[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 25 (Thursday, February 11, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H632-H638]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT IN PERIL
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Green of Wisconsin). Under the Speaker's
announced policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Walsh) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority
leader.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge at this time my
good friend and colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) who will join
me and other Members, including the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ben
Gilman) in a bipartisan discussion concerning the Northern Ireland
peace agreement.
Mr. Speaker, the peace process in Northern Ireland is in serious
trouble. The Good Friday agreement we cautiously celebrated last spring
is now under attack from within. Ulster Party leader David Trimble, who
signed the agreement just nine months ago, is now balking and trying to
reopen, renegotiate and re-interpret the terms of that hard-fought
agreement. Over the past few months we have seen deadlines pass, deals
reneged upon and a return to the ugly politics of exclusion.
Let me remind those who support the status quo that the people in
Ireland, north and south, voted decisively for change in the
referendums last May. History will not be kind to those who fail to
deliver.
The next couple of weeks are critical. On Monday the Northern Ireland
Assembly will meet to formally approve the creation of the 10-member
executive and cross-border bodies. Over the
[[Page H633]]
next two weeks the assembly will make preparations for the transfer of
powers from the Northern Ireland office on March 10.
David Trimble wishes to lay claim to the title of first Minister of
Northern Ireland. If he is ever to fulfill the tremendous
responsibilities of serving as the first minister for both communities
in Northern Ireland, he needs to move forward to implement the
agreement that he is a party to and to appoint ministers to the
executive. If he fails to do so, the two governments party to the
agreement, namely Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and Great Britain
should reject the Trimble veto, take responsibility into their own
hands and implement the agreement. They must support those who are
working for peace, who wish to govern and serve in a new Northern
Ireland. They should implement the agreement.
Mr. Speaker, why should the people of the United States care? Well,
because first of all there are millions and millions of Americans of
Irish descent who reside in the United States, some of whom have paid
very close attention to this, others who have not but yet understand
what all Americans understand, and that is that Northern Ireland must
move forward into a pluralistic, democratically-elected government that
makes it possible for everyone to live out their lives, and practice
their religion, and practice their own philosophy, and raise their
family and raise their children in a spirit of equality and under a
government that allows for individual freedoms and beliefs.
One of the issues that has really hung this process up is something
referred to as decommissioning. Decommissioning is the term that is
used by the political parties of the north that in effect would disarm
all of the combatants in this process, and I stress the words all of
the combatants. As you probably know, there has been for the last 30
years at least a period of strife, civil strife, violence, and it has
been a very difficult time. Decommissioning would require under the
agreement that all parties to the agreement, all political parties to
the agreement, would use their good offices and their political capital
to remove all of the guns and all the bullets from Northern Ireland.
The agreement provided two years for this to take place and urged that
all parties work toward that end, and at the end of the two-year period
ideally all the weapons would be removed.
Mr. Trimble has seized upon this issue and has, I think, really
backed himself into a corner, because what he is saying now is that in
order for him to implement the agreement, the IRA and the political
leadership of Sinn Fein must deliver decommissioning prior to the
implementation of the government, which is in direct contradiction to
the agreement. The agreement says we all work together toward the end
of violence and decommissioning, the end of arms, in a two-year period.
Meanwhile we have deadlines that have to be met in order to put this
government together, and if Mr. Trimble would stick to the agreement,
progress would be being made now, and in fact one of the things that
has to occur along the way is to eliminate the root causes for
violence. And if those root causes are not eliminated, then regardless
of whether the weapons disappear now or later, if the root causes are
still there, the violence will return.
So the agreement was hard-fought, every ``I'' was dotted and ``T''
was crossed with everyone watching, and words do matter over there. So
the agreement needs to be implemented.
I will take another moment and focus on another very important
element in this agreement, and then I will yield to my friend from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
The Good Friday agreement calls for a new beginning to policing in
Northern Ireland and contains a clear and unmistakable mandate for a
new approach in this area, one capable of attracting and maintaining
support from the community as a whole. In doing so it acknowledges the
major defects in the current policing arrangement and the vital need
for change.
{time} 1715
At this critical juncture in the peace process, there is an enormous
responsibility on Members of the Patten Commission. It is essential
that they submit the kind of innovative proposals which the situation
demands. It is no exaggeration to say that many in the Nationalist
community will judge the value of the agreement by what the Commission
delivers on policing. The terms of reference given to the Patten
Commission, which are detailed in the Good Friday Agreement, are
comprehensive and far-reaching. I propose today to include them in the
record of the House.
They require that the Commission deal with key issues, such as the
composition, future police structure, and the whole culture and
character of the force. The objective is to provide a police service
with which both communities can identify. That is definitely not the
case at present.
The overriding problem is that the Nationalist community does not see
the RUC, the Royal Ulster constabulary, as their police force. This is
hardly surprising, given that 93 percent of the force is drawn from the
Unionists, as opposed to the Nationalist community, and for much of its
history the force operated as an arm, often an oppressive arm, of the
Stormont Unionist administration.
