What led to the Belfast Good Friday Agreement? (KS5)

Study each interpretation and summarise the key points made by the historian.

1. What do they argue is the most important factor, individual or group?
2. How did this contribute to the peace process and Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement?
3. What challenges and obstacles had to be overcome?
4. What evidence is given to support this interpretation?
5. Does the historian’s biographical information help to explain their interpretation?
6. From your own knowledge how convincing do you find this interpretation?
7. What further evidence would you want to find in the documents to make the interpretation convincing?
8. If you were to provide a one-word summary of this individual’s contribution, which of these would you choose, or can you think of a better word?
   • Obstructive / Unhelpful / Marginal / Constructive / Helpful / Pragmatic / Visionary / Essential

Professor Henry Patterson

Dr Eleanor Williams

Professor Tom Hennessey

Dr Caoimhe Nic Dháibhéid

Frank Sheridan

Source 1

Part of a record of a meeting on 7 May 1997 between the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and Jeffrey Donaldson, of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). Catalogue Ref: PREM 49/108

Context notes

This document was a record of a meeting between the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and Jeffrey Donaldson, of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). Blair had only just won the UK election on May 1^st. All sides were anxious to see whether the new government would maintain the same position as the previous Conservative government or whether Blair would take a different approach.

Questions

Content

1. Why was Trimble thanking Blair?
2. What were Blair’s views on the Northern Ireland situation?

Inferences from the content

3. What can be inferred about Trimble’s concerns at this point?

Inferences from the context

4. Can anything be inferred about the actions of the Irish government at this time?
5. Can anything be inferred from the fact that the meeting took place at all?

Lines of Argument

Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 2

Part of a record of a meeting on 12 May 1997 between the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and John Taylor, the Deputy Leader of the UUP. Catalogue Ref: PREM 49/108

Context notes

This document was a record of a meeting between the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and David Trimble, leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and John Taylor, the Deputy Leader of the UUP. Blair had only just won the UK election on May 1^st. All sides were anxious to see whether the new government would maintain the same position as the previous Conservative government or whether Blair would take a different approach. At the time all groups were making plans for talks to set up a new government in Northern Ireland which would be based in Northern Ireland and run by representatives elected in elections in Northern Ireland. One of the biggest issues was the inclusion in elections of parties which had not signed up to the principles of The Downing Street Declaration of 1993, which had made clear that a party which did not renounce violence could not be part of any talks. Another point of disagreement was on the issue of cross border cooperation, which related to the role and degree of influence of the Irish Government in matters affecting Northern Ireland. Ahern refers to Bertie Ahern, leader of the Fianna Fáil party in Ireland. As this meeting was taking place an election was due in Ireland in June and Ahern was expected to win, which he did.

Questions

Content

1. What were the main concerns of Trimble in his opening summary?
2. According to Blair, what would the ‘eventual solution’ look like?
3. What was the attitude of Trimble and Taylor to Sinn Féin?
4. What else was worrying the UUP?

Inferences from the content

5. What can be inferred from Blair asking Trimble to summarise the situation?
6. What can be inferred about Blair’s attitude towards Taylor and Trimble?

Inferences from the context

7. Can anything be inferred about the differences between this meeting and the meeting on May 7^th (Source1).

Lines of Argument

8. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 3

Extract from a report written 14 April 1997 by an official to Seán Ó hUiginn, the Joint Secretary of the Anglo-Irish Secretariat in Belfast. It describes a conversation with David Ervine, a former Loyalist paramilitary and member of the Progressive Unionist Party.

Context notes

For most of the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s Loyalist paramilitary organisations had been active in Northern Ireland. They attacked IRA activists, Sinn Féin politicians, other Republican activists but also many who were simply members of the Catholic or Nationalist communities. By the 1990s Loyalist paramilitaries were becoming more active than the Provisional IRA in terms of the number of attacks carried out. However, an important group within the Loyalist paramilitaries favoured an end to conflict by the early 1990s. One of the most important was Gusty Spence of the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF). Another was David Ervine, also a former paramilitary. Ervine met Spence in prison and was greatly influenced by him. He rejected violence and both Ervine and Spence became key figures in bringing about a Loyalist ceasefire in 1994. Leaders of the paramilitary groups the UVF, the Ulster Defence Association (UDA) and the Red Hand Commando formed an umbrella organisation called the Combined Loyalist Military Command (CLMC). This organisation co-ordinated the actions and statements of Loyalist organisations, although it was always a difficult job to control all of the factions within their respective organisations. Ervine himself went on to be a representative in the Northern Ireland government after the Agreement and was generally very well regarded by other politicians involved in the peace process.

