1,486
26
Essay, 21 pages (5000 words)

British and irish protestants and catholics history essay

Cihan Kayaalp

Module Code & Title:

GV906 Conflict Resolution

Coursework Title:

Northern Ireland Conflict Resolution

Assignment Number:

IV

Module Teacher:

Prof. Han Dorussen

Word Count:

5. 449 (excluding reference list)

Submission Date:

Online Submission Procedures:

All essays must be uploaded online via the Online Coursework submission system (OCS). You will be able to access OCS via the myEssex portal or https://ocs. essex. ac. uk/The OCS deadline will be no later than 9. 45am on the date stated in the module outline. If you have worked closely with another student in the preparation of this essay you must acknowledge it. The students name is:

Please read and sign:

I have read, and understand the University Regulations and Procedures on dealing with plagiarism.

I certify that the attached is all my own work. I understand that I may be penalised if I use the words of others without acknowledgement.

Signed:

Date:

Marker Feedback

Informative comments will be given by your class teacher. Please reflect on these comments before undertaking your next assignment.

Assignment Mark:

Introduction

Recent developments in conflict literature have heightened the need for an appropriate conceptualizing of peace and conflict resolution as well as in recent years; there has been an increasing interest in conflict resolution studies. So far, however, to date there has been little agreement on what is the appropriate conflict resolution process; even there are still debates on definition of conflict resolution or conflict settlement and conflict management. This paper will focus on Northern Ireland Conflict resolution process in the light of the related terminology. This paper has been divided into four parts. First part gives a brief overview of the history of Northern Ireland Conflict. The second part deals with the conceptualizing of the win-win solution which is assessed main attribution of Northern Ireland Conflict Resolution Process by this study. Finally during the last part initially it will be tried to understand the Northern Ireland Conflict in terms of New War terminology and secondly it will be tried to understand dynamics of conflict resolution in terms of British Government, Sin Fein and IRA and finally mediator’s efforts.

