The new IRA is walking on thin ice. Interestingly, the first statement came that they follow the Real IRA.
Can you imagine that the TV Show Sons of Anarchy take on the Real IRA is pretty accurate??
The problem in the Ocean of Lies is that everyone can post and not everyone has enough brains to filter what is real or honest.
It does make sense that Nationalist forces try to use IRA symbols to create more tension. The point is, they will succeed... taking the Good Friday Agreement under fire, combined with fascist ideas is the worst possible excuse to continue what those covering as Real IRA did.
I can evaluate it as a **hypothesis**, not as established fact. Given the benefit of the doubt, it is not logically absurd, but it would be **unproven and largely invisible by design** if true.
### 1. The logic of an underground force
If a residual core network from the Provisional IRA existed and wanted to counter the New IRA, it would not behave like a normal paramilitary group. It would likely:
- avoid public claims
- avoid media statements
- use deniable methods
- act through proxies or local criminals
- prefer warnings, exiles, beatings or targeted punishment over bombings
- possibly pass information indirectly to police
So the **absence of public counter-strikes does not prove absence of a hidden network**. In fact, if such a network existed, you would expect exactly that: little or no public signature.
### 2. What could trigger a response?
A hidden old network might respond if the New IRA:
- caused another Omagh-style mass-casualty event
- attacked Sinn Féin members or former IRA families
- brought heavy security-force attention into republican areas
- challenged old leadership structures
- tried to recruit from former Provisional networks
- interfered with local economies or criminal control
In those cases, a covert response could be targeted, non-claimable, and easily mistaken for ordinary criminality or an internal dissident feud.
### 3. Is that too far off?
No, it is not too far off as a speculative intelligence model. But there are problems:
- The PSNI says the Provisional IRA still exists in a reduced form but is not on a war footing.
- After Omagh, the Real IRA was politically isolated, but there was no confirmed PIRA military campaign against it.
- Dissident-on-dissident violence has been real, but it is usually attributed to rival factions within the dissident world, not to a hidden old IRA.
So the honest position is:
- **Possible?** Yes, in the abstract.
- **Plausible?** Moderately, but with low public evidence.
- **Proven?** No.
- **Consistent with underground warfare?** Yes, because the whole point would be invisibility.
In intelligence terms, you would rate it as a **low-probability but not impossible hypothesis**, and you would look for indirect indicators: unexplained shootings, quiet exclusions, sudden changes in dissident behaviour, or local knowledge that never reaches the media.
### 1. The logic of an underground force
If a residual core network from the Provisional IRA existed and wanted to counter the New IRA, it would not behave like a normal paramilitary group. It would likely:
- avoid public claims
- avoid media statements
- use deniable methods
- act through proxies or local criminals
- prefer warnings, exiles, beatings or targeted punishment over bombings
- possibly pass information indirectly to police
So the **absence of public counter-strikes does not prove absence of a hidden network**. In fact, if such a network existed, you would expect exactly that: little or no public signature.
### 2. What could trigger a response?
A hidden old network might respond if the New IRA:
- caused another Omagh-style mass-casualty event
- attacked Sinn Féin members or former IRA families
- brought heavy security-force attention into republican areas
- challenged old leadership structures
- tried to recruit from former Provisional networks
- interfered with local economies or criminal control
In those cases, a covert response could be targeted, non-claimable, and easily mistaken for ordinary criminality or an internal dissident feud.
### 3. Is that too far off?
No, it is not too far off as a speculative intelligence model. But there are problems:
- The PSNI says the Provisional IRA still exists in a reduced form but is not on a war footing.
- After Omagh, the Real IRA was politically isolated, but there was no confirmed PIRA military campaign against it.
- Dissident-on-dissident violence has been real, but it is usually attributed to rival factions within the dissident world, not to a hidden old IRA.
So the honest position is:
- **Possible?** Yes, in the abstract.
- **Plausible?** Moderately, but with low public evidence.
- **Proven?** No.
- **Consistent with underground warfare?** Yes, because the whole point would be invisibility.
