|
|
 | THE GREENING OF THE WHITE HOUSE Monday, March 17, 1997 |
|---|
Conor O'Clery, author of "Daring Diplomacy" answers your questions.
NewsHour Links:
July 15, 1996:
Can there be peace in the wake of sectarian rioting in Northern Ireland?
July 12, 1996:
Peace seems uncertain in the wake of demonstrations in Northern Ireland.
July 12, 1996:
Two Irish reporters participate in an Online Forum on the All-Party Peace Talks.
February 12, 1996:
Following a bombing in downtown London, the NewsHour looks at its impact on the Irish peace negotiations.
December 1, 1995:
Margaret Warner looks at Clinton's trip to Ireland.
International intrigue, closed-door diplomacy, and a monumental struggle between two world powers; no, it is not the latest Tom Clancy novel. It is the true story of the Clinton administration's work to negotiate a new British-Irish accord as told by Irish Times correspondent Conor O'Clery.
His new book, "Daring Diplomacy: Clinton's Secret Search for Peace in Ireland," is the behind-the-scenes recounting of the White House's secret negotiations with the Irish Republican Army [IRA], the furious diplomatic struggles between Britain and the U.S., and Clinton's controversial trip to Northern Ireland.
Although the Clinton administration had publicly addressed the issue of Irish peace, America's activist role in organizing the parties and mediating an agreement had not fully been known.
"Four years ago no one could have foreseen the dramatic events that lay ahead, the bitter crises in the U.K.-U.S. relationship over Gerry Adams, the Kissinger-like use of informal diplomatic channels to shape major U.S. policy decisions, the throwing open of the doors of the White House to the Irish and the emergence of a new, dual set of special relationships - between the United States and both Britain and Ireland, and between Irish Americans and both peoples on the island of Ireland," O'Clery writes.
O'Clery, a 24-year veteran of The Irish Times, recently opened the Beijing bureau of the paper. From 1991-1996 he worked in Washington, covering the negotiations between Clinton, Sinn Fein's Gerry Adams and the British government.
Our forum asks: Why did Clinton get involved in the Irish troubles? What role did Irish Americans play in the negotiations? Is there any future to the Irish peace negotiations? How involved should the United States be? How did these events impact the U.S.'s relationship with Britain?
Questions asked in this forum:
Why did Clinton get involved? What impact has America's involvement in Ireland had on Anglo-American relations? What role is former Senator George Mitchell playing? Is America's involvement in Ireland hubris? How involved in the process was Irish-American community? Additional Comments ...
A question from Amber Stevenson of Chicago, IL:politics of peace
Why would Clinton get involved in a situation like Ireland? I don't think anyone would have noticed if he just let it simmer. Was it political? Or did he truly think he could solve the problems of Ireland?
Conor O'Clery responds:
Clinton got involved because (1) he made promises in the 1992 campaign to do so; (2) he was asked to get involved by the Irish Government and powerful Irish-Americans; (3) he was told it would help bring peace; and (4) he has a personal interest - his mother was a Cassidy, descended from Irish immigrants.
A question from Phil Wright of Woburn, MA:
What was the impact of the White House's involvement in Ireland on Anglo-American relations. I'm guessing that with John Major's aid for Bush in the 1992 election, Clinton's decision to get involved may have been based on an urge to show-up the British Prime Minister (isn't he pretty close with Tony Blair, the Labor party leader, who wants give Northern Ireland semi-autonomy?)
Conor O'Clery responds:
The "special relationship" suffered a set-back when Clinton became the first U.S. President to defy Britain on an Irish issue and gave a temporary visa to Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein in January 1994. He certainly felt he owed nothing to John Major because of helping Bush in 1992. Clinton does not expect any big breakthrough until there is a new government in London this summer. He will probably seek Blair's cooperation in getting the peace process moving again if Blair is the new British P.M. [Prime Minister].
A question from Mary McPike of Arlington, TX:
Is Senator Mitchell still serving a role in negotiations? There was a great deal written about his involvement early on, but we hear little now. How important has he been to the process?
Conor O'Clery responds:
Yes, he is. He is crucial to the talks process as an outside arbiter respected by all. He made a passionate speech in Washington on March 13, pledging continued help and blaming intransigence and violence for stalling the process. He says he will continue to chair the talks.
A question from Tom O'Bannion of Hamilton, ON:
In my estimation, the U.S. belief that it can solve the problems in Ireland is the same hubris that led it to believe it could win a war in Vietnam. The "troubles" have been going on for hundreds of years with lots of nastiness on both sides. Does the author really believe the U.S. can find an answer?
