The Future of Northern Ireland: the Role of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement Institutions

Since the 2016 Brexit referendum a series of crises has gripped Northern Ireland's politics. This has had a destabilising effect across society, which has arguably been felt most acutely by political unionism. The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement (B/GFA) of 1998 created a series of institutions to deal with political conflict in Northern Ireland, manage cross-border cooperation and normalise relations between the UK and Ireland. However, many aspects of it have been sparingly and ineffectually deployed, most notably the second and third strands dealing with north/south and east/west relations respectively. In this article, the authors argue that regular use of the institutional arrangements created by the Agreement would help to deal with the challenges currently facing Northern Ireland and help address unionist anxieties over the Protocol. Use of the North-South Ministerial Council (NSMC), the British Irish Council (BIC) and the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference (BIIGC) should be prioritised. The unresolved issues arising from Brexit require a recommitment to the intergovernmental logic at the heart of the 1998 Agreement, despite the obstacles.     

The Future of Irish-UK Relations: Borders and Identities after Brexit: Introduction

It is apparent that the consociational framework established by the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement (B/GFA) is under threat, while the UK's withdrawal from the EU poses major challenges for maintaining peace, prosperity and social cohesion in Northern Ireland (NI). The contributions to this special collection examine key elements of the post-Brexit reality, with a particular focus on NI and the future of the intergovernmental bodies established by the B/GFA. The implications of the UK government's attempt unilaterally to disapply parts of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland are examined.     

The Rise of the Middle Ground in Northern Ireland: What does it Mean?

Among the many consequences of Brexit for Northern Ireland has been how it has contributed to and coincided with some alteration of the electoral landscape. This includes the rise of the centre ground and, in particular, the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland (APNI). This article focusses specifically on how the Alliance Party, as the largest of Northern Ireland's middle ground parties, has navigated the Brexit period and with what effect. The analysis explores the implications of the growing size and strength of the Alliance Party for Northern Ireland politics, institutions, policies, north-south relations and the constitutional future. It concludes that although the nationalist versus unionist binary remains valid and consequential in Northern Ireland, it is being challenged and tested by the rise of the middle ground in ways which offer both opportunities and challenges for Northern Ireland's future.     

Brexit,the Belfast Agreement and Northern Ireland: Imperilling a Fragile Political Bargain

The major impact of the Belfast Agreement was to engineer a peaceful coexistence between nationalism and unionism that involved each bloc recognising it had sufficient power to thwart the political ambitions of the other side, but not enough to push through its own agenda. This paper argues that Brexit seriously damages this peaceful coexistence and could trigger what is termed an Ulster war of attrition in which Northern Ireland becomes entrapped in a political stalemate where each side strives to triumph without having sufficient power to do so. It also argues that to restore internal political stability in Northern Ireland, and to indemnify against the risk of disorderly relationships between the British and Irish governments in the future, the strategic importance of Strand 3 of the Belfast Agreement requires strengthening.     

The Anglo‐Irish Agreement: 25 Years On

This article examines the surprisingly muted commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the Anglo‐Irish Agreement. It was surprising because not only was the Agreement a major innovation in relations between the two states but it was also the defining political issue in Northern Ireland for almost a decade. It is argued that the significance of the Agreement has been diminished because of retrospective narratives which serve the political convenience of the key parties to the Northern Ireland conflict. The article adapts Oakeshott's notion of the ‘dry wall’ to re‐assess and to re‐state the Agreement's place in recent history.     

Towards a New Ireland

Despite all the contemporary difficulties that we face on the island of Ireland, twenty-four years on from the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, there is a clear sense of hope for a better future. We should be optimistic for our shared future, even if we do not agree on what form that should take. We cannot discuss Northern Ireland or its future without acknowledging that Brexit has significantly shifted the conversation. Not only has it brought Anglo-Irish relations to a low not seen in the past twenty-five years, but it has also damaged the reputation of the UK internationally and brought the topic of Irish unity back to the fore of our political discourse.     

That Awkward Region: Writing and Advising on the History of Northern Ireland

The history of Northern Ireland poses two particular challenges for the political historian. First, histories of the region are inextricably bound up with contemporary political positions: historical time becomes distorted as histories are refracted through the lens of modern political controversies. Second, the importance of historical ‘memory’ to contemporary politics leaves little room for doubt, uncertainty or academic expertise. The past is assumed to be known; what place is there for academic historians when politicians and many members of the public are so invested in their own readings of the past? This article explores these challenges through two case studies in which the author was involved: the Historical Advisory Panel established by the UK government for the centenary of Northern Ireland; and subsequent debates around the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. It illustrates the difficult relationship between academic, public and politicised histories, and considers the lessons for historians whose expertise places them at the interface of those different ‘pasts’.     

