Buy College Paper

Topic: The current status of terrorism in Northern Ireland

Contents

Abstract 2

Introduction. 3

Ideological evolution of terrorism in Northern Ireland. 5

Ideological evolution of UDA (Ulster Defence Association) 5

Ideological evolution of Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) 8

Motivations for terrorism in Northern Ireland. 10

Causes to assist in the formulation of policy in Northern Ireland. 13

The threat of terrorist-affiliated Northern Ireland politicians. 17

Conclusion. 20

References. 21

 

Abstract

Terrorism remains a serious problem in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland conflict is based on strong religious motivations that are intertwined with nationalistic motivation. The reign of terror has pitted republican Irish Roman Catholics against Loyalist Protestants. The Republican Catholics are motivated by the ideologies of Catholicism, nationalism and Marxism while Loyalists are motivated by the Protestant theory and contractarian ideas.

As the conflict between Roman Catholics and Protestants ensued, both sides established various paramilitary organizations. One of these organizations is the Irish Republican Army (IRA), which was started by the Catholics. Loyalist Protestants formed the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) and Ulster Defence Association (UDA). This paper discusses the evolution of these organizations in terms of ideologies, motivations, and causes to assist in the formulation and implementation of policy. Through this discussion, it is evident that the evolution process of nationalistic ideology in Northern Ireland is ongoing. In this process, each of the two camps continues to make efforts to achieve ends that promote its ideological position.

Finally, the paper analyzes the threat posed by terrorist-related politicians in Northern Ireland in the contemporary context characterized by the policy of maintaining a compromise between terrorism and democracy. The constituent elements of the threat are highlighted. The paper also examines the critical vulnerabilities and strategic seams as far as this threat is concerned.  This paper found out that the UK government has given the terrorist-related politicians too many concessions, thereby presiding over the triumph of terrorism over democracy. This is likely to negate the gains already made in eradicating the problem of terrorism in Northern Ireland.

Introduction

Terrorism remains a serious problem in Northern Ireland. In recent times, the most serious wave of terrorism emerged during the 1960s. Between the 1960s and the mid-1990s, Northern Ireland suffered a great deal because of violence. In 1969, many Irish Catholics were disgruntled with the way the country’s affairs were being run. They were particularly dissatisfied with the areas of employment, housing, and civil rights. Although the government has been willing to respond appropriately to the complaints expressed by the Catholics, it has also been too quick to quell demonstrations through violent means.

Order A College Paper Now

On the other hand, whenever the government seems too willing to address the grievances addressed by Catholics, Protestants rise up in arms to terrorize people in Catholic homes.  In some instances, many Catholics have been compelled to flee their homes. At such times, the government has been sharply criticized for failing to provide adequate security to Catholic communities. In order to protect themselves, the Irish Catholics ended up establishing the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

Through the so-called “loyalist” attacks, the Irish Protestants have always hoped to convince the government to continue ignoring the demands of the Catholics.[1] In some cases, the inter-community violence has been so severe that the government has had to bring in British troops. However, this has not always been a permanent solution because the British soldiers have sometimes ended up taking sides against Catholics.

Soon after its establishment, the IRA was a weak organization that faced adversity in the hands of both the police and the British army.[2] During this time, the citizens were under a serious threat posed by loyalist bombs, personal attacks, and firebombs. However, with time, the IRA soon acquired the skills for making powerful bombs to the extent where it even surpassed the skills of the loyalist attackers. Initially, IRA’s main targets were the country’s security forces. However, at some point, the organization’s plans went awry, leading to the death of civilians. Since that, the IRA started being regarded as a terrorist organization.

