In the run up to the EU referendum, former Prime Ministers John Major and Tony Blair visited Derry. With their deep understanding and appreciation for the nuances and sensitivities of Northern Irish conflict honed by their engagement with the topic for substantial periods of their respective premierships, they were both united in their bleak portrayal of a post-Brexit Northern Ireland.
During their trip, Major and Blair posed for photos on Derry’s Peace Bridge. Opened in Summer 2011, the Peace Bridge stands as an iconic focal point for the city’s cultural and artistic centre. Both a literal and symbolic bridge between the two communities (who have traditionally lived separately on either side of the River Foyle), the Peace Bridge stands as a testament to the ongoing success of the peace process in Northern Ireland.
Funded by approximately €20m of the overall €1.3 billion of funds invested in Northern Ireland by the EU since the early 90s, the project is one of many in the province which has benefited from EU funding. The objective of this programme (known as ‘PEACE’) is to provide financing for projects which aim to improve cohesion between communities involved in the conflict in Northern Ireland and the border counties of Ireland, with a specific focus on providing shared facilities for young people. A further PEACE programme was announced in early 2016 with a promise of continued EU assistance and financing of up to €230m. Following the results of the EU referendum, this programme and the related financing for projects in Northern Ireland is clearly now at risk.
However, while post Brexit debate has understandably concentrated mainly on the economic consequences of leaving the EU, from a Northern Irish perspective the greatest impact is likely to be much less tangible and, potentially, much more damaging.
For Northern Ireland, there exists a tragic irony in the UK’s decision to exit the European Union. That voters, mostly English, were swayed by grandiose and bombastic pledges to reclaim national sovereignty, bold demands to “take our country back” and forceful reassertions of national identity is perhaps understandable. However in doing so it seems that little regard was given to Northern Ireland, which has for the past two decades looked upon membership of the European Union as a common, uniting thread between historically divided communities.
As a young man growing up in Derry, I recall my own struggles in crafting and understanding a personal sense of national identity. Ostensibly Irish but with seemingly little in common with “proper Irish people” south of the border, my own sense of self was in many ways shaped by the environment in which I was raised. Although too young to have experienced first-hand the worst years of violence, reminders of long-standing division between the communities and the great tragedies perpetrated against others and ourselves were everywhere. Writ large in the dramatic and uncompromising murals of the Bogside and Fountain areas of Derry. Fleetingly recollected and mono-syllabically acknowledged by older relatives, hushed understated references to the “troubles”, an almost failed attempt to ascribe some broader meaning to the violence we inflicted upon one another, seemed both poignant and characteristically Northern Irish.
John Barry, in his paper on Northern Irish identity, wrote that: “the relations that constitute one’s loyalty to particular institution, places and people are constitutive of one’s identity and membership of the valued community that shares that loyalty.” Absent historic loyalty to common institutions or nations and divided among ourselves, it is hardly surprising that a sense of shared, common identity among the people in Northern Ireland has long proven elusive.
The past 20 years have seen dramatic and positive changes in Northern Ireland. In 1998, the Good Friday Agreement was approved with resounding majorities in referendums both North and South of the border. Perhaps for the first time in Irish history both communities, almost unanimously united in their longing for an end to decades of distrust, anger and violence, came together to agree upon a universal framework for a shared future. In establishing new institutions and arrangements guaranteeing a significantly more robust and far-reaching system of cross-border collaboration among all interested parties, the Agreement spoke of “close co-operation between (the UK and Ireland) as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union.”
In short, we may be Irish, British or, indeed, Northern Irish. Or perhaps even all three at once. But we are each of us, at all times, European. Or at least we were.
With the UK’s exit from the European Union, these institutions and arrangements are surely now threatened. The re-imposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, anathema to all those who lived through the worst days of the troubles and in particular to Irish nationalists, seems inevitable. The less tangible and more ephemeral cultural, social and even religious barriers, broken down over time may now also be reconstructed.
Seamus Heaney once remarked that the Northern Irish conflict forced one to “quest closely and honestly into the roots of one’s own sensibility, into the roots of one’s sense of oneself, into the tribal dirt that lies around the roots of all of us.” While inevitably compelling us to look backward, it has also “forced us to do something even rarer – to look forward and say not so much ‘Who am I, who was I?’ but ‘Who really do I want to be?’”
Having emerged following several decades of national introspection and, at times, violent debate around what type of society we want to be, the people of Northern Ireland ultimately determined to commit ourselves to achieving a newly pluralistic and forward-looking society, with our collective roots as European citizens firmly planted in that once tribal, and now fertile, soil. That this same soil in which our collective vision was beginning to take root has now been scorched by the collective will of a majority of British voters seeking to assert their isolationist, apocryphal vision of Great Britain is a tragedy for us all.