I) History of Conflict

Nationalist aspect of the conflict assess the presence of conflict as between ” British and Irish, Protestants and Catholics, colonisers and colonised, oppressors and oppressed” thus the main source of conflict derived from British invasion on area during the medieval age which caused the deterioration of national Irish culture as well as the losses of Irish historical lands. In this condition they lived miserable life without adequate living standards and despite all these plagues they strictly sustained their devotion on Catholic Church. Protestant aspect of the story is quite different they refuse Williamite’s narration on Jacobite wars as well as annually these wars are celebrating by them (Buckley, 2002: 86). During the 11th century Normans conquered England and next century they invaded Ireland as well as in a short term they successfully controlled the country particularly around Dublin which called as the Pale. However, despite majority of these new settlers were assimilated and integrated into local Irish cultures, Pale has been remained as a castle for them who have been connected with main land of English in terms of security needs (Holloway, 2005: 6). The contrast between this new-comers and Gaelic-Irish was very extensive in terms of politics or economics. Moreover, the global colonization wave on new world triggered demographic stabilization in Britain thus the number of new settlers increased with Scottish and English new-comers. In 1641 Protestants already not only had the 41 per cent of the land but also the majority power in parliament. Despite this successful plantation the settlers were still minority and the most striking example of this was during the 1640’s Gaelic-Irish rebellion they turned from the edge of total devastation due to the successful Scottish intervention and unexpected division into Catholic camp. However, the Cromwellian victory came after this conflict and the defeat of the supporters of James II was strengthened the processes in favour of protestants. Catholics land had fallen from 22 per cent in 1968 to 14 per cent in 1703 (Ruane and Todd, 1996: 19-20). This loses triggered rural unrest during the 18th century and Catholic militias had emerged such as whiteboys or the Ribbonmen in order to defend Catholic Camps interests. This new developments immediately found a reflection on Protestan side and lead to rise of the Protestant Peep O’ Day Boys. In 1795 the ” battle of diamond” was resulted with the eminent victory of Protestants and the Orange Order was built on this victory it was basically indicated that Protestant faith was under the protection king and state. While; according to Protestants it was anticipated as a protection and guarantee of their belief and communal identity , it was assessed as the dominance of Protestant faith against to their beliefs by Catholics (Holloway, 2005: 9). Despite Ireland had its own parliament, it was under the patronage of London. During the 18th century the American and French revolution lead more autonomy desires among Ireland and it also contributed collaboration between two camps which was called as the society of United Irishmen. These new developments was realized as the reform demands, however it turned into rebellion in 1798 as well as the society of United Irishmen did not find enough acceptance among both camps. As a result of this Britain declared Act of Union in 1801 which abolished Irish parliament (Pipe, 1997: 9). Despite politic arena was blocked, the land reform demand has been never deteriorated as well as it was transformed to calls for ” Home Rule”. In 1858 the violent organization such as Irish Republican Brotherhood was established to reach independence but they did not achieve any success. However, politic movements such as Parnell’s initiative was more successful during the first Home rule Bill. During the 19th century not only Nationalist camp well organized and strengthened but also Ulster Unionism had developed and strengthened in order to eliminate ” the threat of Home Rule” (Holloway, 2005: 10)In 1912 the third Home Rule Bill was introduced in British Parliament. it was triggered massive demonstrations and protests and under the leadership of Carson 500. 000 protestants signed the declaration who were concerning about their religious and civil rights. The establishment of the Ulster Volunteer Force followed these developments in order to hinder the continuity of Home Rule process. Similarly Nationalist front formed its own volunteer organization in order to protect the future of process (Pipe, 1997: 13). During the WW I while both volunteer organizations fighting for British Army a new rebellion emerged in nationalist front and 24th of April 1916 they took the control of the General Post Office in Dublin. Despite this attempt failed, several execution of rebellions lead to the rise of popularity of Sinn Fein and in 1918 general election they achieved great victory with their enthusiasm on the declaration of independence. After the WW I Irish volunteers established the Republican Army under the leadership of M. Collins and the independence war was launched. After the bloody confrontation, in December 1921 the establishment of Free Irish state consisting of 26 southern counties was accepted by the British Government (Holloway, 2005: 12). Despite, until the mid of 20th century Catholic population in Northern Ireland suffered from lack of political representation and low level of social-economic living standards, the level of conflict remained stable. However, the emergence of welfare state during post-war period lead an awareness of civil right issues thus the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association was formed in 1967 and still its main attribution was based on social and legal reform demands without any emphasises on sectarian differences or violent methods . However, in 1968 this association launched a widespread protests around the ” one man one vote ” demand, unsurprisingly this protests transformed to bloody clashes between police force and Catholics. Even Prime Minister o’ Neill’s melioration proposals did not make any difference on the conflict. Passive position of police force made bloodier the Loyalist attack against to protestors and the Nationalist front immediately responded this attack in Belfast and the ” battle of Bogside” was started. Due to the fact that The Northern Ireland Government failed to appease the escalation of sectarian conflict, Britain deployed troops in 1969. However it was triggered the mobilization of militias of both sides instead of restoration of order. Following sectarian attacks and murders caused an ethnic cleansing thus 21. 500 people were displaced from their homes. In 1971 British government conducted several investigation and internment without any trial against suspects from both sides however majority of the interned were Catholics and it leads widening anger among the Catholic community. In 1972 this implementation was peaked with the murder of 14 protesters by British army at the civil right demonstrations. In 1972, since the conflict had been exponentially deepened, British government suspended the Northern Ireland Government as a provisional persecution however the direct rule of British government lasted almost thirty years until Good Friday Agreement successfully provided conflict resolution (Holloway, 2005: 16-17).

