The United States Institute of Peace sponsored this public event to discuss the ongoing multiparty negotiations in Northern Ireland.

The speakers explained how recent sectarian violence affects the multiparty negotiations and the possible outcomes of the current negotiations. The speakers will assess U.S. policy options for supporting the negotiations and discuss other nongovernmental efforts to settle the conflict.

Highlights

• Paul Arthur:

  "People have this idea that basically what this conflict is about is procrastination. That you never arrive at a time where you have to think about solutions. That is where we are at the moment."

  "I believe from conversations I have had with most of the actors over the past weeks that we're going to get to some agreement inside the next month and then we'll get down to the serious business [of implementing and refining an agreement] which is going to take a few years."

  "The major issues to deal with will be the three P's, parades, policing, and prisoners, demilitarization, and the composition and powers of the proposed assembly."

• John Darby:

  "There is no coincidence that these events [peace processes throughout the world] took place at the same time."

  "New techniques have evolved and there are growing signs of the various ongoing peace processes borrowing from each other. The most clear example of this is the concept of sufficient consensus in South Africa. This is the view that you can not possibly reach an agreement with all of the parties involved, but you can continue the process with a sufficient consensus of those involved."

  "What may turn out to be the process in Northern Ireland that will have the most significance for some of the other processes are the Mitchell Principles. The idea of having a set of principles which people must sign before they enter the negotiations, principles having to do with handling the question and threat of violence resuming, is being considered by the Basques."

• Some key points on peace processes:

  "The inexperience of negotiators at negotiation - not only the representatives of the paramilitaries, but also the governments—stands out. Generally, these negotiators came to power because of their skill at handling security issues and not their skill at compromise.

  "Violence remains a serious obstacle to peace processes. Ceasefires don't end violence. Typically, violence continues for two reasons. Spoiler violence by those who oppose settlement increase when compromise is in the air. Violence over a long period of time becomes a part of the culture.

  "My money is on an agreement within the next month or two.

Speakers

• Professor Paul Arthur
  Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace
• Professor John Darby
  Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace

Media Inquiries

Please contact Ian Larsen (+1.202.429.3870) or Lauren Sucher (+1.202.429.3822) in the Office of Public Affairs and Communications.