Social Items

TPQ
Showing posts with label Loyalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Loyalism. Show all posts
Christopher Owens  ✍ was at the Crescent Arts Centre, Belfast on 23-March-2024 to listen toa live podcast delving into the world of loyalism.


A wet and drizzly Saturday night in Belfast. A scenario I’m all too familiar with and one that, if you allowed it, would prevent you from doing or attending anything of note. And with the Shrapnel Podcast doing a live recording, there is no excuse for laziness.

Advertised as sold out, the audience are an eclectic bunch, some of whom look around the room quite a bit. Not in a nosy manner but more along the lines of realising that they’re not the only ones who have such interests and finding relief in that.

The following took to the stage:

🖼 Sam McIlwaine and Gareth Mulvenna (Shrapnel Podcast hosts)

🖼 Davy Adams (former Ulster Democratic Party spokesperson)

🖼 Emma Shaw (founder/CEO of the Phoenix Education Centre)

🖼 Beano Niblock (playwright/author)


Beginning the talk by asking how each member of the panel would define loyalism, Davy is quick to point out that he doesn’t consider himself as either a loyalist or unionist anymore as he no longer has time for tribal loyalties, so his allegiances lie with his family and his community. Beano takes a different approach by saying that he would still consider himself a unionist but more of an orphaned one and that, once upon a time, the term he would have used was working class loyalist, but it doesn’t mean the same to him as it did in 1971.

Emma uses these moments to illustrate her belief that loyalism is a broad church but one that is based on family and service to the community and one that has been maligned over the years not just through a hostile media but also from mainstream unionist politicians who were all too happy to goad loyalists into doing their dirty work. The end result of this, according to Emma, is a belief that young people from loyalist backgrounds are disadvantaged educationally and in the job market.

This leads to Davy declaring that the term ‘loyalist’ was created by unionist politicians to differentiate between ‘respectable’ unionism and loyalism (although Sam emphasises that people have to take responsibility for their own actions), thus anyone who raised their head above the parapet were swiftly disowned and castigated as Lundys. Beano notes that this fractured unionism sends out a variety of mixed messaging (who do you vote for, what do they deliver) which makes it difficult to have a united front and, although Emma defends the right for voters to have choice, Davy and Sam bring up the fact that if there was one PUL party, how would it cater to those (like Sam) who would see themselves as left wing?

From a nationalist perspective, this diverse/fractured (whichever term you want to use) perspective can be frustrating as it means that if you ask three unionists/loyalists about their views, you’ll get three differing views back. Sam correctly identified some social issues that are divisive (same sex marriage, abortion) but you can also add the status of Northern Ireland as well: is it as British as Finchley or is it something else entirely? With nationalism/republicanism, there are of course similar debates, but the key is that the end result is Ireland being free from British rule. As pointed out by Enoch Powell 40 odd years ago, the ambiguous nature of relations between NI and Britain has never been truly resolved by unionists/loyalists and, to some, this uncertainty can seem like goalpost moving at times. So it’s great to see the panel openly discussing some of these angles.

Moving onto culture, Beano points out that many loyalists feel that Gaelic culture is being elevated and imposed upon them. Although Davy responds to this with derision by asking why anyone would feel threatened by Gaelic culture (especially when it was kept alive by Irish Presbyterians), Emma manages to tease out the nuances in the debate by discussing the GAA pitch in East Belfast and how resources have been allocated to it over other initiatives which could help the people of the East improve their lot in life via education or employment. She is keen to stress that she has no problem with people wanting to join the GAA or learn to speak Irish, but the perception that these projects have had a substantial amount of money thrown at them because they tick the boxes of what funders are looking for is one that has annoyed the local community.

I have to admit, this is a very interesting angle that I had not considered before. Anyone who is familiar with the gymnastics and conformity that is required when applying for funding will be all too aware of what is being discussed here. We have also seen how such rigid conformity has led to ridiculous situations where students of Asian descent are being denied places in universities (despite scoring highly in tests) because of diversity quotas.

Emma reveals that, in the school where she is on the Board of Governors, there are over 20 languages spoken by the pupils (which, in theory, would make it an integrated school) but because it is classed as a state school, it is not entitled to funding from the IEF (Integrated Education Fund). She also brings up Lagan College (the first integrated school in the country) and, tying it back to her views on funding, points out that although the College likes to advertise itself as being oversubscribed (with the implication that people are fighting to get into the school) the reality is that several schools in the East have closed (such as Orangefield High School and Lisnasharragh High). So not only is it not a surprise that Lagan has high levels of applications, but that kids in the area have to be bussed out to other schools due to these closures.

Sadly, this is true. In 2015, the Belfast Telegraph revealed that:

…seven children from east Belfast had not been able to get a place at a local secondary. They were forced to travel either across the city to Breda Academy, which would mean two different buses, or go outside Belfast to Dundonald or Newtownards.

While there is an argument to be made that offering alternative environments for children to be educated is a good thing, this should be at the behest of the parents and the pupil themselves.

This moved into (what has been described as) the myth that Protestant youth weren’t interested in education, which everyone on the panel greatly dispute. Davy reminisces how education was very much drilled into him from a young age while Emma reveals that, as part of her PhD, she surveyed various primary and post-primary schools in Protestant areas and found that 98% of those she engaged with made it clear that they were very much encouraged by their parents and teachers to succeed in education.

Going to the Q&A section, my question about the possibility of loyalism becoming a populist movement (similar to what we’ve seen in the USA and, to a lesser extent, the south) is greeted with scepticism by Emma, noting that it would take a singular figure to unite the warring elements within unionism/loyalism (i.e. a Trump like figure). Davy describes populism as a threat to democracy (which, although I can see where he’s coming from, I’m not 100% sure I agree with him).

I am glad to say that the discussion on stage tonight was robust, intricate, level-headed, questioning and diverse. Each panellist represented a different strand within loyalism and weren’t afraid to ask each other difficult questions or tease out scenarios where they felt issues of class were far more relevant than loyalism (such as housing, education and employment) a very welcome approach and much more in the spirit of cross-community than a lot of the funding bodies set up to deal with such issues.

Amazing, the things you can find in your city if you venture out on a wet and drizzly Saturday night.


Listen to the Shrapnel Podcast here.

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.

Loyalism 🔴 Alternative Voices — Shrapnel Podcast Live

Dr John Coulter ✍ As expected, the DUP’s annual shindig did not produce a magical breakthrough to unblock the Stormont impasse and all Unionism got was a lame-duck “making progress” waffle.

Given all the back-slapping which the DUP’s teams in the House of Commons and the Lords received, it is very clear the hardliners from the Westminster clique run the party.

Put bluntly, the numbers do not stack up for the party’s devolutionist wing to recommend a return of the power-sharing Executive this side of the Hallowe’en school holidays.

And also given the warm speech reception provided by DUP boss Sir Jeffrey Donaldson for Hilary Benn, British Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, its abundantly clear the DUP is now riding two horses ahead of next year’s expected Westminster General Election.

The policy is to continue talking to Sunak’s Tories, but also hold out hope of a better deal from Benn and Labour boss Sir Keir Starmer if Labour gets the keys to 10 Downing Street.

But all this, in terms of a deal with Labour, could be up to a year away and will the Westminster establishment have the patience to allow Northern Ireland to operate without a fully functioning Assembly?

With the bloody Israel/Hamas conflict in the Middle East now taking centre stage over even the current Russia/Ukraine conflict, the DUP will be hoping any bad news for Northern Ireland concerning the cost of living crisis, the NHS waiting lists, or the impact of the Windsor Framework will be pushed far down the political agenda.

In DUP strategical terms, the ‘long finger’ approach to power-sharing seems the obvious path, but that is assuming working class loyalism can be kept on a tight leash by political Unionism.

If working class loyalism gets a whiff that the DUP, or even political Unionism generally, is deciding to go back to Stormont and try to mess up the Windsor Framework from the inside, there is the real danger that those unelected voices who seem to be shouting from the sidelines in working class loyalism could decide that it was time for political Unionism and loyalism to part company tactically.