Other major participants in the Northern Ireland conflict include the Ulster Defence Association (UDA) and Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF). These are the largest loyalist, unionist organizations in Northern Ireland. Moreover, both of them belong to the Protestant side. UDA was founded in 1971 with the objective of coordinating the efforts of different local vigilante groups into a formidable Protestant force during the sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland. The UVF, which was formed in 1966, has strong affiliations with the protest forces of the early twentieth century. The UVF was committed to the goal of upholding the union of Northern Ireland with Britain. To achieve this goal, UVF members focused on killing IRA members, unaffiliated Protestants Roman Catholics,and members of rival paramilitary groups.[3]

From this overview, it is evident that the problem of terrorism in Northern Ireland is strongly anchored on the issue of religion. This religious motivation is complexly tied to nationalist identities, chiefly the issue of unification with the United Kingdom. In the Northern Ireland conflict, Irish Republicans, who are typically Catholics, aspire to achieve their goal of one day unifying the six northern counties with the larger Republican of Ireland. In this regard, the overarching objective of the conflict is the need for cohesion.

This paper explores the status of terrorism in Northern Ireland. The objective is to analyze the evolution of terrorist organizations in Northern Ireland in terms of their ideologies, motivations, and causes to assist in the formulation and implementation of policy. The paper also examines the threat of terrorist-related politicians. This problem is evaluated in terms of the constituent elements of the threat, its centers of gravity, its critical vulnerabilities, and its strategic seams.

Ideological evolution of terrorism in Northern Ireland

Ideologically, terrorism in Northern Ireland has evolved dramatically since the early twentieth century. This is evident in the emergence of various loyalist groups such as UDA and UVF and the rise of republican organizations such as the IRA. Many changes have continued to occur as far as the ideologies of these organizations are concerned. This turn of events has greatly influenced the dynamics of terrorism in Northern Ireland. One of these dynamics is the emergence of the so-called ‘pro-state’ terrorism.[4] This concept has in most cases being perpetuated by loyalist paramilitaries across Northern Ireland.

Ideological evolution of UDA (Ulster Defence Association)

Since its formation in 1971, the UDA’s goal has been to operate as a loyalist organization with the core objective of coordinating the operations of various Protestant vigilante groups at the local level as part of the grand strategy of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland.[5] Over the years, the association has been responsible for the murders of prominent republicans and Roman Catholics. The British government outlawed the group in 1992. Two years later, the UDA teamed up with other major loyalist paramilitary organizations in the country to declare cease-fire following the decision by the Irish Republican Army to cease to engage in military activities. However, UDA continued participating in sporadic violence. In 2007, the UDA announced its plans to disarm soon after renouncing violence. The decision to renounce violence was prompted by IRA’s declaration of cessation of armed struggle in 2005.

The operations of the UDA since its inception provide crucial indicators of the nature of ideological revolution of terrorism in Northern Ireland. During the 1970s, the UDA claimed that it had between 15,000 and 35,000 members, who served in both the fundraising section and the paramilitary force.[6] In both areas, focus was on the pursuit of the unionist cause using both criminal and legal activities.

How Our Website Works

In the quest for success in the unionist ideology, terrorist organizations in Northern Ireland established political think tanks. These think tanks were of utmost importance in helping spell out the ideologies of the organizations. For example, in 1978, the Ulster Defence Association established the New Ulster Political Research Group[7]. The role of this group was to advocate for the establishment of a platform through which the independence of Northern Ireland would be negotiated. The policy that this think tank advocated for was at variance with the country’s mainstream unionism. This created discord among traditional unionist politicians. The discord was also contributed to by the decision by the New Ulster Political Research Group to disallow members of parliament from Britain from playing a crucial role in the negotiations.

The UDA was also keen to maintain a working-class identity throughout the negotiation process. This desire led to the replacement of the New Ulster Political Research Group with a new political party by the name Ulster Loyalist Democratic Party (ULDP). Through ULDP, the UDA agitated for the establishment of a devolved parliament within the UK, which would specifically be addressing issues affecting the Northern Ireland province. Other requirements included amnesty for all political prisoners from Northern Ireland and the setting up of provisions that would facilitate adherence to the principles of the bill of rights.

