The previous chapter traced the evolution of the repertoire of commonplaces in the Republic of Ireland. I contended that there was continuity and change. The longing to overcome partition as well as a number of identity-constituting norms remained unaltered. However, the episteme, important aspects of the identity narrative involving the repositioning vis-à-vis Unionists, Britain and Europe, as well as the neutrality norm changed fundamentally. This chapter examines how the changing repertoire of commonplaces influenced the formation of an advocacy for recognising the territorial status quo, how and with what success the advocates linked their arguments to the repertoire of commonplaces, and what role the repertoire played for bargaining processes between advocates and recalcitrant actors.

Only shortly after the Troubles started, advocates such as FitzGerald and O'Brien, who already embraced the novel aspects of the repertoire of commonplaces, challenged the taboo against the recognition of Britain's sovereignty over Northern Ireland. Using these novel aspects as clues for a new approach, they argued that the Republic had to learn an important lesson from history. The Unionists' fear of being forced into unification with the Republic had caused them to opt out of the Republic and explained their resolve to defend partition. Overcoming partition required reducing this fear and the recognition of the territorial status quo would be a key contribution to this reduction (comparative reasoning). Additionally, FitzGerald contended that the Unionists' fear could be gradually overcome through a process of co-operation and integration, modelled after the European unification process.