CONFIDENTIAL
in October 1980 which would allow NLMS to accept and apply' the main Convention, but again without being able to become
a Party to it.
NORTHERN IRELAND
15. A particular UK interest in the foregoing is the possi- bility of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) seeking to enjoy the protection of the Protocols. The PIRA is already assiduous in its attempts to argue that it is an NLM and thus should be entitled to PW status, in accordance with Protocol I, for its members 'captured' by the UK Security Forces. The PIRA distributed leaflets at the Geneva Diplomatic Conference making this claim and the Central Relatives Action Committee, a PIRA offshoot, has made representations to the International Committee of the Red Cross seeking PW status for the Maze prisoners. (It is perhaps no coincidence that, since the Diplomatic Conference there has been an increasing tendency for terrorist groups to describe themselves as 'National Liberation Movements'.)
16. We do not consider that the PIRA is already covered by the 1977 Protocol and it is important to do nothing in other contexts which would enhance the status of the PIRA for possible use by them in relation to the Protocol. This will become particularly important once the UK has ratified the Protocol when the PIRA could seek to lodge a unilateral declaration with the Swiss Government.
17. In such an event we would argue strongly against the PIRA's claim to be an NLM: it does not genuinely represent a 'people', Northern Ireland is not a colonial situation, the PIRA does not control territory, etc. It is improtant to bear in mind that whilst, eg, the PLO and SWAPO are recognised as NLMS in the UN context, the PIRA is not. It is also doubtful if, on the basis of its history of past operations, the PIRA would be able to give credible assurances that it would in future abide by the provisions of the Conventions and the Protocol. However, to reinforce our case further we propose to make on ratification a declaration similar to the one we made on signature which would record our understanding that declarations may only be made under Article 96(3) if the body making them is genuinely an authority representing a people engaged in
BORUTIAL
/armed conflict