There is already talk of a resumption of street protests against the Windsor Framework. However, given the experience of a winter street campaign in the 1985/86 era against the then Anglo-Irish Agreement, is there seriously much of an appetite in loyalism for parades in the rain, hail or snow and freezing cold of an Ulster winter?

Yes, a few youths may decide to chuck some bottles and bricks at the PSNI in the dead of winter, but they would really be cannon fodder for the real threat - a resumption of a serious terror campaign against the Irish Republic.

Is there really a new Glenanne-style Gang of loyalists waiting in the wings, or is talk about a Right-wing loyalist backlash against the Windsor Framework merely childish sabre-rattling to gain a few media headlines?

The original Glenanne Gang was widely linked to the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan no-warning loyalist bombs which murdered around 30 people and injured dozens more.

Skeptics may say loyalism no longer has the capacity for a bombing campaign as the main loyalist terror gangs, the UDA and UVF, are more interested in criminality and drug dealing than combating the Windsor Framework.

However, the nature of terrorism has radically changed since the 9/11 attacks in America. Gone are the Seventies days of the Ulster Workers’ Council strike, which collapsed the then power-sharing Sunningdale Executive, when Northern Ireland witnessed massed ranks of loyalists marching in roads and streets.

Terror gangs are no longer organised along the lines of British Army regiments with battalions, brigades, companies and platoons. Radical Islam has perfected the concept of the cell structure where one small gang of a handful of activists does not know what another gang is doing.

This makes it more difficult for the security forces and especially the intelligence community to infiltrate these terror gangs.

Dissident republicans have already tried this tactic with the various factions - New IRA, Real IRA, Continuity IRA, ONH and Republican Action Against Drugs. Ironically, the decision by some of these terror gangs to work together has made it easier for the intelligence community to infiltrate them.

The strategy which modern day loyalists are likely to adopt in any violent campaign against the Windsor Framework is not likely to involve the UDA or UVF because of existing infiltration of them by the security forces.

The most likely campaign would be to conceive new small groups of terrorists who have no previous convictions or connections to loyalism. Such operatives would be difficult to spot as while they would be loyalists, they would not be associated with the Loyal Orders, loyalist marching bands or had a profile at previous anti-Protocol rallies.

They may not even be members of any Unionist party. In reality, they are ordinary Protestants operating well under the radar of the intelligence community.

A cell would be established with one target in mind and that is the only operation they carry out. This would be contrary to the strategies of previous terror gangs, such as the Mid Ulster Brigade of the UVF during the era of Robin ‘The Jackal’ Jackson, or Billy ‘King Rat’ Wright where numerous murders and attacks were carried out.

Likewise, it is unlikely such cells would cause chaos in Northern Ireland. The real target would be the Irish Republic. For example, in 1974 when it became clear Sunningdale was heading for the political rocks, the Irish government attempted to break the logjam by putting proposals on the table which amounted to joint authority by another name.

However, following the Dublin and Monaghan bombing massacre, the Republic’s administration withdrew its proposals. Similarly, in spite of the supposedly current booming Southern economy, does the Republic have the financial clout to withstand a no-warning and indiscriminate loyalist bombing campaign.

The Israel/Hamas conflict has clearly emphasised the horrors being suffered by the civilian populations. The South’s Achilles heel is not attacks on Gardai, the Irish Defence Forces or Leinster House elected representatives, but to target ordinary innocent civilians as was demonstrated in the 1974 attacks.

The delicate balancing act which the DUP, and political Unionism generally, must adopt is to keep the pro-Union community on board with any proposed return to Stormont whilst ensuring at the same time that militant voices within loyalism who would favour a use of violence remain unheard.

Just as Sir Jeffrey can state that he is the leader, not just of the DUP, but of overall political Unionism, another question remains - who is the real leader of loyalism? Put bluntly, are there being in the dark shadows now calling the shots?

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online. 

Loyalist Protocol Bashing - Childish Sabre-Rattling Or Sinister Plotting?

Steven Are ✍ Loyalism is at a crossroads.

On the one path our community can do what we’ve always done; that is, dig in, see conspiracy against us from every quarter, refuse to co-operate out of fear of the enemy and give no quarter safe in the knowledge that when push comes to shove we tend to become clannish and stick together no matter what.

The other requires us to acknowledge that times change, in politics as well as life, and our community will be better served with mature stewardship.

The demographics of the past 10 years have shown a slow but undeniable walk toward greater integration on the island at the behest of the most fundamental of all rights in a democratic society, the right to vote. And this is where the crux lies. Simply digging more trenches and burying our heads achieves nothing but an arse to kick. How can we possibly be defenders of Northern Ireland as a country and yet deny the outcome of democratic voting? Why are we allowing the DUP of all people to represent us going into the future?

I’ve enough white hair to remember who founded the DUP and how he led some of my friends to commit acts of violence then capriciously turn his back on them when politically expedient to do so.

The rest of his ilk still run his party along similar lines. Most galling of all is the childish behavior of refusing to restart the Assembly because they won’t be top dog any more. As any parent will tell you if a child won’t play nice the toy gets taken away, and this doesn’t mean that direct rule becomes the default forever. Eventually the bean counters always win and a SoS will call a referendum. For those who don’t think that will happen I ask you to look at Brexit and the Scot Indy ref debacle.

Cooler, wiser heads must prevail.

Loyalism is always seen as being on the right of political Unionism due to it’s history. We see ourselves, we know ourselves to be “More British than the British”. I’m saying that does not need to change. But we can do ourselves a big favour and look outward instead of inward.

If we can recognize that a United Ireland may happen isn’t it incumbent upon us to get the best deal going for us?

In this light I’m interested in the original Eire Nua model of a federal Ireland, an Ireland which has a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.

If there were to exist an Ulster Parliament say in Armagh, it would be far more in the interests of our people to be involved in it. Greater integration especially among our primary industries benefits us all.

The overarching Bill of Rights and Responsibilities would be a living instrument and not some tablet carved from a mountain sent from upon High.

A few suggestions would be a complete separation of Church and State for obvious reasons, the Responsibility to Vote (Mandatory voting), the Right to Life, the Right to be Free from subjugation from another from any quarter and the Right to Health.

The Responsibilities would include the need to be a good citizen, both domestically and globally. The Responsibility to be a Good Neighbour and the Responsibility to treat others in an ethical way.

None of what I have put forward needs to negatively affect the PUL culture and indeed was pushed by the Presbyterians on me as a child of Blackmouth parents. The conditions that gave rise to the conflict no longer exist. Dublin and the South have clearly demonstrated their horror at what was done in the name of Catholicism and as such that Church no longer has any special relationship with the State as proffered by De Valera. There is no existential threat to the PUL community except of it’s own making.

Our culture does not need to go to places it’s not welcomed, and we should welcome all curious observers. We have a rich and complex history but one that shouldn’t be backward looking, and definitely not one that can’t see anything but the past.

I welcome comments on these thoughts from every quarter.

⏩Steven Are is a Belfast quiller now living in Australia.

New Ulster?

Brandon Sullivan ✍ looks at some of the main characters in the Belfast UDA. 

Fear and Loathing Within the Belfast UDA 

Brian Nelson’s prison journal is a veritable treasure trove of information. Often mundane and petty, it nevertheless has unique historical value as an insight into the world of loyalist paramilitarism.  What is apparent from reading this journal is the breadth and depth of information that the UDA had on republicans.  What is also apparent, from looking at historical reports on killings from the period of time covered, is that the UDA usually failed to act decisively and effectively against the republicans.