* Ciaran McGonagle is a Liberal Democrat member originally from Derry, Northern Ireland and based in Colchester. He is a solicitor working in financial services in the City of London.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
DarwIN Shrewsbury Festival, February 2025
Well, that's one way to report an opinion poll - The Week in Polls
Pruning the money tree
Milnbank Road of old #dundeewestend
Mark Valladares
Margaret
John Walller
Peter Davies
David Allen
25 Comments
With their deep understanding and appreciation for the nuances and sensitivities of Northern Irish conflict honed by their engagement with the topic for substantial periods of their respective premierships
Um… one of them began, and the other completed, the process of surrender to the IRA.
Given the record and legacy of their ‘engagement with the topic’ it’s unsurprising the inhabitants of Northern Ireland would trust each of them about as far as they could throw them.
The re-imposition of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, anathema to all those who lived through the worst days of the troubles and in particular to Irish nationalists, seems inevitable
This must be a special meaning of ‘inevitable’ where it means, ‘has been ruled out by both the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach’.
It’s a good piece and very well written. I’ve no knowledge or experience of Northern Ireland so can’t comment on most of it. However it’s treatment of identity is painful. As my European identity has now been ripped away by a majority vote and in due course I fear my British identity will go the same way I greave. Having two layers of my complex identity ( British, northerner, European, English ) taken away without consent is very disturbing. I can imagine it must be much worse in a Northern Irish context as the situation is more complex still and with such recent violence.
An excellent article. I feel much the same mix of identities as Yellow Submarine, with an extra strand of London immigrant added. Mainstream politics in NI is pretty ghastly, essentially an agreement between two lots of semi-faschists not kill anyone as long as they are left to control their people. Even that was a lot better than the continuous, low-level civil war that it replaced & anything that might highten tension in NI should be seen as obscene irresponsibility.
The Remain campaign raised the possible problems for NI but their concerns were dismissed as part of “Project Fear.”
Lets hope Brexit can be stopped.
Even that was a lot better than the continuous, low-level civil war that it replaced & anything that might highten tension in NI should be seen as obscene irresponsibility
That’s… basically saying that you will allow those who are willing to threaten violence to dictate public policy, isn’t it?
Which is, surly, unacceptable in a democratic society?
Very foolish to think of it as a low level civil war. It was a war to end partition and regain Irish sovereignty. Republicans truly believe that Britain created northern Ireland undemocratically100 years in part to protect unionists and also to prevent a violent revolt from the same. They believe Ireland as a whole is a sovereign state and the introduction. Of a hard border in their minds will be a violation of the good Friday agreement particularly since NI voted to remain. Nationalists are angry because the EU was the one thing that allowed them to be close to the south. This is the oxygen that militants have been waiting for. The British government must do everything in its power to remain in the single market. The brexit referendum has exposed the democratic deficit in the UK which fails to take account of the individual nations wishes. Very. Fearful for NIs future but I pray for peace.
“But we are each of us, at all times, European. Or at least we were.”
Wrong. I will remain European post Brexit. I say this as a Leaver.
Perhaps you meant a EUropean, in the sense of a shared political identity? Precision is everything.
Just because our main parties in Britain have “sister ” parties in Northern Ireland , we get so little coverage of that area , nationally in our broadcast media,compared to Scotland . Even Wales gets more. For some reason , Scotland has , because of its , in my view appalling , loud and aggressive attitude on independence , pushed by the SNP, the fact that Northern Ireland has been so much the opposite in recent many years, dignified, peaceful and constructive , has counted against them in the fact that Brexit has happened to be the supported outcome by the UK, and , as with Scotland , not favoured by them.
We have a superb party in Northern Ireland , in the Alliance party , and post the coalition , and the referendum we need to establish far closer ties , while they have the terrific David Ford at the helm , to strengthen those for good , literally.
Briliant piece. I visited Ireland, North and South, many times as a child in the sixties, as my Northern English relatives have moved to Donaghadee and Coleraine. My uncle worked in the Falls Road. There were many very scary places as well as beautful ones. The border was particularly frightening for my younger brother. It was the only place I ever saw guns as a girl. I too am upset about losing my European identity. I wish to remain a European citizen. And yes, it is even worse for the Northern Irish. In fact those south of the border are implicated too. Any form of destabilization is unthinkable.
Tim, If you believe that the Good Friday Agreement was a surrender to men of violence I’m just happy that you weren’t a negotiator….
If Ian Paisley and Martin could work together, and the Queen shake McGuinness’s hand, it’s time to move on….
Was post apartheid South Africa, under Mandela, the same?
The question of identity seems to be at the root of it.
Some people feel they have lost an identity.
However, it seems like before the referendum, there were people who felt they were having a made-up identity — ‘EU citizen’ — foisted upon them, an identity that they had not asked for and did not want.