A major turning point came in 1989 when UDA transformed itself into Ulster Democratic Party (UDP). The electoral support that UDP gained earned it the mandate to participate in the signing of the Good Friday Agreement of April 1998, which was the outcome of a series of multiparty peace talks. However, the party failed to secure any seats in the newly established Northern Ireland Assembly. This poor showing in the polls may have contributed to the eventual disbandment of the party in 2001.

This analysis of the operations of Ulster Defence Association provides crucial insights into the ideological evolution of terrorism in Northern Ireland. It is evident that the clamor for unionism has been strong in the country. The analysis also highlights the nature of conflict between the unionists and republican Catholics. However, it is also evident that disagreements sometimes arose among traditional unionists and UDA unionists regarding the formation of a devolved parliament in the UK whose role would be to address the issues affecting the people of Northern Ireland.

Ideological evolution of Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF)

One of the arguments that the UVF has staunchly supported is that of the need for Northern Ireland to be in a union with Britain. The organization’s leaders have always insisted that their resolve is to use all possible means to ensure that this goal is achieved. In many cases, this has included engagement in terrorist activities and the persistent killing of Roman Catholics and IRA members. Many members of this organization have already been convicted for committing murder and other crimes. However, his has not greatly changed UVF’s ideology.

In 1994, UVF was one of the terrorist organizations that announced a ceasefire in response to IRA’s decision to discontinue its terrorist activities earlier that year. However, following this ceasefire, disagreements arose within the ranks of UVF. This triggered divisions within the organization, with a new camp, the Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) being formed. The LVF continued with the campaign of deadly violence. However, in 2007, just like in the case of UDA, UVF renounced the use of violence by abandoning its armed campaign across Northern Ireland.

To understand the current status of terrorism in Ireland, it is crucial for the similarities and differences between UDA and UVF to be analyzed in detail. One of the main similarities was the fact that they were both agitating for the unionist cause. Their members were mainly drawn from the Protestant denomination, and they were fighting against the Roman Catholics. Although one would expect these groups to front a united force of opposition, one of their main weaknesses was that each of them harbored dissenting elements. Disagreements emerged within both the UDA and UVF regarding the best way of achieving the goal of unification within the United Kingdom.

The persistent terrorist attacks that continued to affect Northern Ireland since the 1960s are an indicator of serious ideological differences in the country. Both the Loyalists and Republicans in Northern Ireland have been making concerted efforts to legitimate their use of violence as a means for achieving their ideological goals.[8] In these efforts, the arguments made are clearly drawn from theoretical traditions that are by no means within the confines of Northern Ireland. For instance, Republicans have been drawing upon Catholicism, nationalism, and Marxism[9]. On the other hand, Loyalists have been making use of the Protestant theory and contractarian ideas.

Relative success has been achieved by both sides in efforts to persuade their respective constituencies regarding the legitimacy of their terrorist activities. However, in the long run, the diversity in the views held by these two camps may turn out to be counterproductive. For this reason, there is a need for Republicans and Loyalists to seek consensus and seek common ground for the good of Northern Ireland.

The emergence of UVF and UDA as paramilitary organizations may be understood in the context of a situation where a state is unwilling or unable to stage a formidable defense against its enemies. This creates room for private initiatives aimed at propagating ‘pro-state’ terrorism. The underlying objective of such private initiatives is to use violence as a tool for ensuring that the state does not disintegrate in the hands of its enemies. To deal with this question of terrorism, one would first have to address the critical question of the state’s willingness and ability to safeguard and protect its sovereignty. Once this critical issue is addressed, it is possible for one to determine the future prospects of terrorism in Northern Ireland.

Motivations for terrorism in Northern Ireland

The violent conflict affecting Northern Ireland has traditionally been fuelled by religious identities intertwined with nationalistic motivation. Protestants and Roman Catholics have for decades been fighting each other over the destiny of the province of Northern Ireland. In the international context, sociological explanations are sometimes provided for the persistence of this conflict. Different ethno-nationalist movements in Northern Ireland have been motivated to act against the existing social order or government.

