After our guided tour of the Derry city walls, Mr. McCourt took us to meet with representatives from Derry's Peace and Reconciliation Group. The Group is involved in various community building activities, with the aim of uniting the opposing sides toward the betterment of Derry at large. The Peace and Reconciliation Group seems to focus on practical measures which, together, help to improve the situation of folks across the political spectrum. Such measures include: job creation, strict law enforcement, and city beautification. All of this, the representatives explained, will, in theory, provide citizens of Derry a sense of investment in their community and eventually lead to economic growth, increased tourism, and increased cooperation between opposing sects.
Chatting with the Peace and Reconciliation representatives and listening to them discuss concrete ideas about methods to promote peace and decrease sectarianism caused me to reflect on the study abroad trip as a whole. Since the civil rights era in Northern Ireland and the subsequent thirty year Troubles era, conflict in Northern Ireland has been expressed by violent means. 3,500 lives were lost. Many more were injured or are missing. Violent riots, politically inspired hate crimes, and countless bombings bred resentment among North Ireland citizens from all sects and affected the demographics of entire generations. All of that and where has it left the people of Derry and Belfast? The economic situation is dire, social welfare programs are facing major cutbacks, and tourists are afraid to visit their towns. From the perspective of an outsider, it seems like the violent tactics employed by those on both sides of the Northern Irish conflict throughout the years has produced very little. What seems to have been more effective at resolving actual issues and opening true political dialog has been peaceful negotiation. Take for instance, the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. This was an agreement reached through a long negotiation process and agreed to by all sides. The Agreement set up a power sharing government and outlined a disarmament plan which was extremely effective. The Peace and Reconciliation Group seem to be operating within that same paradigm of negotiation. Their hope is that, as the people of Derry become more invested in their community and trusting of authority, they will begin to become invested in the legitimate political process and resort less to violence as a method of political expression.
Nathan Bernaix: Ireland Blog
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Ireland’s Political Transformation Essay
The 20th Century was a century of geo-political transition. Two World Wars and the subsequent Soviet era changed the lines on the world map and global power structure of the Western World. For The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in particular, the 20th Century saw each country drastically transition politically, often through violent means. For the Republic of Ireland in the 20th century, the country transitioned from violent uprisings and rebellions against its status as a British colony in the early part of the century, to a war with Britain which resulted in the partitioning of The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and to the development of its own self-governing body independent of Britain. Northern Ireland transitioned from an era of the Ulster Unionist Party hegemon in which the minority Catholic Nationalist population was discriminated against through housing laws and gerrymandering, to a period of intense sectarian violence and home rule, to a period of relative peace and political power sharing.
For me, transitions are paradigm shifts. These shifts can occur politically, socially, economically, culturally, scientifically, etc. Often these transitions are the result of political campaigning, protesting, and/or political violence. Sometimes, transitions occur gradually as generations turn over and rifts diminish. Sometimes transitions are caused by changing in economic conditions. Sometimes transitions are caused by changes in the demographics of the population racially, religiously, and/or ethnically. Most of the time, political transitions occur due to a number of these factors working together. The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are countries which have experienced drastic and marked political transitions. The causes behind these transitions were complex and interworking.
Ireland was colonized by Great Britain early in the 17th Century. Immediately, the English Protestants attempted to suppress the religious freedoms of the majority Irish Catholic population. English rule went on relatively uncontested until the potato famine and economic depression of the mid-19th century. Irish citizens began to resent the way in which the British government was reacting, or not reacting to the dilemma. The British government held to the belief that the market would correct itself and refused to contribute aid. This non-response by the British government caused a paradigm shift in the way Irish citizen perceived their status in the eyes of the British government. Subsequently, Irish campaigns for independence from Britain began to gain steam. These groups included the clandestine Irish Republican Brotherhood who advocated an armed rebellion against the British government, the Sinn Fein movement, and the Home Rule Movement who advocated for a constitutional change for independence. This is a great example of political transition. In this case, Ireland’s transition from an agriculturally based colony relatively free of nationalist movements to one in which independence from Britain was the paramount political issue was the result of an economic depression, a famine, and the failings of the British government to do anything about it.
The support for Irish independence was tested in 1916 when Padraic Pearse and James Connolly led the Easter Rising, declaring Irish independence and being quickly squashed by the British military. The Easter Rising did not receive much public support, which was one of the reasons it was unsuccessful. However, the decision by the British Government to execute the leaders of the Rising galvanized public support for the cause of home rule. Riding this wave of Irish nationalism, Sinn Fein was successful in the elections of 1918. The success of Sinn Fein angered the British government and led to the Anglo-Irish War which ended with a treaty in which the island was partitioned separating the majority Protestant Northern Ireland from the south. The Republic of Ireland was granted its independence and Northern Ireland maintained its ties with Great Britain. In this case, the political transition of Ireland from a British colony to a partitioned island with an independent south was the result of a Rising, a change in popular opinion about home rule due to perceived unjust executions, a war, and a treaty.
More recent transitions in Ireland have been centered in economics. In its early history, Ireland’s economy was largely based in agriculture. The temperate oceanic climate, vast pastures, and large amount of rainfall contribute to Ireland’s rich farmlands and livestock. More recently, Ireland has made attempts to transition its economy to one based in the service sector. Ireland has a well-educated population due to the support the government has historically granted students. Ireland put this population to use in education, tourism, finance, technology, etc. This led to the economic boom, Celtic Tiger years of the 1990s. The growth Ireland experienced during this era was largely based on the housing market and the construction industry which supported its expansion. However, the housing market bubble eventually burst during the global recession of the late 2000s and took down with it the adjacent construction industry, causing a spike in unemployment, and the banks which made many of the home loans. Ireland received bailout money from the European Union in order to counteract the effects of the failing banks but received the money with the premise that it would make attempts to balance its budget. Currently, Ireland is deciding, as a country, which programs will receive budget cuts. Ireland’s austerity measures are the hottest political topic of the day. The country seems as if it is on the cusp of a major transition. Government spending on social programs and failed economic austerity is, in large part, how Ireland wound up in a recession. Now, the country must decide how it wants to structure its budget in the future as to avoid such economic issues. This is an example of an economic transition. This particular transition was caused by a failing economy and a need to reduce government deficit.
Northern Ireland has a more recent history of drastic political transition. Born out of the partitioning of the island following the Anglo-Irish War of 1922, Northern Ireland was dominated politically by the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). The UUP represented the majority Protestant population and was loyal to the British government. The UUP maintained political control largely through gerrymandering. The Party would define the districts in such a way to ensure that the Catholic minority had limited government representation. Eventually, the party’s dominance was such a guarantee that they simply did not have to appease the Catholic electorate whatsoever since their political influence was so marginal. Inspired by the African-American civil rights movement, the exclusion of Catholics in Northern Irish politics, coupled with discrimination of Catholics in housing and jobs, brought about a movement advocating civil rights for the minority Catholic population in Northern Ireland.