People in Nationalist areas recall in the not too distant past the
use of lethal force by police, the use of plastic bullets, the use of
physical abuse and torture in interrogation centers. They want to know
that these features of policing are gone, and gone forever.
In Northern Ireland, policing has been a major source of division,
pushing the two communities farther and farther apart. In these
circumstances, the demand for change is not about getting more
Catholics into the RUC, it is about completely overhauling how policing
operates in Northern Ireland. It is about creating a new police service
with which the Nationalist community can fully identify.
The situation cannot be resolved by tinkering with the problem or
merely changing the name or the uniforms of the force, however
necessary those changes may be. It requires a fundamental reappraisal
of policing structures.
The Good Friday Agreement identifies the objective, a police service
enjoying the support of both communities. The Patten Commission must
work back from that objective. It is its task to devise the kind of
policing service which meets that standard. The status quo cannot be
the point of departure.
The new agreement must include fundamental changes in the
composition, structure, culture and character of the police. The
Commission's guidelines stress the need for the police to become
accountable to the community that they serve. This means real power
over policing at the regional and local level, with input into
recruitment and direction of the force.
The issue is not about adjusting simply the sectarian imbalance
within the RUC. It is about creating a police service which
Nationalists see as their own. They have never had that.
It is no exaggeration to say that getting the policing issue right
will have a major bearing on the ultimate success of the agreement. It
is vital, therefore, that the Patten Commission's recommendations be
acted upon without delay.
We have seen too many examples of the so-called Securicrats, those
shadowy bureaucrats who operate behind the scenes and appear to pay
little attention to the political leaders, slowing down reforms to fit
some alternative agenda. This must not be allowed to happen with
policing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend and colleague from Massachusetts,
who has shown great leadership on this issue, Mr. Neal.
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Walsh).
Mr. Speaker, there is high significance to this issue as we confront
it here again on the House floor in the sense that in terms of
international relations, this issue was inspired by Members of the
House. It was the constant vigilance of the Members of the House of
Representatives many years ago that played an enormous role in bringing
this question to the surface and allowing members of the international
community to pass some judgment.
I want to thank Mr. Walsh. Time and again, like many Members of the
Republican Party, he and others have
[[Page H634]]
been of great assistance on this question over a long period of time.
As one who has been involved in the issue of Ireland for the better
part of two decades, in fairness it should be acknowledged this
afternoon how far we have come. But the truth is, as we have continued
to role the boulder back up the hill time and again in the face of
obstacles, some minor and some major, it has been the vigilance of this
Congress that has ensured that all voices have rightly been heard.
But let me, if I can, speak for a few moments about the Good Friday
Agreement and the issue of decommissioning, as it is commonly known.
The Good Friday Agreement states that all participants reaffirm their
commitment to the total disarmament of all paramilitary organizations
and to achieve the decommissioning of all paramilitary arms within two
years following the endorsement of referendums in the north and the
south of Ireland.
What is significant about this occasion, I believe, is that nowhere
in the Good Friday Agreement is that issue compromised. It is pointed
out time and again in a prescribed timetable that the people in the
Republic of Ireland and the north of Ireland simultaneously voted for
and endorsed.
So what brings us to this point on the House floor? We are here
because, once again, the Nationalist community, the Social Democratic
and Labor party, led by John Hume, and the Sinn Fein political party,
led by its president, Gerry Adams, have met all of the agreements that
were reached on Good Friday under the substantial and able leadership
of former Senator and our friend George Mitchell.
And what has been their reward as they have gotten to the goal line?
As they have gotten to the goal line, the response has been to move the
goal posts back. Sinn Fein and SDLP both have stated emphatically that
there are no preconditions that have been offered nor none that were
accepted on the issue of decommissioning.
But what do we have as a response from David Trimble and the Ulster
Unionist party? They have sought to rewrite and to renegotiate the
agreement on the matter of decommissioning.
What is to suggest to the Nationalist community that if they want to
subscribe to this precondition, that another precondition might not be
offered in the near future, as it has always been done in the far and
recent past?
David Trimble in this instance, who, by the way, has won a Nobel
Peace Prize, and I held great hopes for just a few weeks ago, has
attempted to review the agreement that the people on the island of
Ireland have voted for. He and some of his allies have deliberately
delivered a crisis in the peace process by refusing to cooperate in the
establishment of the new political institutions in the north of Ireland
that, once again, the people in those six counties have voted for.
They have repeatedly missed deadlines, and they have used
decommissioning as an excuse to try to review the whole topic. What is
sorely needed here is the leadership of the First Minister in Waiting
to accede to the views of the electorate and to all of the political
parties by Monday of next week, or February 15th.
David Trimble and the Unionist party should not be allowed to park,
to rewrite, or to renegotiate this agreement that was approved by the
vast majority. Ten months after the agreement and nine months after the
historic North-South referendums, the Assembly, the Executive and the
North-South Council have still not been established. The refusal to
establish these new institutions is in fundamental conflict with the
letter of the Good Friday Agreement. It is undemocratic and a denial of
the rights and wishes of a majority of the people who voted for that
agreement on May 22, 1998.
We cannot diminish on this occasion or on this floor how significant
this achievement has been. To think that all of the political parties,
with the exception of some fringe elements, have come to the bargaining
table and hammered out an agreement with the endorsement of Bill
Clinton and Tony Blair, who both have done a great job, now to discover
as the deadline for the North-South bodies approach that the would-be
First Minister has decided to erect a new barrier to the accomplishment
of our overall goal, and that is to have a role for Dublin in the day-
to-day affairs in the north of Ireland.
It was just a few weeks ago that we saw the process stumble and we
saw Prime Minister Blair intercede to help pick it up. In this
instance, we hope once again that he would be willing to do precisely
that.
We should not underestimate how far this has come. We should time and
again remind ourselves that we are now far up the hill as to where we
once were. But it needs an extra nudge, and the nudge would be, I
believe, to encourage Prime Minister Blair, and if it is the consensus
of the political parties in the North, Bill Clinton, to once again
intercede.
But if we are to find ourselves each and every step along the way in
this process of having a referendum which parties agree to and the
parties all endorse, and then to say at the end of the day that is not
entirely what was meant, we have to go back and revisit all of these
issues that have intervened in recent time, then the agreement will
collapse of its own weight, and none of us here who have been party to
this solution want to see that happen.
It is time for the development of these bodies, fully in compliance
and in agreement with the wishes of the people in the North.
Mr. WALSH. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished Chairman of the Committee
on International Relations, a real leader on this issue of peace and
justice in Ireland, the gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman).
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to rise today on this very
important issue as the new 106th Congress is taking time to address an
ongoing issue of important foreign policy concern to our own Nation.
The question of the difficult struggle for lasting peace and justice in
the north of Ireland is one of concern to millions of Americans, as
well as peace-loving people throughout the world.
I thank the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) for
arranging this special order, enabling us to discuss the status of the
Ireland peace process. We welcome his remarks. I want to commend to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) for his supporting remarks and
for his ongoing concern for peace in Ireland.
Last year, as we know, was an historic one in Irish history. The good
Friday accord was signed in April of 1998. The Irish people, both North
and South, overwhelmingly endorsed that peace accord in public
referendum. The people in the North then elected as part of the accord
a new Northern Ireland assembly, an assembly to govern much of their
own internal affairs.
Sadly, as so often has been case over the many years, and as my
colleagues have just recited, the issue of arms decommissioning is
still a major obstacle to further progress in the effort to bring
lasting peace and real concrete change in the north of Ireland.
These are goals we and most of the people on that island accept and
want desperately. What is sadly lacking is the political will and
leadership on the ground in the North. The arms issue is once again
being used as the old Unionist veto, which blocks progress and blocks
full implementation of the Good Friday peace accord.
While it is notable that some people have won Nobel Peace Prizes for
their leadership up to and signing the Good Friday accord, the real
prize should come when the terms of the accord are fully adhered to and
agreed upon as negotiated by all the parties.
{time} 1730
In particular, the decommissioning issue is being used to block
creation of a Northern Ireland cabinet level executive intended to help
govern the north, as well as to help implement the new North-South
bodies under the Good Friday Accord.
The new cabinet executive must include Sinn Fein who won that
legitimate right through the ballot box and a Democratic process to
participate and to govern the north, as well as to be able to sit on
the new North-South cross border bodies to govern the new Ireland.
Like it or not, the Unionists must acknowledge that Sinn Fein has a
legitimate Democratic mandate which,
[[Page H635]]
under the terms of the accord, entitles him to two ministerial posts on
the new executive cabinet.
The Good Friday Accord never mandated that the issue of IRA
decommissioning would be a precondition to Sinn Fein's entry into
government and the new institutions it established. It provides only
for ``best efforts'' and the ``hopeful completion of the arms
decommissioning process'' by the year 2000.
The entire and complex Good Friday Accord and peace process will work
only if everyone keeps their word and does not seek to renege on those
portions of the agreement that they now profess to dislike. That is
just how it is, and there can be no unilateral renegotiations, period.
Yet, sadly, the issue is back to being used as a red herring to
rewrite and to undo the Good Friday Accord and thwart the will of the
Irish people who voted in massive numbers for the accord and for
peaceful political change.
It is time to get on with it and put an end to the Unionist veto
which, for far too long, has been used to maintain the unsatisfactory
status quo which is the north of Ireland today. We all know far too
well how political vacuums in the past have been filled in Northern
Ireland. No one wants a return to violence on all sides.
Change must come on the ground, and the nationalist community must be
treated with equality. They must be given their rightful voice in the
future of the new north. Many in the nationalist community have chosen
Sinn Fein to represent them in a new government, and no one has a right
to undo that election.
