Last week the DUP's Gregory Campbell shared a Feile an Phobail platform with Sinn Féin's Alex Maskey, journalist Susan McKay and Palestinian Ishmael Alhintii. Previous DUP reaction to unionist participation was not so positive. In 1995 I shared the same platform with Martin McGuinness and Albert Reynolds resulting in the DUP calling for my suspension from the UUP. Ian Paisley Jnr said my participation was deplorable, adding that: "Unionists will not trust a party which indulges with Sinn Féin-IRA."
When senior Ulster Unionist Dermot Nesbitt participated in the festival in 1999 Sammy Wilson described the event as "a republican festival". Today the DUP no longer despises Feile an Phobail.
One of the first questions was whether Mr Maskey had betrayed his republican principles by laying a wreath at the Cenotaph. To howls of laughter this was put to Mr Campbell who was reluctant to comment but said that republicans must decide if they are democrats or supporters of violence.
Noel Thompson, who chaired the meeting, asked if Mr Campbell saw the wreath laying as a cynical move? Mr Campbell said it was a ploy for which Sinn Féin deserved criticism because of what he described as their continued support for violence. Mr Maskey said that even DUP members had supported his actions. It was all too easy to talk about equality we had to "do something to demonstrate it". Susan McKay supported Mr Maskey saying that it was a liberating act for many west Belfast people whose relatives served in British forces but who had been unable to talk about such things. A unionist asked Mr Campbell when and what he would accept from republicans? Mr Campbell complained that there was no acknowledgement of the terror, pain, agony, murder and arson inflicted upon unionists over 35 years. Once that happened and was physically manifested with weapons decommissioned and the IRA disbanded, the DUP would respond. Mr Maskey spoke of 30,000 voters as a reality that Mr Campbell had to face and one that was not going away.
I then suggested that Mr Campbell had made an important point meriting a more serious response and was later supported by Ms McKay who said "a lot of Protestants are concerned about the IRA". Mr Maskey said if the peace process were allowed to work it would produce an end to arms. The chair interjected saying that getting rid of weapons was part of the process. Mr Maskey agreed, but emphasised "ALL arms", adding that he had gone around the country defending republican actions in support of peace. He said that many locals would be terrified if the IRA no longer existed.
Someone asked if the panel would shake Ariel Sharon's hand in a peace process, bearing in mind his involvement in massacres. Mr Alhintii said a definite "no" on the grounds that Mr Sharon was guilty of war crimes and should not be accepted anywhere. Mr Maskey was uncomfortable with this and said republicans were trying to make peace with unionists and he would applaud Palestinians trying to make peace with Israelis. If Mr Sharon were in a peace process he would shake his hand. In contrast, Mr Campbell said that if he viewed Mr Sharon as Mr Alhintii did, he would not shake his hand. One man received a rousing reception after saying that as a former RUC constable he recently shook the hand of Joe Cahill the veteran republican. He cherished the warmth of a handshake based on mutual respect.
Few people can easily greet those who have grievously hurt them or their people. At the same time Mr Campbell and Mr Alhintii would not find it easy to maintain this stance when meeting enemies offering a sign of peace. Any refusal to greet people can be hurtful and is akin to striking someone across the face. The real purpose of a handshake is to demonstrate that we have no weapons concealed and that we wish opponents no harm. The former RUC man who shook Cahill's hand opened a life–giving space in which freedom can grow and create possibilities for human happiness. In itself a handshake doesn't solve anything but it makes new beginnings possible.
Jesus, whom many people here claim to follow, associated with the disreputable, with members of the establishment and with revolutionaries – who must have committed atrocities. He caused consternation by having fellowship with hated exploiters of his people and he enjoyed the company of women of ill repute. He died a cruel death at the hands of the good people he challenged by these actions. We all have choices to make and these demand courage when around us we see evidence of the damage inflicted by our enemies. Most unionists, nationalists, loyalists, republicans and others face the same dilemma but also the same possibilities.