After several years of marching and protests, the degree of violence at the marches began to escalate. Initially, British forces were sent to Northern Ireland to maintain the peace and protect civilians from the violent protests. However, the killing of 13 unarmed civil rights protestors by British forces in Derry (Bloody Sunday) in 1972 was met with mass public disapproval and sparked an era of sectarian violent conflict, known as the Troubles, which lasted for thirty years. During the Troubles, roughly 3,500 people were killed and many went missing. One violent terrorist act by one group would spark a response from the opposing group in a vicious cycle of sectarian violence. During the Troubles, the minority Catholic population was attempting to advance a transition to a government which did not discriminate against Catholics and Irish nationalists in Northern Ireland. This attempted political transition was driven by violence largely due to the feeling of disenfranchisement with the political system from minority groups who felt like political action would be impossible within a system in which they were not well represented.
The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 effectively ended the era known as the Troubles. The Agreement, helped negotiated by William Jefferson Clinton, consisted of a decommissioning plan in which groups like the IRA were convinced to abandon their violent tactics in exchange for a new power-sharing government. Today, Northern Ireland has a proportional representation electoral system and measures like the single transferable vote system have been implemented to promote cross-party voting to various degrees of success. Parties from all sides work together and the Republican Sinn Fein Party are actually having a good deal of success in recent elections. The political transition of Northern Ireland was a long process achieved through violent civil rights protests, violent sectarian terrorism, and legitimate political negotiation and agreement between the opposing sides. Although there is still sectarian violence which takes place in Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement did actually mark a transition into an era of drastically reduced violence.
Future transitions in Northern Ireland will depend heavily on peace and reconciliation. The Peace and Reconciliation group in Derry focuses on job creation, policing, and maintaining a clean city in order to promote a feeling of ownership and investment among the citizens of the city. This, they say, will promote cooperation toward common goals and that sectarian divisions will eventually dissipate. This envisions a political transition in Northern Ireland in which sectarian conflict is minimized. However, the vision, I believe, is incomplete. Reconciliation will be important to how Northern Ireland successfully transitions into an era of true peace. Both sides need to take ownership of the terrorism that took place during the Troubles. Until past wrongdoings are atoned for, resentments continue to be harbored on both sides of the conflict. Also, I believe that if Northern Ireland is to truly reach peace, it must do more to integrate its school system. Although schools are not mandatorily segregated, Protestant and Catholic students attend separate schools. This means that children are not exposed to individuals on the other side of the conflict until they are older. By this point, the children have been heavily socialized and less able to overcome preconceived notions about the other side. Integrating schools could go a long way in creating empathy through exposure. This honest movement toward peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland will be its next political transition.
For me, transitions are paradigm shifts. These shifts can occur politically, socially, economically, culturally, scientifically, etc. Often these transitions are the result of political campaigning, protesting, and/or political violence. Sometimes, transitions occur gradually as generations turn over and rifts diminish. Sometimes transitions are caused by changing in economic conditions. Sometimes transitions are caused by changes in the demographics of the population racially, religiously, and/or ethnically. Most of the time, political transitions occur due to a number of these factors working together. The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are countries which have experienced drastic and marked political transitions. The causes behind these transitions were complex and interworking.
Ireland was colonized by Great Britain early in the 17th Century. Immediately, the English Protestants attempted to suppress the religious freedoms of the majority Irish Catholic population. English rule went on relatively uncontested until the potato famine and economic depression of the mid-19th century. Irish citizens began to resent the way in which the British government was reacting, or not reacting to the dilemma. The British government held to the belief that the market would correct itself and refused to contribute aid. This non-response by the British government caused a paradigm shift in the way Irish citizen perceived their status in the eyes of the British government. Subsequently, Irish campaigns for independence from Britain began to gain steam. These groups included the clandestine Irish Republican Brotherhood who advocated an armed rebellion against the British government, the Sinn Fein movement, and the Home Rule Movement who advocated for a constitutional change for independence. This is a great example of political transition. In this case, Ireland’s transition from an agriculturally based colony relatively free of nationalist movements to one in which independence from Britain was the paramount political issue was the result of an economic depression, a famine, and the failings of the British government to do anything about it.
The support for Irish independence was tested in 1916 when Padraic Pearse and James Connolly led the Easter Rising, declaring Irish independence and being quickly squashed by the British military. The Easter Rising did not receive much public support, which was one of the reasons it was unsuccessful. However, the decision by the British Government to execute the leaders of the Rising galvanized public support for the cause of home rule. Riding this wave of Irish nationalism, Sinn Fein was successful in the elections of 1918. The success of Sinn Fein angered the British government and led to the Anglo-Irish War which ended with a treaty in which the island was partitioned separating the majority Protestant Northern Ireland from the south. The Republic of Ireland was granted its independence and Northern Ireland maintained its ties with Great Britain. In this case, the political transition of Ireland from a British colony to a partitioned island with an independent south was the result of a Rising, a change in popular opinion about home rule due to perceived unjust executions, a war, and a treaty.
More recent transitions in Ireland have been centered in economics. In its early history, Ireland’s economy was largely based in agriculture. The temperate oceanic climate, vast pastures, and large amount of rainfall contribute to Ireland’s rich farmlands and livestock. More recently, Ireland has made attempts to transition its economy to one based in the service sector. Ireland has a well-educated population due to the support the government has historically granted students. Ireland put this population to use in education, tourism, finance, technology, etc. This led to the economic boom, Celtic Tiger years of the 1990s. The growth Ireland experienced during this era was largely based on the housing market and the construction industry which supported its expansion. However, the housing market bubble eventually burst during the global recession of the late 2000s and took down with it the adjacent construction industry, causing a spike in unemployment, and the banks which made many of the home loans. Ireland received bailout money from the European Union in order to counteract the effects of the failing banks but received the money with the premise that it would make attempts to balance its budget. Currently, Ireland is deciding, as a country, which programs will receive budget cuts. Ireland’s austerity measures are the hottest political topic of the day. The country seems as if it is on the cusp of a major transition. Government spending on social programs and failed economic austerity is, in large part, how Ireland wound up in a recession. Now, the country must decide how it wants to structure its budget in the future as to avoid such economic issues. This is an example of an economic transition. This particular transition was caused by a failing economy and a need to reduce government deficit.
Northern Ireland has a more recent history of drastic political transition. Born out of the partitioning of the island following the Anglo-Irish War of 1922, Northern Ireland was dominated politically by the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). The UUP represented the majority Protestant population and was loyal to the British government. The UUP maintained political control largely through gerrymandering. The Party would define the districts in such a way to ensure that the Catholic minority had limited government representation. Eventually, the party’s dominance was such a guarantee that they simply did not have to appease the Catholic electorate whatsoever since their political influence was so marginal. Inspired by the African-American civil rights movement, the exclusion of Catholics in Northern Irish politics, coupled with discrimination of Catholics in housing and jobs, brought about a movement advocating civil rights for the minority Catholic population in Northern Ireland.