We also need to see new and acceptable community policing in the
north, and equal opportunity, and a shared economic future. I am
pleased to report today that our House Committee on International
Relations will be holding hearings on April 22nd on policing in the
north. We will be taking testimony from the north and from leading
international human rights groups on the RUC question and the
compelling need for new and acceptable policing, which is both
responsive and accountable as envisioned by the Good Friday Accord. I
am convinced that many constructive ideas for meaningful peace reform
will emerge from our efforts.
It is important that we all work together to bring about concrete and
meaningful change, and bring about reform in the north so that one day
soon, the future of Ireland and its warm and generous people will be
theirs and theirs alone to make. It is time to get on with it, to end
the foot-dragging, and to implement the will of the good and generous
Irish people.
I thank the gentleman for arranging this Special Order, and I thank
him for yielding time.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his thoughtful
comments and his leadership, as always, and I welcome the prospect of
hearings in the Committee on International Relations on policing in
Northern Ireland. It is a welcome addition to this overall equation,
and I am sure it will be very, very helpful to all of us who are
interested in this important issue.
Mr. Speaker, I yield at this time to my distinguished friend, the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Gilman) who has been a good leader on this issue and a
faithful friend as well.
At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman
from Worcester, Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), who has had a long
interest in the issues and affairs of Northern Ireland.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Walsh), and my dear friend and colleague, the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) for their long years of
leadership and advocacy for a fair, just and lasting peace in Northern
Ireland.
Like so many of my colleagues, I have relied on their wisdom and
their insights in understanding the complex issues confronting this
country as it moves into a new era of peace. I want to thank them again
for the opportunity this afternoon for Members to come together and
discuss the status of the peace process in Northern Ireland. I would
also like to acknowledge and express my appreciation to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Gilman) for all of his efforts in bringing about a
peaceful settlement to the troubles in Ireland.
Mr. Speaker, like the people of Northern Ireland, the Republic of
Ireland, and England, the world was deeply moved and experienced a
universal feeling of hope when all sectors of the Irish conflict signed
the Good Friday Agreement last year and put in motion a process to
bring lasting peace to Northern Ireland.
All of us watched the people of Ireland and Northern Ireland vote
overwhelmingly in support of the peace agreement, and we watched with
great concern as violent parties attempted to destroy or undermine the
agreement with acts of violence. But the heart and the soul and the
spirit of the Irish people held true to the calling of peace and they
rejected these violent provocations.
The peace process has now reached yet another important crossroads.
For over the next days and weeks, we will actually witness the transfer
of power to the people of Northern Ireland, all the people of Northern
Ireland. And we will see the various parties and sectors form a new
executive, receive posts and ministries in that executive power, and
have the new assembly ratify the North-South Agreement. In March, we
will witness the formal transfer of power to this newly established
executive.
But there are some who state that the establishment of these new
political institutions cannot and should not take place without the
disarmament of paramilitary groups, most notably the decommissioning of
the Irish Republican Army. But Mr. Speaker, the Good Friday Agreement,
as has already been mentioned, requires no such precondition for the
initiation of these new political bodies and the transfer of power.
Indeed, establishing these new institutions and empowering the various
parties and sectors of Northern Ireland will contribute greatly to
building the climate of confidence and trust so necessary for the
successful disarmament of paramilitary groups.
Another key for successful disarmament will be what happens this
summer when the proposals are reforming the police and completing the
demilitarization of troops that will be presented. The reorganization
of the police so that it is both responsible and responsive to all the
communities of Northern Ireland is a critical item of the Good Friday
Agreement. So is the withdrawal and the demilitarization of British
troops on Irish soil a key element to a lasting peace and the rejection
of armed conflict in the future.
According to the framers of the agreement and the British government,
the IRA needs to lay down about 1,500 arms or weapons by May 2000. Mr.
Speaker, I have been very actively involved in the peace accords that
ended the Civil War in El Salvador and that required the guerrilla
forces in that country to give up literally tens of thousands of
weapons. Believe me, Mr. Speaker, it only needs a matter of days to
disarm 1,500 weapons if, and I emphasize if, the political and social
institutions called for in the Good Friday Agreement have been
established and are allowing all the people of Northern Ireland to
participate fully for the first time in determining the future destiny
of the country.
Mr. Speaker, it is easy to overlook the tremendous progress that the
peace process has brought to Northern Ireland. The British government,
to their great credit, is ahead of schedule in the release of political
prisoners. Families are being reunited. It is safer for people to walk
home on the streets of Belfast and Ulster, and business and local
commerce are expanding, and communities are coming together across
sectarian lines, many for the first time, to plan a common destiny.
Those of us in the United States and the international community must
continue to support the peace process, and we must salute the people of
Northern Ireland for remaining firm in their commitment to creating a
lasting peace. But we also must, as my colleagues have already said
here today, put pressure on those who would seek to undermine or
rewrite or amend the process which has already brought us and moved us
so far along this goal toward peace.
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak, if I
could for just a few moments again,
[[Page H636]]
about that policing issue. It was touched upon by the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Walsh) earlier and the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Gilman) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), but it is
a crucial issue in terms of developing some faith in the institutions
of governance in the north of the nationalist community that they
fundamentally see a change in the identity of the police force. They
cannot be seen as occupiers in a land that people see as their own.