The journal also reveals the personality clashes endemic within the UDA, and the rampant self-enrichment.  Nelson reported meeting Davy Payne in the mid-1980s.  Payne was now in charge of “procurement” which usually meant robberies and extortion, but unfortunately for Payne also had a much more dangerous element, of which more later.  Payne wanted the UDA to rob the Fisher Body factory in Dundonald, and asked Nelson to do intelligence-gathering work for this, promising Nelson he'd receive 10% of the proceeds of the robbery.  Nelson did what he was asked, and provided Payne with the information required.  The robbery took place, and Nelson received nothing.  Payne never mentioned it again.  Payne’s role in procurement meant that he now played a role in the importation of loyalist weapons in January 1988.  Nelson himself wrote of the role he had in the procurement of this weaponry, and whilst he doesn’t spell it out, it’s possible that Nelson ensured Payne undertook the risky business of receiving and transporting the consignment.  As ever, Balaclava Street describes what happened next brilliantly.  Apologies for the lengthy quote, but it captures the nature of events perfectly:

For reasons that are still not entirely clear, on the 8th of January 1988 Davy Payne, the UDA’s north Belfast brigadier, turned up at this location in a hired Maestro accompanied by two others, Thomas Aiken and James McCullough, each driving a hired Ford Granada. To the astonishment of the cache’s caretaker, Payne and his two companions began loading the Granadas with 61 vz. 58s (plus 124 magazines), 30 P9Ms, 150 grenades and fuses, and 11,520 rounds of ammunition – the UDA’s entire share.
As the procession left the farm, the Granadas with their rear bumpers practically scraping the ground, it is difficult to fathom exactly what Payne’s plan – if there even was one – for getting the arms safely to Belfast was. Indeed his thinking and motivation throughout the affair eludes comprehension. For whatever reason he decided to set off not on a direct route to the city but via Portadown. The main A27 road from Tandragee to Portadown was heavily patrolled by the security forces and the main entrance points to the town covered by checkpoints, which makes his decision to use this approach, and not one of the numerous back roads which criss-cross the area, all the more mystifying.
What happened next was virtually inevitable. Just three miles into their journey the UDA team were stopped by the RUC and the arms discovered. Various authors and reports have credited the seizure to a tip-off from an agent or informer, and given the extent to which the UDA was compromised at the time this is quite possible, but the sight of two heavily burdened saloon cars with their rear axles grinding along the asphalt would have immediately alerted even the most unobservant constable or squaddie. The lead Maestro, the supposed scout car, was not even equipped with a CB radio, a vital addition that Payne – evidently never having seen Smokey and the Bandit – had neglected to bring along. Given such a standard of planning the operation was doomed from the start.

Nelson had been shocked at Payne’s physical appearance when they met in 1985, following a gap of many years.  Payne, who would have been in his 30s, suffered from a heart complaint and was visibly ill.  He died in 2003, at the age of 53 – ironically, the same premature age that Brian Nelson was when he died.

The Curious Case of a UDA Brigadier Leaping Out of a Window

Throughout the Nelson journal are instances of leading UDA figures being advised by RUC sources that specific republican paramilitaries are targeting them. John McMichael was convinced that an INLA member was tracking him, and ordered Nelson to find and set up for assassination his supposed assailant – let’s call him “Bill.”  Nelson sent two men, later to be part of Johnny Adair’s inner-circle, to carry out surveillance on Bill.  Both men grew bored quickly of their task, and remonstrated with Nelson, saying they’d only do such tasks again if they were armed.  Much like he disliked Winkie Dodds, Nelson loathed these UFF members, and considered them low-lives.  Tucker Lyttle was utterly terrified, and with justifiable reason, of two specific IRA operatives.  One was Dan McCann, who the UFF, in classic Winkie Dodds “Thud & Blunder” style, tried and failed to kill during an attack on his home.  Reportedly, McCann had drifted from the IRA but became active following the botched attack.  McCann was a particularly effective IRA man, and the UDA hierarchy lived in fear of him.  Following his death, another IRA man loomed large in the fears of the UDA upper brass, let’s call him “Graham.”  It’s speculation, but one wonders if the UDA leaders were indeed being targeted by specific republicans, or if the RUC were just feeding misinformation to the UDA in the, somewhat optimistic, hope that the UDA would kill them. 

In the summer of 1988, an internal power struggle led to the ousting of Andy Tyrie and the subsequent empowering of another UDA figure, Tucker Lyttle.  Tucker, perhaps understandably, felt that he was under an enhanced threat from the IRA.  Tucker, in fact, had contacts within the RUC’s Special Branch who not only told him that he was under threat, also advised him that the IRA were considering an attack on 275A Shankill Road, where the UDA had an office (later attacked, with devastating civilian losses, by the IRA in 1993).  Lyttle was particularly frightened of “Graham” who he considered the most dangerous IRA man in Belfast following Dan McCann’s killing (some say murder) in Gibraltar.

During that summer, according to Nelson’s journal, two senior UDA men, Eric McKee and Nelson, left the UDA Office.  As they did, Nelson noticed two men standing outside, one of whom nudged the other.  Nelson asked McKee if he had noticed the two men, and McKee confirmed that he had.  McKee also agreed with Nelson that they did not recognise either man.  Suddenly, the man who nudged the other man turned abruptly and started waving his arm.  McKee grabbed Nelson, and both men, sensing an imminent IRA attack, started to run.  Nelson saw another three men, none of whom he recognised, and signalled to McKee, and they sought sanctuary behind a beef lorry parked outside of a butcher’s shop, urgently saying to McKee “there’s another three men standing at the corner of Canmore Street.”

Both men ran, until they reached Tennant Street, where they stopped and noted that they had not been pursued.  McKee said to Nelson that he was going to collect his car, and instructed Nelson to phone the UDA office and inform them of the ongoing threat outside.  Nelson did this, speaking to a UDA man named Ken who answered the phone.  "Ken, be very careful about who you let in.  We think there's a few fellas from PIRA across the street who might try to get in."  Ken reacted with "Holy shit" and dropped the phone.  Ken then shouted a warning from the bottom of some stairs, advising Tucker, and a UDA heavy named Campbell, that PIRA "were trying to get in through the front door."

Tucker, whose paranoia about an IRA attacked was all-consuming, ran from his office, picked up a chair and threw it through a window.  He then leapt out of the window.  Nelson had headed back down the Shankill, and seeing that the coast was clear, went into the office, where he found Ken and Campbell looking for Tucker.  Nelson noticed the broken window and looked out, realising that, in his haste to escape an IRA attack, Tucker had jumped out of a window three stories above ground level.  In Nelson’s words:

A quick look through the broken window revealed Tucker lying sprawled on the yard below.  By the time I got to him, an ambulance had already been summoned.  Although he was conscious, he was in shock, and it was clear he had done quote a lot of damage to himself, which was to put him in hospital for a month.  Undoubtedly, what had saved him from possible death was the stack of fish trays, belonging to the shop which occupied the ground floor, and which broke his fall. 

The following week, McKee and Nelson were on their way to another UDA office, on Gawn Street, when they discussed a news programme which had been on TV the previous evening. The police had described the hijacking of a beef lorry on the Shankill Road – the same beef lorry that McKee and Nelson had sheltered behind thinking that the IRA had come for them. It was not an IRA unit they had seen, but a group of men intent on stealing a lorry of meat. They both decided not to mention this discovery again.

Holed up in the Mater Hospital, Lyttle remained terrified that the IRA would finish him off, and ordered young UDA members to stand guard in and around the hospital. These included a then low-ranking UFF member, Johnny Adair.

The Rise of Johnny Adair

Adair rose through the ranks, and whilst his unit were obsessed with killing “Graham”, they failed, as they failed to kill any active IRA members. They did kill large numbers of nationalist civilians, but significantly fewer than the C Company of the 1970s.

A frequent claim of Adair is that republicans lived in fear of him, and cites the fortifications of their houses as evidence. Adair’s memoir details the fortifications on his own home, and those of the “main men of C Company.” Perhaps Adair compares the evident fear other and prior UDA leaders had for the IRA and compared his own attitudes to theirs. But then again, Adair still took huge precautions, and the IRAalmost killed him on a number of occasions. It also killed and wounded other members of his unit. In fact, in crude death count terms, the Belfast IRA killed more members of the Belfast UDA than vise-versa during the Adair era.

Adair remains, not least through his own efforts, synonymous with violent loyalism. But the truth is that the deeds of him and his unit didn’t match previous UDA units in terms of targeting republican militants, or political figures, or even, in the crudest possible terms, the number of nationalists murdered. Much is written of him elsewhere, and these three articles was an attempt to add to the narrative.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

Another Look At The Belfast UDA – Part IV

Brandon Sullivan ✍  with a brief overview of the UDA’s “Shopping List” killings.