After several years of marching and protests, the degree of violence at the marches began to escalate. Initially, British forces were sent to Northern Ireland to maintain the peace and protect civilians from the violent protests. However, the killing of 13 unarmed civil rights protestors by British forces in Derry (Bloody Sunday) in 1972 was met with mass public disapproval and sparked an era of sectarian violent conflict, known as the Troubles, which lasted for thirty years. During the Troubles, roughly 3,500 people were killed and many went missing. One violent terrorist act by one group would spark a response from the opposing group in a vicious cycle of sectarian violence. During the Troubles, the minority Catholic population was attempting to advance a transition to a government which did not discriminate against Catholics and Irish nationalists in Northern Ireland. This attempted political transition was driven by violence largely due to the feeling of disenfranchisement with the political system from minority groups who felt like political action would be impossible within a system in which they were not well represented.
The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 effectively ended the era known as the Troubles. The Agreement, helped negotiated by William Jefferson Clinton, consisted of a decommissioning plan in which groups like the IRA were convinced to abandon their violent tactics in exchange for a new power-sharing government. Today, Northern Ireland has a proportional representation electoral system and measures like the single transferable vote system have been implemented to promote cross-party voting to various degrees of success. Parties from all sides work together and the Republican Sinn Fein Party are actually having a good deal of success in recent elections. The political transition of Northern Ireland was a long process achieved through violent civil rights protests, violent sectarian terrorism, and legitimate political negotiation and agreement between the opposing sides. Although there is still sectarian violence which takes place in Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement did actually mark a transition into an era of drastically reduced violence.
Future transitions in Northern Ireland will depend heavily on peace and reconciliation. The Peace and Reconciliation group in Derry focuses on job creation, policing, and maintaining a clean city in order to promote a feeling of ownership and investment among the citizens of the city. This, they say, will promote cooperation toward common goals and that sectarian divisions will eventually dissipate. This envisions a political transition in Northern Ireland in which sectarian conflict is minimized. However, the vision, I believe, is incomplete. Reconciliation will be important to how Northern Ireland successfully transitions into an era of true peace. Both sides need to take ownership of the terrorism that took place during the Troubles. Until past wrongdoings are atoned for, resentments continue to be harbored on both sides of the conflict. Also, I believe that if Northern Ireland is to truly reach peace, it must do more to integrate its school system. Although schools are not mandatorily segregated, Protestant and Catholic students attend separate schools. This means that children are not exposed to individuals on the other side of the conflict until they are older. By this point, the children have been heavily socialized and less able to overcome preconceived notions about the other side. Integrating schools could go a long way in creating empathy through exposure. This honest movement toward peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland will be its next political transition.
Days 9&10
After a brief tour of the Derry Police Department, the group retired for the evening in preparation for our guided tour of the Bogside, the site of Bloody Sunday, the next day. Bloody Sunday is recognized as the event which sparked the era in Northern Ireland known as the Troubles. On a sunny January afternoon in 1972, a civil rights march was organized in Derry/Londonderry to protest the British governments introduction of internment laws. 
The internment laws were a response to rioting and violence which had ramped up significantly in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The British government gave the Northern Irish Unionist government the authority to enforce the internment laws which basically allowed Unionist forces the ability to arrest rioters and protestors and hold them indefinitely without trial. The introduction of the internment laws was met with outrage from the Republicanist movement and was used as a recruiting tool by the IRA. During the infamous civil rights march which became known as "Bloody Sunday", 13 unarmed protestors were shot and killed by British paratroopers.


The violence gained international attention and sparked a series of violent, tit for tat exchanges between Loyalist groups and Nationalist groups which lasted over thirty years and claimed at least 3,500 lives. The response on the ground from Nationalist groups in Derry to Bloody Sunday was so immediate that the British Prime Minister Edward Heath determined that the Unionist Government was ill-equip to handle the groundswell. Heath imposed a direct-rule government wherein power was concentrated in Westminster rather than Stormont. Direct rule lasted until the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.
Obviously, Bloody Sunday triggered events which were, historically, very significant for Northern Ireland. The opportunity to be guided through the hallowed Bogside ground where Bloody Sunday took place by someone who was actually there was an invaluable experience. Our guide, Mr. McCourt was a member of the IRA at the time and was there protesting alongside hundreds of others on that fateful day. McCourt vividly described that day and provided us with personal context. McCourt was part of a large Catholic family during the period of Catholic oppression in Northern Ireland. Because of this, McCourt's mother had trouble finding gainful employment and housing, so she sent him away to a Catholic Boys home. McCourt suffered various abuses during his time at the boy’s home. By the time he was old enough to live on his own (which happened to be the time when the civil rights movement was reaching a fever pitch), McCourt was young, angry, and determined to avenge the discrimination which had plagued his mother. All of this led to McCourt joining the radical IRA, and being present for Bloody Sunday. McCourt described close friends who lost their lives that day. He also described a brush with death he himself had that day. Hearing McCourt describe the events of that day from his standpoint caused me to consider what sort of decisions I might have made if I had lived there and then and under the same conditions. Would I have been involved? Would I have participated peacefully or violently? The tour brought to life, not only the events of Bloody Sunday, but the conditions and the contexts of the times.
The internment laws were a response to rioting and violence which had ramped up significantly in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The British government gave the Northern Irish Unionist government the authority to enforce the internment laws which basically allowed Unionist forces the ability to arrest rioters and protestors and hold them indefinitely without trial. The introduction of the internment laws was met with outrage from the Republicanist movement and was used as a recruiting tool by the IRA. During the infamous civil rights march which became known as "Bloody Sunday", 13 unarmed protestors were shot and killed by British paratroopers.
The violence gained international attention and sparked a series of violent, tit for tat exchanges between Loyalist groups and Nationalist groups which lasted over thirty years and claimed at least 3,500 lives. The response on the ground from Nationalist groups in Derry to Bloody Sunday was so immediate that the British Prime Minister Edward Heath determined that the Unionist Government was ill-equip to handle the groundswell. Heath imposed a direct-rule government wherein power was concentrated in Westminster rather than Stormont. Direct rule lasted until the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.