II) Conceptualizing Win-Win Solution

A termination of the armed conflict, a fair dispute settlement not leading to any new close contact, and an ensurement of the parties’ safety are the primary objectives of conflict resolution approaches. Peter Wallensteen defines the solution of conflict as a process during which conflicting parties has reached an agreement resolving the major disagreements, accepted each other’s presence and ended all attacks mutually. Accordingly it depends on an agreement ending the armed conflict and bringing resolution of disputes. As for that adjudicating and protecting validity of such a binding agreement requires mutual trust. Solution process lacking in this is fragile in the long term, even though it seems temporarily effective. It never loses its stability considerably while conflicting parties are assured their presence and confidence in each other (Wallensteen, 2007: 8)According to Sanson and Bretherton, there are four outstanding features of the conflict resolution approaches. The first one is that parties struggle together towards co-operation in the process of solution. It may convert the conflict into the dynamic providing a common gain. However, the ongoing competition in the understanding of zero-sum stake prevents this conversion (Sanson and Di Bretherton, 2001: 193)The second feature is that the process is inclusive. Such a resolution process addresses the needs and interests of all parties and results in a win-win outcome for the conflicting parties. The third feature is to manage the solution process with the interest-oriented approach by understanding the fundamental interests of the parties each other. The solution provided by imposing one of the parties’ own interests to the other makes sustainable peace impossible. The processes often fail when their previous conflict-provoking locations have been kept and negotiated. Therefore solutions resolving disputes are often achieved by realizing mutual concerns and interests and reviewing the first positions of the parties. The fourth feature is that the solution process and its outcome are peaceful. The conversion of the conflict should not be severe. When the state of conflict is converted into peace by applying for armed force, it may give causes for resorting to armed force again in the future. (Sanson and Bretherton: 194 200)The base founding these four features is the win-win approach obtained interests by parties together. Davidson and Wood’s Conflict Resolution Model-Australia (CRM-A) is one of the models based on a win-win philosophy. This brings collaboration to the fore, unlike the competitive solutions based on options and ideas that one of the parties won, the other one lost. There are four basic stages of Davidson & Wood model: creation of hope for a win-win solution, identification of concerns and interests of the parties, determination of solution options, and exercise of the identified options to win-win solution. Creation of any hope for a win-win solution is required for the start of the solution processes. Because there is mostly a widespread conviction on the conflict solution giving a result that one of the parties has lost, the other one will win. In the first step, the parties therefore must be convinced that elimination of the dispute will be provided in a common gain. In the second step of the process, concerns and interests of the parties should be expressed. Emphasis on the parties’ different posture and approaches to the dispute does not serve on solutions. In the process of a possible solution, concerns and interests should be kept in the forefront rather than different approaches which may lead to allegations of mutual rights. The solution process can be carried out during the parties are satisfied that their concerns and interests are taken into consideration. For the conservation of co-operation atmosphere, it is important to stay away from accusations and threats that can defeat the solution process of the parties (Davidson and Wood 2004: 7)In the third step, exploratory talks on a range of solutions taking into account the concerns and interests of both sides should be held. The more alternatives are produced in this step, the more qualified solution options generally come up. In the fourth step, the final option for a best win-win solution is determined by evaluating enhanced options together. In the process of determining the most appropriate option; parties apply for the strategies such as the increase of the total resources and the reduction of the cost on the sacrificing side of the agreement. This ultimate option must be a powerful proposal which can be adressed the concerns and interests of the parties best. If such a proposal agreed by the parties can not be formed, the points locking the disagreement are redefined and a four-step process is repeated. (Davidson and Wood 2004: 7)

