Some Observations On The Cosantoiri Siochana Anti War Meeting.

national | anti-war / imperialism | news report Thursday April 06, 2006 13:46 by Fintan Lane - Anti-War Ireland

I attended the Cosantoiri. Siochana-organised meeting last Saturday. It ran from about 2pm to 5.30pm and, while initially intended, I believe, to widen involvement in CS, it was transformed for various reasons into a 'coordinating meeting' for diverse anti-war activists and groups. This transformation occurred largely as a consequence of discussion on a thread on indymedia.ie following the recent Dublin anti-war march.

So, my observations…

Attendance

The attendance was encouraging. Probably 25 and more anti-war activists, about half of whom were CS and the rest from the IAWM (including two SWP members), Grassroots Dissent, WSM, Peace People, Anti-War Ireland, Pitstop Ploughshares and Dublin Catholic Worker. I might be forgetting some groups, but the mix was quite good.

Format

Mark Price of CS facilitated. At first, it seemed that CS intended focusing the meeting on a discussion of their own 'agreed principles'. However, the composition of the meeting made this impossible and we quickly moved to 'brainstorming' on future activities, etc. Ultimately, the meeting became an exercise in exploring the possibilities for all elements of the anti-war movement to work together in a constructive fashion. The only major decision taken (I think) was to reconvene on 22 April to continue the discussion and solidify the coordination. I think this was appropriate under the circumstances.

The discussion

People suggested a range of activities (see report above), i.e. everything from direct action (some CS members and anarchists) to lobbying politicians and focusing on the 2007 election (SWP members). The WSM representative suggested no further anti-war actions for the next three months while we come up with a strategy.

This need to come up with a strategy was mentioned by a number of people and reflected, in my opinion, a positive desire to move beyond the current situation. The atmosphere, in general, was very positive and there was very little squabbling. It wasn't that those present were ignoring the differences; it was more that the focus was on what we have in common and on the need to rebuild the movement. In short, the gathering had very many positive attributes and I'll certainly return on 22 April.

The one negative (and it could turn out to be a terminal problem) was a general unwillingness to structure the coordination. Both Deirdre Clancy (Pitstop Ploughshares and Anti-War Ireland) and myself (Anti-War Ireland) argued that the meetings, if they continue on the present basis, are worthy and useful, but ultimately not much more than a diverse group of individuals agreeing to discuss and work together. Wonderful in itself (because of the good mix), but the attendance of individual members of the various anti-war groups doesn't make for coordination, if the organisations themselves have not endorsed the coordination. The organisations, in my opinion, need to delegate people to attend the meetings, and coordination and joint-action must be taken seriously. Other groups, such as PANA, also need to come on board.

The idea that coordination requires the formal endorsement of the various organisations – and the sending of representative delegates – was opposed by both anarchists and the IAWM members. An argument was advanced suggesting that the weight of somebody’s argument is not increased simply because they formally represent an organisation, but, while the point is taken, I think it fundamentally misses the point. The central argument for endorsement by the various groups is that it adds weight to the decisions taken or plans that are floated, and increases the possibility that coordinated action will occur in the wake of the meetings. It makes the coordination real.

Obviously, the creation of such a coordinating mechanism will prove a difficulty for some groups, who may see formal involvement as ‘subordinating’ themselves to the broader anti-war movement. This is a problem that activists are going to have to overcome if the anti-war movement is to move forward.

My fear is that if the coordination role of these gatherings isn't taken seriously, it will become just another anti-war group. That said, it was the first meeting and the importance of coordination and unified action was strongly argued for. It has potential. Also, the diversity of the movement was accepted and respected. The attendance of the IAWM was an excellent development.

Cosantoiri Siochana should be commended for this excellent meeting and for providing an opportunity for some very useful discussion among activists.