Letter: Working out the processes of peace in Northern Ireland
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr Michael Harrison
Sir: Your front-page comment on the anniversary of the peace process ("The pessimists have been confounded", 1 September) was a classic example of an interesting phenomenon to have appeared among many media commentators over the past year. This is the view that the peace process is, of itself, good; and that it follows that those who are pessimistic about its prospects are either lacking in vision, or, worse, wish the process to fail in order to boost their own sectarian dogma. The reality is that many right-minded people in Ulster believe the process has little long-term chance of success simply because the political, tribal and territorial aspirations of both sides, and their arsenals, remain entirely unchanged.
Alongside this there has been no sign whatever of any flexibility or willingness to compromise from the main combatants. While this situation exists, the peace process will remain what it has always been: an artifice created by political hype and sophistry kept in being by the huge desire for peace among the populace. This desire cannot sustain it indefinitely. But, they cry, what about the achievement of the ceasefire? Sadly, most of us in Northern Ireland know that Gerry Adams cannot be summed up as "the man who argued with the IRA". He is rather the man who supported their use of violence for 25 years, will support it when it resumes, and whose recent support for non-violence is not typical, but tactical.
Yours,
Michael Harrison
Belfast
2 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments