Newton Emerson: Many loyalists are desperate to leave. The only thing stopping some is an ‘exit fee’

Loyalists kept their distance from Drumcree for two reasons. First, they knew it was a lost cause and a disaster for unionism. Second, they had just finished discussing their own disbandment with an expert appointed by the British and Irish governments. They did not want to make a mockery of this at the final moment.Dutch academic Fleur Ravensbergen published her report on Tuesday, after a year of talking to paramilitary groups, community leaders, victims of crime and terrorism and public bodies. Her team is believed to have included representatives from the Irish Government and the Northern Ireland Office.The report claims there was significant engagement with dissident republicans, which dissident groups have denied. This confusion is not considered fatal to the exercise – most people have long accepted that loyalism and republicanism present different challenges. Unless or until dissidents do engage, the report is effectively about winding down loyalism.Its main recommendation is that both governments should establish “an independent, time-bound transition mechanism without delay”.READ MOREThis should offer a structured process towards disbandment, with credible monitoring and verification at every step. It should operate in parallel with robust policing and prosecution of offences, rather than functioning as any kind of temporary amnesty, given the extent of paramilitary linked crime. No financial inducements should be offered to groups or their members, as this is “ineffective, counterproductive and damaging to public confidence”.Ravensbergen advises not getting hung up on the word “disbandment”, although it is in the title of her report, as it may be needlessly wounding to paramilitary pride.A PSNI vehicle close to Drumcree Church in Portadown, Co Armagh, on October 9th. Photograph: Liam McBurney/PA Wire “Agreeing the transition process, milestones and end-state of group transition is more important than terminology,” she writes.The report identifies 11 milestones, including ending recruitment, disposal of weaponry and removal of flags, murals and other physical signs of influence.After three decades of peace processing, many people will feel they have heard all this before. If it is implemented, loyalism will simply continue stringing everyone along. While this view is understandable, in reality there has never been a structured disbandment process for loyalists or republicans in Northern Ireland, let alone one with a deadline – there have only been deadlines (all missed) for decommissioning weapons.As to why loyalism would submit to such a process, it is nearer an “end state” than is widely realised.In 2020, police and intelligence service briefings were leaked to the BBC, revealing loyalist groups were still recruiting and had 12,500 “card carrying” members. This entered public consciousness and continues to be cited as if loyalism remains a 1970s-scale menace.Leaving paramilitarism behind must be reward enough, with law enforcement providing motivationHowever, as the full briefings made clear, recruitment is mainly of young drug dealers, while the vast majority of members have been inactive for decades and are desperate to leave. They are not allowed to leave because their £20 monthly membership fees are the bedrock of loyalist finances, for their local “commanders” in particular.The Ulster Defence Association (UDA) charges a £5,000 “exit fee”, which it waives if someone finds religion. So many members have been availing of this waiver that the UDA has been spying on churches to confirm regular attendance, according to a Sunday Life report two weeks ago.The preposterous circumstances of these hollow organisations would be a joke, were they not still all too capable of terrorising their neighbours. Nobody wants or respects them, including most of their members. It should be no surprise that many of their leaders are interested in discussing a way out.Funding for “community work” has characterised much of the official approach to transition. Ravensbergen has identified this as both a failure and a cause of public cynicism. It entrenches paramilitary control over communities at the taxpayer’s expense, while dragging public bodies – including the police – into a charade of respectability.Leaving paramilitarism behind must be reward enough, with law enforcement providing motivation. Adding a deadline might seem pointless without a temporary amnesty but experience elsewhere indicates it is crucial.Most of the world refers to paramilitary transition as Disarmament, Demobilisation and Re-integration (DDR). A model for this has been developed since the 1990s by the United Nations, drawing on lessons ranging from American gang culture to wars in West Africa.Setting a tight deadline, typically a year, is considered essential to focus efforts, draw a line under conflicts and prevent processes being deliberately prolonged and exploited, as has plainly occurred in Northern Ireland. DDR emphasises dismantling command and membership structures and getting people into lawful employment.Ravensbergen has worked with the UN on conflict resolution in the Basque Country, Libya, Iraq and Congo – the latter has had multiple DDR programmes, with varying degrees of success. Her report advises learning from “international experience and expertise”.It is hard not to see this as a mild rebuke to the peace processors of Northern Ireland, who presume they only have lessons to teach the world.