Ross/geograph.org.uk

On Nov. 30, 1995, President Bill Clinton became the first United States chief executive to visit Northern Ireland, touring the cities of Belfast and Derry to show support for the peace process.



The New York Times reported, “The president has been more deeply involved than any of his predecessors in the intractable problems of this island, an involvement that caused him to cast aside the fears of other presidents that a trip here might fray relations with the British.”

For decades, during a period known as the Troubles, Northern Ireland had been the scene of sectarian violence between the primarily Protestant unionists, who supported the continued union with Great Britain, and the primarily Roman Catholic nationalists, who wanted Northern Ireland to be united with the Republic of Ireland, which gained its independence from Britain in 1921. Nearly 3,400 civilians, paramilitaries and security forces had been killed from 1969 to 1994, when the nationalist Irish Republican Army and various unionist paramilitary groups agreed to a ceasefire.

President Clinton found that conditions in the country had improved. The Times described Belfast as having been “defaced until recently by miles of barbed wire and hundreds of concrete-filled barrels that formed an awful monument to sectarian savagery,” but now “British Army patrols have all but disappeared and the checkpoints that blocked roads leading from the airport and the Catholic south have been dismantled.”

Two and a half years after the president’s visit, leaders from Northern Ireland, Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland signed the Good Friday Agreement, which ended direct British rule and called for any change in Northern Ireland’s political status to be determined by a majority of the country’s citizens. In 2007, nationalist and unionist politicians reached a power-sharing agreement for the first time in five years . The Good Friday Agreement is considered the official end of the Troubles, though the actions of extremist paramilitary groups continue to bring sporadic violence.

Connect to Today:

In a 2010 Op-Ed piece that appeared in The Times, Ali Abunimah stated that the United States should apply lessons learned from the Northern Irish peace process to negotiations taking place in the Middle East. Specifically, he argued that Hamas, a political group that rules the Gaza Strip, must be allowed to take part in the peace negotiations, despite the United States, Israel and Europe regarding it as a terrorist organization. Mr. Abunimah compared the situation with Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Irish Republican Army being allowed to negotiate peace in Northern Ireland.

Mr. Abunimah also cited a letter by British and Irish negotiators. It argues: “Engaging Hamas does not amount to condoning terrorism or attacks on civilians. In fact, it is a precondition for security and for brokering a workable agreement.”

What do you think about negotiating with political groups like Hamas that many consider terrorist organizations? Is it necessary to include all sides in negotiations in order to achieve a lasting peace? Why or why not?

Learn more about what happened in history on Nov. 30»

Learn more about Historic Headlines and our collaboration with findingDulcinea »

Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this post left out the phrase “in five years,” and the corresponding link, from the sentence “In 2007, nationalist and unionist politicians reached a power-sharing agreement for the first time in five years .”