Working with Hurt and Fear:Lessons from the

Northern Ireland Peace Process 1985-2007

Geoffrey CorryDialogue facilitator

GLENCREE CENTRE FOR PEACE

AND RECONCILIATION

1972 – The most bloody year of “The Troubles” - 470 lives

Bloody Sunday in Derry, 30th January Burning of British Chancellery in Dublin Bomb at Aldershot military barracks 22/2 Bomb at Abercorn restaurant, Belfast 4/3 Bomb at Donegall Street, Belfast 20/3 Bloody Friday, 26 bombs in Belfast 21 July Severe rioting on streets of Belfast, August

“You don’t do this in my Name”

Public protest in Dublin against the Bloody Friday violence in July 1972

Una O’Higgins O’Malley holds up a placard outside Sinn Fein party HQ in Kevin Street to protest against IRA bombing

“Working for Peace” group formed from protests

Those who turned up on a regular basis to protest against IRA bombings formed the “Working for Peace” group

During the summer of 1973, they brought families from Belfast in need of respite to the staff hostel in Newbridge, Co Kildare

Government (Garret Fitzgerald) invites group to take over the Glencree Centre

Most of group form Glencree and meet in an office obtained in Harcourt Street

Glencree Centre taken over in 1974 and opened in 1976

Radicalisation of young males Deep sense of being

victimised through cumulative cycles of violence

Sense of powerlessness and hopelessness

The feeling of being humiliated

Acts of revenge that follow on from humiliation and start a further cycle of violence

Young males aged 16-25

Gangs restore honour and pride through using guns

Young men who are marginalised from mainstream society are more likely to seek refuge in militant ideologies• bonding together in group• find identity & acceptance• discover a sense of

purpose• provides meaning in life

Alistair Little joinedUlster Volunteer Force (UVF) at 14

I joined because I wanted to avenge the death of my friend’s father who had been shot dead by republicans. I remember going to the funeral and seeing his young daughter who had been shot in the legs screaming for her daddy. I thought my father would be next and at the age of 14 I vowed that if I ever had the opportunity to retaliate I would.

So when I was 17 I walked into the home of a man I didn’t know and shot him dead. I had asked to do it.

My journey to renouncing violence took place during my 12 years in the Maze prison. I came to realise that if you use violence yourself, you encourage revenge and hatred in others. You end up with a never ending circle of violence.

Alistair received a 13 year prison sentence when aged 17, three years after joining the UVF. Released early 1990’s, he has worked to tackle the causes of violence. SA Michael Lapsley. Healing of Memories NI and workshops.

Pervasive sense of intractability by the time we got to 1980’s

Persistence and pervasiveness of the conflict creates hopelessness and powerlessness in civil society

Perception of irreconcilable goals and threatened existential needs drive people back into the struggle to protect their group’s interests and to survive

In turn, these perpetuate the perception of the conflict as a zero-sum game

Martin Luther King

Only when it is dark can you see the stars

Picasso paints the universal cry of human

suffering - Guernica 1937

Why do some conflicts

endure and lead to

repeated cycles of

escalation and

violence?

What is Deep-rooted and Protracted Social Conflict?

Prolonged and sporadic outbreaks of violent conflict

Denial of non-negotiableBasic human needs:Security & physical safetyRecognition of distinctive collective identity Socio-political acceptance, not hatredAccess to political institutions to determine

above needs Edward Azar (1990)

Perceived group victimisation stems from three conditions

1. The denial of group identity and as a separate

community

2. Deprivation of human needs:

Security of Culture &

Valued Relationships

3. Absence ofPolitical

Participationto remedy

victimisation

(Edward Azar 1990)

Majority – Minority tensions arising out of ethnic group conflict can produce

reciprocal negative images

Exclusion of Minority community

Majority community hold on to power• Feel

threatened and insecure

• Feel besieged• Their fear of

being driven out

“If you are one of them, you are not one of us”

“If you’re not one of them, you might be one of us

Fear of losing the identity that gives you security

Group identity give us a sense of inner coherence and stability and provide us with a set of expectations about the world (Hicks, 2000).

Honour, shame, patriotism and self-sacrifice are some of the words associated with the strong reaction we all feel when we perceive our identity under attack.

We display and reaffirm our identities through symbols such as flags, hymns, uniforms, books, customs, etc.

Sense of deep fear that gets stimulated on the other side

The fear that terror and violence engenders

Perceived threat from the enemy

Security measures are a price that have to be paid to protect society

Hardening of the heart

Crossing the West Bank checkpoint on foot on way into Ramallah from Jerusalem

Collective Trauma of the Great Famine 1845-8

Between these three years, the Irish population dropped from 8 to 6 million

Estimated 1 million died in Ireland from potato shortage and 1 million emigrated on “famine ships”

Britain is blamed and it becomes a historic grievance

Monument to the Great Famine at the United Nations park in New York erected by Irish Government

Collective Trauma can block conflict resolution efforts

Every large group has had, at some time, a traumatic event—say, a loss of land or a loss of prestige

If the group does not properly mourn this loss, it may pass its feelings about it onto future generations, and the trauma becomes the group’s "chosen trauma."

A chosen trauma not only solidifies the group’s identity but may be used by the group to resist negotiations with its enemy.

Holocaust People Vad Yashem Memorial Museum in Tel Aviv

Inter-group recognition of each other’s identity and unfulfilled needs

our individual and group identities are in permanent formation and revision

“Parties in conflict, in pursuit of their own security and identity and related needs and interests, undermine and threaten the security and identity of the other."

Powerless people will give emotional allegiance to political leaders who protect and satisfy their basic group integrity and identity needs.

Herbert Kelman

Providing a political outlet and creating political oxygen Terrorism cannot be opposed in isolation or

defeated by military means alone Fight against terrorism must involve a

judicious mix of force and politics at the global level

Providing no political outlet for ethnic grievances increases potential for terrorism

Brains are more important than brawn

THE RIPE MOMENTfor moving into negotiations

arrives when 4 things come together

1. Mutual perception between the parties of a

hurting stalemate

2. Political leadership prepared to work on interest based

alternatives

3. A political way out of the conflict

4. Political and economic support from the International Community (UN & USA + EU)

Glencree Political Dialogue

The Glencree Centre started the Political Dialogue Programme in 1994 and sustained it over 13 years with three elements:

1. Weekend Political Dialogue Workshops (55)

2. Annual 3 day residential Summer School (14)

3. Interest based negotiation skills training

From it came other interlinked programmes to support victims of violence (LIVE) and ex-combatants

Herbert C KelmanHarvard Centre for International Affairs

For more than 30 years, Kelman has worked with Israelis and Palestinians to build peace in the Middle East.

His "action research" projects have focused on "unofficial" diplomacy, interactive joint problem-solving workshops as an approach to resolving protracted conflicts.

Former Richard Clarke Cabot Research Professor of Social Ethics at Harvard University

TRACK TWO DIPLOMACY

INTERACTIVE CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Small group problem solving discussions between unofficial representatives of identity groups or states engaged in

destructive conflict that are facilitated by an impartial third party of

social scientist-practitioners

Ronald J Fisher (1997)

Sub leadership & Influentials

Civil SocietyActors Paramilitary

Groups

Top down Peacemaking

Marginalised

groups

Bottom up Grassroots Peace Building

Track 1

Track 2

Track 3

InfluentialsThose who have access to the top

+ can impact on decision making

2005TRACK 1

Top political leadership

1998

1994

Pre-InfluentialsUp and coming leaders

Squeezing the toothpaste upwards

Building ongoing relationships with all the Political Parties

in these islands

How do you engage the people and parties who are in political power?

Hope is the energy that keeps you going

“Conflict causes so much suffering. The secret is to listen to your enemy.

It is important to engage them, to meet them and to talk to them. They will respect you for that. They will start to listen to you and they will cooperate with you.”

You Tube interview 2009 Fr Alec Reid from Clonard Monastry

Sub leadership

Web of Relationships

(John Paul Lederach)

Paramilitary groups who get tacit support from Civil Society

Top political leadership

Marginalised groups not included in Civil Society

Middle Range Leadership

The Jewish World is Built as a Network

Networking across, up and down the

First, Second and Third Tracks

Peacemaking Pyramid

Deepening the Peace Process

Parties in the Peace Process Network

Will it be possible to trace the role played by participants in building a peace process network up to top leadership, across to extremists and down to grassroots community groups?

British Labour

Lib Dem

PUP

Plaid Cymru

SNP

British ConservativeFine Gael

UKUP

Alliance

DUP

Sinn Fein

Women’s Coalition

UDP

UUPSDLP

Labour

Fianna Fail

Glencree

Attended by almost every Political Party in these islands

Fig.2. Percentage of workshops attended (nos.28-40): Sept '99 - Mar '02

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

24 Parties attended at different times over the 13 years

DUPUK Unionist PartyGreenDemocratic Left (NI)IRSP Scottish ConservativesScottish LabourPlaid Cymru

Civil rights campaignerof the 1960’s and ex-paramilitaries

Party activists who write speeches for the Leaders and at hub of

internal party networks

Meeting government officials and Diplomats from British & USA embassies

Participants from the 3 mainBritish political parties and from

Scotland

Dialogue between DUP and Southern Parties at Stormont

Organising a weekend workshop

Preparatory work

Who do you invite?How do you approach them?Will they accept?

During the workshop

Do they turn up?Will they stay for all the time?Do they stay up all night?

Follow up

Do they keep to Chatham House rules?What do they tell others about their experience?

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

to offer a safe and non-threatening space to politicians from different political traditions

to create understanding of the genuine interests of each party, their proposals for a political settlement and the political constraints within which each party works

to explore and develop consensus around particular issues and problem areas where blockage was occurring within peace process

3 basic conventions of Glencree workshops

1. The participants control the agenda2. Glencree facilitates the process3. Observance of ‘Chatham House rules’

(anonymity - comments are not attributed to named individuals)

Sometimes, learning points / outcomes are distilled in a synopsis after each workshop and circulated together with list of names emails/addresses/phone numbers of people who attended

Chatham House rules

“When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed”

Devised in 1927 (refined 2002)

Founded in 1920, Chatham House is the home of The Royal Institute of International Affairs in the heart of London.

Chatham House rule allows Anonymity for discussions

The Chatham House rule provides anonymity to speakers

Encourages openness, free discussion and sharing of information

All discussions are “off the record” allowing people to speak personally as individuals and not necessarily the policies/views of their organisation

Sitting around the old Glencree fireplace

created a storytelling ambiance

Fireplace in the former conference room

Dialogue circle in the Canada Room

The residential experience Eating and mixing together around meals Sharing a bedroom and hopefully not a bunk with

a political foe Taking walks together on the nearby roads and

up to the lake

Process design for Political Dialogue Workshop

residential weekendFriday Saturday Sunday

am AGENDA SETTING

Topic 3

pmTopic 1 CLOSING

SESSION

BONDING SESSION

Topic 2

Informal time Informal time

“It all happens in the coffee breaks”

Informal conversations may be more important long term than the formal sessions

Not just the coffee breaks, but also the: Walks together outside Personal chats in the corners Meals spent together Fun sessions at night and into the morning Sharing bedroom space (where rooms have 2

or more beds)

Track Two Political Dialogue

PROCESS ISSUESARISING OUT OF DIALOGUE

Role of the facilitator v the mediatorJudgement calls:

- Managing the interaction of micro-moments

- when to hold it tight and when to let it go back to participants

Connecting 2 or 3 parties in sustained dialogue

DIAmeans

“through”

DIA LOGOS

“Dialogue” comes from two Greek words

DIA + LOGOS

LOGOSIs

“Word”Or

“Meaning”

Dialogue is the flow of meaning and understanding

between people gathered and thinking together in an

interactive relationship

William Isaac (1999)

“It seems quite simple – just sitting and talking”

Do we really know how to talk and think together?

Seeing the invisible undercurrents? Managing the conflictual interactions? What do we not yet see at play within the

interactions when people truly talk together?

Talking Circles of indigenous people and first nations

You talk and talk until

the talk begins

- Tribal ritual in a Native American Indian community

3 Layers of Storytelling

Layer 1Surface talk

Layer 2Parallel storiesAffective empathy

Layer 3Cross over &RecognitionCognitive empathy

In-Group PartiesOpening Concerns

Positional story

Out-Group PartiesOpening Concerns

Positional story

Being heard and understood in the

circle

Exploring underlying interests, needs and feelings

Help In-Group to understand & acknowledge Out-Group’s concerns

Help Out-Group to understand & acknowledge

In-Group’s concerns

Different kinds of interactive dialogue

Positional: one argument is set against the other primarily to score points

Relational: the image that one side has of the other & the causes of misunderstandings

Activist: analysing/sorting out the substantive issues to reach common ground

Problem-solving: joint thinking in a systematic way to arrive at joint solutions

Narrative Truth and the Storying process

People organise their experiences in story form to describe what happened and to make sense of lives/relationships

Some problem narratives have been rehearsed and elaborated over and over again into tightly woven stories

It may not need to be factual because you need to hear the perception

Story operates to create reality rather than reporting accurately on that reality

Story telling – disputants offering a part of

themselves to others A positive climate for dialogue can be

nurtured by inviting participants to share memories that are positive and precious, as well as problems and traumas.

To be able to share images of the past that are precious, places or experiences that stand out or things they are proud of.

- Michelle Lebaron (MII conference 2003)

Hundreds of judgement calls When do you move from working on one topic to

another? – or probe deeper on the topic? When do you interrupt to stop emotional

expression? – or allow it to continue? When do you stop asking questions? - or just stay

connected with one party to be really with them as they think their way through a problem; - or feel their way through an emotion or a relational dilemma?

When do you intervene to slow it down, stop charged accusations or move to decision making?

When do you push for closure?

The tipping point in emotional expression

CONSTRUCTIVE AND POSITIVE STORMING

DESTRUCTIVE AND NEGATIVE STORMING

Mediator intervenes to acknowledge negative emotion and bring it back into positive storming

4th Layer of Storytelling

Consolidating new Information,new Insightsand new UnderstandingsLeading to a transformed relationship

Helping In-Group to

understand & acknowledge Out-Group’s

concerns

Helping Out-Group to understand & acknowledge

In-Group’s concerns

The humanising effectRecognition momentTransforming momentMutual reassuranceApology

The Lightbulb moment of new insights and understandings

Affective insights change feelings about the other when they hear what matters to them in ways they were unable to before

Cognitive insights are moments of discovery and clarity following periods of confusion allowing a party to accept the necessity for change

Hearing undisclosed intentions, expectations and hidden assumptions

Picard & Melchin (2004) Insight mediation

Supporting the parties to understand each other

“Paul, I would like you to turn to Jacinta and say in your own words what you understand Jacinta to have said just now.”

“Paul, I would like you to turn to Jacinta and tell her what you have just told me.”[This is best done when positive “I” statements have been made or acknowledgements about the other. ]

“Jacinta, tell Paul what he has understood well and correctly about your situation and what he’s not quite yet grasped?”

“Help Paul to understand the particular concerns you have about this proposal.”

Questions for cognitive bi-lateral check and new understandings

What do you think James does not yet fully understand about your situation?

Which bit does James not yet fully appreciate?

What do you now understand about the incident that you did not appreciate before?

James, is there anything you want to ask Maeve that you still have a question about?

What is it that you do not yet understand about what Maeve said/did?

The Re-entry problem

How can the new insights, ideas, and proposals generated in the workshop be fed back into the political debate and the policy or decision making process within each community?

1. Through careful selection of participants who are willing to engage and have influence

2. By the agenda reflecting their needs

“An opportunity to deepen your own

analysis of the political conflict

and sustain your hope for the

peace process”

Outcomes of Political Dialogue Workshops

Potential change outcomes of dialogue workshops

1. Change at the personal level

To enable participants in the room to gain new insights and understandings

into the nature of the conflict to acquire new ideas for resolving the

conflict To appreciate the constraints of each party To discover ways of overcoming the

barriers to a negotiated political solution

Potential change outcomes of dialogue workshops

2. Change at societal level

To maximise the likelihood that the new insights, understandings and ideas developed by the workshop participants will be fed back into the political debate and decision making arenas in their respective parties

Outcomes of intergroup contact

Greater appreciation and understanding of the other group’s position and interests

The exploding of myths Favourable alteration of demonised

images held of each other More positive attitudes, respectful and

less “dehumanised” relationships Increased awareness that violence is not

a solution to the conflict

The role of Dialogue

“As long as you’re talking, you can’t be shooting”

What good does it do if it is only the moderate representatives of parties to the conflict which gather around the table?

Does it not depend on how the follow up is managed when participants go back to their home constituency?

From sharing comes healing and renewed hope

Learning about the truth is a process of engagement and discovery

It is not about fact finding Out of the interactive “sharings” and the

recovering of truths comes the healing of the relationships

Geoffrey Corry, FacilitatorGlencree Centre for Peace and

Reconciliation

Mobile: 087-2351792 email: geoffreycorry@eircom.net