Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Contentious Issues and the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Independent Commissions and Contentious Issues in Post-Good Friday Agreement Northern Ireland

Part of the book series: Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies ((RCS))

  • 440 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter highlights the importance of the implementation phase of peace processes, particularly the significant role third parties can play in helping to overcome challenges. It outlines how mediation theory can provide both a nuanced and parsimonious way of understanding the work of such actors. It then introduces the Northern Ireland case indicating how factors which effect the work of mediators, mediator identity, mediation context, and conflict intensity manifest themselves in this specific case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This agreement is alternatively known as the Good Friday Agreement or the Belfast Agreement. For consistency, this book will use the term Good Friday Agreement (or simply the agreement), as it is more widely recognized by people outside of Northern Ireland. The text of the agreement is provided in the appendix of this volume.

  2. 2.

    ‘Constructive ambiguity’ refers to the way in which certain actors may selectively interpret a peace agreement to make its provisions more attractive to its constituents. In some cases the source is deliberate ambiguity in the text, in other cases the text may be clearer but actors may still engage in a degree of interpretation.

  3. 3.

    This book categorises the British and Irish governments as third parties not to make a judgement as to the rightful constitutional position of Northern Ireland but rather to distinguish them from the direct conflict parties: the two communities in Northern Ireland.

  4. 4.

    Though there had been some involvement by earlier administrations.

  5. 5.

    The headquarters of the Northern Bank in Belfast was robbed in December 2004. Over £26 million was stolen. It was widely believed that the IRA was involved. The IRA and Sinn Féin denied these charges. Robert McCartney was murdered outside a public house in Belfast in February 2005. There were widespread allegations of involvement by IRA members and three IRA members were expelled from the organisation in relation to the incident. Nobody has been convicted in connection with the killing.

  6. 6.

    While the referendum in the Republic of Ireland was specifically related to a particular element of the GFA, the alteration of Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish Constitution, rather than the GFA more broadly it was widely understood as being a poll on the agreement more broadly.

