So what about those RUC officers then?

So a report says that the RUC collaborated with Unionist paramilitaries and allowed informers to get away with murder. What is the correct response to this news?

Here is the Prime Minister's official spokesman:

This is a deeply disturbing report about events which were totally wrong and should never have happened

Fair enough. But here's mine.

If the IRA were merely involved in criminal activity then the police should have adhered to the highest standards of behaviour. Any transgression against the law should be punished and punished particularly harshly because it was committed by the forces of law and order.

And my view has always was that the IRA should be treated as simply criminals. But you know what? My view lost.

The view that prevailed was that the IRA were political activists engaged in a war. They used any means they could to advance their cause and the police used any means they had at their disposal to stop them. The IRA thought they were in a war, and some police officers took them at their word and acted as if it was a war, with all the dirty things that go on in wars.

Why do I say that this view prevailed? Well, what other construction can one put on the release of dozens of murderers from jail and the bestowing of ministerial office on the IRA's leadership, all in exchange for a ceasefire.

We bought the cessation (or at least partial cessation) of IRA violence at a huge moral price - our willingness to treat common murder as an act of war, and readiness to excuse the murderers.

And given that we have done this, we cannot now turn round to the police officers and treat them as if they were involved in an ordinary law and order situation. It would be offensive to punish the police officers, ruin their lives, while letting Gerry Adams swan up Downing Street.

I wish it were different but, de facto if not de jure, we've accepted the "war" version of events and there's no going back.

Comments

[Patrick Gamble]

Curious logic.

The equivalent of the IRA are the loyalist gangs, to which the same forgiveness of their crimes has been extended.

In fact, more than curious.

Downright ridiculous.

The police were there to enforce the law without favour, supposedly, as in all other civilised countries.

[Stephen R]

Oh Dear!

I always suspected Finkelstein of being dumb...but not this dumb!

So, he hadn't taken into account those murdered, hurt, injured and robbed by those involved in criminal and terrorist activities being actively protected by so called impatial defendants of the the law and themselves being above and beyond the law!

Thats nearly as bad as some the comments from the DUP.

Kneejerk reaction, poorly thought out and dangerous logic and echoes of past apologists comes to mind in light of what is published here.

Only one more thing to say...Read the report Danny.

[Susan]

You make a good point, it was the IRA that insisted they were at war, and both sides in a war do do nasty uncivilised things.

[Michael McGowan]

Stephen R seems to be lapsing into kneejerk reactions too. Or will he nowbe vigorously advocating a similar investigation into the activities of the IRA and their undoubted collusion with elements within the Garda? After all, the one organisation which pursued a 30-year shoot-to-kill policy in Northern Ireland was the IRA.

[Gabor Kovacs]

I haven't read the report, but what Danny says seems to me to have some logic behind it. Remember that he is all for the "crime" approach, but then says that it is the "war" view that prevailed, letting McGuinness and Adams into government...

Now, if it was war, then weren't the RUC part of the war? RUC officers were ambushed and killed. I imagine that being in the RUC was a very insecure existence. The people shooting at them did not regard them as neutral in the manner that Patrick Gamble and Stephen R seem to suggest.

I think I agree: if the terrorists are being pardoned as part of the political processes, then there should be parity of treatment to the police officers who got caught up in the "war".

There needs to be a way of dealing with this: I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest a truth and reconciliation commission.

[Michael McGowan]

Neither side has any interest in a truth and reconciliation commission, least of all the nationalists who do not want a light shone on all the sadistic and barbaric things they did to innocent people. That is why they agitated so long for the Bloody Sunday Enquiry to be reopened but the last thing they want is an enquiry into the countless Bloody Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, etc for which they were responsible.

[deiseach]

I don't know if Daniel Finkelstein was one of the types I'm about to refer to, but the importance of this report lies in its destruction of the mantra of the apologists for Unionism that any transgressions on the part of the security services in Northern Ireland were isolated, the result of "a few bad apples". We now know that this was not the case, that collusion was systematic and went all the way to the upper echelons of the RUC. The sooner we see some acceptance of the reality from those apologists - and, in fairness, Hugh Orde's comments went a long way in that regard - the sooner we'll all be able to move on.

[JC Skinner]

What a complete joke! Police are implicated in the sectarian murder of civilians. Would Finkelstein have them rewarded with medals and big pensions for doing so?
Perhaps because the appalling behaviour of RUC special branch was so similar to the activities of his beloved IDF in Palestine, he feels that the correct response is to applaud, rather than haul the murderers into court and prosecute them.

[Kevin Jones]

I was going to respond point by point but I could not be bothered. The article above is the most uninformed, shameful pile of steamy nonsense I've ever read. Shame on your hate-mongering.

[Michael Derwent]

"Downright ridiculous."

