It is often stated by proponents of "IP/IT/IS" that the techniques of aikido (and presumably other styles) are unimportant; that "IP/IT/IS" operates outside of technique.
Michael, context is everything. i don't remember reading and/or hearing that the propronents of IS said techniques aren't important. Also, it depends on the definition of "technique". if standing around in hugging the tree pose is a "technique", then it's an IS technique and it's important. but if "technique" is something like shihonage or iriminage or ikkyo, then no, from IS perspective, not important in IS training. i am going to presume to speak for the IS lots. IS is like water that you put into a container like the shihonage, ikkyo, single whip, knife hand strike, bong sao lap sao, and so on.
without IS, those containers are still containers but without substance. one of my teacher, Ikeda sensei, said that IS is the aikido technique while ikkyo or shihonage or kokyunage and so on are aikido movements. and it's the technique (IS) that makes the aikido movements work. Same goes for karate, kungfu, taiji, and so on. IS stuffs are arts independent. some arts are better suit for IS, some are not so much. from my point of view, aikido is better suit for expressing IS.
In my very limited experience, I would have to say I disagree. In my admittedly short exposure to "IP/IT/IS" I found that everything shown was technique based. It may not be what many would call a formal technique, but technique I believe it is. In my opinion, it really comes down to what distinctions the practitioner is able to make.
as i mentioned above. it depends on your definition of "technique".