The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“PEACE IN NORTHERN IRELAND” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the Senate section on pages S4743-S4746 on March 28, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
PEACE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I recently returned from a short visit to Ireland, Northern Ireland, and London, England, where I met with government officials and representatives of the political parties in Northern Ireland, on developments in the peace process there. This is an exciting time in Northern Ireland, where a ceasefire is holding for the first time in a quarter century. I ask that the report of my trip be printed in the Record.
The report follows:
Codel Leahy--Trip Report, Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland,
England, February 17-21
From February 17-21, I traveled to the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, and London, England, to meet with leaders of Irish and British Governments and representatives of the political parties in Northern Ireland, and to observe the use of funds administered by the International Fund for Ireland
(IFI). In London, in addition to meeting with British and American officials on developments in Northern Ireland, I also discussed efforts to limit the proliferation and use of antipersonnel landmines. I was accompanied by Tim Rieser and Kevin McDonald of my personal staff. Travel was by commercial air and rental car.
introduction
I have closely followed the situation in Northern Ireland for many years. I was among those who last year urged President Clinton to grant Gerry Adams, leader of Sinn Fein, the political arm of the Irish Republican Army (IRA), a visa to travel to the US. That decision is widely credited with having led to the IRA ceasefire and the peace process that is now unfolding.
The timing of this trip was important because of developments in Northern Ireland since the December 1993 Joint Declaration between former Irish Prime Minister Reynolds and British Prime Minister Majors. That Declaration initiated the latest attempt to resolve the Northern Ireland conflict which has claimed over 3,200 lives in the past 25 years. Most importantly, the two leaders agreed that any change in the status of the North could only occur with the consent of a majority of the people there.
In August 1994, shortly after Gerry Adams received a visa to visit the US, the IRA announced a unilateral cease-fire which led to October cease-fires by Protestant paramilitary groups. Since then, informal talks have been conducted between the Irish Government and Sinn Fein. I arrived in the Republic just six days before the publication of a controversial ``Framework Document,'' which contains proposals put forth jointly by Irish and British Governments aimed at bringing about a permanent settlement of the conflict.
dublin
Meeting with Tainiste Dick Spring: I arrived in Dublin on February 17. Senator George Mitchell, who last December was appointed the President's Special Advisor on Economic Initiatives in Ireland, was also in Dublin that day accompanied by a delegation of officials from the White House and Commerce Department, and our two delegations met over lunch with Tainiste Dick Spring. Our discussions focused on the Framework Document, which Tainiste Spring has had a central role in negotiating, and plans for the May 1995 Trade and Investment Conference.
Representatives of the Irish and American business communities, and the political parties, will meet in Washington over a three day period to discuss potential American-Irish joint ventures and other investment opportunities in the Republic and Northern Ireland.
There is universal agreement among all factions that economic development, especially in areas of high unemployment in the North, is key to any lasting peace since there is a direct correlation between high levels of unemployment and violence. There is also widespread recognition of the crucial role that the United States can play in promoting economic investment. Four areas with high potential have already been identified: tourism, food processing; pharmaceuticals; and telecommunications.
Senator Mitchell, after quoting President Franklin Roosevelt that ``the best social program is a job,'' stressed that this is to be an economic conference, not a political conference, although it is inevitable that politics will play a part. Ireland has much to recommend it, including its highly trained, English-speaking workforce and location at the gateway to 350 million European consumers. Setting up follow-up mechanisms to assist potential investors will be particularly important. Senator Mitchell and I stressed that while the U.S. can help facilitate investment in Northern Ireland, this is a long-term endeavor which depends on the sustained efforts of all the people on the island.
There was also a general discussion about the important role the International Fund for Ireland has played in bringing economic development to disadvantaged areas during a period when the Northern Ireland violence caused many potential investors to go elsewhere.
