Blair issues challenge to IRA to say war is over

PM demands Provisionals give 'clear and unambiguous' answers on arms to restart peace process

Tony Blair went head to head in public with the IRA yesterday by challenging its assertions that it had clearly and unambiguously committed itself to a peaceful future.

He summoned the media to Downing Street to spell out three fundamental questions centring on the abandonment of weaponry, the ending of paramilitary activity and "the complete and final closure of the conflict".

The republican movement gave its initial response through Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein's chief negotiator, who insisted the IRA had been clear and unambiguous and declared himself "very surprised and very disappointed" by Mr Blair's challenge.

He did not, however, give a definitive answer on whether the IRA would address itself to Mr Blair's three questions. The IRA has already issued two unpublished statements in response to a London-Dublin document dealing with demilitarisation and other issues.

Mr Blair's stance that the IRA language does not amount to the "acts of completion" he has asked for is supported not just by David Trimble, the Ulster Unionist leader, but also by the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and by the US administration.

Mr Blair's move is thus seen as an attempt to pile more pressure on a republican movement that is presently politically isolated, with few accepting its claim of clarity.

Mr Blair gave some indication of the language used by the IRA when he posed the question: "When the IRA say that their strategies and disciplines will not be inconsistent with the Good Friday Agreement, does that mean an end to all activities inconsistent with the Good Friday Agreement, including targeting, procurement of weapons, so-called punishment beatings, and so forth?"

Use of language such as "strategies and disciplines" would clearly fall far short of what the Anglo-Irish political world had expected from the IRA, given that republicans have apparently gained useful concessions during a negotiating period of some months.

Mr Blair went on to ask: "Secondly, when they say that they are committed to putting arms beyond use through the Decommissioning Commission, does that mean all arms so that the process is complete? And thirdly, when they say they support the Good Friday Agreement and want it to work, does that mean if the two governments and the other parties fulfil their obligations ... that that means the complete and final closure of the conflict?"

Mr Trimble warned the IRA that time was running out for clarity, declaring: "It is now crunch time for republicans. This time they have got to bite the bullet. Just as there is no such thing as a free lunch, there is no such thing as free political influence and the bill is now sitting on the republicans' table."

Martin McGuinness insisted the IRA statement was clear and unambiguous while the London-Dublin document was conditional and qualified and that Mr Trimble had failed to to clarify important matters.

He said: "David Trimble is demanding victory and surrender and he expects me as a Sinn Fein negotiator to deliver that. I can't deliver that."

Mark Durkan, the nationalist SDLP leader, said the British and Irish governments were right to demand further clarity from the IRA, saying: "The credibility of the process can afford no more ambiguity on such fundamental issues."

Mr Blair will have to decide soon whether to press ahead with elections to the Belfast Assembly scheduled for 29 May.