The harsh truths of partition in Ireland can’t be avoided in the name of reconciliation | Brian Hanley

Bland ceremonies avoid the difficult questions of imperialism, power and class that have divided the country

Today in Armagh a church service is marking the centenary since the partition of Ireland. Though the event is hosted by the five main Christian churches on the island of Ireland, it has been shrouded in controversy since it emerged in September that the Irish president, Michael D Higgins, had declined an invitation to attend.

The president objected that the title and structure of the Service of Reflection and Hope" to mark the centenaries of the partition of Ireland and the foundation of Northern Ireland" were political in nature; though he insisted it wasn't a boycott. Tanaiste Simon Coveney is now representing the Irish government, with Boris Johnson also attending - the Queen's attendance was cancelled yesterday on health grounds. Members of the DUP, and former taoiseach John Bruton, were quick to criticise Higgins' decision, but it was an entirely logical move. Partition was imposed on Ireland a century ago, against the wishes of the majority of its people. The border was opposed not only by republicans, but also by the so-called constitutional" nationalists of the Home Rule party, the labour movement and indeed many southern unionists. The birth of the border came as part of a violent process with what was to become the minority community in the new Northern Ireland effectively battered into submission.

Brian Hanley is a historian and author of The Impact of the Troubles on the Republic of Ireland