Address to peace and Reconciliation Forum: Shortly after the IRA cease-fire, the Irish Government initiated a ``Peace and Reconciliation Forum'' as a way to quickly bring Sinn Fein into informal discussions with the government and other political parties. Although the Unionist parties complained that the Forum was an Irish Government affair and declined to participate, the Forum has provided a bridge between the cease-fire and formal all-party talks which are anticipated in the future.
Senator Mitchell and I were each invited to address the Forum, which is held each Friday at Dublin Castle. Among the audience of approximately two hundred were Tainiste Spring of the Irish Government, Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein, and John Alderdice of the Alliance Party. After introductions by Forum Chair Judge Catherine McGinness and Ambassador Jean Kennedy Smith, I explained that I had come at this pivotal time to give encouragement to all the parties involved in the peace process, and to emphasize that the United States would fully support their efforts in an even-handed way. I stressed that the Framework Document, portions of which had been leaked to the press and were already the focus of much debate and intense criticism from Unionists, should be treated as a discussion document rather than a final blueprint. I said that as long as it was based on the principle of consent, it should threaten no one.
Senator Mitchell, who was in the final day of his visit, described the strong desire he had sensed among the people for a better life and the importance of moving quickly to attract economic investment. He noted that the majority of the 44 million Irish immigrants in the U.S. are non-Catholics, and that economic hardship in Northern Ireland is felt by both Catholics and Protestants. He mentioned several items that will be on the May conference agenda, including: establishment of U.S.-owned plants; support for community banking; tax free regimes for U.S. investors; duty free status for Irish imports; addressing the problem of under-represented
[[Page S4744]] communities in the workforce; the problem of dual currencies in North an South; and the MacBride principles.
Our speeches were followed by a general discussion among the participants, which included several appreciative comments about the important role of the United States in moving the peace process forward.
Meeting with Taoiseach John Bruton: Although there was some initial speculation in the press that Taoiseach Bruton might not be as seized with the peace process as his predecessor, he has won praise for keeping the process moving steadily forward. Senator Mitchell and I met privately with the Taoiseach for approximately 45 minutes. We discussed the Framework Document and events leading up to it, and how he thought it would be received. We also emphasized President Clinton's strong, personal interest in the peace process and the importance of pressing ahead despite Unionist threats to boycott the talks.
Dinner hosted by Ambassador Smith: A dinner hosted by the Ambassador included Judge Catherine McGinness, Senator Maurice Manning, Reverend Roy Magee, and Dr. Martin Mansergh, all of whom have had a role in the peace process. I discussed the British Government's demand that the IRA decommission some of its weapons before Sinn Fein is rewarded with a seat at the negotiating table. The general view was that Prime Minister Major has backed away from this position somewhat, recognizing that the IRA is unlikely to respond favorably at this point and that it would be a mistake to link further progress in the peace talks to this single issue. The point was made that turning over weapons by one side has never happened in Irish history, and that the aim should be to keep the dialogue moving forward. The issue of disarmament by all parties will be dealt with in the process of the talks.
(Since my return, Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams, in response to President Clinton's decision to permit him to raise
funds in the United States, agreed to discuss the issue of disarmament with the British Government at the ministerial level. Although the President's decision was criticized by British officials, I am hopeful that it will lead to further progress towards peace which would be to everyone's advantage.)
The Northern Ireland conflict has been winding down since about 1989. The IRA concluded that violence was accomplishing very little, and that the political process might offer more. On the other hand, the Unionists, lacking imaginative and dynamic leadership, have lost touch with the people, who desperately want peace. But while the war is over, the guns are not going to be relinquished immediately. As the British move their troops out, the IRA and Protestant paramilitary groups will surrender their weapons incrementally as further progress is made towards a final peace agreement. It was also suggested that the British Government exaggerated the amount of weapons possessed by the IRA to suit their own ends, and it also coincidently benefitted the IRA. Now it is a problem for both, and there is no way to prove how many weapons they have. Giving up a small amount of semtex to a third party such as the United Nations or the United States, as I and others have suggested, would be a positive gesture that could help build confidence.