Worse, ridiculous and dangereous comments. Would he condomn British police officers in shoot and kill Al-Qaeda suspects. Maybe the police should get Combat 18 to carry out the assinations. Saves a trial or in the case of Northern Ireland, a non-jury Diplock court. What makes Daniel think that ll those murdered with RUC/PNSIc collusion were guilty?

[Ian Deans]

One might suggest that there are significant similiarities between the Irish problems and the problem of modern terrorism. One might also suggest there are lessons which have not yet been learnt.

[Stephen R]

Oh Dear Again!

You miss the point! Is it OK for (any) security force in any democratic country to actively collude with known gangsters, terrorist and/or criminal elements that result in murders and horrific crimes being committed while offering monetary reward and active protection from prosecutions?

Now, was it OK for elements in the RUC in Northern Ireland to collude with known UVF criminals. Was it OK that 16 people were murdered and the perpetrators were known and actively protected? The argument put forward is 'yes' given it was a 'war' situation. Much too simplistic and offensive to those who lost those close to them as a result.

I don't understand Michael McGowan's points with respect to the published report concerning the motives and procedures of handling such intelligence and protection of sources by a UK police force.

[Eugene Murnane]

Daniel Finkelstein comments are poorly thought out. The RUC were the upholders of the law and should have behaved that way. If evidence exists for a criminal prosecution I believe that should be followed through. I do however aggree on one point that if the paramilitary prisoners from any side are allowed to leave prison on licence I would have no objection to these former police officers being released from prison under the same circumstances. I do accept that these police officers were in a particular difficult situation as regards policing in western Europe, but maybe so were many others. However wrongdoers must be held accountable if for no other reason than to protect democracy in our country.

[John Byrne]

Extremely dangerous logic. Are you seriously suggesting that the police abandon it's mandate and ignore the rule of law in order to support any vigilante / paramilitary group that it happens to agree with on an ideological or political basis? You're an idiot.

[Patrick Gamble]

How does allowing someone to get away with shooting an unarmed femaie Catholic taxi driver become a part of a 'war'?

I do not defend the IRA but a lot of the time they were aiming at military targets.

These murders were simple sectarian gangsterism.

[Vincent Curry]

This argument has a lovely, clear well balanced symmetry - the paramilitaries are to be exonerated, hence so should the RUC.

Unfortuantely the simple symmetry of the argument unravels when you consider the issue in more detail. Firstly, you have to consider the premise that the RUC was to be an impartial enforcer of the law. Hence they cannot be regarded in a similar way to the paramilitaries, the same rules do not apply. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, all communities have to have faith in the police force. Indeed, when one considers that the IRA grew out of a need for the Catholic communities to protect themselves the need for a police force that operates within the law becomes more apparent.

There are harder questions to be considered regarding the fact that the paramilitaries are able to walk free, whilst the RUC are to be held to account. However, one must consider that these officers were meant to be upholding the law rather than colluding in criminal activities, and one must also consider the effect that these activities had on people trusting the police, and the actions that were carried out because of this lack of trust. Hence these activities must be considered in more detail and, where appropriate, punishments applied.

[Daniel]

How in the world does a commentary about collusion with loyalists end up with a million IRA references and a giant picture of Gerry Adams? Blink and you'll miss the one reference to "unionist paramilitaries" at the very beginning.

This particular band of thugs arguably terrorized their own Protestant community even more than they terrorized nationalists. Perhaps the critics of this report would like to explain to Raymond McCord and the relatives of the other victims the finer points of this "anti-terrorist" strategy.

[james stclare]

Yes of course, treat the RUC in the same way as the IRA - As criminal organisation undermining law and order through murder and mayhem. Disband this criminal gang!

[Mike Duignan]

My God, unbelievable comment and shame on those who support finkelstein. For the record:
1. There was no significant finding of any Garda(Southern Irish police)collusion - quite the opposite, by a number of formal reviews.

2. Sinn Fein won four seats in the election - this is why they are represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly, not in return for a ceasefire.

3. It should be remembered that the behavior of the RUC after partition was a key instigator to the IRA violence that started in the late sixties, and in large part the IRA were a reaction and creation of the RUC who acted as a Unionist police force. The RUC was not merely some innocent bobby type police force as in England, but a key part of the political problem in the north.

4. This review covered the nineties and early 2000's, most of this time the IRA were on ceasefire. Hardly the height of the troubles, and during the peace process. There were many in the RUC actively trying to sabotage this process, and goading the republicans in the North was one way of doing it.

I'm no fan of Sinn Fein, or Adams, but the moral equivalence in this article is fascist in nature - that the legal police force in a country is entitled to disregard the rule of law if it should see fit.

[Daniel Finkelstein]

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. I am in favour of the rule of law. Without it you are lost. I do not believe people (the RUC, anybody) can overturn the rule of law. So I understand those who are outraged by my remarks.

