Neutrality: The Great Cop Out

Billy Mitchell

By far the worst approach to the ongoing crisis on the Shankill Road is the approach adopted by those who pride themselves in being �neutral�. There is a belief about in civic society that the safest place to be is on neutral ground. Those who think like that believe that by adopting a neutral stance they will be kept well out of harm�s way.

Properly speaking the �neutral� position is not a position at all. Neutrality, whether it is the absence of a position or, more deviously, the public denial of a private position, is a cop out.

The first group of neutrals are the modern-day Pharisees who look down from the relative comfort of their lofty towers with distain and contempt at what they regard as two sets of reprobate groups fighting it out over territory.� They see people and not the issues. As far as they are concerned the people involved are outcasts who must be shunned and condemned. They make judgements about the conflict on the basis of their preconceived opinions about the people and not on the evidence relating to the core issues. They don�t particularly care one way or the other what the outcome is other than a hope that both groups will destroy themselves in the process. Those who adhere to this type of neutrality have nothing whatever to offer to the Greater Shankill community in terms of conflict transformation or community leadership. They are so heavenly minded that they are no earthly good.

A second group acknowledge that they need to speak out on some broad issues but quickly retreat to neutral ground when it comes down to actually dealing with those issues. It is okay to have a neutral march of Christian witness for peace, but it appears unthinkable that there should be march of Christian witness against known drug houses or vice dens. That would be to take sides against known people � it might even be dangerous. Condemning in general terms the intimidation that led to the displacement of so many families is seen to be neutral, but showing solidarity with those same displaced families when they condemn the security force inaction that permitted their displacement is seen to be taking sides.

Opening churches to pray for peace was seen to be neutral, but how many church halls were opened to document the experience, identify the needs and provide practical advice to the members of the two-hundred-and-seventeen displaced families? Ah, that might have been seen to be taking sides. Prayers without constructive compassionate action are mere words � pious but meaningless phrases that rise no further than the ceiling. God answers prayer through the agency of His people and that demands compassionate remedial action. That action cannot be undertaken on neutral ground.

A third group of neutrals is made up of those who will tell us privately that they know the truth about what is happening but because of their position in society they can�t be seen to be talking sides. To hold a belief in private but to deny it in public � especially in a situation where a whole community is being torn apart with over a thousand people made homeless � is the basest sort of hypocrisy. Generally speaking, those who are afraid to speak the truth are afraid to stand up for any principle.

A fourth group of neutrals are the political opportunists, the believers in pure expediency, who use neutral ground as a cover for playing one side off against the other. In the context of the Greater Shankill community they see the current crisis as an opportunity to weaken and, hopefully, to silence the voice of existing and emerging loyalist political activists.

The nationalist graffiti artist responsible for the slogan �We support the Loyalist feud� probably reflects the views of as many unionists as he/she does nationalists. Dissention and pain within loyalism will clearly bring a sense of joy to as many unionist politicians as it does to nationalist politicians. The longer the �feud� goes on the greater the political damage that may be inflicted on radical loyalism � and than can only be good news for the old guard.

The emerging voice of radical loyalism may well suffer as a consequence of the current crisis. But it will not be silenced. An injured party with a real belief it itself and its policies has an excellent chance of bouncing back. On the other hand the so-called neutrals � whether they be neutral cowards or neutral opportunists � carry within them the seeds of their own destruction. Dodging issues and watering down solutions is not merely the way to failure; it is the way to extinction.�

The greatest need on the Shankill at this time is for a political and civic leadership that is willing to face facts, get off the fence, and start giving leadership. Neutrality is a luxurious cop-out that the suffering people of the Shankill cannot afford.