The nationalism of Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland may be traced back to the sixteenth century. During this time, King James I of England decided to give out some land to Scottish Protestant settlers in Ireland. This decision relegated Irish Catholics to the category of second-class citizens in their own country. This also led to the domination by Scottish-Irish Protestants and settlers from England. In 1919, Irish Catholics finally attained independence. However, this also led to the drawing up of a formal boundary between the British-administered region of Northern Ireland, which comprised of six counties, and the independent Republic of Ireland. Since then, some of the Irish Republicans from the North have been engaging in armed rebellion against political domination by the British and Protestants. Their objective has always been to seek reunion with the southern part Ireland nation.

It is sad that Northern Ireland has for the past several decades being perceived as a theatre of war. For this reason, investors have shunned this country and tourists have chosen not to visit the country. Given that the IRA declared a ceasefire in 1997, there is a sense of  hope that this violent nightmare will eventually end permanently. Yet these troubles could have been avoided in 1922 if Protestants had refrained from putting Northern Ireland under the authority of the UK government.

The move by the Protestants was a selfish one. The intention was to create a province comprising of a Protestant majority. On this basis, some of the nine counties were excluded from Northern Ireland. The inclusion of these counties, including Ulster, Cavan, and Donegal, was motivated by the need to ensure that Roman Catholics did not constitute a majority in Northern Ireland. At the same time, state boundaries were extended beyond the heartland of the Protestants in North Down and Antrim. In this move, the Protestants succeeded in acquiring new territory without necessarily endangering the majority status of the Protestant community.

In this sense, Northern Ireland seems like an artificially created state. Some of the Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland who are aware of this fact feel that there is a need for the province to pursue the goal of unification of the entire island nation. However, some critics point out that failure to divide the island in this way would have brought about civil war.[10] Nevertheless, the creation of the new state was not founded in any differences in geographical features or political aspirations. This seems to have been a major motivation for the ‘pro-state’ nationalist ideology among Roman Catholics within the auspices of the IRA in recent years.

By creating Northern Ireland, Protestants laid a foundation for future conflicts primarily because of the existence of a large Roman Catholic population comprising a third of the country’s population. This Catholic population holds nationalistic aspirations, characterized by the desire to live in a united island of Ireland that is fully independent of the UK. Therefore, Northern Ireland has since its inception faced the challenge of dissent from a large minority that is alienated from the development process of the state. This provides a lot of motivation for the emergence of terrorist organizations that seek to use violent means of achieving their goal of unification with the Republic of Ireland.

Buy Essays

The subsequent behavior of the country’s Protestant majority has aggravated the feelings of alienation among Roman Catholics. For example, for a long time, the Unionist Party continued to enjoy a majority in the Northern Ireland Parliament and in the local councils. The party secured this majority because of the Protestants’ numerical supremacy. It was also contributed to by the practice of gerrymandering by the Protestant-dominated government.

Moreover, Protestants have all along been using their control over the government machinery to ensure that most of the economic rewards went to the Protestant population. In this way, the Protestant Parliament seems to have been serving only the Protestant people, a practice that has left Roman Catholics feeling alienated and helpless in their own country. The two crucial areas in which Catholics have been alienated include public-sector housing and public-sector jobs. Catholics were underrepresented in terms of employment in the public sector. Moreover, Protestants derived the greatest benefits from public-housing initiatives undertaken in the country.

The combination of relative economic disadvantage and thwarted political aspirations led to a wave of protests and terrorism that reached their peak in the 1960s. The brutal manner in which these protests were repressed led to an increase in violence. The situation reached a point where the Stormont rule was unsustainable and Northern Ireland had to be put under the direct rule of the British government in March 1972.

The Direct Rule brought about better opportunities for Catholics than the 50-year rule by the Unionist Party. Catholics are no longer being discriminated against. Employment opportunities for Catholics have also increased dramatically, particularly within the public sector. When the British government established the Fairness Employment, it demonstrated its seriousness in ensuring that fair employment practices were maintained not just in the public sector but in the private sector as well. These efforts have gone a long way in reducing the incidences of terror and violence by the IRA.

