[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 13, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
   IN SEARCH OF A LASTING PEACE IN NORTHERN IRELAND: AN END TO ``THE 
                               TROUBLES''

  Mr. DODD. Madam President, let me turn to a happier subject, if I 
may, one that has been the subject of great concern over the last two 
and one-half decades. I refer to Northern Ireland.
  I rise this evening to speak today about renewed hopes for peace in 
Northern Ireland. After a quarter of a century of political conflict 
and sectarian violence, prospects for peace no longer seem 
unimaginable.
  The reason for this optimism stems from the August 31 declaration by 
the provisional Irish Republican Army [IRA] of its complete cessation 
of military operations and its willingness to enter into inclusive 
negotiations in order to seek a just and lasting settlement to the 
conflict.
  Political leaders in the United Kingdom and Ireland have reacted 
favorably to these recent developments. The cease-fire was warmly 
welcomed by Albert Reynolds, the Prime Minister of the Republic of 
Ireland. While somewhat more reserved in his reaction, Prime Minister 
John Major of Britain was also greatly encouraged by the IRA's 
announcement.
  And, with more than 40 million Americans of Irish ancestry residing 
in the United States, President Bill Clinton expressed the hope and 
expectations of us all in stating his belief that the IRA's decision 
would ``help bring a lasting and just peace to Northern Ireland.''
  Since 1969 the six counties of Northern Ireland have been the site of 
a bloody and protracted conflict that has claimed more than 3,100 lives 
and left more than 30,000 people injured. This tragic affair is only 
the latest stage of an age-old conflict that is rooted in centuries of 
ethnic, political and religious hostility. Northern Ireland has been 
torn between two powerful opposing forces: A Protestant population that 
mainly favors unification with Britain and a Catholic population that 
generally favors political ties with the Irish Republic.
  The most recent phase of violence erupted in 1969, when British 
troops were sent to Northern Ireland and peaked in 1972, the year 
direct rule was imposed by London. Throughout the last 25 years, the 
challenges that have confronted Northern Ireland have been formidable. 
Clandestine paramilitary organizations waged bloody campaigns--the IRA 
a relentless campaign against British rule, and loyalist paramilitary 
organizations vigilante attacks against suspected IRA supporters. 
Significant unemployment and economic stagnation have further added to 
the sense of hopelessness.
  While there are few similarities between Northern Ireland and South 
Africa or Northern Ireland and the Middle East, they do have at least 
one feature in common: The demands of the warring parties have at some 
point seemed so far apart and so intractable as to be irreconcilable. 
In the case of South Africa and the Middle East that has proven to be 
untrue. Be it South Africa or the Middle East, the momentum of the 
peace process itself seemed to sweep away many of the real or imaged 
obstacles to reaching a final agreement. The key ingredient in each 
case was that all sides were unequivocally committed to finding a 
solution. I hope such a commitment is developing with respect to 
Northern Ireland.
  The IRA's cease-fire decision last month, in and of itself, will not 
bridge the sectarian divide that has marked the landscape of Ulster 
since its creation in 1922, and most visibly since 1969 and the start 
of ``the troubles.'' But, it can bring an end to the political 
stalemate that has stood in the way of meaningful efforts to seek a 
diplomatic solution to the conflict.
  Madam President, I have heard skeptical voices question the ``Real 
intentions'' behind the August 31 announcement by the IRA, particularly 
the voices of Protestant unionists politicians. However, I for one 
believe that Gerry Adams, president of Sinn Fein--the political wing of 
the IRA--is sincere in his commitment to desist with military 
operations and in his willingness to try the negotiating track for 
peacefully ending British rule of Northern Ireland. Mr. Adams' 
leadership in convincing his colleagues in the IRA of the wisdom of 
this approach should not be underestimated, nor should the personal 
risk he has taken in doing so.
  In my view, the decision by President Clinton to permit Gerry Adams 
to enter the United States, last February, was an important factor in 
Adams' ability to sell the cease-fire proposal. President Clinton 
deserves credit for making that controversial decision. So too do 
Senators Moynihan of New York and Kennedy of Massachusetts and others 
with a long involvement in Irish issues, who strongly urged the 
President to act positively on the Adams' visa request in those time 
sequences and circumstances.
  These people have been long involved with the issues involving 
Ireland. And those who urged the President to act positively with 
regard to the Adams' visa request I think did so--and I am proud to 
have been one of them--wisely.
  When I met last Friday with Prime Minister Reynolds he told me that 
the Northern Ireland peace process was at a critical juncture, and that 
those who want peace must seize upon this historic moment. That 
conviction inspired him to meet on September 6, with Gerry Adams of 
Sinn Fein and John Hume of the Nationalist, Social Democratic and Labor 
Party [SDLP] to discuss plans for hosting an October, ``Forum of Peace 
and Reconciliation,'' to which all the political parties of the north 
are invited to participate in a dialogue for peace.
  Prime Minister Reynolds deserves our congratulations and support for 
his tireless efforts and inexhaustible patience in his quest for a 
permanent peace for all the peoples of Ireland--north and south.
  It was no accident that John Hume was in attendance at last week's 
meeting in Dublin with Prime Minister Reynolds and Sinn Fein leader 
Gerry Adams. If I were asked to identify one individual whose work has 
been indispensable to serious diplomatic attempts to bring peace to 
Northern Ireland, John Hume would come immediately to mind. John Hume 
began his political life as one of the first leaders of the movement to 
bring civil rights and equality to the long-oppressed Catholic 
community in Northern Ireland. For the last 25 years, John Hume has 
served in public office in Northern Ireland. He has been elected and 
reelected to both the British and European Parliaments--and has used 
these fora, without hesitation, to speak out for justice in the north.
  All in all, John Hume has occupied a unique role in the political 
landscape of Ulster. He and the Social Democratic and Labor Party 
[SDLP] he leads have long been committed to the nationalist ideal of a 
united Ireland. Nevertheless, he has consistently spoken out against 
the ruthless violence of the IRA. By being willing to confront both 
extremes of the Ulster reality, he has been in a position to play a 
crucial role in the peace process.
  Sixteen months ago, not without some personal political Risk, John 
Hume began secret political discussions with Sinn Fein's leader Gerry 
Adams. It was those Hume-Adams talks that prodded Irish and British 
leaders into more active efforts to reach agreement on a framework for 
the peace process--encompassed in the Downing Street Declaration of 
December 15, 1993. The Hume-Adams talks also helped to create the 
political climate that enabled the IRA to decide to foreswear violence 
as an instrument for ending British rule. And knowing John Hume as I 
do, I am confident that he will continue to play a pivotal role as the 
newly energized peace process gains steam.