And there were more of them. So, well, democracy happened.
Tim: “one of them began, and the other completed, the process of surrender to the IRA.”
I accept that you think that, but please consider that the generation of the Deputy First Minister did not want their own children to grow up with the troubles continuing and that the Sinn Fein President did not want “an internal settlement” but accepted one.
When John Alderdice was President of the Liberal International he showed us round . He was the first Speaker of the Assembly and said “Ian Paisley was over there, Gerry Adams was over there”. He also owned a house next to a police station.
I was born in Kent because my father was in the RAF. My identity is British and European. It distresses me that Leavers were able to frame EU citizens as foreigners.
Dav: The decision to call a referendum was not taken democratically, but complacently.
The decision to call a referendum was not taken democratically, but complacently
True, but irrelevant: the result is what matters, not how the referendum came about, and that showed that there are more of us who do not wish to be ‘EU citizens’, and were unhappy about having that identity imposed upon us, than those who revelled in that identity and are sad about losing it.
the generation of the Deputy First Minister did not want their own children to grow up with the troubles continuing
This is the same Deputy First Minister who was at the time commander of the IRA, yes?
If so, and he really didn’t want the next generation growing up with the Troubles, he had a simple way to achieve it: order the IRA to surrender and give up their weapons.
Given he didn’t do that, perhaps he wasn’t quite as committed to the next generation growing up in peace quite as you are suggesting?
Ciaran – I too grew up in Derry, in the Bogside in the 1970’s. So unlike you I am quite old enough to remember the worst of the troubles. In fact my earliest vivid memory of an entire day is not of a birthday or Christmas but of Bloody Sunday which happened (quite literally) on my doorstep when I was 7 years old.
And I grew up in that world of identity politics where (as Seamus Heaney noted in “The Ministry of Fear”) the question “What’s your name, driver?” – often posed to me by British soldiers at the checkpoint into Donegal on the Buncrana Road – was not to be taken at face value. Like virtually all of my peers I left, and these days consider myself European – both culturally and socially. Inevitably the experience of my youth has defined my politics and values.
But I do not share your doom-laden view of the future. I never saw any prospect of a “hard border” being re-established and (as noted above) it has been categorically ruled out by the leaders of both nations.
If I raise my gaze and look beyond my parochial concerns, I see countries that are in depression – places where youth unemployment is 40% or more, where economies are in secular stagnation, where elected governments are entirely subservient to the diktat of the ECB. All in the name of a supra-national project that lacks the courage to take the necessary fiscal steps to remedy these problems.
I now see an opportunity to reassert the sovereignty of nations while preserving free movement of people. An opportunity for the EU – as Donald Tusk is now suggesting – to do less, but do it better. And most importantly for people to regain their belief in their democratic institutions and to reverse the dangerous rise of extremism being seen across the EU member states.
Maybe I’m wrong and you’re right. Maybe it really is all doom and gloom. But as a Liberal I’m an optimist and an internationalist. We should be talking about the real opportunities, not moping about the possible risks.
As a founder member and former chair of the Alliance Party now, like Ciaran, living in London, I applaud this article. It describes eloquently the situation which I saw brewing some time ago and described in an article published by the European Movement last November – http://euromove.org.uk/NorthernIreland.
We can only hope it is possible for Britain and Ireland to find some way to continue close trading and cultural ties and avoid the hardening of the border which Ciaran and I consider inevitable. To achieve this would require a high degree of diplomacy and forbearance, not to mention domestic political risk, on the part of not only these two countries but also the other 26 EU members. The long and troubled history of our two islands shows how easy it would be to slide back into dangerous division and potential conflict.
Thank you all for your comments, particularly the nice ones!
Just to respond to a couple:
@Paul Murray – I found it very interesting to read your perspective, given our similar backgrounds. I suspect our differing views may be explained by the generation gap as younger people do not typically share the same levels of antipathy in the EU institutions. That being said, I am not for one moment suggesting that the EU is perfect. However, some of the things you mention are those areas where the UK had achieved considerable derogations e.g. the social chapter, membership of the Eurozone. Given the outsized role that the UK also played in the development of financial services regulation, I think it is clear that the UK had a very special and privileged status within the EU, achieved over a great many years. I sometimes wonder that, if the UK were to create a new union of European states tomorrow from scratch, it may look very similar to that which they have now chosen to leave….
@Denis Loretto – Thank you for your kind words and for sharing your article. I would be very grateful if you could drop me an email at [email protected] as I would be very interested to know more about the European Movement.
Ciaran and Denis
Well done , as per my previous comments , particularly on the Alliance Party , can we do more to forge a relationship that enhances its chances, it is an admirable party ?