There have to be changes in the uniform, the name of the force, the
emblems and the flag of the new force that will eventually command
respect in both communities. We seek not the triumph of one community
over the other as much as an agreed upon Northern Ireland.
What we ask for is that North-South policing cooperation reinforce
community confidence, and that a permanent international team be sent
to the north to monitor the implementation of the agreements and the
reforms as proposed. This opportunity must be emphasized in terms of
the overall agreements in the north. If we are to have a professional
police force, it must be one that is acceptable to both sections of the
community and indeed, to both traditions. And while the Good Friday
Agreement calls for a new beginning to policing, it has been slow to
come about, and we are anxious to see the Patten Commission deliver on
the agreement of policing and to see the composition of the police
force of the URC in the north be dramatically changed.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Newark, New Jersey (Mr.
Payne), an individual who again has been a great friend on this issue.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my support to the continuation of
the peace process in the north of Ireland. As we all know, the Good
Friday Accords were promulgated nearly a year ago this April, with the
best intent in mind, to end the authoritarian rule and domination of
the Protestant party over the minority Catholics. It gave Catholics a
real voice for once by ending 3 decades of conflict in the north of
Ireland.
Last marching season, last July 4th weekend I had the opportunity to
travel again on my several trips to the north of Ireland, and I was
there during that march when the Orange Order came into Drumcree, and
the standoff was there. That was a tragic week. Following the standoff
in Drumcree, 3 little boys were fire-bombed to death. Very sad and
brutal.
People started to think that perhaps enough is enough, to continue to
celebrate the victory of William of Orange, in which Irish land was
seized and confiscated, is really an insult to the people of Ireland
and Catholics everywhere. Sadly, this parade glorifies a part of
history and is really provocative in nature. So we felt that with the
Good Friday Accords that this would be behind us. So one can imagine
the excitement when President Clinton, along with those of us here,
went to celebrate the Good Friday Accords.
I believed that the political prisoner release of paramilitary groups
on both sides was certainly an issue that was a tough issue. I know
that perhaps Tony Blair is receiving pressure to overturn this rule. I
think this would set a bad precedent for all involved if this was
overturned.
In the same light, I know that the decommissioning issue was one of
the last issues discussed before all parties made the last push towards
peace. I think we know that disarming the paramilitaries was going to
be very difficult, and we know it is a tough, sticky issue in most
negotiations, even with the Palestine and Israel negotiations. The
tough issues are put last, what should happen to the Holy City. So we
are at the tough times.
But let me say that the peace agreement does not explicitly require a
start on disarmament, but it seems like politics is dictating this. I
would hope that we could work out a solution. We have gone too far, we
have suffered too long. We really believe that peace in the north of
Ireland is irreversible, but we do need cooperation from all parties.
I would also like to conclude by adding an article that was in
today's Washington Post by a Mary McGrory who had an article called the
Art of Understanding, and it talked about a dinner that was held Sunday
evening at the Irish Embassy, but it was a little bit different. She
said the number of blacks and whites were equally divided, and the new
mayor of the city was there, and the chairman of the Republican
National Committee was also there. They talked about issues of
commonality, and the thing that was interesting about this is that the
Anacostia area of Washington is an area where Frederick Douglas lived.
{time} 1745
He moved into the area, although blacks were restricted, and he even
had an integrated marriage. He moved there, anyway.
But there was an Irish patriarch named Daniel O'Connell who Frederick
Douglass admired. Frederick Douglass heard him speak in 1845, when
Frederick Douglass went to Dublin. The two men often spoke in public.
Douglass and O'Connell often complimented each other. This article is
extremely interesting.
Please allow me to include in the Record this article from today's
Washington Post, which talked about two great fighters for freedom in
the 1800's, Frederick Douglass, the great African American spokesperson
of the time, and Daniel O'Connell, an Irish patriot.
The article referred to is as follows:
(From the Washington Post, Feb. 11, 1999)
The Art of Understanding
(By Mary McGrory)
It wasn't your usual diplomatic do last Sunday night at the
Irish Embassy. The guests, for one thing, were about equally
divided between blacks and whites, which doesn't happen much
unless African dignitaries are visiting. For another, the
city's new mayor, Tony Williams, was there, and so was the
chairman of the Republican National Committee, Jim Nicholson.
The company had been invited by the Irish ambassador, Sean
O'Huiginn, and his artist wife, Bernadette, to stop by for
supper on their way to Union Station, where an exhibit of art
in Anacostia, the capital's stepchild ward, was opening. The
mayor was there to encourage the ``Hope in Our City''
initiative as just the kind of rational enterprise he hopes
will occur in his administration. And Nicholson was on hand
as ``spouse of'' his artist wife, Suzanne. Her warm,
evocative painting of three abandoned buildings on Martin
Luther King Avenue so charmed the mayor that he put it on his
Christmas card.
Suzanne Nicholson's husband's party may have trouble with
African American voters, but she is a heroine in Anacostia.
Although it is most known for its high unemployment and low
rate of trash collection, she finds it a place of beauty and
inspiration. She visits often, and patronizes the Imani Cafe,
across the street from the scene of her painting.
The Irish ambassador told the gathering about an old tie
between Anacostia's most famous inhabitant Frederick Douglass
and the great Irish patriot, Daniel O'Connell. The two mighty
champions of the oppressed were friends.
Douglass admired O'Connell's fiery speeches on liberty. He
realized his dream of a meeting in 1845, when he went to
Dublin. The two spoke often in public, Douglass of a race in
chains, O'Connell about a nation deprived of all rights and
liberties.
Bernadette O'Huiginn created a sculpture to commemorate the
tie between green and black. She found a Celtic cross in the
gift shop of the National Cathedral, chains to drape over it
at Hechinger's; hunted down a slave's iron collar and bought
a shotput ball that she ``aged'' for the exhibit.
At one side of the drawing room, which throbbed with the
good cheer of people of the same town in search of the same
thing, Chairman Nicholson talked more about politics than the
arts. Guests sought his views on censure--he's against--and
the luck of Clinton. ``Can you believe,'' he asked with hands
spread wide, ``that the pope would come and the king would
die all in the month he needed them the most?'' He meant, of
course, that the pope's visit to St. Louis gave him a chance
to place a filial hand under the pope's elbow and King
Hussein's death gave him a chance to comfort a queen and be
pictured with three ex-presidents.
Impeachment has only widened the gulf between Republicans
and African Americans, who see Clinton as a fellow victim of
persecution by the authorities.
Across the room, guests crowded around the mayor to wish
him well or to give him advice. Williams has just weathered
his first big flap--brought on by a career umbrage-taker in
the city's employ who does not know the meaning of the word
``niggardly.''
After they had supped on curried lamb and Irish potatoes,
the guests went to their cars and headed for Union Station to
see a high display of photographs and paintings that were all
by or about the people of Anacostia. They were pictured as
prophets and angels or just infinitely appealing human
beings. It is a vivid, intimate view of a neighborhood that
never had much going for it, but that now has the attention
of its fellow citizens. The Washington Arts Group, which
arranged the show, says it seeks ``reconciliation through
art.'' It seemed quite a plausible goal Sunday night.
[[Page H637]]
Once again, I would just like to commend the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh),
and all those involved in wishing the peace process in Northern Ireland
to continue. We need to keep the pressure on. It always gets tough when
we are right near the end, but the end of the tunnel is in sight. We
hope that the politics does not destroy this, whether it is in England,
whether it is in Ireland, whether it is in the north of Ireland.
Mr. NEAL. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Newark, New Jersey
(Mr. Payne).
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Baltimore (Mr. Ben
Cardin), a good friend to the Irish peace process, as well.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) for yielding to me. I thank him for his
leadership on this issue, and thank the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Walsh) for his leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honor of representing the Third Congressional
District of Maryland. It is known as the ethnic district. We have many
ethnic communities that are located in my congressional district. We
have a proud Irish tradition in Baltimore and in Maryland.
The people of my district strongly support the peace process in
Northern Ireland. I take this time to emphasize the importance of us
staying the course for peace. I also wish to pay tribute to a young
Belfast man named Terry Enright, who was slain a little over a year ago
in front of a nightclub where he worked by those who would have hoped
his murder would rekindle the smouldering ashes of sectarian strife and
the mindless killings in Northern Ireland.
One year later, though talks on the implementation of the historic
peace agreements have stalled, the streets of Belfast, Antrim, and
Omaugh and all of Northern Ireland are relatively calm and quiet. Terry
Enright's murder could not eclipse his life and its message.
You see, Terry was a young youth counselor, a lover of the outdoors,
sports, and children, who realized that bringing these things together
was part of the solution to the troubles. Terry Enright worked with
children from all walks of life, Protestants, Catholics, Unionists,
Loyalists alike.
I mention this, Mr. Speaker, because his murder did not prompt the
resurgence of violence that his killers had hoped. Rather, it prompted
a collective recoiling in horror from people all over the island of
Ireland. Following a deep and profound sadness, there was a
recommitment from all sides to keep their eyes on the goal line. That
is what Terry would have coached.
Seamus Heaney, the Nobel Prize-winning poet from Northern Ireland,
tells the story of his aunt, who planted a chestnut in a jam jar the
year of his birth. When it began to sprout, she broke the jar and
planted it under a hedge in the front of his house. As the chestnut
sapling grew, Heaney came to identify his own life with that of the
chestnut tree.
Eventually the family moved away, and the new family that moved in
cut down the tree. Reflecting on that tree as an adult, Heaney began to
think of the space where it had been, or what would have been.
He writes, ``The new place was all idea, if you like; it was
generated out of my experience of the old place but it was not a
topographical location. It was, and remains, an imagined realm, even if
it can be located at an earthly spot, a placeless heaven rather than a
heavenly place.''
