Research Project – The 1981 Irish Hunger Strike

As part of my modules for my second year I have had to undertake a research project of my choice for Politics. I am under the impression that the idea is that I would then choose to continue with this research project for my final year dissertation. Nevertheless though, I am somewhat dubious as the political side of the research concerns me. I have more of an aptitude for History. However, the topic I have chosen interests me – of course it does, I would not have chosen it otherwise – and I thought I could explain some of it here on the blog. Or perhaps explain what I have essentially found out so far, as I am only halfway through the project.

Over the summer I watched a documentary on Netflix – I think I did little else all summer – called ’66 Days’ which explored Bobby Sand’s hunger strike. I had admittedly never heard of Sands before or the hunger strike. Of course I was aware of the troubles but had never really learnt much about it. I think it is such a significant aspect of modern history particularly in Britain and Ireland but it is often overlooked which seems quite surprising to me. However, I found the documentary extremely interesting and so I found the film ‘Hunger’ which stars Michael Fassbender as Sands and watched that as will, which just solidified my interest more. I suppose my interest stems from the complexity of the history of the Troubles. I had never properly understood it which I think is the case for most people unless they are Irish and I wanted to. Similarly, like many others, I am not a fan of Margaret Thatcher and so to explore something which made her look like a bad person as well as a bad Prime Minister seemed almost too perfect to pass on. I had previously explored Thatcher’s politicisation of the state during the Miner’s Strike and this seemed like something that would be similar and so interested me.

Before I did any research I wasn’t aware that hunger strikes were a significant aspect of Irish history, or more specifically Irish Political History. After finding this out I think I understood more why Sands was insistent on starting the hunger strike and why he saw it as an important opportunity to stand up for what he believed. The fact that hunger striking was important to Ireland would have helped Sands to gain more support for his strike and also the IRA cause – particularly from the Northern Irish Catholics – and also the fact that it would have helped to solidify the claim that this was a political struggle within the prison system. Sands decided to strike because of the lack of the political prisoner status for the IRA prisoners in the Long Kesh prison; originally the ‘blanketmen’ had been protesting for this to change but their continued failed efforts helped Sands to make the decision to essentially sacrifice his life for a cause he so strongly believed in. Although I do not support the IRA’s use of violence and I understand that most of these men in the prisons had committed a crime, I also understand why they were insistent on political prisoner status and have admiration for Sands and the other hunger strikers for their dedication.

Sand’s story became well known across the world, he is the more famous of the hunger strikers that died, which is admittedly an injustice but there is a reason for this. Sands was the first to strike and the first to die. One of the main reasons that Sands had a significant amount of focus on him at the time was his ability to capture the headlines. This was particularly seen when he was elected as a Member of Parliament for Fermanagh and South Tyrone whilst he was still on strike, he was also the only hunger striker that was able to do this. Shortly after his elections the UK government passed the Representation of the People Act 1981 which prevented prisoners from being nominated as a parliamentary candidate. This tactic was used as a way to highlight the strike and the prison situation. It was also massively humiliating for the British Government and it is clear that is solidified Sands as a hero. It is also important to note that one of the reasons that Sand’s also lives on in the public memory is because of the numerous writings that have been published by Sand’s estate after his death. During his time in prison Sand’s wrote many poems and stories and he famously kept a diary during the first part of his strike, these provide massive insight into his character and his thought process during his time in prison. Although the other prisoners are of course considered to be extremely important to the cause, Sand’s writing provided an emotional attachment at the time and afterwards, it humanised the experience more. It is clear that Sand’s stands out because of his integrity and his intelligence and this explains why forty years later his story is still remembered.

Thatcher was reluctant to change her mind on the political prisoner status, as she believed that if she did she would be justifying the use of violence as a serious political endeavour which is – I am reluctant to say – understandable and initially completely justifiable. However, the fact that Thatcher continued with this narrative throughout the whole of this period does not sit right with me. Thatcher was of course insistent on being recognised as the ‘Iron Lady’, she wasn’t someone who would change her mind on a serious political issue like this. However I don’t think that this kind of affirmative action was what the situation called for. It was a sensitive issue, people were losing their lives and she continued to claim that she played no part in their deaths even though these men were protesting against a ruling she enabled. Although I have a huge amount of hindsight in regard to the situation I still think Thatcher’s inability to cooperate or discuss a serious option, in regard to the situation that involved her backing down slightly, was what caused the outcome of the strike to reflect so badly on the British Government. However, I also think that is a discussion for another day and is not quite the aim of my research.

The research I have decided to do sets out to argue, not about the political prisoner status but to actually examine the outcome it had on the IRA. I want to establish whether the strikes really gained any more support for the IRA and how much it may have helped to establish Sinn Fein as a serious political organisation. However, so far I have only done some preliminary research on the actual strike itself and the reasons behind it, all of which I think is important in understanding the topic. I will most likely discuss the IRA aspect of the strike in a later blog when I have done some more research.

The Strikers

Bobby Sands: 9th March 1954 – 5th May 1981 [66 days on strike]

Francis Hughes: 28th February 1956 – 12th May 1981 [59 days on strike]

Raymond McCreesh: 25th February 1957 – 21st May 1981 [61 days on strike]

Patsy O’Hara: 11th July 1957 – 21st May 1981 [61 says on strike]

Joe McDonnell: 14th September 1951 – 8 July 1981 [62 days on strike]

Martin Hurson: 13th September 1956 – 13th July 1981 [46 days on strike]

Kevin Lynch: 25th May 1956 – 1 August 1981 [71 days on strike]

Kieran Doherty: 16th October 1955 – 2nd August 1981 [73 days on strike]

Thomas McElwee: 30th November 1957 – 8th August 1981 [62 days on strike]

Michael Devine: 26th May 1954 – 21st August 1981 [60 days on strike]