By the end of the 1970s, UDA killings had decreased dramatically, but attacks on actual militant republicans were about to increase, and reach a tempo which Adair’s unit failed to match.

In March 1979, the INLA killed Conservative MP Airey MP, who was in line to become the next Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. This was a shocking blow to the British establishment, of whom Neave was a fundamental part. A number of killings of republicans followed. These killings have been linked to South Belfast UDA/UFF leader John McMichael, and are known as the “shopping list” killings. The sequence of events – Neave’s deaths followed by numerous killings of members of the organisation responsible, led to predictable, if somewhat understandable, claims of high level collusion with loyalist paramilitaries, if not direct involvement of British security forces.

The excellent blog Balaclava Street discussed the “shopping list” killings, and notes that:

If we except the UVF killing of former Sinn Fein vice-president Maire Drumm in 1976, John McMichael’s “shopping list” of 1980-81 was indeed the first time loyalist paramilitaries had gone on the offensive against republicans, in this case the INLA/IRSP and those associated with the Anti H-Block campaign. This offensive, said to have been planned in the room above McMichael’s pub, caused serious damage to the upper levels of the INLA/IRSP by eliminating Belfast OC Ronnie Bunting and political leader Miriam Daly.

The following republicans, a mixture of paramilitary and political figures, were killed:

  • John Turnley – killed 4th June, 1980 (Irish Independence Party)
  • Miriam Daly – killed 26th June, 1980 (IRSP)
  • Rodney McCormock – killed 24th August, 1980 (IRSP)
  • Ronnie Bunting – killed 15th Oct, 1980 (INLA)
  • Noel Little – killed 15th Oct, 1980 (INLA)

And then there was the attempted murder of Bernadette McAliskey and her husband, Michael, by a UDA unit which included Ray Smallwoods. Again, collusion theories abound, with one of the UDA units allegedly shouting "Fuck this for a double-cross!” upon being arrested on leaving the house.

The killing of Billy Carson, in 1979 (discussed in Part Two), would not appear out of place in the “shopping list” of UDA targets and victims – though of course Carson was IRA, and the other victims were INLA, or associated with the H-Block campaign.

Despite the protestations of Adair and his friends, Billy Carson was also the last member of the Belfast IRA killed by the UDA/UFF to appear on the IRA’s Roll of Honour, with the exception of Caoimhín Mac Brádaigh/Kevin Brady, who was killed during the attack on Milltown cemetery.

Murder on the Shankill

On the 4th August 1986, two men, reported at the time as being suspected UVF members, arrived at a council cleansing office on Huss Row, in the Shankill area. The back passenger got off and went into an office where a Technical Services Inspector was standing in for a colleague. The loyalists had somehow found out that the man in the office on that day was a Catholic. The would-be assassin’s gun jammed, and the council inspector grappled with him, got the better of him, and managed to lock himself inside an office toilet. The gunmen fled, and the man was treated for shock and a head injury. One cannot help speculating that the survivor of this nakedly sectarian attack must have been set up for murder by someone he worked with.

Later that day, an IRA unit followed UDR Sergeant Denis Taggart into Battenberg Street, off the Shankill Road (in which Lenny Murphy’s family home was at one point), and shot him dead. Ed Moloney (Sunday Tribune, 05/11/89) quoted loyalist sources saying that Denis Taggart was also a member of the UVF, though he doesn’t appear on any UVF Roll of Honour that I’ve seen. Taggart's 13-year-old son, Leonard, witnessed the killing.

A tragic postscript to the attack on the Catholic council employee, and other sectarian shootings, was the withdrawal of “meals-on-wheels” services for pensioners on the Shankill. They didn’t have enough drivers, and Catholic volunteers, understandably, did not feel safe.

The Murder of Terry McDaid

Denis Taggart’s brother Michael was also a “UVF man” according to Ed Moloney (Sunday Tribune, 05/11/89), and would later become implicated in a murder which spanned the UVF and UDA, that of Terry McDaid. Another of the dead UDR man’s brothers, Thomas Taggart, was released on compassionate parole to attend the funeral. Thomas Taggart had been convicted of the 1973 murder of Shankill Road publican Leonard Rossborough during an armed robbery carried out on behalf of the UVF. Michael Taggart became involved in an intelligence gathering ring, albeit a rather unsophisticated one, which involved a Scottish soldier, then Corporal (now Major) Cameron Hastie, and a UDR Lance Corporal, Joanne Garvin. Hastie, described at his trial as a "very fine soldier" by his regimental commandant, passed documents, including a file on politically uninvolved nationalist civilian Terry McDaid, to Garvin, which ultimately ended up in the hands of loyalist paramilitaries, including Jackie Mahood UVF), and the notorious British Army agent, and UDA Intelligence Officer, Brian Nelson.

John Ware, for The Telegraph (29/03/98), reported the following:

Winkie’ Dodds, a UDA assassin nicknamed ‘the Big Evil’, had gone to see Nelson. He asked him if he had any "targets" for him in West Belfast. Nelson had suggested Declan McDaid, a man he believed had a link to the Provisional IRA. Nelson had given Dodds what he believed to be McDaid's address … along with a photograph of him.

On May 10, as a direct consequence of Nelson's information, two men burst into 4 Newington Street and, in front of his wife and parents, fired seven bullets into the head and body of the man they believed to be Declan McDaid. His youngest daughter was in the adjoining room. She saw her father dying on the floor. But the man the UDA assassins had murdered was not, in fact, Declan McDaid. It was his brother, Terence. When Nelson asked Dodds about what had happened, the UDA man said:

We got the wrong fella. I didn't know that. I mean, the boys went in to see this fella that looks like him. I mean what are they supposed to do, go up and ask his name?

Joanne Garvin was dismissed from the UDR. Cameron Hastie went on to have a glittering career within the British Army. For all the justifiable criticism the UDR has taken, in this case they took robust action against their criminal member. Hastie’s regiment and the British Army did not. The respective calibre of Garvin and Hastie may have informed the different decisions, but it remains a despicable decision.

Such lethal bungling was to be a feature of C Company’s actions. Whilst Dodds was unrepentant and unremorseful about the botched targeting in this case, Terry McDaid’s widow, Theresa, and her children grieved for their husband and father, but poignantly called for there to be no retaliation.

William “Winkie” Dodds

If Johnny Adair’s importance in histories of the Troubles has received an excess of coverage, the same cannot be said about Winkie Dodds. Dodds was born in 1959, and had what his defence counsel described as “a very bad start in life.” A petty criminal and delinquent, in 1980 he took part in a Post Office robbery. An off-duty RUC officer witnessed the robbery, and identified Dodds going into a club afterwards. He was arrested, convicted and sentenced to 10 years, the Belfast Telegraph reporting that "the judge took into account evidence that Dodds was a man lacking in intelligence and immature for his age."

Newspaper reports had him as living rough in the Shankill area. What is interesting is that him and his brother, Milton, were in prison for the same time. Shortly after his release from prison, in 1986, Winkie Dodds became commander of a militant UDA unit within C Company. Brian Nelson linked Dodds to numerous murder attempts in the latter half of the 1980s. Whilst Dodds and his men almost always failed to kill IRA or Sinn Fein targets, they were acting off up-to-date intelligence files. Nelson described Dodds’ tactics as “thud and blunder” – kicking in doors without checking if the target was at home, and other brutal, hapless practises. But Dodds and his men did kill nationalists that were noted on security force files as republican targets. Indeed, at one point, UDA Inner Council members advised Dodds and others to ignore UDR intelligence as it was usually inaccurate as to the republican bona fides of a particular nationalist.

Brian Nelson had contempt for Dodds and other UFF members. He considered them uncouth and unintelligent, and refused requests from his army handlers to socialise with Dodds.

