................................................................................ 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...