Obviously, Bloody Sunday triggered events which were, historically, very significant for Northern Ireland. The opportunity to be guided through the hallowed Bogside ground where Bloody Sunday took place by someone who was actually there was an invaluable experience. Our guide, Mr. McCourt was a member of the IRA at the time and was there protesting alongside hundreds of others on that fateful day. McCourt vividly described that day and provided us with personal context. McCourt was part of a large Catholic family during the period of Catholic oppression in Northern Ireland. Because of this, McCourt's mother had trouble finding gainful employment and housing, so she sent him away to a Catholic Boys home. McCourt suffered various abuses during his time at the boy’s home. By the time he was old enough to live on his own (which happened to be the time when the civil rights movement was reaching a fever pitch), McCourt was young, angry, and determined to avenge the discrimination which had plagued his mother. All of this led to McCourt joining the radical IRA, and being present for Bloody Sunday. McCourt described close friends who lost their lives that day. He also described a brush with death he himself had that day. Hearing McCourt describe the events of that day from his standpoint caused me to consider what sort of decisions I might have made if I had lived there and then and under the same conditions. Would I have been involved? Would I have participated peacefully or violently? The tour brought to life, not only the events of Bloody Sunday, but the conditions and the contexts of the times.
Comparative Politics Essay: Ireland/Poland
Poland and Ireland share similar political systems, religions, and histories. The two countries, however, do differ a bit in terms of economic history. Both countries have, at one time, been partitioned as a result of war and outside influence. Ireland was a British colony for centuries and had many rebellions in its history, including the Easter Rebellion of 1916 and the Anglo-Irish War of 1919-1921 which led the partition separating Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland. Poland, on the other hand, was divided between Austria, Prussia, and Russia in 1795. After WWI, Poland was granted its independence by Woodrow Wilson. However, Poland again was divided in two by the Germans and the Soviets during WWII as part of the Warsaw Pact. Following the war, Poland was dominated by Soviet rule until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Throughout these eras of Polish colonization, the Polish people too had rebellions including the Warsaw uprising against the Nazis in 1944 and the worker’s Solidarity Movement of the 1980s which demanded of the Soviet communist government the rights to unionize.
Since the collapse of the communist government in Poland, it has made attempts to westernize itself by aligning itself politically and militarily with the U.S., EU, and NATO. Ireland is also now a member of NATO after years of political and military neutrality in world affairs. Both Poland and Ireland are majority Catholic and their Catholic populations share a similar history of oppression. While Ireland’s Catholics, prior to their independence, were persecuted by the Protestant British, Catholicism in Poland was suppressed by both the Nazis and the Soviets. Both Ireland and Poland transitioned to democratic constitutional bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system subsequent to their respective independences. Despite these myriad similarities between the two countries, Ireland and Poland do differ economically both historically (Ireland has no history with communism) and presently (as Poland seems to be thriving relative to Ireland).
Poland and Ireland share many political similarities on paper. Both countries are Republics (Ireland is a Parliamentary Republic). Both countries are guided, politically, by a constitution (Ireland’s constitution was created in 1937 and Poland’s in 1997). Both countries are democratic (however, Poland’s democracy is much younger, as it transitioned from communism around the time of the falling of the Berlin Wall). Both countries run a democratic bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system. As such, both countries’ branches of government are similarly structured. Both countries have a president representing the executive branch and a prime minister representing the head of government/state. Poland has a bicameral National Assembly with an upper house and a lower house representing its legislative branch while Ireland has a bicameral national parliament with a House of Representatives and a Senate representing its legislative branch. Both countries have a Supreme Court with a series of smaller municipal courts representing its judicial branch. Poland has multiple political parties: Civic Platform, Law and Justice, Palikot Movement, Polish People’s Party, and Democratic Left Alliance. Ireland also has multiple political parties: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, Green Party, and Sinn Fein. Both Ireland and Poland grant universal suffrage to citizens at age 18.
Although Poland and Ireland are both members of the European Union, their respective experiences within the Union have been markedly different. While Ireland has been a member of the EU since 1973, Poland did not join until 2004. After the communist government collapsed in Poland in 1989, the country experienced a period of severe inflation and was unable to pay on its international loans. The new Mazowiecki government responded with the Balcerowicz Plan, which “freed most prices, dramatically reduced state control over the Polish economy, and clamped down on runaway inflation” (state.gov). The Balcerowicz Plan was met with international economic confidence and spurred new international loans and debt restructuring. With this international confidence Poland was able to promote Foreign Direct Investment and tariff-free trading within the European Union. The Balcerowicz Plan was a significant piece of legislation which helped to stabilize Poland’s economy as it transitioned from communism to a free market.
The success of the Balcerowicz Plan allowed for Poland’s continued economic growth into the 21st century. Continued Foreign Direct Investment has “driven the growth of Poland’s technology sectors…motor vehicle, electric machinery, and service center sectors” (state.gov). Poland’s economy was also able to withstand the global economic meltdown of 2008, growing its GDP 15.8% from 2008-2011 (state.gov). Economic experts attribute this success to Poland’s, “a well-timed fiscal stimulus at the outset of the crisis, effective use of EU transfer funds, low financial exposure of the well-managed banking sector to the sovereign debt of troubled countries, and the insulation Poland enjoys through its floating currency and its relatively small traded sector” (state.gov). Clearly, Poland has both benefitted from its central position in the EU by way of low tariffs and high Foreign Investment. However, Poland’s late arrival to the EU and its relative insulation in relation to other EU countries and their debts has also greatly benefitted the economic situation of Poland and allowed it to weather the global economic meltdown of 2008.
Poland’s relative economic success compared to other EU countries during the period of global economic crisis stands in stark contrast to the economic experience of Ireland during the same period. In the 1990s, Ireland’s economy was thriving – achieving “several years of double-digit GDP growth” (state.gov). This period in Irish economic history is known as the “Celtic Tiger” period. The success of the Celtic Tiger was, “driven by a progressive industrial policy that boosted large-scale foreign direct investment and exports” (state.gov). This growth slowed after the September, 11th attack, yet Ireland was still performing well economically compared to most of their EU counterparts. The post-9/11 success of Ireland’s economy was mostly due to the success of the housing market and the complimentary construction industry, as nearly 25% of Irish jobs were in the construction sector (state.gov). However, the collapse of the housing market in 2008 quickly caused a collapse of Irish banks and government finance, as great deals of Irish loans were tied-up in the housing market leading to mass-defaults on housing loans (state.gov).
Ireland has yet to recover from the economic collapse of 2008. In 2010, “the Irish economy experienced double-digit unemployment, deflation, a virtual standstill in credit availability, and a widening government budget deficit” (state.gov). The collapse of the housing and construction industries in Ireland have ensured continued unemployment. As the government maintains a budget deficit (spending on stimulus programs to reinvigorate the economy while experiencing a drastic decrease in tax revenues as people are out of work and building permits are non-existent), it is forced to make critical decisions about where government will be allotted. Ireland received a 67.5 billion euro bailout from the EU Stabilization Fund in late 2011 (state.gov). In exchange for the bailout, Ireland has committed to austerity measures, “designed to reduce its deficit to 3% of GDP in 4 years” (state.gov).