Causes to assist in the formulation of policy in Northern Ireland

Various causes have been launched in Northern Ireland with the aim of formulating policy that would end the reign of terror in the territory. The introduction of Direct Rule by the British government remains one of the most critical milestones for the country’s stability. Following this move, Great Britain changed its military strategy towards Northern Ireland. However, this military strategy has been heavily criticized for perpetuating the repressive character of the British government in dealing with terrorism in Northern Ireland.[11] The British military has been blamed for its failure to derive a conceivable relationship between military means and political ends. Nevertheless, the reality of the matter was that the British military strategy was adaptable in the way it alternated between offensive and defensive means depending on political context.

The military strategy remains one of the main causes aimed at achieving the goal of a peaceful state of Northern Ireland. The British military achieved success in dealing with the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA). The approach was said to be successful because of its stark contrast with the oppressive strategies of the Republican government. The British government expressed the willingness to engage in negotiations and compromise when necessary.

Looking into the future, there is a lot to be learnt from the approach adopted by the British military in Northern Ireland. One of these lessons is that military means should be fitted to the chosen ends in Northern Ireland. Aspects of negotiation and compromise play a critical role in ensuring that a wave of terror does not re-emerge. The British military has derived many benefits by adopting a low profile characterized by a defensive stance. In this approach, inter-agency cooperation needs to be strengthened. Moreover, public relations efforts are of utmost importance in ensuring that cohesion is maintained. Focus should be on limited controls characterized by static defenses. This way, the people of Northern Ireland will continue to feel that they live in a free country in which there is no unwarranted meddling by the British government.

Cooperation between military and civil organs in the country has been of great importance in ending terrorism. A case in point is the cooperation agreement between civil servants and the Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR). Another example is the established of The Information Policy Cell. In this strategy, the objective was to inform the Northern Ireland public on the wide-ranging military implications of the problem of terrorism in the country. the British military hoped that once this information was provided to the public, it would be easy for the goal of safeguarding Civil Power to be achieved through various efforts by the Security Forces. Efforts need to continue being made to improve community relations particularly in Catholic areas. This can be achieved through various projects such as the establishment of youth clubs and efforts to encourage local people to participate in local security committees.

The issue of new constitutional arrangements also needs to be highlighted as one of the causes aimed at ending terrorism in Northern Ireland. By agreeing to put in place new constitutional provisions, the British government effectively surrendered to the terrorist strategies of the IRA. Although this seemed like some sort of perversion of democracy by terrorism, it was nonetheless an essential move because it saved Ireland from collapse in the hands of terrorist tactics of the IRA. The British government needs to continue selecting ‘the lesser evil’ in agreeing to compromise with the IRA for the sake of the prosperity in Northern Ireland.

The Anglo-Irish agreement entered into between IRA terrorists and the British government was not subjected to approval by the citizens of Northern Ireland. The British government was aware of the fact that this seemed like a blow to the values of democracy. However, there was a need for a compromise and cooperative efforts to be entered into for the sake of improving security. Some critics argue that this strategy is counterproductive because it has increased the likelihood of the resurgence of IRA violence in efforts to gain further concessions from the British government.[12] Nevertheless, resurgence to terrorism may not occur if both the British government and the IRA maintain the existing spirit of goodwill and commitment to the goal of peace and stability.

The Belfast agreement of 1998 remains a crucial reference point in efforts to ensure that the problem of terrorism does not recur in Northern Ireland. This agreement was the culmination of multiparty negotiations aimed at bringing about peace in the country. The agreement focused on three core provisions. The first one related to Northern Ireland’s democratic institutions. It also addressed the issue of establishing an Executive Authority and an Assembly. This provision removed all safeguards against politicians with affiliation to terrorism, such that they could easily have access to these institutions. Through these institutions, the politicians obtained a means for pursuing different political objectives.