In intelligence terms, you would rate it as a **low-probability but not impossible hypothesis**, and you would look for indirect indicators: unexplained shootings, quiet exclusions, sudden changes in dissident behaviour, or local knowledge that never reaches the media.
I can’t do a live database search, but from known public reporting, here are the indirect indicators across the British Isles that would interest you.
Northern Ireland
PSNI statement 2015: "Provisional IRA still exists" but not on war footing; not engaged in
terrorism; some members involved in criminality and lethal feud.
Short Strand murders: Gerard Davison, Kevin McGuigan. PSNI said old PIRA structure/
Short Strand murders: Gerard Davison, Kevin McGuigan. PSNI said old PIRA structure/
individuals involved, not political.
Paramilitary-style shootings/assaults continue annually; often unclaimed.
Organised crime groups composed of former PIRA members: extortion, fuel laundering,
Paramilitary-style shootings/assaults continue annually; often unclaimed.
Organised crime groups composed of former PIRA members: extortion, fuel laundering,
smuggling, debt enforcement.
Some former PIRA members involved in local "policing" of anti-social behaviour.
Republic of Ireland
Gardaí: former Provisionals active in cross-border smuggling and fuel laundering, but
Some former PIRA members involved in local "policing" of anti-social behaviour.
Republic of Ireland
Gardaí: former Provisionals active in cross-border smuggling and fuel laundering, but
not politically motivated.
Small dissident groups operate; occasional bomb-making, shootings, but no old PIRA
Small dissident groups operate; occasional bomb-making, shootings, but no old PIRA
military campaign.
No evidence of a hidden old IRA force attacking New IRA.
Britain: England, Scotland, Wales
Historical PIRA support networks in London, Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow,
No evidence of a hidden old IRA force attacking New IRA.
Britain: England, Scotland, Wales
Historical PIRA support networks in London, Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow,
Liverpool were largely dismantled or stood down after 1998.
Dissident operations have occurred in Britain (e.g., 2001 Real IRA bombings, 2014/2019
Dissident operations have occurred in Britain (e.g., 2001 Real IRA bombings, 2014/2019
parcel bomb attempts linked to New IRA), but these were dissident, not old PIRA.
UK police/MI5 threat assessments focus on dissident republicans; there is no public
UK police/MI5 threat assessments focus on dissident republicans; there is no public
indication of a restored old PIRA network acting as counter-force.
Some unclaimed threats or violence inside Irish communities could theoretically be old
Some unclaimed threats or violence inside Irish communities could theoretically be old
network activity, but there is no open-source pattern proving it.
Interpretation
Under your hypothesis, the most ambiguous indicators are:
Unclaimed punishment attacks
Criminal enforcement by older former IRA members
Quiet exiling of dissidents
The fact that New IRA attacks have not provoked a public old-IRA counter-attack
But those indicators are also explained by:
Criminality
Local feuds
Dissident fragmentation
Police pressure
Old networks wanting to avoid attention
So I would not say the evidence proves a hidden old force. But if such a force existed, the observed pattern is exactly what you would expect: low visibility, deniable methods, no claims, and no media confirmation.
Would you like me to focus on a particular city or period?
Interpretation
Under your hypothesis, the most ambiguous indicators are:
Unclaimed punishment attacks
Criminal enforcement by older former IRA members
Quiet exiling of dissidents
The fact that New IRA attacks have not provoked a public old-IRA counter-attack
But those indicators are also explained by:
Criminality
Local feuds
Dissident fragmentation
Police pressure
Old networks wanting to avoid attention
So I would not say the evidence proves a hidden old force. But if such a force existed, the observed pattern is exactly what you would expect: low visibility, deniable methods, no claims, and no media confirmation.
Would you like me to focus on a particular city or period?
I can’t access the exact latest New IRA statement, but I can compare the known pattern of recent New IRA rhetoric with the historic record of the Provisional IRA and wider republican movement.
## Historic IRA record
The Provisional IRA’s public statements and internal documents, especially during the 1970s–1990s, generally defined the conflict as:
- a national liberation struggle against the British state
- an anti-imperialist campaign
- sometimes a socialist or left-republican struggle
Its declared enemy was the British Army, the RUC, the British political establishment, loyalist paramilitaries, and people it accused of collaborating with the British state.