III) Northern Ireland Conflict Resolution Analyse

A) Northern Ireland Conflict as a New War

Solution tools developed in the conflict resolution discipline has been shaped with state-centric perspective at the first stage. One of them is the international actors such as the United Nations, whose authority other states respect. Diplomacy at an interstate level, negotiation and mediation options may be included in these tools. After the weakening of the state-centric approach to international relations, different solution models including local, regional and international actors have been developed in the field of conflict resolution. It is observed that a lot of study has been conducted on the role of citizens of the conflicting parties and civil society members during conflict resolution processes. For example, ” Public Peace Process” developed for the solution of ethnic conflicts by Harold H. Saunders is a characteristic model of the citizens who has no official capacity, but effects in peace processes. According to Saunders, constant dialogue and interaction between the citizens belonging to conflicting parties is a dynamic to change the violent based relationship and to reveal the psychological effect to initiate solution processes. Continuous dialogue for the parties is not a process to bargain or a chance to convince each other, but an interaction of the parties to listen to each other and to learn from each other. In conflict resolution processes, the place of non-state armed actors has not been studied equally as compared with the role of civil society (Saunders, 1999: 81-85)Armed Conflict Data compiled by Swedish-based Uppsala Conflict Data Collection Program shows that this trend has crystallized in the period after the Cold War. According to this Program; 128 armed conflicts occurred between the years of 1989-2008 or ongoing. Only 8 of them took place between states, while 120 of them were consistinf of non-state actors as one of the conflict parties. These conflicts at least one side of which was non-state armed groups have showed the need for a theoretical approach to the stage of fight against armed non-state actors in conflict resolution discipline. In particular, lack of theoretical work has stood out on the function of the stage of fight against terrorist organizations which claimed to represent a specific ethnic community in the conflict resolution process. This study aims to understand multi-dimensional analysis of conflict resolution and qualifications of peace building process against the separatist terrorist during the settlement of Northern Ireland conflict. In addition, this study is an effort to understand the struggle against terrorist organizations targeting ethnic separatism in the theoretical framework in conflict resolution processes (Harbom and Wallensteen, 2009: 578)In the Post-Cold War period, academy of social sciences has given some thought to ethnic conflicts which arose in areas ranging from political order after the disintegration of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. This process allows theoretical approaches with different explainations to be developed to the tendency of elements trying to achieve the right to self-determination. As a result; an important empirical and theoretical literature on ethnic conflict has occurred. But terrorism based on ethnic separatism hasn’t reached the same level of academic interest despite its emergence in earlier periods and it has largely been ignored apart from a few studies. It has been distinguished with its distinctive features from ideological terrorism whose precedents were mostly seen during the Cold War. Ethnic terrorist organizations act with more narrow-scoped purposes than ideological terrorist organizations. They determine specific objectives for specific ethnic groups, while others target a total change of political order of a country or a region. There are more functions of their violence than the actions of other terrorist organizations. Peace initiatives of moderate actors belonging to the same ethnic community have failed and social polarization has deepened as long as they have acted resort to violence. In Post-Cold War period, they are able to provide external support easier than ideological terrorist organizations. They are also able to provide considerable public support especially in Western countries in the name of propaganda with the the claim of an ethnic representation and a struggle for freedom. Neighboring countries and powerful actors on an international scale may direct the conflict processes based on ethnic separatism in accordance with their own interests. This direction is often carried out to establish the political influence over the target state, reformed or ended according to the course of the ongoing relations with it. In the case of an interstate animosity and competition, terrorist organizations targeting ethnic separatism can take a more significant external support. The enemy and rival states encourage ethnic separatism and provide direct support to them in conflict with the central government (Byman 1998: 149-69)External support for them is more long-term and stable than for ideological terrorist organizations. It is observed that countries supply a stable external support to ethnic separatist terrorist organization in case the population belonging to the same ethnic group is in neighboring countries and in powerful states as a diaspora. Withdrawal of this support to ethnic terrorism is usually provided with a result of intense diplomatic processes with the concerned states. Therefore, there is a more problematic basis of the international dimension of fight against ethnic separatism based terrorism. It requires an arduous process to stop this support given to the organizations, especially in the countries where public propaganda examples are given with a diaspora. These features take the way of fight against terrorism and the nature of conflict resolution process to a different point in the conflicts containing ethnic terrorism. Armed group targeting at separatism often continues acting violence for further apart from the general demands of the ethnic community. For this reason, conflict situations in which ethnic separatist terrorist organization target at the central government can be separated from the ethnic conflicts between communities. In ethnic clashes two or more community often enters into conflict with each other towards different targets due to ethnic nationalism.

