have decommissioning. In other words,
you can't get rid of weapons till the people holding those weapons say: Alright
I'll talk about getting rid of them. That is just commonsense isn't it?
ANCRAM: Yes, but you're not-I mean, in practical
terms, you're not going to get rid of weapons from people who are not involved
in the decision making process to get rid of them - that's right. But, if I
was to take the logic of what you're suggesting to its final conclusion, you'd
be saying that anyone who actually holds weapons, by not becoming part of the
process can hold the whole of the political part of this agenda to ransom.
HUMPHRYS: That's the political reality isn't it?
ANCRAM: It isn't. There's an..as I said
earlier the majority of both parts of the community are going to be represented
at these talks. And, there is an enormous agenda on the political side to do
with the relationships within Northern Ireland, between Northern Ireland and
the Republic of Ireland, between the Republic of Ireland and the United
Kingdom, all of which are going to form the basis of any accommodation that's
going to work. And there's a lot of work which will be undertaken by, as I
say, the majority representatives of both communities who will be there.
HUMPHRYS: But if the main purpose of these
proceedings is to bring a permanent peace to Northern Ireland - indeed, the
island of Ireland - and one of the Parties, the main Party that has been waging
war or terrorism, or whatever you want to call it, is not there, you cannot
achieve that end, can you?
ANCRAM: Well, we can achieve the end of reaching
a political accommodation which must be the foundation of any long term just,
democratic and peaceful settlement. But the message you're giving me is not
one I think, which you should be addressing to me. You should be addressing it
to those members of Sinn Fein and of the IRA who are turning their backs on the
wishes of the people of Northern Ireland to see an inclusive process which can
produce a lasting accommodation. They're turning their backs on them by
refusing to restore that ceasefire which existed up until the 9th February,
and are continuing therefore to hold the shadow of the gun over this process.
HUMPHRYS: There is the risk, is there not, that
this process is going to go nowhere?
ANCRAM: There's always the risk in anything that
we do in this context that that will be the case. But this process will work
if those who are taking part in it want to make it work, and that hasn't always
been the case in the past. But one of the messages that came to me very
strongly through the election - and I get it on the streets, I get it in the
schools I visit as the Education Minister here - is that people want to see
their politicians try to find an accommodation...
HUMPHRYS: Right.
ANCRAM: ...without compromising their
principles, but looking for those compromises within those principles that are
going to move the process forward. And, if politicians here are listening to
people, then I think that determination and will to make this work will be
there.
HUMPHRYS: You want peace. Apart from that what
does the British Government want to be the outcome of these talks. Are you
open to any possible political settlement?
ANCRAM: We are open to a political accommodation
which I hope will underpin peace in the long term which is acceptable to the
people of Northern Ireland. And, the key to this whole process - and I
described it earlier as a democratic process - is democratic consent, what the
people of Northern Ireland decide that they want. First of all, through their
political representatives in these negotiations; then, as the Prime Minister
has said through a referendum, and finally through Parliament. That we will
accept but it must be what the people of Northern Ireland themselves want.
HUMPHRYS: Michael Ancram, thank you very much.
...oooOooo...
|