The second provision focused on the setting of the North-South Ministerial Council (NSMC). This council is responsible for developing cooperation and pursuing action in different areas across the Island of Ireland. This cross-border body needs to continue being promoted in order for a sense of integration to be perceived by all the people of this island nation. Since terrorist politicians have been given an opportunity to participate within the NSMC, the decisions of this body should be binding to everyone across Ireland. This move is critical in efforts to deal with terrorism. The all-inclusive approach gives terrorists an incentive to abandon their terror tactics and to resort to orthodox means of pursuing their political ends. However, one may argue that such an approach gives paramilitary organizations an opportunity to advance their ideology of a united Ireland.

The third proposal in the Belfast Agreement of 1998 entailed the establishment of the British-Irish Council whose aim is to promote mutually beneficial relations between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. This objective is a noble one because these two nations have many things in common. Moreover, the proposal provides a compromise between those politicians who abide by democratic ideals and those who are affiliated to terrorism. By voting for the Belfast Agreement Northern Ireland affirmed its commitment to the spirit of compromise in ensuring that the threat posed by renewed campaign of terror by the IRA was assuaged.

A major problem is that the Belfast Agreement created a false promise of the achievement of a final settlement.[13] On the contrary, Northern Ireland is yet to reach a point where a final agreement may be said to have been reached. For instance, since the signing of the Belfast Agreement, two other crucial agreements have been entered into. One of them is the St. Andrew’s Agreement of 2006. The other one is the Hillsborough Agreement of 2010. In both agreements, the underlying objective is to ensure that the Belfast Agreement is achieved without subjecting it to any substantial modifications.

The establishment of the additional agreements in 2006 and 2010 creates the impression that the issue of terrorism in Northern Ireland is far from being resolved. In the case of the St. Andrew’s Agreement, the intention was to introduce practical changes to the way various institutions work in the process of ensuring that power was devolved from Westminster to the Assembly and Executive of Northern Ireland. This goal of devolution seems to have been achieved in 2010 following the signing of the Hillsborough Agreement, which marked the transfer of  justice and policing powers from Westminster to the Executive of Northern Ireland. One of the biggest problems is that the Northern Ireland Executive is under heavy influence from politicians affiliated to terrorism.

The threat of terrorist-affiliated Northern Ireland politicians

At this point, the threat that this paper addresses is the one posed by terrorist-affiliated politicians from Northern Ireland. This threat is analyzed in terms of its centers of gravity, its critical vulnerabilities, and strategic seams. The reason for focusing on these politicians is because their actions are critical in determining whether Northern Ireland will degenerate into a wave of terrorism or it will continue to thrive in an environment of peace, economic stability, and reconciliation.

Although the number of these terrorist-affiliated politicians from Northern Ireland is small, the threat they pose as far as the national security of the country is concerned should never be underestimated. These terrorists primarily target soldiers, police officers, and prison officers.[14] Attacks on these targets are a reflection of attacks against the wider community. Moreover, the attacks are an affront to the desire for peace that the people of Northern Ireland expressed democratically when they voted to endorse the Belfast Agreement.

The main critical vulnerability for these politicians is the establishment of the Northern Ireland Office. This office was established with the aim of coordinating the strategic response of the government to this threat. The intention remains to reduce the risk posed to individuals and communities in Northern Ireland as well as the rest of the United Kingdom. In efforts to achieve this goal, the Northern Ireland Office should continue working closely with various organs, notably the Northern Ireland Executive, the Security Service, and the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

The task of supporting operational partners within Northern Ireland is a challenging one. For instance, when high-profile politicians are accused of masterminding terrorist activities, it becomes difficult for the authorities to open charges against them without being seen to be perpetuating oppressive tactics to quell dissenting voices in the Northern Ireland peace process.[15]

One of the main constituent elements of the threat posed by the terrorist-related politicians from Northern Ireland is the existence of an unstable constitutional arrangement of which they are an integral part.[16] This arrangement has led the establishment of insecure foundations for the country’s institutions. In the context of the Belfast Agreement, terrorist-related politicians gained access to the Northern Ireland Executive as well as the Assembly and the NSMC. In this way, they had acquired new means through which they could intensify cooperation between South and North with the aim of establishing a closer relationship between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland.

