Consociationalism and the Compromised Peace: Lessons from Northern Ireland
Date
2017
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Swarthmore College. Peace & Conflict Studies Prog.
Type
Thesis (B.A.)
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
en_US
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Full copyright to this work is retained by the student author. It may only be used for non-commercial, research, and educational purposes. All other uses are restricted.
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
The conflict in Northern Ireland is best characterized as a political struggle
between those who strive for the north of Ireland to be reunified with the south and
those who wish for the north to remain within the United Kingdom. Unionists tend to
be Protestant, identify with England and believe that Northern Ireland should remain
within the United Kingdom. While Nationalists, or Republicans, tend to be Catholic,
identify with Ireland and believe that Northern Ireland should be reunified with the
south.
Hundreds of years of competition between these two groups eventually
culminated in a three-decade long war known colloquially as “The Troubles,” lasting
from the late 1960s until the 1990s, and during which there were tens of thousands of
casualties, both civilian and combatant. However, the passage of the 1998 “Belfast”
Agreement is usually recognized as the conclusion of this period of sectarian violence.
Among other developments, the Agreement established a system of consociational , or
“power-sharing,” democracy in Northern Ireland. Prior to consociationalism, Northern
Ireland was directly ruled by the United Kingdom from London.
Previous scholars of the ongoing Northern Ireland peace process have focused on
the role of grassroots movements, community dynamics and intergroup relationships.
However, as a scholar exploring Northern Ireland from the outside-in, I am particularly
interested in the role of government in peacebuilding, especially as it relates to the
development of a sustainable peace. I believe that approaching Northern Ireland from
this perspective lays the foundation for future comparative analysis, which may
eventually allow us to derive generalizable lessons on democratization broadly, and
power-sharing democracy specifically, as prescriptions to violence and conflict around
the globe.
Chapter I is dedicated to presenting a comprehensive albeit intentionally
incomplete backstory to the situation in Northern Ireland. After reviewing Ireland’s
sectarian history, it becomes clear why power-sharing democracy is the preferred
solution to the region’s troubles: it brought a degree of cooperation between historically
antagonistic groups, and an end to the levels of direct violence from the era directly
preceding its implementation.
In Part A of Chapter II, I explore the character and definition of power-sharing
democracy based on consociational theory. In Part B I challenge the effectiveness of the
Belfast Agreement. While the Agreement created relative peace and stability, it failed to
resolve a fundamental tension at the heart of the conflict – that is, the tension between
unionists and nationalists rivaling aspirations for the society.
And finally, in Chapter III, I explore the relationship between consociationalism
and racism. I argue that consociational Northern Ireland is racist because it fails to
adequately address the concerns of ethnic minorities, such as broader societal racism,
and actively excludes and discriminates against ethnic minorities through the political
process.