Much like in the U.S, Irish social programs have been the first items of consideration for cuts to the government budget. As our study abroad group visited Ireland in the summer of 2012, political signs and graffiti either protesting or supporting the austerity measures were ubiquitous on the streets of Dublin. A public referendum to decide which aspects of the government budget will receive cuts is on the horizon and the debates are heated. Young people are concerned with paying for college, adults are concerned with unemployment, and the elderly are concerned with social security. Citizens who have grown to expect their government to supplement certain costs are frightened by the prospect of having to provide for themselves, especially amid such harsh economic conditions. Personally observing the heated political signs and graffiti in Dublin and speaking to locals in the pubs angry at the prospect of having to vote on referendums with diluted and ambiguous language was an experience which would be virtually inaccessible to a political scientist who has not visited Ireland. I imagine walking the streets of Warsaw would also provide opportunities for similar observations.
The major political divisions in each country have to do with economics and class issues. As aforementioned, the current political debate in Ireland has to do with austerity measures and determining which programs experience budget cuts. In Poland, despite its overall economic success, the wage gap separating the classes is quite high, leading to labor unrest similar to the Occupy Wall Street Movement in the U.S. These are the key differences we miss in the two countries if we focus solely on differences in their electoral laws and political institutions. The two countries are being forced to reconsider their political-economic system as a result of the global recession. Indeed, both countries have similar political institutions in place to address such issues. However, Ireland, unlike Poland, does not have a recent history with communism. The Polish people are only now seeing firsthand the economic stratification which often results from a capitalist economic system. It should be interesting to see how the Polish people handle the ill-by-products of capitalism in a democratic way. It is very much uncharted territory for them. Poland and Ireland’s political-economic structures could look drastically different in a few years depending on how the economic issues are resolved in each country.
Since the collapse of the communist government in Poland, it has made attempts to westernize itself by aligning itself politically and militarily with the U.S., EU, and NATO. Ireland is also now a member of NATO after years of political and military neutrality in world affairs. Both Poland and Ireland are majority Catholic and their Catholic populations share a similar history of oppression. While Ireland’s Catholics, prior to their independence, were persecuted by the Protestant British, Catholicism in Poland was suppressed by both the Nazis and the Soviets. Both Ireland and Poland transitioned to democratic constitutional bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system subsequent to their respective independences. Despite these myriad similarities between the two countries, Ireland and Poland do differ economically both historically (Ireland has no history with communism) and presently (as Poland seems to be thriving relative to Ireland).
Poland and Ireland share many political similarities on paper. Both countries are Republics (Ireland is a Parliamentary Republic). Both countries are guided, politically, by a constitution (Ireland’s constitution was created in 1937 and Poland’s in 1997). Both countries are democratic (however, Poland’s democracy is much younger, as it transitioned from communism around the time of the falling of the Berlin Wall). Both countries run a democratic bi-cameral parliamentary multi-party system. As such, both countries’ branches of government are similarly structured. Both countries have a president representing the executive branch and a prime minister representing the head of government/state. Poland has a bicameral National Assembly with an upper house and a lower house representing its legislative branch while Ireland has a bicameral national parliament with a House of Representatives and a Senate representing its legislative branch. Both countries have a Supreme Court with a series of smaller municipal courts representing its judicial branch. Poland has multiple political parties: Civic Platform, Law and Justice, Palikot Movement, Polish People’s Party, and Democratic Left Alliance. Ireland also has multiple political parties: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, Green Party, and Sinn Fein. Both Ireland and Poland grant universal suffrage to citizens at age 18.
Although Poland and Ireland are both members of the European Union, their respective experiences within the Union have been markedly different. While Ireland has been a member of the EU since 1973, Poland did not join until 2004. After the communist government collapsed in Poland in 1989, the country experienced a period of severe inflation and was unable to pay on its international loans. The new Mazowiecki government responded with the Balcerowicz Plan, which “freed most prices, dramatically reduced state control over the Polish economy, and clamped down on runaway inflation” (state.gov). The Balcerowicz Plan was met with international economic confidence and spurred new international loans and debt restructuring. With this international confidence Poland was able to promote Foreign Direct Investment and tariff-free trading within the European Union. The Balcerowicz Plan was a significant piece of legislation which helped to stabilize Poland’s economy as it transitioned from communism to a free market.
The success of the Balcerowicz Plan allowed for Poland’s continued economic growth into the 21st century. Continued Foreign Direct Investment has “driven the growth of Poland’s technology sectors…motor vehicle, electric machinery, and service center sectors” (state.gov). Poland’s economy was also able to withstand the global economic meltdown of 2008, growing its GDP 15.8% from 2008-2011 (state.gov). Economic experts attribute this success to Poland’s, “a well-timed fiscal stimulus at the outset of the crisis, effective use of EU transfer funds, low financial exposure of the well-managed banking sector to the sovereign debt of troubled countries, and the insulation Poland enjoys through its floating currency and its relatively small traded sector” (state.gov). Clearly, Poland has both benefitted from its central position in the EU by way of low tariffs and high Foreign Investment. However, Poland’s late arrival to the EU and its relative insulation in relation to other EU countries and their debts has also greatly benefitted the economic situation of Poland and allowed it to weather the global economic meltdown of 2008.
Poland’s relative economic success compared to other EU countries during the period of global economic crisis stands in stark contrast to the economic experience of Ireland during the same period. In the 1990s, Ireland’s economy was thriving – achieving “several years of double-digit GDP growth” (state.gov). This period in Irish economic history is known as the “Celtic Tiger” period. The success of the Celtic Tiger was, “driven by a progressive industrial policy that boosted large-scale foreign direct investment and exports” (state.gov). This growth slowed after the September, 11th attack, yet Ireland was still performing well economically compared to most of their EU counterparts. The post-9/11 success of Ireland’s economy was mostly due to the success of the housing market and the complimentary construction industry, as nearly 25% of Irish jobs were in the construction sector (state.gov). However, the collapse of the housing market in 2008 quickly caused a collapse of Irish banks and government finance, as great deals of Irish loans were tied-up in the housing market leading to mass-defaults on housing loans (state.gov).
Ireland has yet to recover from the economic collapse of 2008. In 2010, “the Irish economy experienced double-digit unemployment, deflation, a virtual standstill in credit availability, and a widening government budget deficit” (state.gov). The collapse of the housing and construction industries in Ireland have ensured continued unemployment. As the government maintains a budget deficit (spending on stimulus programs to reinvigorate the economy while experiencing a drastic decrease in tax revenues as people are out of work and building permits are non-existent), it is forced to make critical decisions about where government will be allotted. Ireland received a 67.5 billion euro bailout from the EU Stabilization Fund in late 2011 (state.gov). In exchange for the bailout, Ireland has committed to austerity measures, “designed to reduce its deficit to 3% of GDP in 4 years” (state.gov).
