Peace Process in Northern Ireland

* Re “Next, a Generation of Troubles,” Commentary, Dec. 3: The article on Northern Ireland by Eamon Lynch speaks of the experience of a new generation in the province. In some ways, however, the article itself is a generation out of date.

In a somewhat twisted chain of logic, which starts by gratuitously questioning Britain’s bona fides in the current peace process, Lynch concludes that the nationalist (Catholic) community will not be willing to consider “returning to the back of bus”--as if to imply that that was, for some unimaginable reason, the British government’s preferred outcome.

Lynch willfully ignores two decades of anti-discrimination legislation which now gives Northern Ireland some of the most far-reaching safeguards in this respect to be found anywhere in Europe. He ignores two attempts at creating a power-sharing regional administration, in the early 1970s and again in the mid-’80s. And he ignores important government-sponsored initia- tives, such as a schools-based program which exposes students on both sides of the community to each other’s cultural and historical traditions. Most importantly, he ignores the decade-long effort on the part of the British and Irish governments to cooperate in seeking a lasting settlement in Northern Ireland on the basis of consent.

The article ends with a rather dark prediction to the effect that, if the peace process should fail, a new and even more ruthless cadre of Republican hard-liners will emerge to resume the campaign of violence. This is, however, precisely the legitimate fear that has so far proved a stumbling block to all-party talks: Protestant politicians have not been prepared to sit round the table with Sinn Fein on the basis of an implied threat that, if the IRA does not get its way, violence could start up again.

This is the importance of the twin-track strategy announced by the British and Irish prime ministers before President Clinton’s recent visit. At the same time as preparatory talks among the parties take place, an international body headed by former U.S. Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell will make recommendations as to the modality of the “decommissioning” of the stocks of weapons held by paramilitary groups, including the IRA. Only in this way can the necessary trust and confidence be established in order for the talks to have some realistic hope of success. It will certainly not be possible on the basis of the grim threat implied in Lynch’s article.

ANGUS MACKAY

Vice Consul (Press & Public Affairs)

British Consulate, Los Angeles