B) Role of British Government

Britain’s experience in Northern Ireland issue show the efficacy of a multi-dimensional solution process during which security dimension is not neglected. The United Kingdom has carried out its political and economic initiatives for the solution of this issue co-ordinately with the armed struggle against the IRA since 1980s. London’s efforts to resolve the issue were promoted to a comprehensive solution process with the Belfast Agreement (Good Friday Agreement) signed in 1998 between the United Kingdom and Ireland. With that process, the IRA put an end to acts of violence and disarmed under the supervision of an independent international commission. Disarmament Commission declared that the organization left all its weapons in 2005. So the IRA which had carried out terrorist attacks against Britain since 1969 entered in the process of final disarmament and the cycle of violence ended. With the end of the IRA terror, the political wing of the organization, Sinn Fein gained legitimacy in Northern Ireland and the party had a voice in the regional government as a representative of Catholics (Elliot, 2007: 90-91)Issue of Northern Ireland predisposing to the emergence of the IRA could be traced back to the beginning of the 17th century when England built residential units in Ulster region, Northern Ireland. British were separated from the Catholic Church and established Church of England in the 16th century. This ushered in a revolution that two different communities had been created in terms of both ethnic and sectarian. Thus the conflict between the Catholic Irish and British Protestant population in the north of the island has survived until today. The United Kingdom annexed all Ireland in 1800 and London continued to its dominance on the north of the island when Ireland won its independence in 1922. The IRA playing an important role in the independence of Ireland re-emerged to end British domination on Northern Ireland in 1969 (Holloway, 2005: 10)In the first place, the United Kingdom had only a security-oriented motion against the IRA’s terrorist actions for the unification of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Socio-economic imbalances between Irish Catholics and Protestants were overlooked and the political aspects of the issue were ignored. During this period, the British army played a dominant role in the fight against terrorism but made mistakes such as open fire, indefinite detention and torture to the demonstrators who brought the IRA more supporters. The United Kingdom improved the way of fight against terrorism thanks to its experiences and started to political and economic initiatives towards the solution of the issue of Northern Ireland in the 1980s. It continued to these initiatives without neglecting safety measures and its armed struggle against the IRA terrorist organization. (Holloway, 2005: 17)London entered into close cooperation with Dublin after Anglo-Irish Agreement signed in 1985. According to the agreement, measures would be taken towards the improvement of economic conditions of the Northern Ireland. When the United Kingdom and Ireland declared the emphasis of peaceful settlement with Downing Street Declaration in 1993, they ascribed the requirement of participation in the negotiation process is to leave the severity. While London was continueing peace initiatives in contact with Dublin, it carried out security dimension of the struggle with determination in order to wear the IRA militarily and psychologically. (Bew and Gillespie, 1999: 30-31)After 1985 British military in Ulster was significantly reduced and more effective fight against terrorism was targeted by standing the police out. The United Kingdom expanded the jurisdiction of the security forces with regulations in 1980s and continued the armed struggle against the IRA without interruption. During this period, London neutralized a large number of its militants with successful co-ordination of intelligence and performed point operations for its important members. Having largely eliminated the organization’s physical mobility, the British government put the IRA quite weak to the planned period of political settlement process. Indeed, it determined the process up to Belfast Agreement by binding the IRA to the requirement of leaving weapons to make a cease-fire with peace talks (Cunningham, 2001: 61-62)The advancement of the peace process started in 1998 was able to possible when the IRA committed to non-violence in 2000 and declared the end of the armed activities in 2005. It could be expressed that London put a multi-dimensional solution into the practice with Belfast Agreement signed between England and Ireland in 1998. The United Kingdom determined that the increase in the welfare of the Catholic population in Northern Ireland and in the Catholics’ right to have a say in the management of the region would serve for the solution and it carried out the process in this direction. After 1998, London did not ignore the security dimension in the maturing multi-dimensional solution process and continued its commitment on the disarmament of the IRA. Indeed Belfast Agreement was designed to democratize Northern Ireland and to ensure social cohesion under its disarmament conditions. With the agreement, the opportunity for equal political representation of the Protestant and Catholic elements was provided in Northern Ireland which would continue to be dominated by Britain. Also some steps were taken for the establishment of the socio-economic balance and the elimination of discrimination and sectarian. With the agreement, Catholics were included in law enforcement forces providing the region’s internal security at a level of Protestants. The United Kingdom eventually transferred the local administration of Northern Ireland to the area of energy, which it had handled from London since 1972 (Cunningham 2001: 147) (Holloway, 2005: 41-42)