Much like in the U.S, Irish social programs have been the first items of consideration for cuts to the government budget. As our study abroad group visited Ireland in the summer of 2012, political signs and graffiti either protesting or supporting the austerity measures were ubiquitous on the streets of Dublin. A public referendum to decide which aspects of the government budget will receive cuts is on the horizon and the debates are heated. Young people are concerned with paying for college, adults are concerned with unemployment, and the elderly are concerned with social security. Citizens who have grown to expect their government to supplement certain costs are frightened by the prospect of having to provide for themselves, especially amid such harsh economic conditions. Personally observing the heated political signs and graffiti in Dublin and speaking to locals in the pubs angry at the prospect of having to vote on referendums with diluted and ambiguous language was an experience which would be virtually inaccessible to a political scientist who has not visited Ireland. I imagine walking the streets of Warsaw would also provide opportunities for similar observations.
The major political divisions in each country have to do with economics and class issues. As aforementioned, the current political debate in Ireland has to do with austerity measures and determining which programs experience budget cuts. In Poland, despite its overall economic success, the wage gap separating the classes is quite high, leading to labor unrest similar to the Occupy Wall Street Movement in the U.S. These are the key differences we miss in the two countries if we focus solely on differences in their electoral laws and political institutions. The two countries are being forced to reconsider their political-economic system as a result of the global recession. Indeed, both countries have similar political institutions in place to address such issues. However, Ireland, unlike Poland, does not have a recent history with communism. The Polish people are only now seeing firsthand the economic stratification which often results from a capitalist economic system. It should be interesting to see how the Polish people handle the ill-by-products of capitalism in a democratic way. It is very much uncharted territory for them. Poland and Ireland’s political-economic structures could look drastically different in a few years depending on how the economic issues are resolved in each country.
Day 8
After our tour of the Titanic exhibit and folk museum, the group met with another former political prisoner, this one being from the Loyalist side. His name was Richard and he was to give our group a tour of the famous Belfast murals covering the city in both the Catholic areas (Fall Street) and the Protestant neighborhoods (Shankhill Road). A large "Peace Wall" separates the two neighborhoods. The wall is about 10 feet of brick and another 10 feet or so of fencing. It is meant to prevent paramilitary groups from lobbing explosives from one neighborhood into the other. The wall is necessary due to the close proximity of the two disparate neighborhoods (the neighborhoods are separated by less than 100 yards). Much like the rest of the murals throughout Belfast, the murals on the Peace Wall are in good condition and do not appear to be tampered with. Visitors are encouraged to leave messages of peace on the wall. I signed and dated the wall myself. John explained that the opposing sides have an understanding of mutually assured destruction when it comes to the murals, so that if a republican mural is tampered with, a unionist mural will be tampered with in retaliation.

The mural I chose to analyze was a mural protesting the existence of "4,400 Palestinian Political Prisoners." Upon first glimpse of this particular mural, I was confused as to why a mural honoring the Palestinians and the Middle East conflict was painted alongside murals honoring the Northern Ireland conflict. Our guide explained the connection. Apparently, Northern Irish republican groups identify with the plight of the Palestinians. This is primarily due to the fact that Israel is supported the British government, but also because they view the conflict in the Middle East as a similar battle over a home territory. Conversely, unionists identify with the Israelis and support British involvement in the conflict. Therefore, the mural protesting the withholding of Palestinian political prisoners signifies both republican sentiment in Northern Ireland as well as its place in a global context.

The mural I chose to analyze was a mural protesting the existence of "4,400 Palestinian Political Prisoners." Upon first glimpse of this particular mural, I was confused as to why a mural honoring the Palestinians and the Middle East conflict was painted alongside murals honoring the Northern Ireland conflict. Our guide explained the connection. Apparently, Northern Irish republican groups identify with the plight of the Palestinians. This is primarily due to the fact that Israel is supported the British government, but also because they view the conflict in the Middle East as a similar battle over a home territory. Conversely, unionists identify with the Israelis and support British involvement in the conflict. Therefore, the mural protesting the withholding of Palestinian political prisoners signifies both republican sentiment in Northern Ireland as well as its place in a global context.
Day 7

Today we had the fortune of being given a tour of Stormont. As special guests, we were granted actual access to MPs from a few different parties, a question and answer session, and a chance to sit in on a session of the legislative assembly. The actual building of Stormont was a wonder of architecture. In many ways, it was like a larger version of Belfast City Hall. It too had lots of Italian marble and elaborate chandlers. However, the grounds of the building are what really set it apart. Stormont sits atop a very large hill and features a driveway the length of several football fields and lined with beautiful native flora and fauna. Complimentary to the building itself, the Stormont grounds are perfectly symmetrical on either side of the drive. The building faces due south as an insulting gesture to Dublin and the government of the Republic of Ireland. Stormont was used as a safe haven for Allied forces in WWII and was covered in manure to provide cover from Axis bombings.
For the end of the tour, the group was taken into the balcony of the legislative assembly hall to hear and see live debates over issues facing Northern Ireland at the moment. The seats in the rooms were arranged by party affiliation with Unionists on one side and Nationalists on the other. The debates were structured in this way: a Minister (we were there for the Minister of Social Development) would present a number of pre-assigned questions. The minister would give his opening statements and then open the floor for debate. The minister would then respond to each point and move on to the next question with each question taking about 7 minutes to debate. During the debates, the MPs who were not speaking looked very distracted. Many of them were on their phones, iPads, thumbing through paper work, or having side-sessions with other MPs. In fact, one of the male MPs motioned to Kelly in a flirtatious way seemingly asking for her phone number. How inappropriate! Some of the questions debated:
- Housing laws
- Gambling
- Youth Justice
- Sectarianism, and defining what qualifies as a hate crime
- The legal aid system and equal access to legal representation
- Full body scanners in prisons
Following our observation of the legislative assembly, we met with a few MPs individually and were armed with pre-written questions for them to address. First, we met with a man called Pat Ramsey from the Social Democratic and Labour Party. SDLP is a moderate party which emphasizes greater political cooperation between the north and south. As such, Ramsey took us through a brief history of Ireland from the start of the Troubles until the present and spoke mostly of the peacemakers along the way. Specifically, Ramsey highlighted the work of John Humme, an Irish politician who helped to bring Republicans into the fold politically. Humme was a peacemaker who believed that political unification could transcend the physical boundary separating Ireland and Northern Ireland. Also, Ramsey spoke about the crucial role of Bill Clinton in the Good Friday peace agreements of 1998. Representing the moderate SDLP, Ramsey appropriately minimized the role of paramilitary groups in modern day Northern Ireland. Ramsey stated that there are small factions of sectarian groups intent on carrying out paramilitary acts, but that these groups are not representative of the sentiment of the country as a whole.