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

Another Look At The Belfast UDA – Part Ⅲ

Dr John Coulter ✍ the time has now come for Unionism to reform the Unionist Labour pressure group to give the Loyalist working class a real voice in politics, especially if the DUP snubs any deal agreed between the UK Government and the European Union over the future of the Protocol.

The Unionist Labour pressure group originally existed within the UUP to reach out specifically to the Loyalist working class, and Northern Ireland’s working class in general.

But maybe Unionism is asking - why a Unionist Labour pressure group when the Tories have such a commanding majority at Westminster and the British Labour Party refuses to contest elections in Northern Ireland?

In September 2019, I posed the question if the Dublin-based Irish Labour Party, one of the oldest political movements on the geographical island of Ireland, would organise north of the border and contest elections as a socialist alternative.

Sinn Fein always crowed that it was the only all-Ireland party, a point it would constantly rub in the noses of the Northern-based SDLP.

And even when the SDLP considered a merger or partnership with one of the Southern-based parties, the SDLP could not make its mind up which party to unite with given the various Left-wing factions with the Stoops - some were Fine Gael, some Labour, and some Fianna Fáil. Needless to say, the project collapsed allowing Sinn Fein to further eat into the moderate nationalist vote.

So why is now the time to revive Unionist Labour? It is certainly not a knee-jerk to the Irish Unity debate which many nationalists and republicans are currently indulging in given the rise in the Sinn Fein vote on both sides of the Irish border.

The Unionist Labour project has been resurrected because of a key document which has just been published by the British Labour Party - A New Britain: Renewing our Democracy and rebuilding our economy: Report on the Commission on the UK’s future.

Two recommendations were made by the British Labour Party in relation to Northern Ireland in the document fuel the perception the party is adopting a more pro-Union approach.

Recommendation 26: We support devolution in Northern Ireland, consistent with the principle of consent and the commitments made in the Good Friday Agreement and wish to see it restored and strengthened.

Recommendation 27: Enhanced Access to Economic Resources for Northern Ireland: The British Regional Investment Bank should maximise support for innovation and investment in Northern Ireland, in conjunction with Invest NI and the European Investment Bank.

While the British Labour Party has traditionally viewed the moderate nationalist SDLP as its sister party in Northern Ireland, this latest document from British Labour is essentially pro-Union and pro-UK in ethos.

Traditionally, too, the British Labour Party has constantly refused to formally contest seats in Northern Ireland because of this supposed link with the SDLP. Therefore, a number of unofficial Labour movements have contested elections in Northern Ireland as a result.

Historically, the ruling Unionist Party pre-1972 and the proroguing of the original Stormont Parliament sought to connect with the working class in Northern Ireland via the Unionist Labour pressure group.

However, given the influence of the middle classes and ‘Big House’ Unionist families in the UUP, many of its supporters felt the working class vote within the party was muted and opted to join the now defunct Northern Ireland Labour Party (NILP).

Unionism has constantly been accused of ignoring the working class in general and especially in the loyalist community. The reforming of Unionist Labour as a legitimate pressure group within the UUP would enable the party to reach out to that seemingly voiceless section of the Northern Ireland community.

The DUP has largely focused on the middle class voter base traditionally held by the UUP. While the DUP initially under the late Rev Ian Paisley portrayed itself as the voice of the Loyalist working class, the DUP needed to become a middle class movement if it was to successfully overtake the UUP in elections.

Working class loyalist movements, such as the Progressive Unionists (PUP) and Ulster Political Research Group (UPRG), are too closely linked to loyalist terror groups.

Indeed, given the influence of Christian fundamentalism in the Protestant working class, anything smelling politically of socialism was either a communist plot or ‘off the devil.’

Left-wing politics were largely shunned by Unionism because of the socialism pushed by the political wings of the various republican terror groups - the Workers’ Party (Official IRA), Sinn Fein (Provisional IRA), and Irish Republican Socialist Party (INLA).

Historically, too, Unionism also dismissed any Left-wing ideology as James Connolly, one of the leaders of the 1916 Easter Rising, was a founder member of his own communist party - the Irish Socialist Republican Party.

For example, some Christian fundamentalists even branded the PUP in Belfast as the ‘Shankill Soviet’, comparing working class socialist movements within Unionism as being akin to the structures of the Communist Party in the old Soviet Union.

The Unionist Labour pressure group would be an ideal vehicle for steering loyalists away from the paramilitaries and towards a purely democratic way forward and also as a means of mobilising among the working class.

Unionist Labour should not be a stunt to revive UUP fortunes among the working classes, especially in Loyalism. All of Unionism needs to address the issue - if the Protocol cannot be amended and Stormont is mothballed, how do we prevent working class loyalists taking to the streets in a violent rioting backlash?

Speaking of a backlash, nominations are closing this week for the annual Coulter’s Coveted Cock-Up Cups and Awards which have been running since 2009. As ever, competition is fierce for the Top Tit Trophy and especially the much sought after Gobshite Cup. The results will be announced on St Stephen’s Day or Boxing Day depending on your religious beliefs!


Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online. 

Time To Reform Unionist Labour To Give Loyalism A Real Voice

Brandon Sullivan ✒ ✍ delves into the activities of John White, Davy Payne, Kenny McClinton: C Company in the early 1970s.Ⅱ

John White, along with Davy Payne, and Kenny McClinton were founding members of the UDA’s Shankill Road C Company, according to Johnny Adair’s autobiography. When White was asked how he could have stabbed Irene Andrews (murdered along with SDLP Stormont Senator Paddy Wilson in 1973) to death he replied “we thought she was a Catholic.” Like Adair, Kenny McClinton enjoys publicity, and like White, spoke of using a knife in their loyalist terrorism. McClinton described loyalist violence like this:

People in loyalist circles are driven by ideals and the defence of their country. The only reason for them to exist is to defend the loyalist community. It is cause and effect. The IRA rebellion was the cause. The effect is armed loyalism.

McClinton was jailed for two murders; a politically uninvolved Catholic civilian, and a Protestant bus driver. Neither killing had any effect on “the IRA rebellion.” Why would they?

Davy Payne is suspected of being involved in murders, some involving the use of knives and torture. Kevin Myers wrote a memorable eulogy about Payne, on another occasion describing him as “one of the most ferocious savages in the history of Irish terror.” The sadly now defunct blog “Vixens With Convictions” also wrote of a sordid double murder Payne was alleged to have been involved in, that of Patrick O’Neill and the singer Rosemary McCartan.

Whilst White is typically exaggerating when he says C Company were responsible for “90%” of sectarian murder from 1972 – 1976, it is true that the west Belfast UDA had within its ranks pitiless murderers and sadists with the drive and capacity to murder any nationalist civilians that they could get access to, often after barbaric abduction and torture. From teenage boys, to middle aged mothers, the 1970s Belfast UDA murdered on scale, and at pace. They killed far more people than the Adair era UDA did.

What effect did this have on the IRA? Well, it didn’t affect their capacity to kill large numbers of RUC members, British Army soldiers, UDR members, and Protestant civilians, and neither did it put them off a wild campaign of bombing “economic targets” that reduced much of Northern Ireland to rubble. Recruitment never seemed to suffer, and in fact some IRA figures openly admitted that loyalist murder kept the volunteers coming:

IRA reaction to the double murder (Patrick O’Neill and Rosemary McCartan) was callous indifference. Former IRA Chief of Staff Daithi O’Connell coolly explained in an interview that Catholic victims of loyalist death squads served to increase recruitment to the IRA’s ranks and kept sectarian hatred perennially on the boil.

John White himself, acknowledged that he and his organisation's campaign of violence against the nationalist population had zero effect on the IRA, though he did say that it curtailed the social lives of Catholics. It also inflicted desperate suffering and grief on nationalists, as well as subjecting once proud loyalist areas of the North to gangster rule. Payne was known for his brutality to his own men, and as we have seen, McClinton murdered a Protestant bus driver.

“Davy Payne Does the Military Reaction Force (MRF) a Big Favour”

Much has been written about collusion. It is undoubtedly true that it took place, and did so from the chaotic early days of the conflict. How successfully loyalists parlayed that collusion into effective action against the IRA is debatable.