C) Role of Sinn Fein and IRA

Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA terrorist organization served on the settlement process in Northern Ireland to a certain extent. After 1998, Sinn Fein recognized that the legitimacy of politics in Northern Ireland couldn’t win as long as it kept in touch with an organization performing the armed terrorist attacks and so played a role in convincing the IRA to put down their weapons. When the IRA put off laying down arms in the case of Northern Ireland, peace process following the Belfast Agreement remained bumpy (Curran and Sebenius, 2002: 13, 14)Therefore, London suspended Northern Ireland’s government in order to prevent a complete collapse of the process for certain periods and tried to prepare the ground for reconciliation between Sinn Fein and Protestant parties in the region. Likewise it was depended on the stability of governments of the region for a healthy functioning process after Britain had transfered the powers of local government to Northern Ireland Assembly (Archick, 2013: 3)In July 2001, Northern Ireland’s Prime Minister David Trimble resigned by stating that the IRA hadn’t left weapons yet and for this reason he couldn’t continue to share government with the politicians linked to a terrorist organization which had ongoing armed activities. At the same time Sinn Fein began to call for the IRA to lay down arms because of the rising international response to terrorism after Protestant Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) leader, Trimble’s resignation and the September 11 attacks. It also realized that it would be isolated in the politics of Northern Ireland in case the organization didn’t complied with the requirement to lay down arms and it could face with the United States and so it developed a more positive attitude for the peace process. In the same period, the IRA continued acts of violence despite the statements. The Catholic community began to rise in the reactions to its ongoing activities and Sinn Fein’s commitment on its disarmament and liquidation was strengthened. In April 2005, Sinn Fein’s leader, Gerry Adams called the IRA for leaving acts of violence, the disarmament and the adoption of civil politics only as a method of combat. Having taking account the Adam’s call, the IRA terrorist organization announced that it had terminated the armed activities and left their weapons in July 2005. Independent international commission also announced that the IRA had left all their weapons in the same year. After the IRA’s disarmament, armed Protestant group LVF operating in the region announced an end to acts of violence and disarmament, too. This disarmament achieved in restoring the natural history of Northern Ireland politics, and paved the way for political parties representing the Catholics in the region, especially Sinn Fein. After the 2007 general elections, Sinn Fein established a basis of power-sharing government with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) supported by Protestants and had a voice in local government. It managed to compromise with Protestant parties on the transfer of the powers on the jurisdiction and the police force targeted by the IRA terrorist organization to Belfast and contributed to the process of solution to the issue of the Northern Ireland. Kristin (Archick, 2013: 5-10)