Meeting with former Taoiseach Albert Reynolds: Without the forceful leadership of former Taoiseach Reynolds it is doubtful that there would be a cease-fire or peace process today. Reynolds told me that the Unionists, who claim they were not consulted on the text of the Framework Document, had significant input into the 1993 Joint Declaration. Reynolds said it was his idea to replace Article 3 of the Irish Constitution, which contains Britain's claim of sovereignty over Northern Ireland, with the principle of consent. The aim was to shift responsibility for the status of the North to a majority of the people there. This was a crucial initiative that has become the cornerstone of the Framework Document.
Reynolds described the future as unpredictable. The demographics of the North are changing. Today, 57 percent are Protestant, down from 63 percent a decade ago. In another generation the majority may be Catholic. But not all Catholics want to be part of the Republic.
Reynolds said that both sides accept the reality that the weapons will have to be surrendered, but it will take time. As the process develops it will become less of an issue. He said the IRA will never turn over their weapons to the British, since it would imply surrender. It will have to be to a third party. Reynolds said United States support for the peace process has been critical. He said the decision to grant Adams a visa was what led to the cease-fire, but that there was no way Adams would or could renounce terrorism at that time and that anyone who thought so was naive. He agreed with the view that the Unionist leadership is out of touch. They never thought a cease-fire would happen, and in the unlikely event that it did they assumed it would be short-lived. They have not thought about what they would do in the absence of violence, and were unprepared for the situation they now find themselves in.
belfast
The trip from Dublin to Belfast was notable for the dramatic change that has occurred at the border, where just six months ago a British military checkpoint slowed traffic to a crawl and subjected travelers to close scrutiny by armed soldiers and searches of any suspicious vehicles. Today, the checkpoint is unmanned and vehicles pass through without delay. Although British military observation posts still protrude from the tops of hills, the military presence generally is far from what it was. In Belfast, where armored troop carriers and helmeted troops regularly patrolled the streets in large numbers, daytime patrols there have ended. British troops now wear berets instead of helmets.
The reduced British military presence in Northern Ireland has won wide acclaim from Catholics. However, the day before I arrived in Northern Ireland heavily armed British troops conducted a raid in the IRA-stronghold are of Crossmaglen near the border, which drew strong criticism from Sinn Fein as well as Irish Government officials, who felt that the eve of publication of the Framework Document was a time for both sides to show restraint.
Dairy Farm IFI Project: Shortly after arriving in Belfast I toured the `Dairy Farm'' shopping center with International Fund for Ireland Chairman Willie McCarter, and IFI Joint Directors General Chris Todd and Brendan Scannell. The center, located in a Catholic area of West Belfast, is a community-owned project developed with $3.8 million from the IFI. It includes a retail complex with a large supermarket, multi-purpose civic center, library, retail units, and service businesses that have brought life to a depressed community that lacked any of these facilities.
In later meetings with IFI officials, I discussed past management problems with the Fund and reports that the House and Senate Budget Committees have proposed to eliminate United States funding for the IFI in FY 1996. They assured me that the IFI is no longer financing golf courses and other kinds of projects that drew past criticism, including from myself. It targets disadvantaged communities, Catholic and Protestant, in the North and in border counties in the Republic. Since its inception a decade ago, the IFI, with total contributions of about $400 million from the US and the European Community, has leveraged twice that amount in private sector investment. These funds have
been used to support economic regeneration projects in some 300 communities.
I pointed out that whether or not there is an earmark for the IFI in the foreign aid appropriation, the President has said he will provide a $30 million contribution to it in each of FY 1996 and FY 1997, a $10 million increase from FY 1995. IFI officials, and indeed everyone I spoke to in Dublin, Belfast and London concerned with the situation in Northern Ireland, argued persuasively that continued United States funding is an important measure of its support for the peace process.
Comber Orange Lodge: In preparation for my visit to Northern Ireland, I requested the opportunity to speak to a Unionist audience. Arrangements were made for me to address the Orange Order in Comber, a middle-class community near Belfast. The Orange Order is the oldest and largest Protestant organization in Northern Ireland, with over 80,000 active members, and some 4,000 members in the Republic. They regard themselves as British subjects and are intensely pro-Unionist.
