Thank you for your reply to my original letter. I am gratified that you no longer employ name- calling (".. pseudo left elements" P.3 NCMLU Statement), in place of argument. Regrettably, you still seem to confuse assertion with evidence.

Let us inspect some of that 'evidence':

You refer to "the holding of the referendum on the 'Good Friday Agreement' (the first All-Ireland ballot since I9I8). . ." There were in fact referenda, -2-, with different questions asked in each, not a single all-Ireland ballot.

You speak of the re-routing of provocative Orange marches away from sensitive predominantly nationalist areas. Presumably you have heard of Drumcree, and the forcing through of that march by Mo Mowlam in recent times This is just one (highly publicised) facet of a problem which remains far from resolution.

You note "agreement on the formation of a power sharing executive and cross-border bodies" and "the first meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council."

You will have noted that the UUP through David Trimble have recently banned participation by Sinn Fein Ministers in such bodies, effectively killing those bodies. In any event, the first cross-border bodies were established first around 80 years ago, at the time of the formation of the two Irish statelets. Their usefulness may be judged by the traces left by their disappearance. In respect of the power sharing Assembly and Executive which you also applaud, these were suspended, by the British Government at the instigation of the UUP, in February this year. The Ulster Unionist Council has threatened to repeat the procedure again, unless their demands are met

You cite the Report of Chris Patten on the reform of the RUC. An independent member of that commission has written in 'The Guardian'  that the British government's implementation of Patten has "gutted" it.

SARCASM

Yes, I implied criticism of your use of the term 'Northern Ireland'. Use of that term implies support for the British created statelet. No progressive British or Irish political organisation uses the term, as far as I know, and for those of us who live here, use of the term implies recognition both of the statelet, and its associated panoply of Orangeism, Unionism, and British imperialism. No thank you!

Sinn Fein Republicanism

You admit that "we would use the terms 'Nationalist & 'Republicanism' as interchangeable" (P.3 your reply) and this represents a basic weakness in your understanding of the dynamics of Irish history and politics. Republicanism in Ireland first replaced Nationalism in the country with the founding of the Society of United Irishmen by Theobald Wolfe Tone and others, and the subsequent rebellion in 798 - well over a century before the formation of Sinn Fein. The United Irishmen drew their inspiration from the progressive, democratic movements in France and America. Read Marx's opinion of-the Fenians (Irish Republican Brotherhood) for his opinion on the direct successors of "the United Irishmen'.

It is quite simply a gross distortion to equate right-wing elements such as Griffith, who directly betrayed the revolutionary Republic, with the mainstream, albeit sometimes minority, progressive and democratic ideology of Republicanism. Surely you would not overlook figures such as Connolly, Larkin, George Gilmore or Frank Ryan?

But, you quote extensively from the 'Campaign for Labour Representation in Northern Ireland', which does suggest that the IRA / Sinn Fein's "social policy has been inconsistent and unprincipled, certainly not socialist" (Your Reply p.4).

However the CLRNI analysis is utterly tainted by virtue of the fact that it is an avowedly 'two nations' organisation, ...a pale, social-democratic successor to the notorious British and Irish Communist Organisation (B&ICO) I will not deal in detail with their self-serving analysis. I will, though, point out that any such analysis, which conflates Sinn Fein and the IRA, is hardly worth the paper it is written on. Connolly was not a Sinn Fein member. Nor was Jim Larkin. Returning to the founders of Republicanism we find that Tone relied on what he called 'the men of no property' to carry through his revolution. James Connolly pointed out that if "you raise the green flag over Dublin Castle tomorrow, and do not set about the building of the socialist republic, all your efforts will have been in vain." An optional extra? Nationalism in Ireland is precisely the ideology, which has always opposed Republicanism, always failed to carry through the stage of national democratic revolution to its end.

Republicanism is not and should not be, as you correctly state, Socialist Republican, at this stage, but neither should it be left to the leadership of the petty bourgeoisie. Marxist-Leninists should be critically supporting Republicans, not tailing them, but leading them. Whatever our respective opinions on the merits or otherwise of the Good Friday Agreement, what is required from Marxist-Leninists at this time is not a statement on one tactical question, but a thorough analysis of the entire situation, peace process included.

I for one would certainly appreciate such a statement and the opportunity to discuss/debate it.

Fraternally,

E. M.