Questions

Content

1. Why was Ervine pessimistic in May 1997?
2. What were Ervine’s concerns about successive ‘measured responses’?
3. What difficulty did Ervine identify for the CLMC?

Inferences from the content

4. What can be inferred about the CLMC’s views and attitudes to the peace process?
5. What can be inferred about the challenges facing the CLMC?

Inferences from the context

6. Can anything be inferred from the fact that this conversation took place at all?

Lines of Argument

7. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 4

Extract from a report summarising talks between the UK government and various political parties and community groups in Northern Ireland, 14 October 1997. Catalogue Ref: PREM 49 / 119

Context notes

This meeting took place about six months before the final Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. The Prime Minister and Taoiseach met with all of the Northern Ireland parties. This extract records their discussions with the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition (NIWC). This was a cross-community party founded in 1996 by a Catholic academic, Monica McWilliams and a Protestant social worker, Pearl Sagar. They did not campaign specifically as a feminist organisation, and they were not Nationalist or Unionist in their aims. The movement principally aimed to try to represent the views of the wider community and not the main political parties or the paramilitary groups.

Questions

Content

1. Who is talking to whom at this meeting?
2. What points were made about developments in the rest of the UK outside Northern Ireland?
3. What were the leaders of the NIWC hoping for?
4. How did Blair respond to the views of the NIWC leaders?

Inferences from the content

5. Do you get the impression that the NIWC leaders are optimistic or pessimistic about the peace process?
6. How would you describe Blair’s attitude towards the NIWC?

Inferences from the context

7. What inferences can be made from the fact that these talks were taking place?
8. Is it possible to make any inferences from the fact that this particular group (the NIWC) was involved in the talks?

Lines of Argument

9. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 5

Extract from a statement by the UK Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr Mo Mowlam in April 1998. Catalogue Ref: PREM 49 / 412

Context notes

In 1972 the Northern Ireland Parliament (based at Stormont on the edge of Belfast) was suspended due to the political upheavals in the province. What followed was known as Direct Rule – Northern Ireland was governed directly by the UK Government, and the main responsibility for Northern Ireland lay with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. When Labour won the 1997 UK General Election, Dr Marjorie ‘Mo’ Mowlam became the Northern Ireland Secretary. In this document she set out the main terms of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement and in this extract gives credit to some of those who made it possible. Senator George Mitchell is an American politician. John de Chastelain is a Canadian diplomat and former army general. Harri Holkeri is a former prime minister of Finland. Tony Blair is the UK Prime Minister. Bertie Ahern is the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of Ireland.

Questions

Content

1. Who is given credit by Dr Mowlam in this extract?

Inferences from the content

2. Would you agree that whether an individual or group is named implies that they played an important role?
3. Is it possible to infer whether Dr Mowlam thinks any individual or group played a particularly important role?

Inferences from the context

4. Can any inferences be made from the fact that Dr Mowlam did not name any of the Northern Ireland political parties or their leaders?

Lines of Argument

Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 6

A letter from US Senator George Mitchell to UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on 30 April 1998, soon after the signing of the Agreement.

Context notes

Mitchell was a US Senator who had a deep interest in Northern Ireland. President Clinton appointed him as US Special Envoy in 1995 to be an independent figure in the Northern Ireland peace process. He became the Co-Chairman of the Northern Ireland Peace Talks, an important figure in the talks which eventually led to the Agreement. His job was to be an independent and impartial individual who could help to resolve disputes. He was best known for his work in negotiating the decommissioning of paramilitary forces. However, he also worked with the political parties, persuading them to accept the Mitchell Principles. These were a set of limits on political parties, the most important of which was that unless they renounced violence they would not have any role in any of the talks or negotiations. The letter was written a few days after the Belfast (Good Friday Agreement) was agreed.

Questions

Content

1. What was the main reason for Mitchell writing this letter?

Inferences from the content

2. What inferences can be made about Mitchell’s views on the negotiations?
3. What can be inferred about Mitchell’s views of Tony Blair?

