Good Friday Agreement Articles

6.C is why, in the spirit of concord, we strongly recommend that the people of the North and the South approve this agreement. (ii) To make the most appropriate efforts to reach agreement on the adoption of common policies in areas where there are reciprocal cross-border and intersessive benefits and which fall within the jurisdiction of the two administrations, the North and the South, to work resolutely to overcome any differences of opinion; There were many books and articles written by participants, journalists and academics who tried to describe the process that led to the agreement, and explain why it happened.4 Peace, like victory, has a thousand fathers, and studies of the peace process have identified a wide range of factors that probably contributed to the outcome. So why another article about it? My intervention aims to « bridge » the gap between two complementary perspectives: the point of view of a diplomat, 5 My objective is twofold: to help practitioners to think about how to orchestrate the various instruments of diplomacy to support current and future peace efforts6 and to contribute to the long-standing academic debate among historians and political scientists on statements of cause and effect in international relations. In particular, I would like to study the interaction between structural factors (such as demographics, the economy and the end of the Cold War), the peace process and the efforts of the main actors involved in the process. 1. The two governments will sign as soon as possible a new Anglo-Irish agreement, which will replace the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, include an understanding of constitutional affairs and reaffirm their solemn commitment to support and, if necessary, implement the agreement reached by the negotiators and annexed to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The agreement was reached between the British and Irish governments as well as eight northern Ireland political parties or groups. Three were representative of unionism: the Ulster Unionist Party, which had led unionism in Ulster since the early 20th century, and two small parties linked to loyalist paramilitaries, the Progressive Unionist Party (linked to the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) and the Ulster Democratic Party (the political wing of the Ulster Defence Association (UDA). Two of them have been widely described as nationalists: the Social Democratic and Labour Party and Sinn Féin, the Republican party affiliated with the Provisional Republican Army. [4] [5] Apart from these rival traditions, there were two other assemblies, the Inter-Community Alliance Party and the Northern Ireland Women`s Coalition. There was also the Labour coalition. U.S. Senator George J.

Mitchell was sent by U.S. President Bill Clinton to chair the talks between parties and groups. [6] Many viewed the process that led to the 1998 agreement as a model for successful conflict resolution. Whether the process contributed to success, of course, depends on the definition of success. There is little doubt that the agreement has led to a decrease in inter-communal violence. Including the paramilitaries, they were less likely to attack the process or agreement that the process engendered. It was equally important that they take an interest in the management of dissidents who wanted to challenge the agreement. Although dissident groups persist on the Republican side and on the loyal side, their effects have been marginal.