Ulster's grim alternatives
Recently in our columns Lord Richard Cecil advised the Government, in regard to its Ulster policies, to govern or get out: in a grimmer and more threatening situation that remains the stark choice and, given the depressing repetitions of the Prime Minister's weekend broadcast, and the helpless intransigence of Mr Rees and Mr Orme, it seems unlikely that the choice to govern will be taken.
It is necessary now to spell out, as clearly as is possible in a desperately confused situation, the nature and consequences of the two alternatives to the present policy. It is necessary also to avoid recrimination for past errors and misdeeds, of which many can be laid at the door of this and the last British government. For, if there is any way ahead it is one that will require the maximum unity in this island, and the maximum resolution.
If the choice truly to govern were taken it could only mean the introduction of martial law. We have spoken before of the terrible strain to which the British Army in Ulster is subjected: when the first Protestant barricades went up, at the outset of the present general strike, the Army, at the behest of its political masters, could do no more than stand politely by. Yet many soldiers believe that if those first barricades had been instantly brought down, the situation might never have developed as it has done. Indeed, throughout our military involvement in the Ulster situation the Army has been allowed only very late in the day to move as it wished. It has been subjected to the constant and unbelievably irresponsible harassment of so-called liberal groups in this island, as well as to the legalistic sniping of successive Dublin governments in foreign courts. It has been vilified behind a mask of praise for its endurance; even its mild methods of interrogation have been banned after pressure; and individual soldiers of the Queen have walked the dangerous streets of Ulster knowing that to reply to a traitorous terrorist's fire is as likely as not to put them in the dock. It is a situation that cannot continue, if the morale of the Army is at all to be preserved, and if we are to bring to an end a situation in which extremist groups on both sides of the religious fence play cat and mouse with the security forces, testing each time the political will that stands behind them, adamant in its weakness.
Martial law, then, would involve the appointment of a single officer to command the troops in Ulster and the giving to that officer of complete military and political control of the province. He would be told that, although he could be dismissed, his day-to-day government Would be in no way interfered with, and that he :would have the unstinting support of the Politicians at Westminster. Such reporters or television crews as he might permit in Ulster NYOuld operate strictly under his authority. He "light be given six months or a year to restore order and, at the end of that period, there Would be a general election in Ulster whether he had succeeded or not. The victors in that election could then enter into negotiations with the British government of the day as to the future of Northern Ireland, and the outcOtne of those negotiations would settle poliheal relations between London and Belfast "ace and for all.
Though it is right to set out that choice, it remains, of course, unlikely that any British gclvernment would have the courage to adopt !t• The alternative of withdrawal remains, and I,ts Consequences must, likewise, be set down. rew can now doubt — since they have seen on television and in the newspapers the dark and Sinister face of Protestant extremism as before they have seen that of the IRA revolutionaries that the Ulster Workers' Council has the 8.11Pport of an entrenched, determined and IMplacable Protestant majority. If the troops ,Were withdrawn that majority would be vitt-`,„ballY certain to embark on a pogrom of the k-atholics. The Dublin government might or Plight not throw its own army into the battle: lts hesitation in this regard would be based on a sensible awareness of the fact that that army Would almost certainly be thrown back from tl,le gates of the north. There would be two elvIl wars in Ireland — one between Catholics arid Protestants in Ulster, the other between Ulster and the rest of the island. The IRA 1•Nould be speedily eliminated as a military ":"•ce in the North only to become, very likely, a serious threat to democracy in the South. The carnage would in any event be shocking, 4,11, d might even spread to certain British cities ulvided between Catholic and Protestant Irish P0Pulations, most notably Liverpool and Glasgow, E.ither course, then, would produce results stasteful where they were not appalling. 'Nevertheless it is imperative to embark on one J_0 the other. On television at the weekend Mr ,Wilson and Mr Pym presented the honourable, the decent, the humane case for and justificatiPh of the way Britain has so far handled the !■tuation. They did it with dignity and force. H. ut they could not conceal the fact that, for all that they had to say, and for all the firmness ith which they said it, we have now only a Luankrapt policy. The time for radical decision "as now arrived.
Nursing grievances
1( h
t.L -as been said — and rightly said — that flere are certain professions in society where 1113b satisfaction is so high that it compensates br. some inadequacy of salary. But there is a Pl3h Mt beyond which vocational pressure canr•Tt be pushed, and we would seem to have ,Zaehed that point with the decision of one of 'u de nursing unions to take some form of in4strial action. The nurses have decided to do e is, because their desperation is now so acute, ven though they fear they may forfeit the 4arge measure of public sympathy which is at lill'esent theirs. It would be a sad commentary ri the judgement of the public if any such thing were to happen, and a sad indication that members of the public simply do not realise how dangerously close to breakdown the whole National Health Service system is.
Despite its very obvious inadequacies, and despite, in particular, the existence of very different standards of treatment in different hospital areas around the country, the NHS has remained popular, and an enormous amount of underpaid dedication goes into keeping it in reasonable working order. The plain fact of the matter is, however, that, the demand for free health care being in practice unlimited, no service free at the point of use can hope to provide, in the future, an attention that is adequate, let alone one that would match the dreams of the founders of the service. The best that can be done, if nobody is willing to undertake radical reform, is a certain amount of patching and mending, and a generous pay increase for the nurses is a patch long overdue. It is disgraceful where it is not ludicrous for Mr Foot and Mr Wilson to tell the nurses they must await the outcome of an independent inquiry into their affairs when, only a week or two ago, the money was readily found for a singularly generous increase in student grants. If there is any justification for the extensive network of situations in which the state is the arbiter of payment for services received, it must lie in the capacity of the state to discriminate sensibly and humanely between the values of different services. And nurses are worth more than students.