The Agreement made it compulsory for terrorist-related politicians to enter into a partnership with democrats at every level of the country’s institutions. This constitutes a major center of gravity for the threat posed by political actors who have a history of perpetuating terrorism as a means of achieving political ends. It is imperative to note that their ideological position regarding the destiny of the nation of Northern Ireland remains largely unchanged. Since no separation of power has occurred between the Legislature and the Executive, no proper system exists for maintaining checks and balances.

Another center of gravity of the threat manifests itself through the nature and operations of the NSMC. The NSMC brings together ministers from the Irish government and Northern Ireland. The purpose of this partnership is to build cooperation between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in order to address the numerous issues that affect both economies. This will bring about a progressive merger between the two economies. This move towards a closer union is one that has for the last four decades been favored by the terrorist-related politicians. The seriousness of the threat arises from the fact that the politicians may start a new wave of terrorism in order to arm-twist the UK government into granting them further concessions, leading to the reunification of North and South. The entry of terrorist-related politicians in the political process of Northern Ireland has essentially exposed the critical vulnerabilities of the UK government and Loyalists.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the goodwill of the terrorist-related politicians from Northern Ireland is essential to the success of efforts to deal a death blow to the ugly image of terrorism in the nation. In recent years, the UK government has decided to compromise between democracy and terrorism. In this process, it has created a situation where terrorist-related politicians control over the Assembly and the Executive of Northern Ireland. This has corrupted the very foundation of human rights and democracy in Northern Ireland. For this reason, the country is at a risk of resurgence of terrorism. Victims of terrorism may be prejudiced by the government that is dominated by people who have for decades advocate the use of terrorist activities to achieve political goals.

This paper concludes that the UK government has given the terrorist-related politicians too many concessions, thereby presiding over the triumph of terrorism over democracy. Politicians who have for decades advocated the use of terrorism now hold influential positions in both the Assembly and in the Northern Ireland Executive. This is likely to negate the gains already made in eradicating the problem of terrorism in Northern Ireland. Without the goodwill of terrorist-related politicians from Northern Ireland, it may be impossible for the nation to avoid a resurgence of terrorism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Bairner, Alan. The battlefield of ideas: The legitimation of political violence in Northern Ireland. European Journal of Political Research, 14, no. 5, (1986): 633–649.

Bennett, Huw. From Direct Rule to Motorman: Adjusting British Military Strategy for Northern Ireland in 1972. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 33, no. 7 (2010): 511–532.

Bruce, Steve. The problems of ‘pro‐state’ terrorism: Loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. Terrorism and Political Violence, 4, no. 1, (1992): 67-88.

Dixon, Paul. Guns First, Talks Later: Neoconservatives and the Northern Ireland Peace Process. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 39, no. 4, (2011): 649-676.

Edwards, Aaron. Terroristic Narratives: On the (Re) Invention of Peace in Northern Ireland. Terrorism and Political Violence, 23, no. 3, (2011): 357-376.

Guelke, A. The Northern Ireland Peace Process and the War against Terrorism: Conflicting Conceptions? Government and Opposition. 42 no 3, (2007): 272–291.

Hayes, Bernadette. Public support for political violence and paramilitarism in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. New York Taylor & Francis, 2005.

Holland, J. Hope against history: The course of conflict in Northern Ireland. New York: Taylor & Francis, 1999.

Jarman, Neil. From war to peace? Changing patterns of violence in Northern Ireland, 1990–2003. Terrorism and Political Violence, 16, no. 3, (2004): 420-438.

Kingston, Shane. Terrorism, the media, and the Northern Ireland conflict. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 18, no. 3 (1995): 203-231.