Beyond Unionism versus Nationalism: the Rise of the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland has always been a polity noted for its strong links between national identity, religion, and voting, and acute British unionist versus Irish nationalist divisions. The constitutional question of whether Northern Ireland should be part of the UK or a united Ireland dominates. Yet, recent surveys have suggested a sizeable and growing section of its electorate declares itself neither unionist nor nationalist. This development may have assisted the growth of the centrist Alliance Party, which rejects unionist and nationalist identities and claims to be neutral on Northern Ireland’s constitutional status. Alliance doubled its vote across three elections in 2019 and is now the third largest party in the region. This article examines the importance of ideological dealignment relative to other factors, such as Alliance’s opposition to Brexit, in explaining the rise of a non-binary party in a divided society.     

‘Irish Republic’, ‘Eire’ or ‘Ireland’? The Contested Name of John Bull's Other Island

One of the less visible consequences of the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement of 1998 was that it finally put to rest a fifty year dispute between Ireland and the United Kingdom about the names of the respective states. This article begins by outlining the constitutional background to this complex terminological dispute, and then examines it from three perspectives. The first is that of the Irish state itself, which in recent decades has opted unambiguously for 'Ireland'. The second is the British government, which until the end of the twentieth century preferred the labels 'Eire' or 'Irish Republic'. The third is the militant nationalist republican movement, whose terminology was designed to deny the legitimacy of the existing state. The article concludes by examining the political significance of this issue, arguing that while its most obvious importance is symbolic, it has also had real meaning for the identity and for the geographical definition of the state, as well as for the British-Irish relationship.     

In Defence of Politics: Interpreting the Peace Process and the Future of Northern Ireland

The interpretation of the Northern Ireland peace process is highly controversial because it not only has implications for the future of Northern Ireland but ‘lessons’ are also drawn for dealing with terrorism and insurgency globally. This article reviews and critiques key interpretations of the peace process. ‘The Militarists’, Republican Dissidents and Neoconservatives, offer a ‘fundamentalist idealist’ interpretation which leads them to reject political compromise and continue to pursue victory by military means. ‘The Enthusiasts’ are leading figures in the Labour government who champion the outcome of the peace process and recommend ‘talking to terrorists’. ‘The Sceptics’ argue in defence of politics and support the pragmatic realism used to negotiate accommodation. They are critical of ‘The Militarists’ for misinterpreting the peace process and threatening to go back to ‘war’. ‘Sceptics’ welcome powersharing but criticise the ‘Enthusiasts’ for mishandling the peace process and undermining the moderate parties. This has left Northern Ireland with high levels of segregation and economic inequality that prevent the consolidation of peace.     

Scotland's Sectarianism Problem: Irish Answers?

A series of developments during the 2010–11 football season has led to an intense public debate over the question of the nature and extent of religious sectarianism in Scotland. The Scottish National Party (SNP) government has responded with a new piece of legislation which has been widely criticised and has prompted some commentators to speculate about a political ‘own goal’. This article provides a guide to the debate around sectarianism and its historical and political dimensions. It also suggests that the Irish roots of the problem in Scotland should be properly acknowledged, and that a possible way forward could involve cooperation between Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland within the structures and procedures of the British–Irish Council (BIC).     

Irish Unification After Brexit: Old and New Political Identities?

This article contends that the outcome of the prolonged dispute about the future constitutional status of Northern Ireland (NI) will be shaped by the emerging dynamic between ‘old’ and ‘new’ political identities in NI. The ‘old’ identities conceived political outcomes as defined by two monolithic ethno-cultural blocs: nationalism (alongside republicanism) and unionism (alongside loyalism). Nationalism and unionism formed the ‘two communities model’ of consociational governance enshrined in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement (B/GFA). Today, despite the Agreement being in existence for over twenty years, growing numbers of citizens identify with neither ethno-cultural category. Recent elections indicate that more pluralistic ‘new’ political identities are gaining ground at the expense of traditional alignments. The implications for NI's constitutional future are likely to be profound. The emerging constituency of non-aligned voters will have a decisive impact on the final outcome of any border poll on Irish unification. Such voters typically support the cross-community Alliance Party, the Greens, or the left People Before Profit (PBP) party. Crucially, these parties are concerned as much with economic and social issues as constitutional questions. In the context of growing political fluidity, the result of any future border poll remains contingent.     

The single transferable vote and ethnic conflict: The evidence from Northern Ireland

There has been a long-running debate amongst constitutional engineers between those who favour the proportional representation of parties (usually via PR-Closed List systems) and post-election power-sharing (Lijphart) and those who favour attempting to induce pre-election inter-ethnic ‘vote-pooling’ (Horowitz) as a more effective and stable method of governing divided societies. Less attention has been paid to the fact that other options are available. A leading candidate amongst these is the Single Transferable Vote (STV), a non-categorical ordinal ballot system that may be capable of combining the essential ‘fairness’ of proportionality with the centripetal benefits of some inter-ethnic vote-pooling. Northern Ireland is the only divided society with extensive experience of STV elections. This paper examines the empirical evidence before and after the 1998 Belfast Agreement by examining the operation of the electoral system at the Northern Ireland Assembly elections of 1982, 1998, 2003, 2007 and 2011. The main findings are that prior to the 1998 Agreement inter-ethnic vote-pooling in Northern Ireland was very close to zero. Afterwards (1998–2007) terminal transfers from the moderate unionist UUP to the moderate nationalist SDLP averaged 32 per cent (and 13 per cent in the opposite direction). Although most transfers clearly remain within ethnic blocs, these inter-ethnic terminal transfers are a change with the past and suggest that STV may be an appropriate electoral system choice for some divided societies.     