Mr. Speaker, let the words of Seamus Heaney and the life of Terry
Enright be a reminder to us all, especially Irish leaders, as they
steer through the particularly rough shoals of implementing the peace
talks. We ask that these men and women be remembered; that we
understand and reflect on their lives.
Terry's life has been reflected on by his parents and by his two sad
and mystified daughters, who hope all remember Terry in life, just as
Heaney remembered his chestnut tree in life. But let us hope that also
the imagined realm of peace and equality in Northern Ireland generates
``an earthly spot of placeless heaven'' for all those in Northern
Ireland.
Through the work of President Clinton, Senator George Mitchell, David
Trimble, John Hume, and the citizens of Northern Ireland, we can almost
glimpse it.
Though the negotiations in Stormont may be stalled, they should not
stall the momentum of hope. Let these leaders hear and speak the words
of present compromise instead of stumbling over the words of past
conceits. Terry's father reminds us it was a similar impasse in the
peace talks before the Good Friday agreement that created the political
vacuum in which his son was murdered.
Terry Enright's mother, Mary, when asked how she can cope with the
rage and frustration over her 28-year-old son's tragic killing,
explains: ``But if you drive a car looking through the rearview mirror,
you'll end up crashing.''
Mr. Speaker, the imagined realm of Heaney's fallen chestnut tree and
the reality of Terry Enright's work in life ought to direct these
leaders in this perilous moment of peace to look up and to look ahead.
I know I speak for all Members of this body in urging us to remember
the goal of peace in Northern Ireland. It is within our grasp. We must
stay the course. I urge us to continue to do so.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland
(Mr. Cardin) for calling attention to what happened on the night of
January 14, 1998, when Terry Enright, a 28-year-old nationalist, was
killed by the Loyalist volunteer forces outside of a Belfast pub. He
was the 3,233rd person killed in the 30 years of sectarian conflict in
the north of Ireland. His wife, Deidre, is a niece of Gerry Adams.
His funeral was the largest burial service since Bobby Sands in 1981,
attracting thousands of people from both the Nationalist and the
Unionist communities. They came in such numbers because Terry Enright
was a popular social worker and an athlete who worked with
disadvantaged youths. He was a role model to both Protestant and
Catholic youngsters who participated in his Outward Bound program and
admired his message of nonviolence.
Many people said they would remember the funeral, where two bright
rainbows appeared when the casket was brought to the church and when it
was eventually taken away to the cemetery. On the 1-year anniversary of
his death, let us remember the life and spirit of Terry Enright, and
let us pay tribute to a brave young man who rose above the conflict and
dreamed of an Ireland free of violence and sectarian hate.
This life highlights how difficult this task has been, but at the
same time, the acknowledgment demonstrates how far we have all come in
this process. We should note the work of not only the friends of
Ireland here in this Congress, with the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Walsh) and many others on the Ad Hoc Committee on Irish Issues, but
also the role that President Clinton, Prime Minister Blair, Mo Mowlam
and Bertie Ahern have played, as well as John Hume and Gerry Adams.
We should not be discouraged at this time. We can only hope and pray
that the best instincts of all the parties will prevail in the next few
weeks as we enter this critical phase once again of Irish history. We
hope and conclude in the near future that all the people on the island
of Ireland will live in an agreed-upon Ireland. I thank my friend, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Jim Walsh) for organizing this special
order.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record this article from the Online
Edition of the Irish News.
The article referred to is as follows:
(From Irish News: Online Edition, Feb. 11, 1999)
Squaring the Arms Circle
The future of Northern Ireland will be decided within
weeks. Next week the assembly will decide whether or not to
adopt proposals for a 10-member executive and cross-border
bodies.
In the next week or two the executive will be established
in shadow form, ready to accept powers back from Westminster.
The deadline for that is March 10--though Tony Blair and Mo
Mowlam have both said they are prepared to allow some
slippage.
Progress depends on reconciling David Trimble's refusal to
sit alongside Sinn Fein ministers in the absence of concrete
decommissioning with Sinn Fein's refusal to link membership
of the executive with the hand-over of arms.
Nobody knows how this particular circle will be squared.
One thing is certain, neither
[[Page H638]]
Mr. Trimble nor his Sinn Fein counterpart Gerry Adams seems
willing to give way first.
The most likely formula revolves around the status of
ministers.
It has been suggested that the appointment of ministers
with shadow powers would be a clear signal to republicans of
unionist bona fides. This in turn would give republicans
space for the beginning of actual decommissioning.
There may be an element of wishful thinking here. But it is
difficult to see any other solution which would give both
sides the space they need.
Mr. Trimble would be able to tell his electorate that
republicans would not bet a hand on the reins of power
without movement on weapons. Mr. Adams would be able to say
that Sinn Fein ministers had been appointed without
decommissioning being given in return.
Both men should take encouragement from the real desire for
movement within the community they serve.