Inferences from the context

4. Can anything be inferred from the timing of this letter?

Lines of Argument

5. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 7

Extracts from a Question and Answer session between US President Bill Clinton and US journalists on 13 April 1998

Context notes

The USA had a large population of Irish-Americans, descended from people who had emigrated to the USA since the 1600s. As a result, US Presidents tended to be very interested in the situation in Ireland, particularly Democratic Presidents as the Democratic Party had a large support among Irish-Americans. When he was first elected in 1995, President Clinton was relatively critical of the British government in Northern Ireland. However, over time his position changed and he worked to support the peace process alongside the UK and Irish governments and the political parties in Northern Ireland.

Questions

Content

1. According to Clinton, who deserves most credit for the Agreement?
2. What actions did Clinton take to support the peace process?

Inferences from the content

3. Is it reasonable to infer that Clinton’s contribution was more one of influence than specific actions?

Inferences from the context

4. Can anything be inferred from the timing of this statement?

Lines of Argument

5. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 8

A letter from the UK Prime Minister John Major to the SDLP leader John Hume, September 1996

Context notes

One of the key dates in the peace process was the Downing Street Declaration of 1993. In this agreement, the UK and Irish governments enshrined the principle of consent – that Northern Ireland would remain in the United Kingdom unless the majority of the people of Northern Ireland decided otherwise. Another key principle was that only political parties which rejected violence would be included in talks about the future of Northern Ireland. In 1994 the Provisional IRA (PIRA) announced a ceasefire. This helped Sinn Féin to be accepted into discussions. However, the PIRA broke its ceasefire in February 1996. The Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) leader, John Hume, had been in discussions with Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams through the early 1990s and as this letter suggests, continued to try to encourage communication between Republicans and the UK government.

Questions

Content

1. According to the letter, what was the IRA’s position?
2. How did Major respond to the IRA’s position?
3. What other IRA actions does Major refer to?

Inferences from the content

4. How would you describe the attitude of Major towards the IRA and Sinn Fein?

Inferences from the context

5. What can be inferred about the importance of SDLP leader John Hume from this letter?

Lines of Argument

Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 9

Extracts from the opening remarks of Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams to the first meeting of Northern Ireland parties and the UK and Irish governments in October 1997.

Context notes

When the peace process began there were three main strands of the discussions. Strand One concerned the Northern Ireland Assembly. Strand Two concerned issues within the island of Ireland and relations between the Irish government and Northern Ireland. Strand Three concerned relations between the British and Irish governments. This document sets out the opening comments made by the Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams at the opening talks on Strand Two. Sinn Féin was a Republican party in Northern Ireland. Unionists and the British government regarded Sinn Féin as the political wing of the Provisional IRA. However, Sinn Féin always denied that there was an official connection.

Questions

Content

1. What was Sinn Féin’s political position?
2. How did Adams describe his main objective?
3. According to Adams, which issues fuel the conflict?
4. According to Adams, what should the British government do?
5. What responsibility, according to Adams, do the Nationalists and the Irish government have?

Inferences from the content

6. How would you describe the general tone of this statement?
7. How do you think other parties and the two governments might have viewed the statement?

Inferences from the context

8. Can we infer anything from the fact that the statement is being made at all?

Lines of Argument

Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?

Source 10

Notes from a meeting between the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, 28 March 1998.

Context notes

Blair became Prime Minister in May 1997 and Ahern became Taoiseach in June 1997. The two leaders had a good working relationship which helped the peace process. In this conversation they refer to a number of developments. Strand One was the creation of a new Assembly to govern Northern Ireland. Strand Two concerned relations between the Irish government and Northern Ireland, and the creation of organisations which would have a role in issues which ran across the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, such as heritage or cultural bodies.

Questions

Content

1. What was the main concern about the North-South bodies?
2. Did Ahern and Trimble agree on this issue?
3. What other activities of Ahern are described in the notes?

Inferences from the content

4. What can be inferred about Ahern’s influence on Nationalist groups in Northern Ireland?

Inferences from the context

5. What can be inferred about the relationship between Blair and Ahern from this document?

Lines of Argument

6. Which historian could use this document as supporting evidence?