I sometimes wonder that, if the UK were to create a new union of European states tomorrow from scratch, it may look very similar to that which they have now chosen to leave
I would hope it would, except it would explicitly be and remain a co-operative of sovereign nations which wish to trade and generally co-operate together on things like scientific research, and it would neither seek to be a federal super-state, nor have the unnecessary trappings of one, like a flag, anthem, parliament, currency, or ‘citizenship’ (how can you be a citizen of something that isn’t a country, anyway?).
I would get enthusiastically behind such a co-operative union of nations.
Whether or not the border would become a “hard” border in the event of Brexit is a matter for the E.U., not for the U.K. and Irish governments. It seems to me that the situation would be as it was in the 1980s: passage with one’s personal goods within reasonable limits would be unrestricted and uncontrolled; commercial traffic would be subject to control by customs and excise authorities. Commercial vehicles would again be a sight on major cross-border roads. Minor cross-border roads would again be ‘unapproved roads” liable to spot checks by customs and excise. ‘Securing borders’ as imagined by Brexiteers would be almost impossible, as citizens of all European countries would still be able to cross without visas or with tourist visas. Unauthorised residence in the U.K. could, as now, be prevented by requiring residence permits linked to national insurance registration. But I do not think Brexit will ever happen. Once its unavoidable consequences become evident during negotiations (pull-outs, closures, redundancies, inflation, loss of entitlements etc.), too many will call “Stop!” for the U.K. government to be able, politically, to continue. Why doesn’t the Lib. Dem. party state unambiguously, “We won’t have it, we’ll abort negotiations if we can”?
Whether or not the border would become a “hard” border in the event of Brexit is a matter for the E.U., not for the U.K. and Irish governments
It’s the border between the UK and Ireland; they both specifically opted out of Schengen in order that it would remain so; of course it is a matter for the UK and Irish governments, why on Earth should anyone else, especially the EU, have any say whatsoever?
My business has been a big investor in Northern Ireland over the last few years and it’s fair to say that this probably wouldn’t have been possible if Brexit had been anticipated. As so often here the potential outcomes could be far more extreme than on the mainland, a hard border would be a disaster or having an open land border to an EU state could be a real opportunity.
One thing that does make my blood boil was firstly the appointment of Theresa “barely there” Villiers as SoS and then her backing for Brexit despite there being a huge cross party support for Remain. Notwithstanding her convictions, I can’t remember her having anything meaningful to say on NI during the referendum.
Hopefully the new SoS James Brokenshire (great name, maybe Cameron should change his to Brokenthenation?) may show a little more pragmatism towards calls for some form of special EU/UK status for NI which she immediately ruled out.
We should update this thread in the light of the decision of the European Commission about tax from Apple. The front page headline in The Irish Times of 31 August 2016 was ’13 billion euros EU’s Apple ruling leave Government facing split’. The Irish Prime Minister, Enda Kenny leads a Fine Gael team with support from Independents and some tolerance from Fianna Fail. The Independent TDs might not support the PM in appealing against the ruling. Apple certainly will appeal and will therefore not pay immediately. Even if Apple were to make a partial or entire payment the Irish government would not be entitled to spend it immediately. It would go into ‘escrow’ pending the outcome of the appeal, probably in several years time. The Republic does not have the Fixed Term Parliament Act. The timing of the next general election is uncertain and the outcome is uncertain.
The European Commission wants Ireland to use the money to repay debt, but there are always political and electoral pressures to spend.
According to Northern Ireland’s Deputy First Minister (SF), writing in The New European, leaving the EU would cost Northern Ireland about three billion. He had met Theresa May but she had not offered to make up the loss. The Irish Republic has, over the years, been reluctant to pick up a large bill for Northern Ireland, but this unexpected and arguably unlikely windfall might cause all sorts of political and financial speculation.
Denmark, Ireland and UK joined the EEC on 1 January 1973. According to UK PM Edward Heath there was an intention to have a common system of corporation tax, but in his memoirs after the Tories were defeated in 1997 he lamented the lack of progress. There is currently political pressure for that, but Ireland is against. Ireland continues to need inward investment and continues to suffer a high rate of net emigration.
A previous Fine Gael government saw education as the main answer to emigration, and invested accordingly, but the benefits occur in the medium term, longer than the parliamentary cycle of the Dail, and, regrettably, emigration continued.
The Financial Times has also commented about all sorts of international complications.
Nobody mentioned Luxembourg, which former British Commissioner Lord Cockfield had told us not to worry about. With hindsight he was wrong.
Tim 26th Jul ’16 – 10:25am I have never had access to security sources, but have always wondered exactly how the peace process would work. According to Bill Clinton (My Life, pages 800, 801, 808) the Provisional IRA responded to the Omagh bombing by telling those responsible that there would be trouble in the event of a repeat. President Clinton’s source was the Irish PM at the time, Bertie Ahern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertie_Ahern