Brexit and Militancy: Legacies of the Good Friday Agreement
By Julian Mattachione, Queen’s University
Northern Ireland faces an uneasy peace. Centuries of conflict, division, and imperialism have left wounds not easily healed. Throughout the 20th century, Northern Ireland was consumed by an asymmetric, low-level civil conflict. An ethnonationalist war was fought between Republican factions seeking to unify Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, against Loyalists who wanted to keep Northern Ireland in union with Britain. This conflict commonly referred to as “the Troubles”, officially ended in 1998 with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, only after claiming 3,600 lives and leaving a permanent legacy of division in Irish society.
The signing of a peace agreement does not always guarantee peace. Small militant factions and splinter groups often remain post-conflict, wielding significant political influence as public memory, social cleavages, and the infrastructure for asymmetric warfare are still present. This is the case in Northern Ireland. Although the disarmament and demobilization of militant groups occurred in the aftermath of the 1998 agreement, some belligerents avoided elimination, transforming into criminal organizations, social groups, and legitimate political parties. Generations of ideology, hate, and fear, do not disappear so easily. Two decades later, the socioeconomic and political circumstances of “Brexit” expose this societal disorder and threaten to plunge Northern Ireland back into a state of violence.
The 2016 referendum that saw Britain choose to leave the European Union saw Northern Ireland vote with a slight majority to remain in the European Union. The pro-EU cause was championed by Irish nationalists as a tool to push for Irish unity, while Brexit was championed by those who once supported Unionist causes. According to Nicholas Wright of University College London, the success found by the pro-EU camp shows that Unionist parties no longer hold an outright majority in Northern Ireland. Wright believes that about 70% of Northern Irish voters support parties that are in support of remaining with the European Union. However, with Northern Ireland voting to remain and Britain choosing to leave, it was feared that post-Brexit developments could antagonize dormant militant groups and give new life to an old conflict.
Political leaders recognized this problem, seeing that a hardened border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland would instigate ethno-nationalist tensions. Border conditions understandably became a priority in negotiations. Former UK Prime Minister Theresa May proposed, and current Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed that special considerations must be made to ensure stability. The arrangement created would see Northern Ireland remain as a part of the U.K. Customs Union but aligned with the European Union’s regulatory framework. Simply put, this arrangement would mean that trade between Northern Ireland and Britain must undergo custom checks during transit on the Irish Sea. This would create a clear distinction between two parts of the United Kingdom, something universally opposed by Unionist groups. Post-Brexit, several organized protests have rallied against this arrangement, with some criminal and paramilitary loyalist groups hinting at violent action.
The 1998 Good Friday Agreement redefined the governing relationship between the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, and the United Kingdom. It sought peace between the competing factions and determined Northern Ireland’s position between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, opting for no change without the consent of the majority. For academics Eileen Connolly and John Doyle of Dublin City University, the Brexit referendum has shifted the way Northern Ireland’s sovereignty is recognized. They believe that the anti-Brexit majority reflects the historic support given to Ireland’s government by the European Union and its member states, as the EU has refused to negotiate a land border between the Republic and Northern Ireland. Likewise, Brexit has challenged the stability and general peace created by the Good Friday Agreement, prompting new discourse on the concept of a unified Ireland. This discourse gives momentum to the fringe, militant groups of both pro-Union and pro-nationalist camps.
But what does this have to do with war and conflict? Underlying tensions and disparity not yet reconciled from generations of violence promote anti-British sentiment, a key factor in the countries decision to stay with the EU. In turn, ‘Brexit’ has brought new life to dormant militant and political groups. The 2019 report given by the Police Service of Northern Ireland determined an increase in “paramilitary violence” from previous years. It is thought that this increase directly relates to post-Brexit tensions. Unionist protests against proposed trade conditions have incited counter-protests from Republican factions, most notably, members of the New IRA — a successor of the paramilitary Irish Republican Army — who have conducted a series of targeted bombings and shootings against their political rivals. This violence culminated in 2019 with the murder of journalist Lyra McKee by supposed dissident Republicans during an Easter Rising commemorative demonstration.
Annekatrin Deglow, a researcher for Sweden’s Uppsala University, explains “armed conflicts shape dynamics during war, and these dynamics leave social legacies long after war is over.” For Northern Ireland, war is not a distant memory. Twenty-one years ago, the country was still in the midst of conflict. The signing of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement was successful at stabilizing a volatile situation but did not effectively address the ethno-sectarian cleavages existing in Northern Irish society. It is these cleavages that informed the Brexit vote, that inform every aspect of their political process, and that will continue to seek violence.
Julian is a fourth-year undergraduate student at Queen’s University, majoring in Political Studies and minoring in History. He is interested in Arctic security, Canadian sovereignty, climate security, and the role of non-state actors in international security. His current research explores the changing dynamics of Canada’s Arctic and the challenges of northern security. He is looking to pursue further education and employment with the Canadian Armed Forces.