  British Prime Minister John Major also deserves special 
congratulations, as well, for making a solution to the crisis in Ulster 
a priority for his administration. Although he has sought additional 
clarifications from the IRA concerning its August 31 declaration, he 
has taken some very constructive steps to further the process. I 
applaud, for example, his gesture of instructing that British troops in 
Northern Ireland replace combat helmets with berets--a symbolic but 
important signal that Britain does have some measure of faith in the 
IRA's declaration.
  Prime Minister Major's continued participation in the peace efforts 
is critical. Only he can persuade the Unionists that it is in their 
interest to sit down at the negotiating table and find a political 
solution to their differences with Ulster's Nationalist Catholic 
political leaders. Only he is in a position to respond to events as 
they unfold with gestures designed to build confidence and trust in the 
negotiating track. Such actions as lifting the broadcast ban on members 
of Sinn Fein would serve to do so; and in any event, the continuation 
of the broadcast ban is incompatible with an open political dialog. 
Returning Republican prisoners currently held in Irish or British jails 
to Belfast, and downsizing the deployment of British troops in Northern 
Ireland are also likely to reassure elements of the IRA that there 
truly is a peace dividend in laying down their arms.

  There are those in the United States and particularly in the Irish-
American community who are already asking, ``What can the United States 
Government and the American people do to further the peace initiative 
and end the troubles?'' The most important contribution that the United 
States can make is to assist in the rebuilding of an Ulster economy 
that has been devastated by decades of conflict and neglect. In the 
end, peace will be fleeting if there continues to be significant 
unemployment and economic decay in Belfast.
  Both the U.S. public and private sectors have roles to play in 
revitalizing the Ulster economy. President Clinton has already pledged 
to provide financial assistance in support of the peace process. I hope 
that before Congress adjourns next month, we will have given that 
President whatever authority he needs to make good on his pledge of 
assistance. More important, in the long run, is the increased interest 
of the United States private sector in making job-creating investments 
in Northern Ireland. Without increased employment and economic growth 
to build upon a political settlement, the permanence of peace is in 
serious question; in my opinion.
  We wait the next steps in the Northern Ireland peace initiative. I am 
convinced that the moment has arrived to begin the final march toward 
resolving the troubles so neighbors can live in peace and harmony, 
without the bullet and the bomb.
  Perhaps the historian J. Bowyer Bell stated it best in the concluding 
sentences of ``The Irish Troubles: A Generation of Violence.'' He 
wrote,

       It is such a small, lovely island and they are such a grand 
     people * * *. Great issues have been fought out in a small 
     compass but not to resolution or exhaustion. And so for the 
     Irish troubles a generation is gone and a century is running 
     out, but not Irish persistence The Irish, whatever else, are 
     indomitable.

  Ultimately, it is that indomitable spirit that will produce the peace 
that all the men, women, and children of Ireland have long sought and 
have so long prayed for.
  My sincere hope is that they will not be disappointed as this process 
unfolds.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from 
Ohio is recognized for 15 minutes.

                          ____________________