The dull rumbling sound following Gerry Adams's announcement of a republican reaching-out to unionism could have been thunder. More likely it was the sound of unionist politicians' feet, determined to put as much distance between themselves and Sinn Féin as possible.
Certainly the republican party have their work cut out, and Alban Maginness's response wasn't much of a leg-up. Sinn Féin are playing catch-up to the SDLP, Maginness declared, and anyway, deeds, not words are what matter.
There's some truth in the catch-up comment, but he's wrong about the deeds and words. If John Hume and Gerry Adams hadn't had the courage to engage in discussions, despite media vilification and opposition from within their own parties, the IRA ceasefires and all that has flowed from them might never have happened. Words and deeds aren't alternatives, they're combinations.
Mind you, even on their own, words can be powerful. Remember following the Good Friday Agreement, when Gerry Adams complimented David Trimble for his role? Within days the Sinn Féin leader's "Well Done David" was plastered on walls in unionist areas, not as a compliment but as an accusation. And of course unionists of all hues, from the bleak reaches of DUPery to the twinkling charms of Dermot Nesbitt, have proved incapable of following civilised etiquette in the presence of their opponents. Moral self-righteousness is so ingrained in unionist thinking, shaking a republican hand has all the attractions of squeezing the contents of a poop-scoop.
But it won't do. Somewhere, someone in the ranks of unionism is going to have to step forward and embrace change, otherwise unionism is doomed. The recently published booklet A Long Peace: The Future of Unionism in Northern Ireland got a lot of attention because of what it said about the Orange Order. It said several other things also.
Like this. "In relative terms, its (the north of Ireland's) manufacturing sector now receives fifty times as much subsidy as English manufacturing, with between a third and a half of manufacturing capital expenditure coming from the public purse during the 1990s (the figure in England was 1% in 1995). Most of this money has been squandered, with Northern Ireland's productivity levels low compared to the rest of the UK, itself not an impressive performer against international benchmarks."
Read that and the words "life-support system" and "terminal" spring to mind. But not, it seems, to the mind of David Trimble. In the section titled 'Learning to Win', he says: "It is not in our interest for Northern Ireland to appear to be a failed political entity, or something that does not work."
But that's exactly how it appears. The economic figures suggest that the north of Ireland isn't working, can't work. And the actions of David and his Amazing Collapsing Assembly over the past four years suggest that politically, it isn't working and can't work either.
At Queen's University Bookshop last week, another book with some relevance to our situation was launched: Uneasy Ethics by Professor Simon Lee, late of this parish. In the chapter titled 'Northern Ireland: Uneasy Peace', the professor refers to the stereotype of Protestants and Catholics here.
"Both teams are seen as believing in certainties, but Protestants are perceived to read texts and contexts in straightforward ways while Catholics are thought to pursue subtexts with some worldly experience or cunning."
That's the perception. Let's test the reality against the Good Friday Agreement. Under the heading 'Constitutional Matters', Section 1 (ii) we find: "A united Ireland can only be achieved with and subject to the agreement and consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland."
Catholics and Protestants signed up to this in 1998. Many nationalists/republicans did so with considerable misgivings, since it requires them to turn aside from their belief that a majority of the people in Ireland, not Northern Ireland, should decide regarding Irish unity. But they read the document, swallowed hard and signed.
Unionists too signed. But since that day the air has been thick with unionist insistence that should a majority of people in the North vote for a united Ireland, this would be insufficient: the Good Friday Agreement looks as if it says an overall majority, but it really means a unionist majority.
This from politicians who continue to present themselves as plain-dealing, my-word-is-my-bond people.
It is in the interests of republicanism that Gerry Adams work for reconciliation with unionists, and that's why he's reaching out. It is, to an even greater degree, in the interests of unionism that it respond positively. But is there a unionist politician capable of emerging from the fog of self-deception to meet Mr Adams? I've got a £10 note says there's not.