Next, we met with a member of the Sinn Fein Party called Raymond McCartney. Sinn Fein is Ireland's largest nationalist party. During the times of the Troubles, the party supported the IRA in their "armed struggle." With the expectation that we would be meeting with a member of the Sinn Fein party, I had in mind an extreme, radical, charismatic figure. Raymond McCartney was not that. He was an unimposing, seemingly orthodox politician. The ideas he expressed were not dissimilar to the ideas one might hear from any U.S. politician. McCartney (although he is a former political prisoner who has a mural painted of him in his home town of Derry in honor of his hunger strike protest against British internment), spoke of such micro level, benign issues as education, job creation, and foreign investment as methods by which Northern Ireland can overcome its current recession. My question for him had to do with youth involvement in politics. I mentioned that we had been to the Belfast City Hall the day before and met their 26 year old mayor (also a member of Sinn Fein). I asked if it was a sign that young people were becoming more involved in politics and, if so, how it has changed the dynamics of the political dialogue in the country. McCartney said that Sinn Fein has gone to great lengths to ensure that their party includes young people as a way to maintain viability and embrace fresh ideas. Furthermore, he said that the party embraces all types of diversity, as it enriches the party by diversifying the pool of ideas. We shook hands with Mr. McCartney, took a photo, and exited Stormont by way of their lovely driveway.
Terrorism v. Freedom Fighters Essay
In areas of contention, and especially those with colonial histories of direct rule from mother countries, the line separating acts of terrorism from freedom fighting is razor thin. In Northern Ireland specifically, discerning these differences is especially difficult. For example, the majority party in Northern Ireland's Parliament is Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein has garnered votes via legitimate elections, and yet, many of its members were heavily involved with the IRA (Irish Republican Army) in the 1970s during the time of conflict known as the Troubles. This was a period of resistance to British rule and intense fighting for civil rights for the minority Catholic population. The IRA is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, but to many in the Republican population of Northern Ireland, the IRA's acts of violence are likely perceived as freedom fighting acts in response to a history of civil injustices.
Terrorism can be defined as an act which is violent in nature, has political purposes, disregards civilians, and is clandestine in nature. Terrorist methodology is often employed by groups seeking political power or influence, but who do not possess the means by which to field a legitimate military. Therefore, improvisational and ad hoc strategies are often employed by terrorist groups. When most U.S. citizens think of terrorist groups, we think of Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. What many might not know is that Al-Qaeda and many other terrorist organizations base their strategies in the tactical style of the IRA. The IRA fits all of the criteria outlined above for a terrorist organization. They are indeed violent, ambivalent toward civilians, politically motivated, and clandestine.
The IRA was born out of the Irish civil rights movement in response to the formation of a new Ulster Volunteer Forces (UVF: the original UVA were volunteers who fought alongside Allied forces in World War I in hopes of gaining independence from the British government as compensation). The new UVF was created in the 1966 and began to incite riots with Catholic sects in Belfast. Catholic families were burned out of their homes and in need of protection that they did not feel they were receiving from the British government. The IRA then stepped in in 1969 to fill that void. There are several instances of violent acts committed by the IRA, among them:
- The instance in Falls Street area in Belfast wherein three Scottish police officers were murdered in response to Catholic anger over the English implementation of a curfew
-Bloody Friday: the IRA's response to the violence of Bloody Sunday wherein twenty one bombs were planted in Belfast City Center and nine people were killed
- And the continuous back and forth retaliation murders throughout the period known as the Troubles throughout the 1970s and into the early 1990s
The IRA shared the traditionalist republican view that the Northern state is illegitimate. Following the attacks on Catholics in Belfast, the IRA used the events to rally Catholic support for their use of military tactics as a way to protect Catholics from further attacks. As British forces became increasingly involved in protection, the amount of sectarian violence and rioting increased on both sides. The IRA's mission then became more and more about the legitimacy of the constitution and the question of a united Ireland rather than simply protection for its people. These aims were squelched following the events of Bloody Sunday, as the Unionist Party regained control of Stormont and introduced direct rule in 1972.
At that point, the IRA came to represent the violent opposition to the standing government, continuing to struggle for political significance through acts of violence in response to Loyalist acts of violence throughout the era known as the Troubles. The era effectively ended in 1998 with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, a peace treaty. The IRA in particular was ordered to decommission by the British and Northern Irish governments as part of the Agreement. The group took a vow to rid itself of all of its weapons and disengage itself in all terrorist activities. An Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD) was established in order to monitor the IRA and assure that the group followed through on its promise. The IICD declared the IRA free of weapons and disengaged from all terrorist activities by 2003. Loyalist groups, however, criticized the IICD for its supposed lack of transparency, but independent groups have declared the IRA to be "committed to a political path."
The violence has since deescalated, but tensions remain. Massive peace walls and gates have been constructed to keep opposing neighborhoods separate but sectarian violence still bubbles under the surface. All in all, roughly 3,500 people died over the course of the Troubles era, many of them civilians. This indicates a lack of regard for civilians, collateral damage of rioting, and/or purposeful targeting of civilians: all characteristic of terrorist groups.
The IRA, much like other terrorist organizations, uses clandestine methods in order to accomplish its aims and prevent its members from becoming political prisoners. The methods often used by terrorist organizations are meant to be small incidents writ large as a part of a larger political mission. However, because terrorist organizations do not possess the legitimacy enjoyed by states (such as global support or a political process by which to make decisions about conflict), terrorist groups are forced to carry out violent acts in a clandestine fashion in order to avoid political imprisonment. In this way, both the IRA and the UVF could be considered terrorist organizations.
As aforementioned, the line between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is often razor thin. In the case of Northern Ireland, the decision as to whether we should consider a group like the IRA to be freedom fighters or terrorists is especially difficult. A freedom fighter, taken literally, is someone who fights avidly for his/her freedom. Using this definition, I think it is clear that the individuals fighting on behalf of the IRA were indeed freedom fighters.
The IRA became active in response to the UVF's and the British government's persecution of Catholics in Belfast in the late 1960s. The Irish civil rights movement began, similarly to the U.S.'s own civil rights movement, as a reaction to the unjust treatment of Catholics in terms of housing, gerrymandering, employment, and other laws. Furthermore, Britain's direct rule of Northern Ireland was likely difficult to swallow for Republicans, a group with no loyalties whatsoever to Great Britain and its government. For all of these reasons, it is easy to see how a Republican group such as the IRA would feel like its freedom was constantly being threatened. Their ethnic identity as Catholics were being devalued and downgraded by the Protestant majority population, and their native homeland was being directly run by a satellite government to which they shared no allegiance.