My purpose in addressing the Orange Order was, as an Irish American Catholic, to attempt to counter the impression that the United States Government, and especially Irish American Catholics like myself, seek a particular outcome in the North. I stressed that the United States has one goal only, peace, and that it will support the peace process even-handedly. I expressed support for the principle that the status of the North should not change without the consent of a majority of its people. I also stressed the importance of protecting the civil rights of all people, majority and minority.
Several people in the audience vigorously criticized the Framework Document. I responded that rather than reject a document that has not yet been published, they should look towards bringing their ideas and concerns to the negotiating table and to treat the Framework for what it is, a discussion paper rather than a final settlement.
Unionists fear that the British Government's real purpose in seeking a resolution to the Northern Ireland conflict is to abandon them, and they see the United States as part of a pro-Nationalist plot. They fear being isolated--foresaken by Britain and unwilling to become Irish. Lacking dynamic and imaginative leadership, they are at risk of history passing them by. Many long for a past that never was, dream of a future that never would be, and they fear a present they do not understand.
Members of the Comber Orange Lodge were impassioned, but respectful. They claimed to support tolerance and jobs for all people, and pointed out that many Protestants are as bad off as Catholics. Several complained about not being able to interest the US media in their cause, although they refuse the press access to their own meetings.
Meeting with Gerry Adams: I spent about an hour with Gerry Adams. I commended the efforts he, John Hume and Albert Reynolds have made to seize this opportunity for peace. We discussed Adams' request to raise funds in the United States, which at the time was under consideration by the Clinton Administration. He felt that British opposition to it was nothing more than an effort to control the peace talks, since it is even inconsistent with their own policy of letting him raise funds there. He added that Sinn
[[Page S4745]] Fein can already raise funds in the United States, only he and certain other leaders are banned from doing so. I told him that the fundraising issue is an issue primarily because the British have made it one.
Adams said the United States contribution to the IFI enables the Administration and the Congress to speak with credibility on the peace process. He added that the Catholics were organized and ready to make proposals to the Fund, unlike the Protestants, but that Protestant leaders have since been impressed by the Fund's accomplishments.
Adams raised the case of an IRA prisoner in Tucson, Arizona, who is charged with buying explosive detonators. He expressed concern about the conditions of his imprisonment.
Meeting with West Belfast Catholics: On Sunday morning, after meeting with Sister Mary Turley and Father Myles Kavanaugh of the Flax Trust, which like the IFI funds projects in disadvantaged neighborhoods in Belfast, I met with a group of Catholic community workers in West Belfast. Geraldine McAteer, the spokesperson for the group, explained that they work in both Catholic and Protestant neighborhoods. She said there was a great desire for peace, and that with the ceasefire they were finally able to stop living in fear of seeing their children beaten or killed. She said people of both traditions want equal social and cultural rights. She emphasized the importance of equal self-esteem. She said Unionists should be able to act British if they choose, and Nationalists should be able to act and feel Irish. She said there is room on the island for both, and that both have much in common.
We talked about why there was a sense that this time the conflict might really be over. They said that working class Protestants have come to recognize that although they always thought being tied to Britain would make them better off, it has not turned out that way. Their kids are doing worse in school than Catholics. They said the Unionists need to learn to fend for themselves, because the government is not going to do it for them. Catholics realized that a long time ago.
They said the Unionists fear that a united Irish Catholic majority would mistreat them as they have mistreated the Catholic minority in the North. At the same time, when they as Catholics imagine a united Ireland, they become concerned about being part of a religious state. They favor separation between church and state, and the right of all to worship as they please.