D) Role of Mediator

In June 1996, former U. S. Senate, George Mitchell, was appointed by the U. K. and Irish governments as a co-chairman of the All-Party peace talks in Northern Ireland. His main mediation effort was concentrated on to reach a comprehensive agreement in order to end the conflict which based on historic hostilities in Northern Ireland. Since there was strong barriers between parties , he had not only to dealt with to elimination of these barriers but also the establishment of negotiation environment between parties which strictly refused to talk. Strong historical, socio-economic, and causes of conflict lead deep-rooted concerns and feelings of distrust by people on both sides. Extremist ideas were not only blockaded to negotiations and peace talks efforts but also lead continuing violence. (Curran and Sebenius, 2002: 1)Mostly Mitchell is considered as the coalition builder his mediation effort can best described as a ” winning coalition of the center against the extremes.” The main reasons of this perception is since Mitchell faced a context where the extremes dominated the issue as well as the centre was deeply fragmented, Mitchells main strategy was based on the collaboration of centres and elimination of extremist (2002: 4) When Mitchell involved to talks there was three main coalition first one was between the unionist parties and the Britain second one was between the nationalist parties and Irish government and the last one was between armed groups which tries to use violence in order to reach political goals. However during the nineties there were several variables which contributed to Mitchell’s effort on peace. In spite of the deep polarization and contrast between societies, the question on the legitimization of representation of Catholic and Protestant communities’ interests lead to the peace hope with Mitchell’s effort. People on both sides were tired of political and military confrontation and it can be said that both communities seemed to have a will to a peace in terms of status quo. Thus, In July 1994, the IRA declared a ceasefire that was a comprehensive signal to peace in the course of mediation process. Secondly; Ireland membership of EU was not only strengthened the relation between U. K. and Irish government but also boosted Irish economy which was seriously damaged and suffered from ” troubles” era new rising business community in Ireland also desired to the end of this war. Finally, after Margret Thatcher cooperation between Britain and Ireland was gradually strengthened one of the most striking example of this was the declaration of Sinn Fein could not be assessed as a militarily or terrorist organization if they accept to end and refuse the use of violent. Moreover in this condition British government declared that Sinn Fein will be accepted as a legal party during peace negotiations (2002: 13). In this context Mitchell’s approach can be summarized in three categories 1) A process strategy: Mitchell adopted a consequential decision, He did not follow the Anglo-Irish procedural rules during the peace talks in terms of participation and framework of negotiation. Thus with the participation of the loyalists, British and Irish governments approved to participants in the All-Party talks and also both sides reach a consensus on rules of procedure for the peace talks themselves. Since, Mitchell concentrated on procedure it provided a high level of legitimacy in terms of both sides. Thus he had a chance to the introduction of ” Mitchell Principles” as precondition in order to participate in talks which basically depends on ” essential commitments to democracy, dialogue, and non-violence”. 2 ) An issue strategy : This strategy is basically indicate that Mitchells effort on division of the hard-soft issues and of decommissioning them from process, secondly the separation of initial issues , which were clustered and negotiated in this separation during the peace talks. Mitchell’s issue-oriented approach provide elimination of barriers between parties due to the fact that these issue clusters negotiated at same time. 3) A timing strategy: Mitchell never adopted classic action-forcing power of deadline instead of it He adopted ” As Long as It Takes” approach and this approach was successfully provide Mitchell’s natural deficiency which derived from his low level of official power and strong barriers between parties. It can be argued that Mitchell’s three strategies brought the success of All-Party Talks. (2002: 15)

Conclusion

Experiences of states in the United Kingdom show that the armed struggle against ethnic separatist terrorist organizations should be carried out within a multi-dimensional solution process. These examples reveal that the armed struggle itself will not be enough such as only developments of democratic rights and freedoms and socio-economic conditions are not sufficient. The armed struggle to deter organization militarily and psychologically should be maintained in coordination with the democratization process and the socio-cultural and socio-economic steps for the advancement of process. In the face of a multi-dimensional solution process, terrorist organization on the one hand loses its public support and on the other hand realizes that the struggle against the security forces of the state is in vain. In the case of interruption of external support, terrorist organization tends to rely on the option to lay down arms after losing the support of society and realizing this fact. As a conclusion it can be argued that; taken together the Multi-dimensional attribution of British policy and Mitchells main strategy based on the collaboration of centres and elimination of extremist not only lead an appropriate negotiation environment for conflict resolution but also the emergence of Sin Fein as a legitimized notified party. Thus as explained above the main characters of win-win solution can be observed into the Northern Ireland Conflict resolution process and finally it can be argued that this solution led the disarmament of IRA as well as it generated a sustainable peace between conflicting parties.

Thank's for Your Vote!
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 1
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 2
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 3
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 4
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 5
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 6
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 7
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 8
British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Page 9

This work, titled "British and irish protestants and catholics history essay" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Essay

References

AssignBuster. (2022) 'British and irish protestants and catholics history essay'. 22 September.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2022, September 22). British and irish protestants and catholics history essay. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/british-and-irish-protestants-and-catholics-history-essay/

References

AssignBuster. 2022. "British and irish protestants and catholics history essay." September 22, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/british-and-irish-protestants-and-catholics-history-essay/.

1. AssignBuster. "British and irish protestants and catholics history essay." September 22, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/british-and-irish-protestants-and-catholics-history-essay/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "British and irish protestants and catholics history essay." September 22, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/british-and-irish-protestants-and-catholics-history-essay/.

Work Cited

"British and irish protestants and catholics history essay." AssignBuster, 22 Sept. 2022, assignbuster.com/british-and-irish-protestants-and-catholics-history-essay/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving British and irish protestants and catholics history essay, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]