The Good, Bad and Ugly: What lessons can we share?

It is hard to believe that the Belfast or Good Friday Agreement was signed some 17 years ago. Despite the passage of time, many countries in conflict continue to look to Northern Ireland as a model for their contexts.

In the last ten years, the International Conflict Research Institute (INCORE) at Ulster University has been involved in more than 50 local-global exchanges aimed at learning lessons for or from Northern Ireland.

The Agreement is viewed globally as a positive model, particularly in the way it guarantees nationality and identities, regardless of the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has also demonstrated that it is possible to pursue divergent political goals in a peaceful way.

Two issues that those wanting to learn comparative lessons also consider significant are policing and funding with its allied impact on community work.

Rebuilding trust in the police following conflict is a common global problem. The extensiveness of the Patten Commission process is of constant interest, as well as the creation of shared civilian oversight mechanisms such as the Policing Board.
On the funding front, the extent of funding used to develop the peace process at the community level is a source of fascination to international visitors. Many cannot believe that over £1.5 billion has been put into community peace work since the Agreement.

They are quick to see however that funding has helped develop a skilled community sector who can share lessons on a range of peacebuilding methods as diverse as using art, sport, dialogue, and development. At the same time, international lesson- learners are also often astounded at how much still needs to be done. Seeing the ugly truth of “Peace Walls” and some murals with their violent imagery is a revelation to visitors, as they tend to believe the process has moved well beyond these types of manifestations of conflict. Explaining that only 7% of children attend integrated schools close to twenty years on from the Agreement is shocking to most visitors. Pointing out that, despite some slight improvements in residential mixing, most people reside in largely single-identity communities is also often a surprise.

Those who study and practise conflict transformation are quick to realise that many aspects of the Northern Ireland process represent a negative peace. That is a context where political violence has decreased but the underlying issues that fuel conflicts have not been addressed.

When asked why this is the case, I respond that a more vigorous policy move towards integration has not taken place because there is no commonality of vision in terms of the type of society we are ultimately working towards. Is the goal thin integration or deeper social transformation? Are we going to settle for a society where the dominant communities are going to remain separate and, hopefully, equal, co- existing in negative peace? Alternatively, are we seeking more profound change, where all aspects of life are integrated? This is not an academic question but a practical one as it touches on what is needed to sustain peace in Northern Ireland in the long run.

International lessons would suggest that minimal social change might not be enough for peace to endure, especially in a context where different cultures and political aspirations are inevitably going to rub up against one another. In this context, even outsiders can see that a deeper level of social integration is needed. Without this, peace will always remain tenuous and will mean we can only share the lessons from limited specific examples rather than the peace process as a whole.

Published in Fund Focus, International Fund for Ireland Newsletter, June 2015

President Clinton Back in Derry to Cement the Peace

This week President Clinton made his fifth trip to Derry demonstrating his ongoing commitment to the peace process in Northern Ireland. President Clinton walked the Peace Bridge with Nobel Peace Prize winner John Hume and his wife, Pat. He helped launch a new book, “Peacemaking in the Twenty-First Century,” celebrating the Tip O’Neill peace lectures given at the University of Ulster’s Magee campus, to which he contributed a lecture along with others including John Kerry, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Kofi Annan.

President Clinton then addressed a public audience of some 3,000 people in the Guildhall Square of the city, along with the Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, and members of other political parties, civil society groups, and Tom O’Neill the son of former US Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. President Clinton told the crowd “never underestimate the impact that this small place has had on the large world because of that peace agreement…people want to know how it was done. You have inspired the world”. The President pointed out that other societies are looking to Northern Ireland as an example of how violence can be transformed into peace. The recent ceasefire by the Basque-separatist group ETA, and the beginning of decommissioning there, is an example of a society that looked to the Northern Ireland model.

But despite the phenomenal progress and what Northern Ireland has taught others, President Clinton also noted “there are still issues that remain unresolved in the 19 years since the ceasefire and 16 years since the Good Friday Agreement”. The President did not highlight specific issues but his message was well timed. The recent all-party talks facilitated by Richard Haass and Meghan O’Sullivan aimed at addressing the outstanding issues of the peace process, including how to resolve differences about flags, parades and dealing with the past, did not bear fruit.

Derry Peace Bridge, © Brandon Hamber

President Clinton understands the challenges facing the Northern Ireland peace process more than most. He has been an advocate for peace for decades, dating back to his days as the Governor of Arkansas. Campaigning for the presidency in 1992, he promised to appoint a peace envoy to Northern Ireland and said “I think sometimes we are too reluctant to engage ourselves in a positive way because of our long-standing special relationship with Great Britain and also because it seemed such a thorny problem…I think the United States is now in a position to think about positive change”.