Ms. McAteer mentioned the planned construction of a public university on land within their community, funded in part with K5 million from the IFI. She expressed support for the project because of the economic benefits it will bring, but concern that too little has been done to involve community members in the planning of the project. She fears that many of the high paying jobs will go to outsiders, and local people will be left only the menial jobs. I later conveyed her concern to IFI Chairman Willie McCarter.
london
Meeting with Ambassador William Crowe and Under Secretary Peter Tarnoff: At an evening meeting with Ambassador Crowe and Under Secretary Tarnoff, we discussed a wide range of issues including Northern Ireland and the problem of the proliferation of antipersonnel landmines. The issue of Gerry Adams' request to raise funds in the United States came up, and the Ambassador expressed concern that the IRA has done nothing since the cease-fire to enhance confidence in its commitment to peace. Ambassador Crowe also expressed concern about the landmine problem and described some of his own experiences with landmines in combat.
Meeting with Under Secretary Sir Timothy Daunt: I met for approximately 90 minutes with Under Secretary Daunt and three members of his staff on funding for UN peacekeeping operations, international efforts to stop the proliferation and use of antipersonnel landmines, and developments in Northern Ireland.
Sir Timothy and his staff expressed alarm at proposals under consideration in Congress which would have the effect of drastically reducing United States funding for UN peacekeeping operations. They specifically mentioned legislation that would apply the cost of in-kind contributions, such as transport costs and materiel, towards UN assessments. They said the effect of this, if applied to Britain, would be that the UN would owe Britain hundreds of millions of dollars it does not have and UN peacekeeping would quickly end. The logical results would be greater direct United States military involvement in regional peacekeeping activities. I told them that I agreed that these proposals are misguided, and that what is needed is a permanent UN logistical force that can respond to humanitarian crises without unnecessary delay.
On the subject of landmines, Sir Timothy said that Britain and the US are near agreement on a comprehensive agreement
(``control regime'') on the production, use and transfer of antipersonnel landmines. He said Britain accepts elimination of antipersonnel landmines as the final goal. They favor restructuring landmine stockpiles in favor of mines that self-destruct or deactivate within 48-72 hours, if they are not in marked and guarded minefields.
I explained the problems posed by such an approach, namely, that they do not always self-destruct and that it assures the continued use of non-self-destruct mines by countries that cannot afford the more expensive alternative. Sir Timothy said that while Britain recognizes these arguments, which are also put forward by certain Members of Parliament and nongovernmental organizations, the government continues to regard landmines as a legitimate and necessary weapon. He said that in the future there may be alternatives and changes in military strategy, but that elimination of these weapons is not feasible in the short or medium term. He added that the British military believes they can assure a failure rate of self-destruct mines of not more than 1/1000. I said that while the United States and British Governments can say they will use only self-destruct mines, Third World governments will be unmoved. They are not going to declare war against either of our countries, but they are going to keep using them against their own people and their neighbors.
The British officials expressed concern that insurgent groups would not comply with a complete ban on antipersonnel mines. I said that while there will always be some who ignore a ban, if the use of landmines is treated as a war crime they will be rarely used. This is what we have seen with chemical weapons. Sir Timothy said they are afraid to take an ``all or nothing approach'' that could jeopardize support in the Third World for less drastic measures. I pointed out that the approach being advanced involves an elaborate, largely unenforceable scheme that will not solve the problem.
The subject of demining was discussed. I was told that Britain has contributed K7 million towards this effort, and that 67 British troops are involved in training deminers in Cambodia. While this is important, all agreed it was a far cry from what is needed.
Finally, we discussed the Northern Ireland situation. Sir Timothy spoke of the strong sense of alienation felt by Unionists in the North. He said the overwhelming majority of people in Britain want to get out, but they also have a sense of responsibility that is reflected in the K4.5 billion in aid Britain sends to Northern Ireland annually.
Meeting with Member of Parliament Paul Murphy: Paul Murphy is
the Labour Party's chief spokesman on Northern Ireland. He began the meeting by describing his contacts with leaders of Sinn Fein, who he said are skillful and well-informed, if somewhat unsure of how to proceed. They clearly want to get back into the political process, and are anxious to be treated as politicians although they control only 8-12 percent of the vote. He said Sinn Fein is a growing political threat to John Hume's Social Democratic and Labour Party. He said he is encouraged that Protestant gunmen have also spoken about the need to solve social problems. The armed groups have become used to peace, to being able to walk around without fear. He believes that anyone who threatens that will be harshly criticized.
I told Murphy that I was very impressed with Prime Minister Major's leadership on the Northern Ireland issue, and Murphy confirmed that the British Labour Party fully supports the British government's policy. He said both have strong Unionists in their ranks, but agree on the principles in the Framework Document. He added that there may be some disagreement over the pace of moving ahead. He said the Ulster Unionist Party is facing a successionist vote, and that it's current head, James Molyneaux, may resign in favor of David Trimble who has been a vocal opponent of the Framework. He said no Unionist can embrace any kind of ``all Ireland'' structures, although the obvious and intelligent solution is to have one approach in such areas as energy, tourism, trade, and agriculture. He said he understands the Unionists' fear of being absorbed into a theocracy, but questioned why they are so upset when they know the Framework enshrines the principle of consent and they constitute a majority. He said the Unionists will complain about the Framework but they will be under considerable pressure from their constituents, who want peace, to join the process.
We discussed the issue of Gerry Adams' request to raise funds in the United States. Murphy said he has no objection to this as long as the proceeds are not used to buy weapons. We also discussed the need for reform of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the Protestant police force in Belfast which is hated and feared by Catholics. Murphy said that any Catholic who joined the RUC would be killed. Sinn Fein favors disbanding the RUC and creating a new, united police force for the whole island.
Meeting with Minister of State Tony Baldry: Minister Baldry's portfolio includes North America, foreign assistance, and international counternarcotics programs. We discussed recent changes in the Congress, and the need for more interaction between legislators from our two countries. We also discussed Northern Ireland, and the use of the British Virgin Islands as a transhipment point by narcotics traffickers.
conclusions
The single most compelling message I heard from the people of the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland was that they are done with violence, and that anyone who returns to violence would be condemned by a majority of people of both traditions. I could feel an intense desire on the island to find a way for both Catholics and Protestants to coexist. However, I also sensed that some Unionists, who have willingly seen themselves as British subjects their whole lives, are so
[[Page S4746]] fearful that their way of life is coming to an end that they could ignite renewed violence if they are not reassured otherwise.
Despite this danger, I was very impressed with the momentum the peace process has gained. The visionary leadership of John Hume coupled with the courageous decision of British Prime Minister Major, former Irish Prime Minister Reynolds, and Prime Minister Bruton, to seize this opportunity, have constructed a process that I am optimistic will lead to lasting peace.
The much-anticipated Framework Document was published the day after I arrived back in Washington, where it was very well received. Since then, President Clinton has agreed to permit Gerry Adams to raise funds in the United States, and Adams responded by declaring his readiness to discuss the decommissioning of arms with the British Government. The British Government reciprocated by withdrawing 400 of its troops from Northern Ireland. Ministerial level talks between Britain and Sinn Fein are expected soon. I believe this is crucial to reassuring Unionists that they will not be left defenseless to a renewed IRA threat.
The role of the United States in this effort cannot be overstated. After a somewhat inauspicious beginning, the International Fund for Ireland has served a vital role in creating jobs--29,000 at last count, and bringing hope to hundreds of the most depressed communities, both Catholic and Protestant, in Northern Ireland and the border countries of the Republic. The IFI is clearly a short-term solution. If peace takes hold, private investment should replace the IFI as the engine of economic development within two or three years. Until then, the IFI is an important symbol of U.S. support for the peace process and a tangible way to support that process during this fragile period.
In addition, President Clinton's willingness to take political risks that the Irish and British Governments were either unwilling or unable to take themselves, has made an enormous difference. My hope is that my reinforcing his message in Dublin, Belfast and London I was able to give some added impetus towards lasting peace in the land of my father's father.
____________________