Ed Moloney (with James Kinchin-White) on his excellent blog TheBrokenElbow wrote that:

official papers from 1971 show the Heath cabinet agreed a potential intelligence relationship with ‘Protestant vigilantes’ – ‘civil defence’ groups could be ‘tolerated’ – dealings would be ‘unofficial & local.’


This agreement was made at a “Gen 47” meeting held in October 1971. As Moloney writes:

… the UDA was soon wading in blood and that … when the GEN 47 committee convened in London, the UDA had been responsible for just 4 deaths (including two UDA men killed by their own bomb). And because of a policy never to claim killings, unlike the IRA which invariably admitted its violence, it was never clear when the UDA had murdered people. The following year the UDA killed 72 people – one every five days and the reality that lay behind this particular ‘civil defence’ group was bloodily apparent.

Central to the Belfast UDA’s killing campaign was Davy Payne. Despite, or possibly because of this, Payne had good working relationships with some factions of the British security services. When a three man MRF unit was apprehended by an angry loyalist crowd (the British army estimated 150), who thought they’d captured an IRA cell, local loyalists made off with valuable materiel from the MRF car. The military log recorded that during the incident:

The MRF men were then kicked and punched by the Prot crowd. Mil ptl then arrived and managed to get the 3 MRF men out. They were taken to Flax St (one badly beaten up, two slightly injured) One wpn lost (Sgt Williams’ 9mm pistol) in the crowd and the RUC took possession of Lcpl Kinlock’s 9 mm pistol. By the time the car was recovered the red folder (which contains nominal role, codes, c/s, RV’s in city registered initials etc) was missing.

The MRF got their valuable materiel back courtesy of Davy Payne – who was recorded as a “contact” of the army. The full story is fascinating, and it’s worth reading the MRF files on TheBrokenElbow. Interestingly, the “Sgt Williams” is “Taffy” Williams, charged by the RUC with the attempted murder of Nationalists, but found not guilty.

Moloney’s note about 72 murders committed by the UDA is relevant to this article. Adair’s UDA never carried out anything like that many killings in such a condensed period of time. And his unit perhaps did not have anyone like Payne in it.

A Short History of Davy Payne

The Sunday World has reported that Davy Payne was related by marriage to John White. Kevin Myers wrote that what separated Payne from most other UDA members was his “astonishing readiness to kill.” In October 1972, Payne was charged with possession of a large cache of weapons which were kept in a lock-up garage owned by him. He was found not-guilty, but interned shortly afterwards. The Irish Sunday Independent (27/10/74) interviewed him, and noted that he had just spent ten months interned without trial. Payne, bizarrely, said at an internment hearing he had 15 security force witnesses appear against him, accusing him of the murder of Paddy Wilson, and being commander of the UFF. Payne had two Catholics support his release: “One is a builder here on the Shankill who gave me a character reference, and the other is a Catholic woman from Andersonstown whom I had helped.

When asked about sectarian murder, Payne said “I can understand how some people on our side could justify this type of murder. Personally, I would not engage in a sectarian battle." Payne also claimed, probably with good cause, that the Official IRA had him “under sentence of death.” It is unclear if the OIRA, or the PIRA, ever did try to kill him. His “own side” certainly did, as we shall see, in 1978.

The Belfast Telegraph (12/05/75) reported that:

The UDA's brigade commander in North Belfast, Mr. David Payne, saved the Jolly Roger Club in Alliance Avenue from serious damage on Saturday night when he carried a bomb clear.

Payne had nipped the fuse of the bomb, and then carried it (the bomb was contained in a satchel) to a piece of waste ground using a bamboo pole. The reported noted that the UVF had denied that they planted the bomb. In 1976, the IRA opened up on the Jolly Roger, killing two politically uninvolved Protestants, and a UDA member, William Archer, was shot dead outside it on another occasion. At some point after 1976, Payne was relieved of his command of the North Belfast UDA over allegations of the misappropriation of funds.

Payne then shocked militant loyalism when he openly supported the “Peace People” movement, giving speeches rejecting violence, and being involved in the administration of a £10,000 grant in 1978 (Magill 01/03/78). Given that Payne was ejected from role as a UDA leader it would be easy to view his conversion to peace as cynical and opportunistic, but the UDA nonetheless attempted to kill him over it. One week after he gave a speech at a Peace People rally in Ballymena, gunmen arrived at Payne home and opened fire, wounding him in the leg. The gunmen were presumably unmasked, and their fates are unknown, as is the effect the attempted murder had on Payne’s commitment to peace.

By 1980, Payne was running Crumlin Road Opportunities, a cross-community project aimed at training with vocational skills young people who would contemporaneously be described as NEET – Not in Education, Employment, or Training. Trainees included Johnny Adair (who discusses the project in his autobiography) and Skelly McCrory. McCrory was at an event hosted by the Lord Mayor of Belfast in 1982. The Lord Mayor, Tommy Patton, “paid particular tribute” to Payne (Belfast Telegraph, 18/06/82).

The project Payne managed was situated in Ewart’s Mill. In 1972 a nightwatchman employed at Ewart’s Mill, Thomas Madden, was sadistically murdered. Payne has been linked to the shockingly brutal murder of Mr Madden by a number of historians. Tom Madden’s employment at the Mill would have been known to his assailants. One wonders if Davy Payne ever spared a moment for Tom Madden as he held court in Ewart’s Mill, whilst drawing a government salary and administering £120k of UK and European Social Fund money (over £550k nowadays adjusting for inflation).

Perhaps predictably, Payne was sacked from Crumlin Road Opportunities for the same reason he was relieved of his command of the North Belfast UDA (having his fingers in the till). He was later allowed back in, with disastrous results for the post Anglo-Irish Agreement era UDA. Also worth reading the Balaclava Street article which covers Payne's final hurrah for the UDA. Ed Moloney noted that it was one Brian Nelson who was meant to take delivery of a massive shipment of loyalist weaponry, but he ducked out at the last minute, leaving the hapless Davy Payne to pick up the slack.

The UDA in Belfast towards the end of 1970s

Whilst 14 year old Samuel McCrory was getting hammered literally for anti-social behaviour in 1979, the UDA/UFF (according to the imperfect CAIN resource) in Belfast killed two republicans: an OIRA activist named Joseph McKee, and a Provo, Billy Carson. The UDA/UFF also killed at least six politically uninvolved nationalists, and were involved in feud killings.

One of the men convicted of killing Carson was named David Milton Dodds, the other was a man named Mullan. Another man named Dodds, “Winkie” became a senior C Company figure in the 80s and 90s, ultimately falling foul of Adair as did his brother, Milton Dodds. A source indicated that David Milton Dodds is Winkie Dodds brother, though I cannot say for sure if he is or not. There are two years between them in age.

The murder of Carson was unusual for the UDA at that time. It involved a high level of planning, and up-to-date intelligence. Dodds and Mullan called at Carson’s home, but he wasn’t in. They returned later that day, and sat with his family until Carson finally arrived home, at which point they shot him dead. This was a killing which wouldn’t have been out of place in John McMichael’s “shopping list” of killings in 1980 and 1981 (more of which in part 3). It was arguably more sophisticated a killing, with a more consequential impact on the IRA, than anything Adair’s C Company did.

The ratio of republican to nationalist victims of UDA violence in 1979 was unusually high, and the number of victims significantly lower than previous years, but otherwise 1979 was very much business as usual for the UDA in Belfast.

In 1980, members of the UDA’s C Company committed a murder which was as brutal as anything committed in the 1970s, and as futile as any carried out by Adair’s outfit a decade later. A juvenile delinquent, Alex “Oso” Calderwood beat an unarmed and defenceless nationalist, Alexander “Speedy” Reid to death with a concrete breeze block. As Calderwood put it:

“I grew up hating Roman Catholics and that’s the honesty about it because I don’t think I was politically aware. It was basically sectarianism at its heaviest. I joined the UDA when I was 16 years of age, in C Company with people like Bucky McCullough, Tucker Lyttle and Jimmy Craig.