Decades of political violence had left more than 3,600 people dead in Northern Ireland, but the United States (US) largely stayed away from the conflict. Hesitant to strain their relationship with Great Britain and unsure of success, the US treated The Troubles as “an internal problem to be worked out” as President Reagan once put it.

Politicians like Tip O’Neill tried to change this policy, and through his friendship with John Hume, managed to increase a focus on the Irish question and establish the International Fund for Ireland, which contributed to job creation and equality. However, it was when President Clinton was elected that there was sufficient political power to reverse the US government policy of non-interventionism.

This policy change however required risks. In 1994, President Clinton granted a US travel visa to Gerry Adams, leader of Sinn Féin. He believed that Adams was serious about making peace and that, if given greater legitimacy, he could help press the IRA to give up violence. The strategy worked. The visa increased Adams’ standing and enabled him to be more involved in the political process. In the words of the Irish Taoiseach, John Bruton, President Clinton’s decision to engage Sinn Féin “…gave them the confidence to end their campaign”. The British were furious at first when the visa was granted, but during his US visit, Adams promised to push Sinn Féin to make concrete positive decisions. Afterward the British accelerated their efforts to get political talks going, and the Irish government pressured Sinn Féin to cooperate. Seven months later, the IRA declared a ceasefire.

It took nearly four years for these initial steps to transform into the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. During this time, President Clinton continued to work for peace with all the parties. He appointed Senator George Mitchell as a peace envoy, and in 1995 became the first sitting US President to visit Northern Ireland, where he reaffirmed his support for a lasting peace. Speaking to a huge crowd in Guildhall Square, nearly 20 years ago now, he praised the ongoing efforts for peace, saying “… I see a peaceful city, a safe city, a hopeful city, full of young people that should have a peaceful and prosperous future here where their roots and families are”.

President Clinton’s engagement helped sustain the parties through years of difficult negotiations and a break in the cease-fire. He responded immediately, for example, after the Omagh Bomb in 1998 and travelled to Northern Ireland to calm tensions and meet the victims’ families. On the last day of negotiations, he stayed up all night on the phone to bring all of the parties together. The Good Friday Agreement was announced the next morning. After the peace agreement was signed, President Clinton remained committed to the future of Northern Ireland. In the last weeks of his presidency, he again visited Belfast, and urged everyone to move forward toward peace and prosperity.

The consistent message coming from President Clinton has through the years resonated with the philosophy of John Hume who always linked non-violence with economic growth. It is no wonder then that President Clinton chose to honour John Hume in his latest visit to Northern Ireland. It was also appropriate that President Clinton announced a Chair in Peace based at INCORE at the University of Ulster named after John Hume and Tip O’Neill, whose collective visions for Northern Ireland President Clinton was able to help realise in his Presidency and beyond.

So Northern Ireland has indeed come a long way in the last two decades. Derry as a city in particular feels a world away from the violence of the past. Last year it was the UK City of Culture and all the people of the city shared in its diversity and cultural heritage, and optimism remains high.

But at the same time, there is deep division in Northern Ireland. For example, only 7% of children go to integrated schools and many communities remain divided by so-called “peace walls”. Residential segregation between largely Catholic and Protestant communities is still a reality. The political process has faltered recently, particularly around how to deal with the past. Many victims of both paramilitary and state violence still feel their needs have not been met, especially in relation to truth and justice.

In this context, we need to thank those who forged the peace and pushed for it, but we also need to stay true to their wider vision, and we cannot be complacent. To echo the timely words of President Clinton this week, despite the progress, the people of Northern Ireland and the politicians needs to free themselves “…of the past so you can embrace it and be proud rather than be imprisoned by it". In short we need to now “finish the job”.

Blog originally published on the Clinton Foundation website, 7 March 2014, click here.

Lack of Integration Strategy Undermining Northern Ireland's Political Progress

University of Ulster Press Release

The failure to progress a sharing and integrated strategy in Northern Ireland is undermining the achievements of the Good Friday Agreement, a leading University of Ulster academic has warned.

Professor Brandon Hamber (pictured) , the director of the University of Ulster's international conflict resolution research centre INCORE, told a joint committee of MPs and TDs in Dublin that significant strides had been made since the Agreement was forged 15 years ago.

However the Magee-based academic cautioned, as recent events in Northern Ireland have shown, in the absence of any strategy to deliver the integration envisaged in the Good Friday Agreement, the political process was vulnerable to stresses.

Professor Hamber told the meeting of the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement that we need to acknowledge the progress that has been made, violence has decreased and the institutions are functioning but segregation remains.

“What we do know is integrated schooling has not changed significantly. Although there have been advancements, they have not been dramatic.If you look at mixed marriages, for example, these types of factors have not changed dramatically.

"In numerous quarters, this has been put down to a lack of policy on how sharing and integration will take place…the whole spirit of integration as expressed in the Agreement has not yet been realised.