That was well articulated yesterday by the G7 group which
represents business and the trades unions.
Their interests are at one with the interests of the entire
community. They know all too well that political stability
will bring enormous economic rewards.
Sir George Quigley put the issue succinctly when he said:
``For everybody to wait for somebody else to move before
moving themselves is a sure recipe for permanent immobility.
``Northern Ireland has no future of any quality except as a
stable, inclusive, fair, prosperous and outward-looking
society.''
That fact has not been lost on the prime minister.
Yesterday Downing Street let it be known that Tony Blair
intended to become ``much more fully engaged'' in the coming
weeks.
Mr. Blair has played a crucial role in moving the process
forward. He has done so because he has earned the respect of
both traditions.
He should know that the vast majority of people on this
island, as well as within Northern Ireland, will support
efforts to find a way around this problem which recognizes
the concerns of both sides and strives for an accommodation.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. As always, I am
inspired by the thoughts and words of my colleagues. Certainly nothing
stirs the blood of an American more than the issues of war and peace
and freedom and liberty versus subjugation of philosophy or religion or
free speech.
My colleagues who have spoken tonight not only have given their
thoughts and words to this, but their time. Many, many of them have
traveled back and forth over the Atlantic to lend whatever assistance
we can to this very critical process at a very critical time. I am
inspired by their actions, and I am comforted by their actions, and I
am comforted by the leadership that both parties have provided, that
our president has provided. Progress would not have been made without
that effort.
I would also like to thank our dedicated staffs who have put so much
time, of their time and energy into this, providing us with a the
background, making the phone calls, staying on top of the issue. It is
not just out of the fear that they will not have their job, they are
doing it because they believe in it. Their effort is appreciated.
I would also again like to thank my colleagues. There were many who
had planned to attend this evening's special order, but with the change
in schedule they headed home, people like the gentlemen from New York,
Mr. Peter King, Mr. Vito Fossella, and Mr. Jack Quinn.
For the good of the order, I would like to make my colleagues aware,
and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) knows that, that the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the new Speaker of the House,
accompanied President Clinton on his first visit to Ireland back in
1995 at the historic beginning of the American role in this peace
process under President Clinton's leadership.
This is a critical time. As has been mentioned, there are several
critical dates coming up. We will be watching. The price of failure is
great. The judgment of history if we fail will be cruel and harsh.
With the receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Trimble, along with
Mr. Hume, was recognized. Their efforts were recognized, but the stakes
were raised. Surely with the receipt of this prize comes a tremendous
responsibility to fulfill the obligation of truly creating peace.
If Mr. Trimble is to be a leader of all of the people of the north of
Ireland, certainly he must address the hopes of the vast majority of
those people who voted for the agreement, not his interpretation of the
agreement.
We have worked together well, Republicans and Democrats, House and
Senate, President and Congress. We cannot stop now, we are so close to
the end. I am reminded, after we had spent a good 5 or 6 days in
Northern Ireland this summer with Speaker Gingrich, full of hope, we
returned to the United States, only to be advised on landing that a
bomb had exploded in Omaugh, killing little kids and pregnant women and
old folks and people with hope and promise and belief that peace is at
hand.
Let us not let those lives go for naught. Let us continue this
effort. Let us close the deal. Let us bring peace and justice to all of
Northern Ireland.
Mr. COYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to urge the participants
in the Northern Ireland peace process to continue carrying out the
agreement that was reached and ratified last year. I also want to thank
my esteemed colleague and good friend, Richard Neal, for organizing
this evening's special order.
Mr. Speaker, many of the Members of Congress who, like myself, have
been actively involved in Irish affairs were greatly pleased when
negotiations last year were successful in producing the Good Friday
agreement on the future of Northern Ireland, and when the people of
Ireland subsequently voted to approve the agreement. This was a major
step in resolving this unfortunate, bloody stalemate. I was honored to
have been asked to be part of the official U.S. delegation visit to
Ireland and Northern Ireland last September.
No one anticipated that there would not be further setbacks and
obstacles to peace as the process agreed to last year was implemented.
The Omagh bombing in Northern Ireland, the conflicts during last
summer's ``marching season,'' and the debate over the scheduled release
of IRA prisoners, all threatened last year to derail the peace process
that was set in place by the Good Friday peace pact. Now, the peace
process has become stalled over disagreement over Sinn Fein's
participation in the new executive assembly.
I want to urge the signatories to the Belfast Agreement to abide by
the clear terms of the agreement they signed. All of the signatories
agreed that the terms that they agreed to were fair to all involved.
Moreover, the voters overwhelmingly approved this process. Now is not
the time for anyone to back out of their commitments or to renegotiate
the parts they don't like. No, Mr. Speaker, the peace process has been
clearly laid out and agreed to. The alternative is more violence and
terror and stalemate. The people of Northern Ireland deserve peace.
Enough blood has been shed. I urge the parties to the Belfast Agreement
to carry out their obligations under that document and take the brave
steps necessary to achieve a lasting peace in Northern Ireland.
____________________