Lafree, Gary. The impact of British Counterterrorist strategies on Political violence in Northern Ireland: Comparing deterrence and backlash models. Criminology, 47 no. 1 (2009): 17-45.

O’Dowd, Liam. From Labor to the Tories: The ideology of containment in Northern Ireland. Capital & Class, 6, no. 3 (1982): 72-90.

Piazza, James. Poverty, minority economic discrimination, and domestic terrorism. Journal of Peace Research, (2011): 48, no. 3, 339-353.

Sànchez-Cuenca, Ignacio. The Dynamics of Nationalist Terrorism: ETA and the IRA. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19, no. 3, (2007): 289-306.

Thompson, John. Deprivation and Political Violence in Northern Ireland, 1922-1985: A Time-Series Analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 33, no. 4 (1989): 676-699.

End Notes

[1] Thompson, John. Deprivation and Political Violence in Northern Ireland, 1922-1985: A Time-Series Analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 33, no. 4 (1989): 676-699.

[2] Piazza, James. Poverty, minority economic discrimination, and domestic terrorism. Journal of Peace Research, (2011): 48, no. 3, 339-353.

[3] Hayes, Bernadette. Public support for political violence and paramilitarism in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. New York Taylor & Francis, 2005.

[4] Bruce, Steve. The problems of ‘pro‐state’ terrorism: Loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland. Terrorism and Political Violence, 4, no. 1, (1992): p. 71.

[5] Sànchez-Cuenca, Ignacio. The Dynamics of Nationalist Terrorism: ETA and the IRA. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19, no. 3, (2007): 289-306.

[6] Sànchez-Cuenca, Ignacio. The Dynamics of Nationalist Terrorism: ETA and the IRA. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19, no. 3, (2007): 289-306

[7] Edwards, Aaron. Terroristic Narratives: On the (Re) Invention of Peace in Northern Ireland. Terrorism and Political Violence, 23, no. 3, (2011): 357-376.

[8] Bairner, Alan. The battlefield of ideas: The legitimation of political violence in Northern Ireland. European Journal of Political Research, 14, no. 5, (1986): 633–649.

[9] O’Dowd, Liam. From Labor to the Tories: The ideology of containment in Northern Ireland. Capital & Class, 6, no. 3 (1982): 72-90.

[10] Jarman, Neil. From war to peace? Changing patterns of violence in Northern Ireland, 1990–2003. Terrorism and Political Violence, 16, no. 3, (2004): 420-438.

[11] Bennett, Huw. From Direct Rule to Motorman: Adjusting British Military Strategy for Northern Ireland in 1972. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 33,no. 7 (2010): 511–532.

[12] Dixon, Paul. Guns First, Talks Later: Neoconservatives and the Northern Ireland Peace Process. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History,39, no. 4, (2011): 649-676.

[13] Lafree, Gary. The impact of British Counterterrorist strategies on Political violence in Northern Ireland: Comparing deterrence and backlash models. Criminology, 47 no. 1 (2009): 17-45.

[14] Kingston, Shane. Terrorism, the media, and the Northern Ireland conflict. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 18, no. 3 (1995): 203-231.

[15] Guelke, A. The Northern Ireland Peace Process and the War against Terrorism: Conflicting Conceptions? Government and Opposition. 42 no 3, (2007): 272–291.

[16] Holland, J. Hope against history: The course of conflict in Northern Ireland. New York: Taylor & Francis, 1999.

Get a 15 % discount on an order above $ 30
Use the following coupon code :
tpc15
Our Services:
  • Essay
  • Custom Essays
  • Homework Help
  • Research Papers
  • Argumentative Essay
  • Assignment
  • College Papers
  • Powerpoint Presentation
  • Dissertation
  • Thesis Paper
  • Dissertation
  • Editing Services
  • Review Writing
  • Lab Report
  • Book Report
  • Article Critique
  • Case Study
  • Coursework
  • Term Paper
  • Personal Statement
Order a customized paper today!