The INLA killed Bucky McCullough, Adair’s rise to prominence would be occasioned by Lyttle’s fall from UDA grace, and Jim Craig was allegedly killed by individuals linked to Adair. And, of course, former associates of Adair’s would murder and secretly bury the son of UDA legend Bucky McCullough.

UDA killings had decreased dramatically, but attacks on actual militant republicans were about to increase, and reach a tempo which Adair’s unit failed to match.

More in part three…

⏩ Brandon Sullivan is a middle aged, middle management, centre-left Belfast man. Would prefer people focused on the actual bad guys. 

Another Look At The Belfast UDA – Part Ⅱ

Dr John Coulter ✍ If the Northern Ireland Protocol remains on the political table well into next year, will we see the old chestnut of an independent Ulster once again find itself up for discussion in the loyalist community?

While 2023 will, hopefully, see me clock up 45 years reporting on political developments in Northern Ireland, at times of crisis for Unionism, it seems loyalists prefer to beat the Ulster Independence drum from time to time.

The inability of Unionism to rid itself of the Northern Ireland Protocol, which is posing a clear threat to the future of the Stormont institutions, especially as the cost of living crisis begins to bite hard over the winter months, loyalists are again turning to the concept of an independent Ulster - especially as Unionism is now a minority ideology at Stormont, and the recent census shows that the gap between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland has all but evaporated.

It should be noted that when Unionism feels the Union is safe, an independent Ulster is always off the table as a ‘nonstarter’. But if the body politic in Unionism feels Northern Ireland has been placed on a slippery slope to a united Ireland, the independent Ulster drum is well and truly battered!

It’s been almost four years since the last time such a drum was beaten - and that was in the aftermath of Brexit. I last penned an article on an independent Ulster in July 2019.

In all reality, an independent Ulster has been viewed as more of ‘doomsday solution’ than a serious workable alternative to the ending of the Union. It was always seen as a purely loyalist and Protestant solution and never took account of the number of pro-Union folk from the Catholic community.

Its first real serious entry into the Unionist political arena came in the aftermath of the collapse of the Sunningdale power-sharing Executive following the Ulster Workers’ Council strike of 1974. Essentially, Unionism had no workable alternative to Sunningdale, so independence for Ulster was on the agenda for loyalism by default!

At that time, it was being pushed by the Vanguard Unionist movement, then one of the most influential pressure groups within the pro-Union community. But Vanguard made the error of becoming a separate political party and by the end of the Seventies was almost defunct as a movement.

The Ulster Defence Association dabbled with the concept of Ulster independence to give the terror group a distinct political agenda compared to the overt socialism of the rival Ulster Volunteer Force’s political wing, the Progressive Unionist Party.

It would not be until 1985 and the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which gave Dublin its first real say in the running of Northern Ireland since partition in the 1920s, that Ulster Independence would emerge seriously again.

The Dublin accord mobilised a section of the loyalist community which had been politically silent for a number of years. A series of militant organisations were launched, all with an agenda linked to an independent Ulster.

As part of the broad Ulster Says No campaign, the UDA openly erected recruitment posters. A grassroots movement known as the Ulster Clubs was launched, mirroring the Unionist Clubs which were formed in the early 1900s to combat the influence of the Home Rule for Ireland movement.

The red-berated Ulster Resistance paramilitary group emerged in 1986, again with a pro-independence agenda to combat the threat to the Union. The UDA, Ulster Resistance and the Ulster Clubs were all advocating an independent Ulster in some shape.

More overt pro-independence groups emerged, such as the Ulster Movement for Self-Determination (MSD), and the Ulster Independence Committee (UIC).

MSD wanted a nine-county independent Ulster with Southern border counties being used as security ‘buffer zones’ between the new loyalist state and the Republic of Ireland. The UIC version of independence was based on the current six-county Northern Ireland.

Now, with the prospect of a total collapse of Stormont if a future Assembly election does not result in the restoration of the devolved institutions and a potential Sinn Fein government in the Dail, loyalists are again revisiting their independence option.

But the brutal reality which the pro-independence lobby within loyalism continually cannot answer is - who will bankroll an independent Ulster?

It certainly won’t be Westminster as the concept of an independent Ulster is based on the view that the London establishment wants to cut Northern Ireland adrift from the Union.

Indeed, would the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, which represents some 50 national and regional parliaments across the globe be prepared to fund the new statelet? This could be a non-starter given the influence of the British Government in the CPA.

It won’t be the Americans given the massive influence which the Irish American lobby wields, particularly within the Democratic Party in the United States.

That only leave three significant power blocks for an independent Ulster to look towards - rejoining the European Union, China and Russia.

Given the war in Ukraine and the growing tensions in China, neither of these superpowers are in a current position to take on the bill for an independent Ulster.

In short, Ulster independence remains a theoretical debating topic. Until loyalists can find a significant financial sponsor who will fund independence, the concept will remain nothing more than a sabre-rattling agenda.

Its danger is that it could propel the hardmen of Ulster loyalism to the fore as a significant force against the Protocol.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online. 

Will Ulster Independence Re-Emerge On The Loyalist Agenda In 2023?

Christopher Owens ✒ invites Gareth Mulvenna to discuss his new podcast, co-launched with Sam McIlwaine.

Dr. Gareth Mulvenna needs no introduction to readers of this blog, but one thing they might not be aware of is that he has launched a new podcast with fellow researcher Sam McIlwaine. Titled Shrapnel, it is available on Apple Podcasts and describes its mission statement as a podcast looking “…at pieces of the past in Northern Ireland . . .  bring you the voices and conversations that aren't given a platform by the mainstream media.”

Once again, I am grateful to Dr. Mulvenna for taking time to answer these questions.

CO: What was the impetus behind starting up the Shrapnel Podcast?

GM: Around five and a half years ago Sam contacted me on Twitter, and we started chatting about the current state of loyalism and some of the historical aspects of my research. We then met up in a KFC for a coffee and a solid friendship blossomed from there. We started going for regular walks and chatted about the topics above but also about our shared experiences of mental health and anxiety. We often talked about how brilliant it would be to invite other people into the conversation to get another dimension on what we were talking about. Sam comes from the Shankill and identifies as a loyalist and a socialist, I come from north Belfast and find it difficult to identify as anything. Sam is a few years older than me, and we come from very different backgrounds, but as adults we have shared concerns and interests, and these are what drove us to realise ‘we aren’t hearing these conversations reflected in the mainstream media’ so we need to take the challenge onboard ourselves and see where it goes.

Brian Smyth of the Green Party was on the Echo Chamber podcast around the time of the April 2021 riots, and he recommended me to Tony and Martin. I could talk about what was happening within loyalism at that time to a southern audience with a degree of expertise given my background in research and writing, but I felt that they could benefit from hearing from Sam. I think initially Sam was a bit reticent to raise his head above the parapet, but he soon realised that people need to understand that loyalists aren’t Neanderthals; that’s the public misconception, which I feel is driven by the media and commentators. Of course, there are some loyalists who play straight into that by acting to the stereotypes.

CO: What do you hope to achieve with it?

GM: We hope to look at how the past has shaped the current state of loyalism and unionism. Shrapnel was a name we decided on to reflect the idea that damage spreads out and inflicts pain on a large number of people; that painful events in the past can determine peoples’ feelings about the society they currently inhabit. It’s about giving a platform to people who speak a bit of sense and don’t just say what’s popular for likes and adulation. It doesn’t mean we are always going to speak to people who agree with either of us. Sam and I would disagree on many issues, and although I have written about loyalism, I’d certainly be no cheerleader for it. However, I have said before, I have empathy for people I’ve worked with on storytelling and oral history. These voices need to be heard. It always grinds my gears when the same commentators, with a few notable exceptions, are trotted out by the BBC and UTV to say the same meaningless thing every time. It’s easy to be there on the outside throwing brickbats and adopting an almost smug attitude toward communities that you have very little experience of, and it’s what I see happening quite a lot these days.