A more nuanced perception of groups such as the IRA and UVF would define them as freedom fighters that use terrorist tactics. Both groups are fighting over disagreements as to how government should run in this region. Each group has a distinct vision: Republicans advocate a united independent Ireland with a distinct constitution, and Unionists identify with Protestant Great Britain and have loyalties to its government. Each of these groups equate freedom with the fulfillment of their vision of government and are willing to fight with great risk in order to see their vision to fruition. They are, therefore, indeed freedom fighters. At the same time, each of these groups has used violent tactics in order to advance their political ideology. These methods have been politically charged, clandestine, and harmful to civilians. By definition, this implies that these groups are indeed also terrorists.
In conclusion, the situation in Northern Ireland with groups such as the IRA and the UVF is such that there essentially is no line separating the freedom fighters from the terrorists. Of course, there are surely members of each group who represent the extreme. There are always those who riot simply for the sick thrill of rioting and without the political motivations. Conversely, there are individuals on both the Loyalist and Republican ends of the political spectrum who desire cooperation and peaceful negotiation between the two sides. However, the members involved in the IRA and the UVF during the times if the Troubles are perfect examples of the blurry line which narrowly separates terrorists from freedom fighters.
Terrorism can be defined as an act which is violent in nature, has political purposes, disregards civilians, and is clandestine in nature. Terrorist methodology is often employed by groups seeking political power or influence, but who do not possess the means by which to field a legitimate military. Therefore, improvisational and ad hoc strategies are often employed by terrorist groups. When most U.S. citizens think of terrorist groups, we think of Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. What many might not know is that Al-Qaeda and many other terrorist organizations base their strategies in the tactical style of the IRA. The IRA fits all of the criteria outlined above for a terrorist organization. They are indeed violent, ambivalent toward civilians, politically motivated, and clandestine.
The IRA was born out of the Irish civil rights movement in response to the formation of a new Ulster Volunteer Forces (UVF: the original UVA were volunteers who fought alongside Allied forces in World War I in hopes of gaining independence from the British government as compensation). The new UVF was created in the 1966 and began to incite riots with Catholic sects in Belfast. Catholic families were burned out of their homes and in need of protection that they did not feel they were receiving from the British government. The IRA then stepped in in 1969 to fill that void. There are several instances of violent acts committed by the IRA, among them:
- The instance in Falls Street area in Belfast wherein three Scottish police officers were murdered in response to Catholic anger over the English implementation of a curfew
-Bloody Friday: the IRA's response to the violence of Bloody Sunday wherein twenty one bombs were planted in Belfast City Center and nine people were killed
- And the continuous back and forth retaliation murders throughout the period known as the Troubles throughout the 1970s and into the early 1990s
The IRA shared the traditionalist republican view that the Northern state is illegitimate. Following the attacks on Catholics in Belfast, the IRA used the events to rally Catholic support for their use of military tactics as a way to protect Catholics from further attacks. As British forces became increasingly involved in protection, the amount of sectarian violence and rioting increased on both sides. The IRA's mission then became more and more about the legitimacy of the constitution and the question of a united Ireland rather than simply protection for its people. These aims were squelched following the events of Bloody Sunday, as the Unionist Party regained control of Stormont and introduced direct rule in 1972.
At that point, the IRA came to represent the violent opposition to the standing government, continuing to struggle for political significance through acts of violence in response to Loyalist acts of violence throughout the era known as the Troubles. The era effectively ended in 1998 with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, a peace treaty. The IRA in particular was ordered to decommission by the British and Northern Irish governments as part of the Agreement. The group took a vow to rid itself of all of its weapons and disengage itself in all terrorist activities. An Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD) was established in order to monitor the IRA and assure that the group followed through on its promise. The IICD declared the IRA free of weapons and disengaged from all terrorist activities by 2003. Loyalist groups, however, criticized the IICD for its supposed lack of transparency, but independent groups have declared the IRA to be "committed to a political path."
The violence has since deescalated, but tensions remain. Massive peace walls and gates have been constructed to keep opposing neighborhoods separate but sectarian violence still bubbles under the surface. All in all, roughly 3,500 people died over the course of the Troubles era, many of them civilians. This indicates a lack of regard for civilians, collateral damage of rioting, and/or purposeful targeting of civilians: all characteristic of terrorist groups.
The IRA, much like other terrorist organizations, uses clandestine methods in order to accomplish its aims and prevent its members from becoming political prisoners. The methods often used by terrorist organizations are meant to be small incidents writ large as a part of a larger political mission. However, because terrorist organizations do not possess the legitimacy enjoyed by states (such as global support or a political process by which to make decisions about conflict), terrorist groups are forced to carry out violent acts in a clandestine fashion in order to avoid political imprisonment. In this way, both the IRA and the UVF could be considered terrorist organizations.
As aforementioned, the line between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is often razor thin. In the case of Northern Ireland, the decision as to whether we should consider a group like the IRA to be freedom fighters or terrorists is especially difficult. A freedom fighter, taken literally, is someone who fights avidly for his/her freedom. Using this definition, I think it is clear that the individuals fighting on behalf of the IRA were indeed freedom fighters.
The IRA became active in response to the UVF's and the British government's persecution of Catholics in Belfast in the late 1960s. The Irish civil rights movement began, similarly to the U.S.'s own civil rights movement, as a reaction to the unjust treatment of Catholics in terms of housing, gerrymandering, employment, and other laws. Furthermore, Britain's direct rule of Northern Ireland was likely difficult to swallow for Republicans, a group with no loyalties whatsoever to Great Britain and its government. For all of these reasons, it is easy to see how a Republican group such as the IRA would feel like its freedom was constantly being threatened. Their ethnic identity as Catholics were being devalued and downgraded by the Protestant majority population, and their native homeland was being directly run by a satellite government to which they shared no allegiance.
A more nuanced perception of groups such as the IRA and UVF would define them as freedom fighters that use terrorist tactics. Both groups are fighting over disagreements as to how government should run in this region. Each group has a distinct vision: Republicans advocate a united independent Ireland with a distinct constitution, and Unionists identify with Protestant Great Britain and have loyalties to its government. Each of these groups equate freedom with the fulfillment of their vision of government and are willing to fight with great risk in order to see their vision to fruition. They are, therefore, indeed freedom fighters. At the same time, each of these groups has used violent tactics in order to advance their political ideology. These methods have been politically charged, clandestine, and harmful to civilians. By definition, this implies that these groups are indeed also terrorists.
In conclusion, the situation in Northern Ireland with groups such as the IRA and the UVF is such that there essentially is no line separating the freedom fighters from the terrorists. Of course, there are surely members of each group who represent the extreme. There are always those who riot simply for the sick thrill of rioting and without the political motivations. Conversely, there are individuals on both the Loyalist and Republican ends of the political spectrum who desire cooperation and peaceful negotiation between the two sides. However, the members involved in the IRA and the UVF during the times if the Troubles are perfect examples of the blurry line which narrowly separates terrorists from freedom fighters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)