England,Englishness and Brexit

In the 1975 referendum England provided the strongest support for European integration, with a much smaller margin for membership in Scotland and Northern Ireland. By 2015 the rank order of ‘national’ attitudes to European integration had reversed. Now, England is the UK's most eurosceptic nation and may vote ‘Leave’, while Scotland seems set to generate a clear margin for ‘Remain’. The UK as a whole is a Brexit marginal. To understand the campaign, we need to make sense of the dynamics of public attitudes in each nation. We take an ‘archaeological’ approach to a limited evidence‐base, to trace the development of attitudes to Europe in England since 1975. We find evidence of a link between English nationalism and euroscepticism. Whatever the result in 2016, contrasting outcomes in England and Scotland will exacerbate tensions in the UK's territorial constitution and could lead to the break‐up of Britain.     

Institutional Change and Conflict Regulation: The Anglo-Irish Agreement (1985) and the Mechanisms of Change in Northern Ireland

This article uses historical institutionalist theory to assess the impact of the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985 – often seen as the first step towards gradualist change in the role of the state in Northern Ireland. It uses new data to show how the elites who initiated the process conceived of it and to identify the mechanisms producing change. The study shows that the mechanisms of institutional change identified in comparative studies of industrial policy and welfare state development are also to be found in processes of intergovernmental ethnic conflict regulation. In turn, it highlights a mechanism of institutional change – ‘wedging’ – not discussed in the literature.     

Back to Stormont: The New Decade,New Approach Agreement and What it Means for Northern Ireland

The decision of the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Féin to once again share power in Northern Ireland has ended a three-year hiatus in the region’s devolved government. The deal which resurrects the devolved institutions—New Decade, New Approach—is not short of ambition. It introduces significant institutional reforms which place the institutions on a more sustainable footing and limit the potential for abuse of the Assembly’s infamous Petition of Concern. Nettles have been grasped on issues to do with language, culture, and identity that have long vexed political parties in Northern Ireland. Tucked away in the deal’s appendices are commitments to implement outstanding pledges made in previous agreements, plus ambitious plans for the new Northern Ireland Executive. However, as parties in the region were quick to discover, aspects of this deal are easier said than done. This article considers what New Decade, New Approach promises and, if fully implemented, what its implications are for politics and governance in Northern Ireland.     

The Northern Ireland Peace Process in an Age of Austerity

The steady drip of dissident Republican attacks forms the backdrop to this special issue of Political Quarterly. Moreover, this comes at a time of economic austerity, when Northern Ireland faces unprecedented cuts to its public sector‐dominated economy. The economic crisis in the South adds an additional layer of uncertainty to the picture. In the past, economic deprivation has been associated with conflict in Northern Ireland and elsewhere. Might the peace dividend and constitutional settlement which have underpinned the Northern Ireland ‘miracle’ since 1994 be under threat? Or is there now sufficient momentum in both of Northern Ireland's main ethnic communities that such an outcome can be safely averted? This paper summarises the thinking of our symposium and special issue on this topic, updating our picture of the Northern Ireland peace process.     

Security: Missing from the Northern Ireland Model

The Northern Ireland model is best defined as the framing of the political endgame of Northern Ireland’s conflict culminating in the 1998 Belfast Agreement, otherwise known as the Good Friday Agreement. The Northern Ireland model is popularly portrayed as a negotiated settlement. It focuses primarily on the bargain reached by Northern Irish political parties, assisted by British and Irish governments and mediated by US senator George Mitchell. Academics and officials alike use it to explain how the “Troubles” ended and peace was achieved. Conspicuously absent from this model is security. It also grossly understates the difficulty in dealing with a modern insurgency (the Provisionals) and leans too heavily toward skewed post-conflict thinking that views insurgents as “peacemakers” prevented from making peace because of a manifestly poor security response, particularly that of the police force and its intelligence agency (Special Branch). The perspective of politicians and diplomats who brokered the peace settlement prioritizes political negotiations at the expense of the security response; in so doing, the role of security is undermined and overlooked. Most contemporary academic works promote this outlook. Excluding security, however, thwarts a comprehensive analysis of the Northern Ireland conflict and renders any examination partial and unrepresentative. There is therefore a significant intellectual gap in our understanding of how peace was achieved, which this article redresses. Ultimately, it questions the Northern Ireland model’s capacity to assist in other relevant conflict contexts in any practical sense by arguing that a strategy where security pushed as politics pulled brought about peace. In other words, security played a crucial part because it forced the main protagonists into a situation out of which the Belfast Agreement emerged.