Failure Behind IRA Terrorism
The IRA was a Catholic leaning terrorist organization trying to effect change in a largely Protestant Democratic country. The vast majority of the people of Northern Ireland were Loyalists, who did not support the idea of an independent Irish state. The domestic violence and terrorist attempts of the IRA to achieve political change was ineffective, due to the country's lack of support and the governments ability to achieve political change peacefully.
In 1968, the IRA initiated the Civil War threatening to "unleash a new campaign of terror" on the death of one of their primary leaders (6). Following their leaders' death, the IRA enacted a series of bombings, shootings, and the torture loyalist civilians. The IRA quickly became an image of terrorism in Northern Ireland. The goal behind their terrorist attacks was the freedom of an independent republic. This dream of theirs was never realized, and the IRA was disbanded, due to disapproval from the Protestants, and government intervention. The domestic violence enacted by the IRA was met with opposition by the largely Protestant population of Northern Ireland. Instead of fighting against the government with their country's support, the IRA was fighting against their country's people. Due to Irelands dominant Protestant population, violent attacks to achieve political independence were largely opposed. Northern Irelands prime minister, Terence O'Neill, expresses the publics hatred of the violence in a speech given in response to the Civil War outbreak: "'We are all sick of marchers, and counter-marchers'" (8). Verbally attacking both Protestants and Catholics alike, O'Neill declared it imperative for Northern Ireland to find peace amid their diversity. Similarly, in Hans-Jörg Anders image: the wall with the painted WE WANT PEACE sign behind the boy (pictured), was made by protestors seeking an end to the terrorism of the Civil War. An agreement could not be reached between the two political parties, because the Republicans were convinced the way to achieve an independent state was through violence. Government intervention was deemed necessary, and the results agreed upon did not settle with Republican extremists. In 1998, the Good Friday agreement declared that Ireland would remain a part of British territory, with the privilege of staying a republic (9). Therefore, the violent attacks enforced by the IRA, proved pointless due to the failure of achieving an independent republican state. In general, domestic violence associated with terrorist attempts reap consequences straying from the desired goal of the attacks. In Northern Ireland, what started as a violent Civil War to achieve an independent state, ended in a peace treaty leaving Ireland under British territory (9). Violence, used as a weapon to achieve political independence, is not nearly as effective as non-violence. Non-violence, in itself promoted a powerful method of protest that proved successful in several independence movements. |
Why are non-violent protests more successful?
The reason non-violence is more successful is because of its appeal to the public. Non-violence is more forgiving on the people, while a violent movement can breed fatalities too great to come back from. Looking at India, during the Indian Independence Movement, Mahatma Gandhi was the leader of a non-violent movement that rocked the nations. Similarly, Gandhi rallied Indians to protest against an oppressive British government, who'd denied Indians their legal rights. In Northern Ireland, while the reason for protest was the same, the Civil War brought no support for the Catholics who were up against a large Protestant population. The overwhelming difference between India and the Irish Catholics fight for independence, were their methods, and levels of success. Gandhi gained the support of the people through a non-violent movement called satyagraha, a form of non-violent protesting which included all Indians who were searching for independence (10). In contrast, the Irish Republicans lacked support from the people, due to their violence and small numbers against a Protestant population. Furthermore, Gandhi was fighting for the people, while the Republicans were fighting against the Protestants and their political fallacies.
Ultimately, India gained independence from Britain, while Ireland remained part of the United Kingdom.
It can be said that a non-violent movement is one sided, and violence is inevitable in a civil war. However, the idea of non-violence drew masses of supporters to Gandhi's side, and performed a long lasting movement eventually seeing independence from Britain, in 1947 (9). Although India's independence was achieved violently near the end, the story of the country's non-violence movement drew international support from various countries, and served as a successful means of obtaining independence in other countries around the world.