The Northern Ireland Development Group, established in January of the previous year, has the aim of enhancing the communication techniques of those who champion the union’s continuance with the UK. Recently, they unveiled a new discourse document named the “Unionist Predicament”.
The moniker is apropos. A singular question encapsulates this predicament: how can the politics of unionism evolve to better echo and cater to the desires and requirements of an evolving Northern Ireland?
In light of the recent UK election results for Unionist factions, including the loss of three Democratic Unionist Party constituencies, one of which was to the Alliance Party, addressing this quandary has become increasingly critical.
Central to the issue has been a historical pattern of dependence on fear and loss, and the use of this as both a credibility defense mechanism and a reactionary communication strategy in response to perceived threats. This defensive positioning fosters a restorative rather than progressive focus, attempting to assuage an escalating community discomfort by underscoring the need for the preservation of safety amidst a rapidly changing environment.
In contrast, the document’s underlying message is one of apprehension that political unionism, if not expanded to a more comprehensive and inclusive political entity, will not only continue to suffer from a perceived irrelevance and inefficacy but potentially exacerbate it.
The discussion document urges political unionism to underscore their ties to Britishness and the wider dynamic of identity shared amongst the four UK nations. Furthermore, it recommends fostering stronger symbiotic relationships between unionism and loyalism by prioritising issues related to education, employment, health, and the environment at the focal point of political actions and policy instead of the fixation on the potential threat of a united Ireland. Notably, it proposes that political unionism ought to conceive and convey policies that cater to all and not just a select few.
Recognising an evident shift in the younger generation’s voting patterns, which appears to be leaning away from ideological debates and towards issue-oriented priorities, there is a significant opportunity for messages that resonate with inclusivity and the greater good. A fresh communication strategy focusing on advancement, potential, and opportunities combined with the shifting social climates, technology’s pivotal role in society, and the emergence of fluid identities within a citizenship and responsibility framework is likely to garner more traction than the worn-out narrative “vote for us or face the consequences”.
In the search for a more compelling narrative, political unionism could benefit from highlighting the additional value that the union can offer beyond simply assuring that Ulster nationalism is alive and kicking.
The virtues extracted from this unity, such as inclusivity, equity, and acceptance, are essential not only for Northern Ireland’s history, but for its future trajectory as well. Hence, the importance of creative sustenance should not be underestimated. To broaden both national and international influence, it is crucial to extend our gaze beyond our immediate surroundings, fostering stronger partnerships not only in Europe and the United States but improving links with Dublin as well.
The political Unionism’s hesitance to foster and sustain productive connections with Dublin about a shared society is rather unfruitful, keeping in mind, it is the best approach to ensure a united Ireland isn’t imposed but incorporated into a different paradigm—one that is ideally enhanced by mutual respect and dedication to amicability. Without forging new ties that showcase the potential and worth of alternatives, fear of a united Ireland is bound to escalate.
Political Unionism remains feeble and perplexed on the reconciliation front. Sinn Féin’s reconciliation is tied to a united Ireland which is known to exclude unionists and hinges on the national issue to depict progress in a way that appeals mainly to Nationalists and Republicans. Unsurprisingly, Unionists find little to no appeal in this, only rejection.
Regardless, this should not imply that political Unionism should continue to ignore the matter, solely because it contradicts their viewpoint. It merely emphasises that launching such a debate based on divisions of national identity might be incorrect, and a different approach could yield better results.
Perhaps Political Unionism should strive to cultivate reconciliation not in terms of ideology but focusing on common issues affecting everyone such as sectarianism, climate change, and post-generational trauma. By doing this, political Unionism may foster movement and confidence by addressing shared concerns, rather than those that divide.
While the use of the term reconciliation might make the individuals seem reasonable, when it’s used for making others appear unreasonable, then questions regarding their genuineness and objectives arise, thus progress gets hindered. Perception molds reality, and the current reality in political Unionism is a dispute over who can most effectively prevent further deterioration. This is not only self-defeating but also regressive and productive.
Certain elements within the realm of political unionism are, undeniably, forward-thinking. However, their message hasn’t been effectively propagated due to a poorly managed atmosphere, unable to capture the increasing societal urge for an improved and unique future. It is essential to change, not by mere discussions, but by showing real-time developments. Alterations should not involve discarding past learning but leveraging the crème de la crème of it to initiate modifications. Consistency, coherence, and brevity play strategic roles in impactful political dialogue. It can be speculated that political unionism might have to endure a temporary decline for rejuvenation, which demands a shift from instantaneous reactions to long-term, gradual changes.
Moreover, it is crucial to disseminate new optimism and political obligation that guarantees universal advantages. Strategic and tactic planning must centre on enabling the public to tangibly witness this metamorphosis and grasp its relevance in crafting a novel world.
The first step would be for political unionism to transition from an impromptu reactionary approach to a long-sighted developmental strategy, focusing on social progression, and recognise the significance of amassing incremental improvements. If it fails to do so, it will inevitably continue its descent into oblivion and irrelevance.
Graham Spencer, a Social and Political Conflict Professor at Portsmouth University is the author of The Unionist Predicament, accessible at nidg.co.uk.