Conor O'Clery responds:
The analogy with Vietnam is not correct. There are no U.S. troops in Northern Ireland. Clinton is acting as an interested party rather than a referee. I don't believe the U.S. can find an answer but it can help the participants find and answer.
A question from Roger Smith of San Diego, CA:
What role has the large Irish-American community played in the U.S. involvement in finding a potential peace in Ireland?
Conor O'Clery responds:
Irish-Americans for the first time engaged a U.S. President and helped persuade him in turn to engage in the peace process. Irish-Americans also identified political benefits for Sinn Fein (visas for Gerry Adams, fund-raising, high-level political access, etc.) if the IRA were to end its campaign of violence and declare a ceasefire - which it did for 18 months and may do again soon.
Additional CommentsAnne O'Gorman, Santa Cruz, CA:
(Could it be that) the deportation from the U.S. of Irishmen such as Danny Morrison and Pol Brennan and their Irish-American families is somehow linked to U.K.- U.S. relations? (Isn't) peace better served by allowing these men to live in peace in the U.S.rather than returning them to their homeland?
If Loyalists are allowed to remain in the peace talks upon resumption in June, how can a political party such as Sinn Fein be excluded due to lack of an IRA ceasefire, in light of the recent murder in Belfast of John Slane?
Mike Burke, Belleville, IL
In 1992, Mr. Clinton promised the Irish-American community that there would be "no more Joe Dohertys." What, in your opinion, did he mean by that? He is currently allowing the INS to continue deportation proceedings against a number of Irish-Americans.
These men have already served their time; the English even acknowledge this. These men have committed no crimes in this country. They are married to Americans and are the fathers of Americans. One of them, Matt Morrison, of Saint Louis, in addition to having the support of thousands of citizens, dozens of Congressmen, the Governor of Missouri, the former Prime Minister of Ireland, Albert Reynolds, and SDLP leader John Hume, also by unanimous vote gained the support of the Derry City Council in Ireland; this means the representatives of Ian Paisley's party agreed that these deportation proceedings should be brought to a halt.
The financial burden faced when fighting one's own government is resulting in the children of these couples being caught up in a whirlwind of demonstrations and fundraisers. When do you think the President will stand up to England and say, "This is wrong!"
Tom Brady, Spokane WA:
How come when the IRA breaks the ceasefire by bombing or shooting a soldier, people acknowledge the opponent nature of violence in reaching an accord; yet when the Paramilitary Protestants bomb a political headquarters inside of the Republic, and just this past Saturday shoot an UNARMED CIVILIAN in front of his own children, there is no widespread condemnation by the White House?
Both the British army and the IRA acknowledge there are open hostilities, yet people equate killing a soldier with killing an unarmed civilian, including the White House. I don't understand because when President Clinton sent the American troops to Bosnia he acknowledged their duties as members of the Armed Forces and that they were being placed as soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines in harm's way.
When I put on an USAF uniform during Vietnam, I knew that I could have been placed in harm's way. Don't you think the volunteer British soldier knew what being a member of the Armed Services meant, just as I did? How can the White House equate killing soldiers with killing unarmed civilians? I am not saying the violence is not tragic but it is entirely different.
James Scott, Bedford MA:
The government of the Irish Free State and the SDLP appear hell bent on gaining admittance of Sinn Fein / IRA to the peace talks once they announce yet another "cease fire."
Of course Nationalists desire a unified Ireland, and bringing one about is their blind objective, apparently without considering the opinions of the Unionist population.
At the moment the IRA terrorists are on the "outs" because they continue to practice their revolutionary objectives through bombing, killing, shooting, maiming, intimidating and terrorizing the populace of the United Kingdom.
Is it an objective of the Nationalists to push the IRA onto the backs of the Unionists even though they rightly refuse to negotiate with Sinn Fein / IRA who, admitted to the talks, would have arms "under the table, on the table and outside the door?"
Robert Kerr, Hastings, NE:
Is the issue of Northern Ireland of any significance in the future (UK) elections for Parliament? If so, is there any significance difference between John Major and the Conservative Party's stance? I am curious about this since the recent news about the Labour Party centers around its drift toward a more central, neo-Conservative set of ideas.
The PBS NewsHour is Funded in part by: Additional Foundation and Corporate Sponsors
Program
Support
From:
Copyright © 1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