Except for this:

I lost the argument. The rule of law WAS overturned. We decided to treat murders as if they weren't murders and murderers as if they were statesmen. I didn't decide this, we did. We paid this price for peace. And we can't unpay it - wishing we hadn't done it or apply to one group of corrupt murderers involved in the conflict a law we haven't applied to others. So those people who are standing on their high horse and accusing me of letting off crooks - I ask you to consider whether you haven't approved of just that in the case of the IRA and loyalist paramilitaries. And having let, for instance, the loyalist paramilitaries off the hook we can't really do different for the peole who let them do it.

I wish we were in the world where the pure rule of law applied and your moralising meant something. Because for years that was was my tune, my moralising. And I was defeated. People decided peace was more important.

[Michael McGowan]

Danny, I think you are being too apologetic to a bunch of critics who simply want a double standard to apply: IRA crimes - fine; RUC crimes - not fine. I do not excuse for one moment every single act committed by the RUC, least of all in the 1960's, but a few points need to be made:

1. A police force could not operate effectively in the kind of environment that existed in Northern Ireland unless it was prepared to use informers, double agents and other lowlife to penetrate and subvert terrorist organisations. Otherwise it would lose.....which is of course what a lot of the crypto-IRA sympathisers on this thread wanted. The security forces were always required by their ilk to operate according to Queensbury Rules which would render them largely ineffective so that the thugs and goons of Irish Republicanism could win.

2. So what if Sinn Fein has 4 MPs? The Nazi Party had dozens in the Reichstag by the end of 1932 while its street enforcers killed and maimed its opponents and intimidated voters. Quite a good analogy in fact.

3. The IRA "protected" its communities from the police and security services. Really? Perhaps you should speak to the families of Robert McCartney and Jean McConville about the reality of being "protected" by the Provisional IRA. By the way, "SS" in German translates as "protection squads".

[Ross]

The O'Loan report does not actually provide any evidence of this supposed collusion. In fact the conclusions she reaches seem to be baseless accusations against the same people she made baseless accusations against in her report into the Omagh bomb.

Even if the allegations are assumed to be true, the idea that the police covering up the crimes of informants is 'collusion' is dubious at best. This happens in all investigations of criminal gangs such as the various FBI investigations into the mafia. On this basis you could argue that Freddie Scappatucci's handlers were colluding with the IRA.

[Stephen Bull]

Simply no.

[Patrick Ryan]

British people seem to have lost sight of the fact that the UVF and other terrorist outfits, who are self professed Brits., in Northern Ireland are in fact British terrorists. It is members of such organisations who were protected by the RUC Special Branch and got away with these crimes.

It was senior officers of the RUC/PSNI oversaw the concerted destruction of records and evidence.

The O'Loan report concerned only one unit of the UVF in north Belfast over an eleven year period, i.e. the investigation was very limited in scope. If it could be extended accross Northern Ireland and throughout the Troubles, this investigation only reveals the merest tip of a very large iceberg of criminal activity on the part of the police. Ms O'Loan has said that on account of the systematic destruction of evidence and records, referred to above, extending the investigation elsewhere would be of no value.

For the information of readers the UVF was established in the early years of the 20th. Century before the IRA came into existence and it was the first grouping to import arms into Ireland - 10,000 rifles and about 1 million rounds of ammunition and a few machine guns, I believe. Incidentally, these weapons were never decommissioned!

[Rebecca Sherry]

I have never before felt so compelled to comment- lest I be let down by the experience my age denies me. That said, it is with naivety you link the IRA's acts with the RUC's now proven collusion with loyalist paramilitaries. Explain to me how an 'impartial' enforcer of the law can be pardoned while gunning down civilians, injuring a 3 year old child... While many knew to fear the police during the troubles, not everything should be put down to the 'time that was in it'. The RUC's actions must not be excused or indeed juxtaposed with the acts of a terrorist organisation as you do. Explain to me your concept of law and order, of the accountability of a public body in whom a people ought to be able to place their faith. Disappointing.

[Frank O'Brien]

Finklestein et al. seem to loose one important point in IRA v RUC/UDA/UDF and that is that the IRA DID go to prison. Many non-IRA "suspects" also wound up in prison or dead. One high profile member of this Catholic "enemy" was Pat Finucane, another was Rosemary Nelson. Their crimes were they defended both Catholic and Protestant cases of RUC/PNSI arrests.
A Tory MP; name of Hogg (still an MP) made a speech giving UVF killers the green light, the RUC helped collaborate the murders (if not actually taking part).