But Shrapnel isn’t just about loyalism and unionism; we want to talk about men’s mental health and addiction. We want to hear from people who are very often bypassed by the press and media. It’s easy to go on Twitter and inflame peoples’ feelings by typing out a few stanzas of bile; its less easy to go face to face with other human beings and explain yourself. We aren’t going to be adversarial, but we won’t let people off the hook if we think they need to be challenged.

CO: Is it a rebrand of Hidden Histories, or something separate?

GM: Something separate, totally. Myself and Sam collaborated on the penultimate episode of HH with the chat we had with Brian Allaway, but this is a very different beast. I’d still like to do something purely Troubles-focused, but I’m increasingly finding the subject emotionally exhausting. It’s taken its toll.

CO: In the climate, where podcasts are overtaking the mainstream media, what do you see as positive and negative aspects of the industry and are there issues that would solely apply to here?

GM: I think there is always a role for mainstream media, but I’m glad to see the playing field being levelled. When Lyra McKee started crowdfunding ten years ago, she came in for some criticism from a few journalists who were of the opinion ‘she hasn’t got her stripes yet’. Lyra knew the sands were shifting and she was a visionary in many respects. If you have a voice, if you have a story, if you have the abilities to write and talk to people then do it. Yes, having the background in journalism is nice, but some people don’t have the luxury of studying again. Ever since I was 11 or so I wanted to be a journalist. When I was sent to the Sunday World as a 17-year-old on a work experience placement it shattered my understanding of journalism and what I had anticipated it to be. I was lucky enough to work closely with Marty O’Hagan and I really liked him, and big Jim McDowell was personable enough, but the others were aloof, arrogant and disinterested. I’ve had a few minor scrapes with newspapers over the years – whether it be them misrepresenting me, or as in the case of the Belfast Telegraph, ignoring my pitches completely, and sadly those experiences just reinforced my feelings about local journalism.

Now, there are many journalists I hugely admire. People like Rodney Edwards, Henry McDonald, Malachi O’Doherty and Freya McClements, but I feel that too many journalists bring their prejudice and agenda into their writing, and that isn’t good for us as a society.

I suppose the big problem with podcasts is quality control, and that’s one of the downsides of the democratisation process. Anyone anywhere can get a podcasting kit and the next day their podcast will be on Spotify or iTunes. Some of the absolute shit I have listened to about Northern Ireland is incredible. There’s no quality control, no thought given to basics such as facts. But the important thing is that if you can do it right, and I think me and Sam are doing that with the guidance of Tony and Martin of the Tortoise Shack/Echo Chamber, then the world is your oyster. And if someone comes behind us and does it better, then that’s good for us.

CO: Are there other podcasts related to NI that you would recommend?

GM: I really like Stray Bullets by E.S. Haggan. He’s a former RUC officer who channels his PTSD and anxiety about what he experienced in service during the 1980s into fantastic pieces of writing and memory which translate evocatively to the podcast medium. To be honest Chris, I find that when I’m listening to podcasts – which is often – I like something a bit different to what I research and write about. My favourites are The Price of Football, The Adam Buxton Podcast and Faculty of Horror.

CO: In relation to men's mental health, you've written about how you are often contacted by men around the same age as us whose fathers has been in paramilitary organisations, but never discussed it with the family. Can you elaborate on why you think this is a potential time bomb not only in terms of legacy but mental health as well?

GM: I was contacted a few years ago by one young man around the same age as myself whose father had been in jail for a very long time. His father had never talked to him or opened up about why he had been in jail, but the young man knew that he had been involved in loyalist paramilitarism in the 1970s. I knew of the fella’s dad – the case – and was able to advise him that there was material in the public domain. He was adamant that he wanted to know more, even though I warned him of the potential ‘pandora’s box’ effect. I showed him the newspaper article relating to his dad’s conviction and directed him to other sources such as the Public Record Office. Some people aren’t aware that they can apply to access these records under FOIA. The fella was obviously very shocked when he read the article, but he thanked me, and it allowed him to broach friends of his dad in Scotland who gave him a bit more context about what life was like in 1970s Belfast. I gave him a copy of Tartan Gangs as well, and he found that useful. I think it’s difficult for fathers and sons to communicate in general. Guys from my generation and before are very rarely encouraged to hug our dads or show any affection to them. That makes it harder to be deep in terms of conversations as well, I think.

Imagine what it must be like, though, knowing that your dad had been in jail for something during the Troubles, but you didn’t know how to broach the subject, or your dad couldn’t articulate what he had been through. That’s what the uncomfortable reality is in our society; that often the victim-makers are among the most damaged people and that can bleed into their families – intergenerational trauma like victims and their families. Male suicide rates are through the roof, and I think this is a further challenge within loyalist communities where you have all these guys who can’t talk to their children about what they were involved in because the community saw them as pariahs when they were released from jail. On the republican side there is more of a community spirit and former prisoners are welcomed back into the community; into the political machine; into cultural and sporting pursuits. There’s little of equivalence on the loyalist side – they are given an arm’s length by people and politicians, and that leads to an unhealthy cycle where people feel invalidated and young men further bottle up their feelings about who they are and where they’ve come from. I honestly think there’s a huge study to be done on the subject. Maybe it’s something the mental health champion can look at?

CO: In terms of what you're saying re. loyalist alienation from the wider Unionist community, this is something that has been expressed since, at least, the 70's. Yet, the likes of John Taylor (when interviewed for Loyalists) will freely admit that there is a sneaking regard within Unionism. This attitude, to me, not only suggests a huge double standard, but also an abusive relationship. Do you find such views are held by former loyalist prisoners, which then furthers the alienation?

GM: I think John Taylor ultimately speaks for himself. If you ask other unionists, they certainly wouldn't have the sneaking regard that he mentioned. It's difficult to analyse the unionist community in those black and white terms. Where this attitude does exist, it speaks to a massive double standard. Former loyalist prisoners, in general, or those I've spoken to, to be precise, don't have much time for the politicians. However, the politicians have always been good at whipping up tensions and blinding people with constitutional anxieties. There was an entire generation of loyalist militants who went through the cages of Long Kesh and who came out as political thinkers and community advocates. Their opportunities were stymied from the off though as the constitutional politicians were afraid of losing their power base. The PUP for example were talking to their constituencies about the issues that are directly relevant to their day to day lives and trying to make a difference by bringing normal politics to the fore. This can and has been swept away by the politics of fear as espoused by the large unionist parties. It's a never-ending cycle.

CO: Over the summer, we've seen a lot of discussions (most of them bad faith) on (where else) Twitter around legacy issues which has seemingly descended into a mixture of whataboutery, trolling and deliberate antagonism, even from so called respectable commentators. With the level of vitriol on display, do you see any hope for this place?

GM: Increasingly, no.

 As I’ve said before, Twitter exposes the two chauvinisms on offer in this small place. Instead of trying to understand each other, they constantly seek to belittle one another, poking the proverbial bear and shovelling poisonous bile down each other’s throats. This isn’t just the domain of trolls; it has become mainstream and normalised in many instances. Thankfully I know that there are a lot of good people out there who come from different backgrounds who are working together, but loyalists feel that the roles have been reversed from the pre-Trouble’s era. They see republicans in the ascendancy, as triumphalist. What I would ask those people – the loyalists – is, how do you react positively rather than in a knee-jerk fashion as you have always done? They feel that even the moderates are on the side of republicans now. It’s very difficult for a community to absorb that level of negativity, either real or perceived, and have anything positive to say or do. We need more honest conversations across the board. Republicans will always want a united Ireland while very few loyalists would entertain the transition into a united Ireland. Irish history unfortunately demonstrates that people resort to arms when things don’t go their way. In that respect it’s more important than ever to realise the harm of rhetoric and not to get caught up in emotions. It's sad Christopher.

I’ve never once thought about leaving Northern Ireland, but over the past couple of years I’ve considered it – for my family more than anything. Our petty differences will always define us to some extent, and I am sure a lot of people are exhausted by it all; particularly those of us who either remember the violence of the Troubles or the tail end of it all.

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist.

⏩ Gareth Mulvenna is an historian of loyalism. Follow on Twitter @gmulvenna1980.

Shrapnel ✑ In Quillversation with Gareth Mulvenna

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)