OLDEST IRISH AMERICAN NEWSPAPER IN USA, ESTABLISHED IN 1928
Category: Archive

Old American lessons ring true in today’s North

February 17, 2011

By Staff Reporter

The total population of the American colonies was less than three million. Many in the 13 colonies traced their origins to the nine counties of the ancient Irish province of Ulster.
Historians have estimated only about one third of the population of the colonies supported rebellion and separation from England at the beginning of the American Revolution.
Another third remained loyal to the British crown. The remaining third attempted to remain neutral and get on with their lives.
The American Revolution was, in many respects, a civil war in which those who wanted to maintain the status quo and union with England fought those who wanted independence and the opportunity to create their own destiny.
There were different traditions even among those who supported American independence. The anti-elitist traditions of Calvinism, with its radical democratic character, heavily influenced views in New England.
Traditionalist Presbyterian thinking had a powerful influence and was more distrustful of radical democracy. But Presbyterians tended to distrust absolute monarchies and arbitrary power even more.
The Anglicans of the emerging southern landed aristocracy adapted their traditional respect for authority to value individual ability more than social position.
As Americans, we adopted, with great effect, the collective views of these groups on the role of law as a restraint on arbitrary power, and as a guaranty of equality and equal opportunity.
These traditions came together in Philadelphia in 1787 after the chaos experienced under the Articles of Confederation in the years following the Revolution.
The Philadelphia negotiations led to a constitutional settlement. That settlement was, at its heart, a series of compromises between large states and small, merchants and farmers, tradesmen and planters, Calvinists and Anglicans.
To ensure that basic rights and liberties would be protected, a system of checks and balances was agreed upon to prevent the executive, legislature, or the courts, from asserting unchecked power.
The men who gathered in Philadelphia would only place their trust in a written constitutional settlement, and not the changing whims of political expediency. They recognized that to accommodate several traditions and win the allegiance of the people, they had to offer protection of individual liberty and freedom while assuring the traditions and beliefs of any one sector of society was not imposed on another.
The essence of what occurred in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 was a process of intense negotiation and reflection, followed by more negotiation.
We know from personal diaries, correspondence and debates that no one achieved everything they desired. Indeed, negotiations were to continue for several years after adoption of the Constitution.
These negotiations continued to occupy the energy of men at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but compromise brought resolution, as it had with issues resolved in the constitutional negotiation.
The parallels between what occurred in Boston, New York and Philadelphia, and what was to occur in Belfast and St. Andrew’s over two hundred years later, are striking.
The American Revolution lasted six years. Much uncertainty followed in the years after the right of self determination was achieved. The economy was in tatters. Sectional leadership lacked the ability to develop the abundance of natural resources and inherent skill of the people. Disunity under the Articles of Confederation, which predated the Constitution, made clear the need for a constitutional formula that would bind together disparate and distrustful interests to work for the common good.
The conflict in Northern Ireland, in its recent manifestation, lasted almost 30 years. The economy was wrecked. It was heavily dependent on subsidies from the British treasury. War weariness led to intense negotiation to achieve a political settlement.
In retrospect, we see in the northern Irish experience, as in all serious negotiations, that the further apart the starting positions of the parties, the longer the distance they have to travel to reach accommodation.
The Dublin government and main stream nationalists agreed to modify Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish Constitution, which had claimed de jure jurisdiction over the entire island of Ireland.
London and the unionists agreed that the future sovereignty of Northern Ireland would be determined by the wishes of the majority of people living in Northern Ireland.
Local control was returned to a local parliament that requires cross-community concurrence for legislative initiatives. In fundamental terms, the people of the Six Counties will determine their future governmental allegiance and ensure that the majority of both traditions support their self government.
The good news from Northern Ireland is that intelligent people from the nationalist and unionist communities learned the arts of negotiation and compromise. They have experienced first hand the consequences of failure to negotiate. Both sides have conceded on points they would have considered unimaginable, or impossible, three decades ago. Each side took considerable risks; some risks remain.
There are some on both sides who reject compromise and working together for a common future. Republican dissidents and unionist extremists cannot see the value in what has been achieved.
Hard line unionists like Jim Allister have induced a certain amount of paralysis in some unionist politicians. Yet enormous progress has been achieved. Most people can see a better future, despite the risks inherent in change. They have redirected the wasted energy of conflict into a drive for opportunity for all the people of Northern Ireland.
Difficult challenges remain, like those which faced Americans before they reached a constitutional settlement. There is still a fear of change among many.
Some communities have seen few benefits from the peace process. Training programs, relevant education, and investment are needed to bring the peace dividend to nationalist and loyalist communities that were usually the last to receive benefits under the old regime.
There is a need for investment in interface areas, which remain deprived. We cannot let the people living in these areas lose faith in the peace process.
There remain deep class divisions, which are impediments to educational and economic progress. Sectarianism is still present in less blatant forms, but present nevertheless.
More energy needs to be devoted by the government to combating sectarianism. This effort must begin in the schools and extend to the other institutions of society.
The leaders of loyalism, drawn from working class and deprived areas realize now that they were often used by political leaders and others who disowned them when their past roles became an embarrassment.
Loyalist leaders see their communities afflicted by unemployment and drugs. Their young people often lack marketable skills and goals for the future. Many of these leaders are now fathers and grandfathers.
They want a better future for their children and grandchildren. They realize they have much in common with the working class people in the nationalist communities, although traditional barriers still separate them.
There are deep divisions in the unionist community based on broad barriers of education and economic privilege. The conflict broke down the old system under which many were granted meager rewards for their willingness to serve the interests of their social betters.
Loyalists see the old order no longer has a place in the world, but they do not yet know how to create a place for themselves and their children in the new order.
We, as Americans, should be prepared to help.
The genes that helped produce engineering marvels and successes of the last two centuries in America and Ireland are still there in working class areas of Northern Ireland.
Equally encouraging has been the views of nationalist leaders who are determined not to see done to unionists and loyalists what was done to nationalists under the old regime.
The nationalists know too well the economic and social costs of second class citizenship. No community can prosper where artificial barriers are put in place because of one’s religion, or social class.
This pragmatic, but highly moral, approach by nationalist leaders will underpin a settlement based on equality and parity of esteem of all people and traditions in a transformed Northern Ireland.
Like Americans living under the Articles of Confederation, people and politicians in Northern Ireland have come to a new awareness that economic prosperity and a better life for all can only be achieved through the rule of just law, stability and investment in infrastructure.
Mature debate continues to take place, just as it did in Philadelphia, to evaluate means and methods to achieve that better future.
The debate now takes place in the context of long experience and the benefit of lessons learned from what cannot work. The people of Northern Ireland have forged, and will continue to refine, a system that can and does work.
Those who have not been to Northern Ireland will find a warm welcome.
It is a place ready and motivated to make it worthwhile for American firms and pension funds to become partners in a new society.

This op-ed is an edited version of a speech given by attorney and retired army general Jim Cullen at the Irish Echo’s recent “Gateways to Tomorrow” conference in Boston.

Other Articles You Might Like

Sign up to our Daily Newsletter

Click to access the login or register cheese