[eddie appleby]

So if Finklestein thinks it's ok for the 'police' to use death squads to eliminate what they see as enemies of the state then lets apply it to the current situation, we are in a war on terrorism are we not? and that's according to our own government. So using F's logic, lets allow the UVF (who are not on ceasefire) to operate on the mainland and do the same to the muslim communities and 'take out' suspected terrorists, activists etc, so, the odd innocent muslim will be killed here and there but it will be all worth it in the end because we will be rid of these 'enemies of the state' and then Finklestein and his ilk can go back to whinging about the wrongs done to the jews by the gestapo who also had state backing and then of course there is the IDF's appreciation society to bang on about. How can anyone condone terrorist police? Ronnie Flanagan the guy in charge at the time is now HM Chief of Constabulary and an advisor to John Reid, INCREDIBLE! You wouldn't see this in a central American banana republic never mind Britain. All of these so called police officers should be suspended without pay, Flanagan should be sacked and his 'Sir' removed and he should then be made to answer the questions instead of feigning amnesia, those retired senior officers who refused to answer questions should have their plumb pensions stopped and should be made to answer for their actions, the DUP and other apologists need to think very carefully about what they are condoning here because any police force that acts outside of the law is no better than the criminals and terrorists they are supposed to be protecting us from! By the way I am no IRA/Sinn Fein supporter here nor am I a lefty or any other looney I am just an ordinary working man with a family growing up in a country that seems to be lurching dangerously close to being 1980's central american style police state run by paranoid control freaks and cowardly politicians who are afraid to speak up the liberty and protection of our rights and defend the rule of law. Finklestein you are complete moron if you cannot see the WRONG in what this report has uncovered and this is just from one small area of NI God only knows how many other innocent people where 'allowed' to be killed elsewhere in NI and maybe even beyond?

[Michael McGowan]

Isn't it predictable that we are treated to the usual lexicon of evasions and half-truths from the fellow travellers of extreme Republicanism? In no particular order:

1. The UVF may indeed claim to be British. So what? From the perspective of most British people, they do not represent them in any way, shape or form and are vicious sectarian thugs and gangsters. It would be good to be confident that most Irish people see the IRA in the same light. And in this regard actions count for more than pious cliches.

2. It is a matter of intense debate when the UVF and the IRA or its forebears came into existence. Violent Republicanism goes back a very long way too. But why is it relevant anyway? We live in the present. And please don't trot out the mantra that the IRA has decommissioned all its weapons simply because it says it has. Would you accept the UVF's uncorroborated sayso on the status of their weapons?

3. Rebecca Sherry completely misses the point. I am not excusing police criminality. I am criticising people like her who turn a blind eye to Republican criminality and insist that the police operate under constraints which are designed to make them powerless to deal with that criminality which blighted the lives of thousands. She is clearly no disinterested bystander seeking to hold the rule of law. Quite the opposite.

4. By no means all IRA killers went to jail. Most of the terrorist murders of the Troubles remain unsolved, thereby prolonging the agony of the victims. In any case, most IRA prisoners did not serve their sentences in full. While nothing excuses killing the Finucanes and Nelsons of this world, they were undoubtedly hardline Republican sympathisers. I have much more sympathy for the likes of Lord Justice Gibson and his wife, who were murdered (probably with Gardai collusion) for seeking to uphold civilisation, not the ethically diseased barbarism and anarchy favoured by Finucane and Nelson.

[Ross]

{Many non-IRA "suspects" also wound up in prison or dead. One high profile member of this Catholic "enemy" was Pat Finucane}

Sean O'Callaghan has confirmed that Pat Finucane was part of the IRA, he was not an innocent victim.

{So if Finklestein thinks it's ok for the 'police' to use death squads to eliminate what they see as enemies of the state}

Even the evidence free O'Loan report does not claim that the UVF were being used as a death squad, but rather that members of the RUC were covering up the crimes of their informants after the fact.

[Mike Derwent]

Ross, Sean O'Callaghan would say anything to keep his media profile up. According to the 2003 British Government Stevens Report his murder was indeed perpetrated in collusion with British police in Northern Ireland and the police also said they had no evidence that he was in the IRA. No wonder then the British Governemnt enquiry empowers the government to block scrutiny of state actions. We already know the answer why - Collusion.

[Tom Rawlinson]

Americans are proud of much more serious collusion against far less dangerous people. The Black Panthers were shot to death in a few months at almost exactly the same time as the troubles in NI brewed up.

As the Church Select Committee found:

............ effort included mailing anonymous letters and caricatures to BPP members ridiculing the local and national BPP leadership for the express purpose of exacerbating an existing "gang war" between the BPP and an organization called the United Slaves (US). This "gang war" resulted in the killing of four BPP members by members of United Slaves and in numerous beatings and shootings. Although individual incidents in this dispute cannot be directly traced to efforts by the FBI, FBI officials were clearly aware of the violent nature of the dispute, engaged in actions which they hoped would prolong and intensify the dispute, and proudly claimed credit for violent clashes between the rival factions which. in the words of one FBI official, resulted in "shootings, beatings, and a high degree of unrest in the area of southeast San Diego." 8