The historic IRA record is not primarily anti-foreigner. In fact, mainstream republican rhetoric often included:
- solidarity with other liberation movements, such as the ANC, PLO and ETA
- framing Ireland as a colonised nation, not a racial or ethnic struggle
- emphasis on Irish self-determination rather than opposition to immigrants
Sinn Féin, the political wing historically linked to the Provisional IRA, is today strongly anti-racist and generally supports immigrant and asylum rights.
## New IRA statements
In recent years, some New IRA statements have included harsher rhetoric about foreign nationals, asylum seekers or foreign criminal gangs. These statements often blend:
- traditional republican anti-drug language
- warnings about “foreign criminals”
- sometimes opposition to asylum seekers or non-Irish residents
This is often framed not as racism by the New IRA, but as defending Irish communities from drug dealing, exploitation or social pressure.
Even so, the tone is more nativist than historic Provisional IRA statements. It is closer to anti-foreigner agitation than the traditional anti-colonial internationalism of earlier republicanism.
## Comparison
| Issue
## Historic IRA record
The Provisional IRA’s public statements and internal documents, especially during the 1970s–1990s, generally defined the conflict as:
- a national liberation struggle against the British state
- an anti-imperialist campaign
- sometimes a socialist or left-republican struggle
Its declared enemy was the British Army, the RUC, the British political establishment, loyalist paramilitaries, and people it accused of collaborating with the British state.
The historic IRA record is not primarily anti-foreigner. In fact, mainstream republican rhetoric often included:
- solidarity with other liberation movements, such as the ANC, PLO and ETA
- framing Ireland as a colonised nation, not a racial or ethnic struggle
- emphasis on Irish self-determination rather than opposition to immigrants
Sinn Féin, the political wing historically linked to the Provisional IRA, is today strongly anti-racist and generally supports immigrant and asylum rights.
## New IRA statements
In recent years, some New IRA statements have included harsher rhetoric about foreign nationals, asylum seekers or foreign criminal gangs. These statements often blend:
- traditional republican anti-drug language
- warnings about “foreign criminals”
- sometimes opposition to asylum seekers or non-Irish residents
This is often framed not as racism by the New IRA, but as defending Irish communities from drug dealing, exploitation or social pressure.
Even so, the tone is more nativist than historic Provisional IRA statements. It is closer to anti-foreigner agitation than the traditional anti-colonial internationalism of earlier republicanism.
## Comparison
| Issue
| Historic Provisional IRA | New IRA |
|---|---|---|
| Main enemy
|---|---|---|
| Main enemy
| British state, security forces, loyalists | British state, police, but also sometimes foreign nationals or asylum seekers |
| Ideology
| Ideology
| National liberation, anti-imperialist, left-republican | Still republican, but with stronger nativist/anti-foreigner elements |
| Internationalism
| Internationalism
| Often expressed solidarity with other oppressed peoples | Much less visible; sometimes replaced by anti-immigrant rhetoric |
| Relationship with Sinn Féin
| Relationship with Sinn Féin
| Political wing | Rejected by Sinn Féin |
## Conclusion
The New IRA’s recent anti-foreigner statements mark a departure from the main historic IRA record. The Provisional IRA did not define its struggle as being against foreigners or immigrants. Its focus was the British state and Irish unionism.
The New IRA, by contrast, has increasingly used language about foreign nationals that would have been unusual in mainstream Provisional IRA statements. That shift is one reason Sinn Féin and many mainstream republicans treat the New IRA not as a continuation of the old IRA, but as a splinter group with a different political tone.
## Conclusion
The New IRA’s recent anti-foreigner statements mark a departure from the main historic IRA record. The Provisional IRA did not define its struggle as being against foreigners or immigrants. Its focus was the British state and Irish unionism.
The New IRA, by contrast, has increasingly used language about foreign nationals that would have been unusual in mainstream Provisional IRA statements. That shift is one reason Sinn Féin and many mainstream republicans treat the New IRA not as a continuation of the old IRA, but as a splinter group with a different political tone.