References

  • Alderdice, John. 2013. Interview by Dawn Walsh, 7 January.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley, Kyle, David Quinn, Bidisha Biswas, and Jonathan Wilkenfeld. 2006. Mediation style and crisis outcomes. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50(1): 58–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob. 1997. Mediation in international conflict: An overview of theory, a review of practice. In Peacemaking in international conflict: Methods and techniques, eds William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen, 125–154. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, and Sigmund Gartner. 2006. Is there method in the madness of mediation? Some lessons for mediators from quantitative studies of mediation. International Interactions 32(4): 329–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, and Allison Houston. 2000. Why do they do it like this?: An analysis of the factors influencing mediation behavior in international conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution 44(2): 170–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, and Su-Mi Lee. 2003. Mediating international conflicts: Examining the effectiveness of directive strategies. International Journal of Peace Studies 8(1): 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, and Gerald Schneider. 2000. Who mediates? The political economy of international conflict management. Journal of Peace Research 37(2): 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, and Richard Wells. 1993. Evaluating mediation strategies. Peace & Change 18(1): 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, Jacob, Theodore Anagnoson, and Donnette L. Wille. 1991. Some conceptual issues and empirical trends in the study of successful mediation in international relations. Journal of Peace Research 28(1): 7–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhmelt, Tobias. 2012. Why many cooks If they can spoil the broth? The determinants of multiparty mediation. Journal of Peace Research 49(5): 701–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, Joe. 2013. Interview by Dawn Walsh, 25 January.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, Lesley. 2013. Interviewed by Dawn Walsh, 26 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clancy, Mary-Alice C. 2010. Peace without consensus: Power sharing politics in Northern Ireland. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Liam, and Michael Prescott. 1999. IRA seeks link in arms deal to scrapping RUC. Sunday Times, 25 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consultative Group on the Past. 2009. Report of the consultative group on the past (23 January 2009; launched on 28 January 2009). Belfast: CGPNI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, Chester A., and Fen Olser Hampson. 1996. Making peace settlements work. Foreign Policy 104: 54–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cusack, Jim. 1998. Prisoner debate to reflect unionist outrage the early release of republican and loyalist prisoners may move centre-stage in the next week as unionists and their allies in the conservative party try to link it to the decommissioning of weapons. Irish Times, 6 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Chastelain, John. 2001.The Northern Ireland peace process and the impact of decommissioning. Working Paper No. 8. Dublin: Institute for British-Irish Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Rouen, Karl, and Jacob Bercovitch. 2008. Enduring internal rivalries: A new framework for the study of civil war. Journal of Peace Research 45(1): 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, John. 2012. The EU and Northern Ireland, SAARC and Kashmir: The role of regional organisations in internal conflicts. Centre for International Studies, Dublin City University, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent Commission on Policing. 1999. A new beginning: Policing in Northern Ireland: The report of the independent commission on policing for Northern Ireland, September 1999. Belfast: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent International Commission on Decommissioning. 2000a. Report of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD), 26 October 2000. Belfast: IICD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent International Commission on Decommissioning. 2000b. Report of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD), 22 December 2000. Belfast: IICD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent International Commission on Decommissioning. 2006. Report of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD), 19 January 2006. Belfast: IICD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent International Commission on Decommissioning. 2011. Final Report of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD), 4 July 2011. Belfast: IICD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent Monitoring Commission. 2004. Second report of the independent monitoring commission. London: House of Commons.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Body on Arms Decommissioning. 1996. Report of the International Body on Arms Decommissioning, [Mitchell Report]. Belfast: NIO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kydd, Andrew. 2006. When can mediators build trust? American Political Science Review 100(3): 449–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacGinty, Roger. 1997. American influences on the Northern Ireland peace process. The Journal of Conflict Studies 17(2): 31–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, James. 2013. Interview by Dawn Walsh, 21 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, Lee. 2006. Promoting democracy in Northern Ireland: George Bush and the peace process. The Political Quarterly 77(1): 61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarry, John, and Brendan O’Leary. 2006. Consociational theory, Northern Ireland’s conflict, and its agreement. Part 1: What Consociationalists can learn from Northern Ireland. Government and Opposition 41(1): 43–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKittrick, David. 2001. Northern Ireland: Blair tells parties: We must make a breakthrough; Intensive talks move to England to try to resolve the arms decommissioning issue amid growing signs of optimism. The Independent, 10 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, Frank. 1998. Tories may vote against prisoner release bill, bipartisan policy strained by attempts to link releases with arms decommissioning. Irish Times, 15 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möller, Frida, Rouen Karl De Jr, Jacob Bercovitch, and Peter Wallensteen. 2011. The limits of peace: Third parties in civil wars in Southeast Asia, 1993–2004. In Unraveling internal conflicts in East Asia and the Pacific, eds Jacob Bercovitch and Karl DeRouen Jr, 47–65. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, John. 1999. Blair suffers loss of credibility on ulster; Prime minister and taoiseach invite US ex-senator mitchell to head peace talks review, as all sides cling to hope of finding settlement. The Guardian, 16 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, Clare. 1998. Mowlam moves to allay RUC fears. Irish Times, 18 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, Laurie. 1999. When push comes to shove: The failure of international mediation in African civil wars. Track Two 8(2): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. 2010. The Report of the consultative group on the past in Northern Ireland, second report of session 2009–10: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Joseph. 1990. Soft power. Foreign Policy 80: 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prior, Lindsay. 2010. Using documents in social research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsbotham, Oliver, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall. 1999. Contemporary conflict management. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, Albert. 1999. The Irish Government and the peace process, 1992–1994: A political perspective. Working Papers in British Irish Studies 30: 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaefer, Sarah. 1999. Parliament: Northern Ireland: Mandelson urges unionists to back peace deal as ‘dream draws closer’. The Independent, 25 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sens, Andrew D. 2013. Email interview by Dawn Walsh, 1 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, Isak. 2009. Who brings which peace: Biased versus neutral mediation and institutional peace arrangements in civil wars. Journal of Conflict Resolution 53(3): 446–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannam, Etain. 2007. The European Commission’s Evolving role in conflict resolution, the case of Northern Ireland 1989–2005. Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of Nordic International Studies Association 42(3): 337–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Times. 2000. Symbols and substance. The Times, 31 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touval, Saadia, and William Zartman. 1985. International mediation in theory and practice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press/Foreign Policy Institute, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, James, B. Stark John, and L. Standifer Rhetta. 2001. Mediation: A current review of theory and development. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(3): 370–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, James, and Daniel Druckman. 2003. Mediation in peacekeeping missions. Journal of Conflict Resolution 47(5): 693–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallensteen, Peter, and Isak Svensson. 2014. Talking peace: International mediation in armed conflicts. Journal of Peace Research 51(2): 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, Barbara. 1999. Designing transitions from civil war: Demobilization, democratization, and commitments to peace. International Security 24(1): 127–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkenfeld, Jonathan, Kathleen Young, Victor Asal, and David Quinn. 2003. Mediating international crises: Cross-national and experimental perspectives. Journal of Conflict Resolution 47(3): 279–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Institute for International Conflict Resolution and Reconstruction, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Dawn Walsh

Authors
  1. Dawn Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Walsh, D. (2017). Introduction: Contentious Issues and the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. In: Independent Commissions and Contentious Issues in Post-Good Friday Agreement Northern Ireland. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50772-9_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation