|
January 29, 2009
Posted: 1444 GMT
LONDON, England (CNN) – It was like picking at a painful scab; the analogy rings true both literally and figuratively. As the ‘Consultative Group on the Past' prepared to announce its proposals for dealing with the legacy of Northern Ireland, the emotion was raw, the language blunt. One woman in the crowd bellowed, "Everybody has the same hurt!" And it is this concept that the report's authors tried to capture with their 30 recommendations. Instead, the most contentious of their recommendations enraged many. It calls for paying the closest relative of everyone who died in the conflict £12,000 ($17,000 dollars) as a so-called "recognition of their loss." So that would mean not just the families' of the victims, but the families of paramilitaries that fired the bullet or planted the bomb would also be eligible. "This is an absolute disgrace, any right minded person would say this is wrong, you cannot reward a perpetrator for their evil sins," said one woman whose parents were killed by the IRA. Even before the press conference could get off the ground, protesters outside held up signs that read: ‘£12,000 can't buy justice' and ‘Terrorists are not victims.' One protestor put it this way: "They have brought more tears to innocent victims. Because they have brought huge pain with this monstrous proposal that everyone, including murders, families of murderers, should be rewarded for their murder." Inside, emotions spilled over temporarily preventing the authors of the proposals from announcing them. All the language and rage was so familiar, too familiar. For decades, 'The Troubles,' as they became known, fed a vicious circle of violence between the mainly-Protestant Unionist and Catholic Nationalist communities in Northern Ireland. This latest commission was tasked with trying to figure out how best to deal with the legacy of the violence. The co-authors, both respected religious figures from both sides of the divide, tried to explain the recognition payment would be a way to achieve justice – a bold gesture to acknowledge the moral position of the other side, without diluting your own. "We're still fighting about who was right or righter. Who had moral justification and who had god on their side," said Lord Eames, one of the report's authors. But the more he spoke, the more enraged people in the room became. It's clear that as far as they are concerned, this was one step too far on the path of reconciliation. Just as all of this was unfolding in Belfast, George Mitchell, President Barack Obama's Middle East peace envoy, was arriving in Jerusalem. He is intimately familiar with the bitter emotions now flowing again in Northern Ireland after being a key architect of the Good Friday Peace Agreement that in 1998 finally brought a formal end to The Troubles. Mitchell's peace agreement proved that a plan for peace can certainly be capable of stopping the bullets and bombs even when reconciliation remains elusive. Building a cohesive community with a future though, one that is not burdened by the blood wars of the past, is key. The legacy proposals were supposed to be a soothing balm for the pain of the Northern Ireland conflict. Instead, the equivalence such reconciliation necessarily needs to apply seemed still a step too far for many. Those following Mitchell's progress in the Middle East, take note. Posted by: International Security Correspondent, Paula Newton |
Recent Posts
Categories
|
Loading weather data ...