| « Caption Competition | Sectarian Gesture Made to Celtic Fans » |
Ireland Doesn't Stop At Dundalk
It's one of those rare happenings that makes you wonder if you might actually be asleep. Many unionist bloggers have said repeatedly that Ireland is greater than the Republic and that neither nationalists nor the Southern state should not enjoy a monopoly on the definition of Ireland or Irishness.
Chekov (who, as ever, puts his point across much more eloquently than myself) has spotted that Barry McElduff has, rather uncharacteristically, done something vaguely sensible in recent days. Apparently the West Tyrone MLA has written to all the Republic's TDs and Senators to challenge "this notion that the 26 counties constitutes Ireland".
Follow up:
I suppose I am doing it to challenge partitionism – this notion that the 26 counties [Republic of Ireland] constitutes Ireland. I find it very offensive.
Even in the EU I hear people talk about Ireland and Northern Ireland. Sometimes they talk about the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
I’d call it geopolitical speak.
Barry McElduff, MLA (Sinn Fein)
Leaving aside the comedy value of McElduff referring to the six counties and 26 counties then complaining about "geopolitical speak" (baring in mind his party colleagues insist their ministries refer to Northern Ireland as "here" or "the North"), his "challenge" is either aimed more at personal publicity than affecting serious change, or he has gone about this very badly.
If he really does wants to change something, what would send a more powerful message than a united call from all the local parties for the Republic's government to recognise that Ireland is bigger than the Southern state? After all, nationalists want unionists to recognise that we're all Irish and there are a number of Unionists out there who would point out that being Irish doesn't necessarily imply the anti-British, tricolour-waving, GAA playing capers so intrinsic to separatist Irish nationalism. Of course that might mean forgoing the romantic nonsense about "challenging partitionism" and evocative swipes at the Southern parties, and that would never do.
The British government must bare some of the blame for this, having failed to challenge the Republic's admittance to the EU and UN under the erroneous name of "Ireland" and therefore implying jurisdiction over part of the United Kingdom.
Whatever, it'll take a serious effort to change a mindset as engrained as this one is in the Republic, so a few proposals off the top of my head:
- Sinn Fein stop pretending the border doesn't exist, thus re-enforcing said mindset.
- A public statement from all our parties that they will stop referring to the "Irish" government and call on the British government to do the same (and to reverse the growing trend of referring to the South simply as Ireland).
- A concerted effort to challenge the BBC (and anyone else?) every time they refer to "Ireland" when they mean the Republic.
I suppose it's too much to hope that Barry will follow through with any measure of consistency and declare that the Northern Ireland football team is just as Irish as the Republic's and therefore there is no reason for nationalist players to defect, so any other ideas?
Trackback address for this post
15 comments
I agree with your general principle (not your follow up proposals).
The official name of the Republic as "Ireland" seems to be a throwback to the old Article 2 where the territory of the state was described as the whole country.
Now, following the constitutional amendment it looks ridiculous and the fact that the name of the independent IRish state is "Ireland" despite not covering the whole country is just wrong. I think this is something that I think both northern nationalists and unionists can agree.
Point 1 isn't necessarily the one I have a problem with. I fully support the concept of ignoring partition as much as possible and working within an all-Ireland context as much as possible. However, SF's idea of pretending it doesn't exist while serving in a partitionist executive is a bit silly alright.
It's more the 2nd bullet point I don't agree with. One could argue that the "Irish government", as the government of the independent Irish state, can be described as such (even though it doesn't have jurisdiction over the whole country).
Point 3 I agree with entirely.
I see where you're coming from on point two, but I think it's wrong. The Dublin government may be the only sovereign (or independent) government, but Northern Ireland has its own locally-based executive, assembly (legislature?), civil service, courts etc. - in essence, many of the instruments and institutions of government. In a strict sense, surely the term "the Irish government" should include all of these as well.
I realise that in common usage "government" is often used to refer to the executive, but even with that there is still more than one (again, not independent or sovereign, but still Irish).
After all widespread practice of referring to the United States as "America" can lead to confusion between America (the country) and America (the continent) but there seems to be little anyone can do about this.
Similarly there was a bit of a rumpus a few years back during the break up of Yugoslavia when one of the emerging states adopted the name "Macedonia". This upset a lot of Greeks who interpreted it as a territorial claim over the Greek province of the same. Initially Macedonia (the country) pointed out that there was "no copyright on the names of countries" but the prospect of (another) war eventually lead to a rather long winded compromise whereby the country officially adopted the name "The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" of course in the real world all but the most geopolitically pedantic still call the place "Macedonia".
I do get slightly peeved at a the habit a lot of (particularly English) people have of referring to the Ireland (the Country) as "Eire" though.
Well as long as the Republic use an ambiguous name I don't think they've any right to complain about any name others use to make it clear they're referring to the state rather than the island (though they do, whether it's Eire, the Republic of Ireland, the Irish Republic, Southern Ireland). I just wish there was one 'standard' one.
And it's not just an internal matter because it affects all of us. What if Northern Ireland was officially renamed Ulster (as I think was proposed at one time). Would that be an internal matter for the people of
And as for Macedonia, they were persuaded to compromise on the name by the fact that Greece could veto their admission into the UN, hence the FYR (regardless of what their constitution says). My proposal was that the UK should have adopted the same approach to the Eire.
I generally agree that (unless to convey a meaning that would be lost in the other language) it's ridiculous to throw words of one language in a sentence in another, but if the Republic's constitution does it you can hardly blame others who follow suit.
I could easily see an argument that in English, Eire is simply a name derived from a foreign language (a la France?).
At the end of the day none of "The Republic of Ireland", "The Irish Republic", "Soutern Ireland", "Eire" etc. all seem to have their own issues. If Eire annoys you that much though, it sounds like the Republic needs a more accurate name than simply "Ireland". If you lot can come up with it, we'll use it.
I do think it shows a ignorance, especially from those on the mainland of basic Geography. They simply don't understand the concept of the border and no ammount of ranting from me or anyone else is going to change that.
It's not just the Island of Ireland that they seem to have problems with e.g, there appears to be a team representing 'Korea' at this years Olympics?
It's a difficult one to work around. Perhaps , as has been suggested here, the best solution would be to name Northern Ireland something completly different? What that would be, i don't know. One thing for sure is that whatever it was, at least one section of the community would never accept it and we would be back to square one again.
It's not just countries. I would love to know where e.g. Ards, Carrick and Derry are? Can't seem to find them on any Atlas?
Even so, it would still be part of Ireland. The problem would still be there.
If Northern Ireland were to have a name change to something not including the word Ireland then the ROI could be recognised as Ireland as Northern Ireland as whatever the new name was.
Hence, no more confusion and annoying conversations with American tourists.
Never going to happen though.
The fact that more of an issue wasnt made of it during the talks leading up to the Belfast agreement amounted to a missed opportunity which I cant see presenting itself again anytime soon
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