"Of course, policy does not determine practice but it does provide us with a yardstick for measurement and it helps us create a vision for action in terms of what might be needed”.

Professor Hamber told the joint committee of TDs and MPs that other conflict resolution processes around the world had shown addressing underlying issues, including economic concerns and segregation, would provide stronger social cohesion and a greater guarantee of peace in the long term.

If underlying causes of conflict are not addressed, Professor Hamber said, "In the conflict field, we would talk about this as a negative peace. In other words, there is a context where political violence has decreased but a lot of the underlying issues that potentially can fuel violence still remain in place”.

Specifically Professor Hamber called for an integrated strategy in Northern Ireland on dealing with sectarianism, flags, parades and dealing with the past, and a recommitment to the essence of the 1998 Agreement, which talks specifically about the importance of integration in schooling and housing as key to reconciliation.

Note to Editors:







INCORE (International Conflict Research Institute) is a joint University of Ulster and United Nations University project based on the Magee campus. It aims to address the causes and consequences of conflict in Northern Ireland and internationally while also promoting conflict resolution management and peace-building strategies.

Professor Hamber was giving evidence in Leinster House to the Joint Committee of the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement alongside Peter Sheridan, Chief Executive, Co-operation Ireland and Neil Jarman, Director, Institute for Conflict Research.

The joint committee of TD and Northern Ireland MPs is chaired by Deputy Joe McHugh TD.

For further information, please contact:

David Young Telephone: 028 9036 6074 Email: David Young

What does peace mean in the South?

Widespread relief greeted the 1998 Good Friday Agreement when over 94% of people in the Republic of Ireland voted to give up the territorial claim to the whole island enshrined in the Constitution until such time as there was a consensus to do otherwise. The desire to end the conflict was strongly endorsed in both jurisdictions, sustained by a dogged and consistent commitment to peace by the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern – a fact now buried, for the time being at least, under the debris of the current economic crisis.

The Southern reaction to the Peace Process varied depending on how closely affected by the conflict you were. For those living in the border region, the disappearance of the British Army and the opening of border roads, facilitating ease of movement between towns and villages whose hinterlands and livelihoods had been disrupted by the violence, was greatly welcomed.

Cross-border cooperation in tourism, infrastructure, policing and community development, all boosted by EU Peace funding, has allowed fractured communities to pick up the pieces and start again. For many Protestants in the Southern border counties, there was encouragement to engage in public life again after an ‘eyes down, mouths shut’ policy of trying to survive in a climate of fear and intimidation in a region deeply affected by the violence across the border. Many today continue to live with the residue of that.

The further south or west you travelled, it was hard to believe that the peace process meant anything more than an escape from the nightly violence beamed into living rooms and the interminable discussions about a solution. And of course for others, their interest didn’t extend further north than Sainsbury’s in Newry or Asda in Enniskillen. For a small minority the Agreement was seen as a sell-out.

To read the rest of the article by Barbara Walshe visit 15 Years On.

Human rights and women's rights frozen out

Negotiating a peace agreement in a conflict society provides several challenges. First, you need to create a constructive process; second, you need to ensure that the proposals mean something to everyone at the table and third, you have to ensure that what is agreed gets implemented. It could be argued that the Northern Ireland process was a fairly inclusive one, and the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement was a fairly comprehensive one. But what does the aftermath of the agreement look like?

When George Mitchell told the negotiators on Good Friday in 1998 that ‘the hard work starts now’ he meant that implementing the agreement in the spirit in which it was signed would indeed be hard work. And making it work has been like trying to tattoo a balloon. The perceived gains and losses have to keep pace with each other – otherwise some will accuse others of overplaying their hand. So a peace agreement often hangs on the undertakings it makes. But where there is a clash of interpretations about how these should be fulfilled then a feeling of bad faith can quickly replace the more clear-eyed view of the future, such as the one promised on that Good Friday.

An example of this is the Agreement’s proposal on a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland which, following St Andrews, all the parties were committed to but have taken no decisions on since then.  Building on the largest public participation exercise ever undertaken in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission forwarded its advice to the British government in 2008. However, both the British government and the Northern Ireland Executive appear frozen on what to do next.

To read the rest of the article by Monica McWilliams visit 15 Years On.

15 Years On...

I am part of a group called 15 Years On. It is a group individuals working in peacebuilding, peace research, cross-border and cross-community organisations who have come together to discuss how we might use 2013 to reflect on the successes and failures of the 15 years since the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement and how we might learn from those experiences to do better in the future. In late 2012 we began a year-long conversation about the progress of peace and cooperation in Northern Ireland, and about where we should go from here. We plan this conversation to take place largely online, leading to a culminating event sometime in autumn 2013. I encourage you to visit the project website, http://15yearson.wordpress.com.