Friday, 21 March 2008

The Good Friday Agreement

I didn't realise until I passed the Belfast Telegraph offices today, but it's 10 years since the Good Friday Agreement (well, not really, but this is the problem with moveable feasts...). This topic still produces a little bit of internal conflict within me, the basis of which is whether we can ever satisfy ourselves that the ends justify the means.

The issue is that the Good Friday Agreement did mean agreeing to power-share with people who for most of their lives as terrorist, often in the most reprehensible way. Many were thugs who used the excuse of political conflict to indulge their blood-thirst and further their own means. The result of the Good Friday Agreement was that some of these men were given respectability and a major role in the governance of the province. There is a strong sense, I feel, that justice has not be done in Northern Ireland, and people who have committed some heinous crimes will have got away with it (in this life at least).

But the results of this are hard to argue with. With the exception of a few isolated incidents such as the Omagh bombings and the riots that occasionally flair up in parts of Belfast, Northern Ireland has experienced a decade of peace. And the consequences is increased prosperity for the province. You don't have to talk to me for very long to figure out my opinion of the beauty of my homeland, yet for many years our tourism industry was stifled because many people were afraid to visit. Peace removes this fear, and tourists have flooded in and prosperity has increased. This prosperity has been quite noticeable on my brief tour around Belfast this morning - I don't think I've seen so much building work going on in the city, and while I was away a new high-end shopping mall was opened in the centre of town. Belfast and the rest of Northern Ireland has benefited greatly from the aftermath of the Good Friday Agreement, and there is much to give praise for.

I think I am always going to feel somewhat uncomfortable about this issue, but pragmatically, I wouldn't want to do anything that moves us backwards from where we are now. I suspect that if the peace process can be continued without flare up until a new generation of politicians take the reigns of the province, ones that haven't been tainted by the nastiness of the troubles, then it will be much easier to put the past behind us and move on with the tentative hope that the "Ireland problem" may be nearing to solution. But for now, I think many will feel the tension that comes from the bad associations that our present leaders bring to mind.

I should add a disclaimer to my thoughts. I have what could be described as a true Norn Irish heart, but it should be noted that I am now an exile in my 6th year, and so my opinions should not be taken as those of one in touch with the feeling of people of Northern Ireland. I'm sure that I could be described as being out of touch or, even worse, having a "touch of the English" around my opinions! So be warned...

2 comments:

Greg Tarr said...

There's been interesting stuff in the Guardian this week from Jonathan Powell's new book talking about the secret channel between the IRA and British Government, did you see any of it?

It seems that Adams, McGuinness et al have changed, you don't get the impression they would turn back to violence now that they have their power-sharing. But does the end justify the means?

Unknown said...

I hadn't seen that, I should look it up at some point. I do sincerely hope that Adams and co have changed their ways, but trust is hard to earn and they are still very much associated with the IRA (by the way, similar accusations can be made for many loyalist politicians). This is why I have hope for things when the new generation emerges. But I agree, it'll be hard even then to be comfortable with justifying the actions taken by the results it achieves.