|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 12/99
The Difficult and the Possible—Mediation in Northern Ireland
Phase 1: The Art of Mediation Workshop
June 3, 1997
Mediation and Peace-Building
The Mediation Network for Northern Ireland was established in 1991 by a group of individuals who had been organising mediation training since 1986. The Network promotes the use of Third Party intervention in disputes and supports creative responses to conflict in Northern Ireland society.
In 1992, I began work as the Director (and first employee) of the Mediation Network. At the time of writing we employ two other practitioners, an administrator and two full time volunteers from the Mennonite Church (USA) In addition, we engage the services of ten sessional workers, as paid trainers or volunteer mediators, and we provide various support and guidance to about fifty practitioners across Northern Ireland. Within the near future we will employ an additional practitioner, an executive officer and a clerical assistant.
The Mediation Network seeks to promote a culture of Third Party intervention in conflict in Northern Ireland. We wish to foster an awareness that conflict can be ‘processed’ in ways which are positive and helpful. For too long in our society, people have lived with the notion that conflict offers two alternatives: the Fight or Flight syndrome—a belief that if you are strong enough you can fight in conflict and, if you feel too weak, you can take flight from it and engage in avoidance strategies. After more than a quarter century of violent conflict, we aim to capitalise on a growing awareness among our people that fighting and/or avoidance have not served us well and that more creative responses to conflict must be utilised.
This is nowhere more obvious than in our conflict over parades—the age-old tradition of marching with banners, bands and sashes to celebrate the Protestant identity and Reformed Faith. In recent years, Catholic protests against such parades have, in turn, led to widespread unrest with the potential of fragmenting the fragile stability of our divided society and even pushing our people towards Civil War.
The British Government’s response has been to commission a report from the North Group to recommend ways forward. When the Report of the Independent Review of Parades and Marches was published on 30 January, it was extremely gratifying to find that the use of mediation was affirmed within the report’s main recommendations and steps are now being taken to provide for the greater use of mediators to assist with the so-called Marching Problem.
In Northern Ireland, mediation is an example of a transition from peacekeeping to peace-building. By this I mean a change in our understanding of how peace really works; that ‘Peace-making’ involves more than condemnation of violence; that ‘Peace’ is built, gradually, over decades and generations. And that, central to the concept of building peace, is a belief in the fundamental importance of relationships based on respect and dignity. Mediation is one way in which we have been assisting in this task of establishing greater trust and respect between our divided people. In the case of the Mediation Network we have been greatly influenced by the thinking of Professor John Paul Lederach of Eastern Mennonite University in Virginia, USA
Through his contact with us since 1993, Lederach has helped us to appreciate the importance, firstly, of seeing peace-building as a multi-generational task involving the gradual transformation of a conflictual society and, secondly, of ensuring that peace-building becomes an organic phenomenon, at work at all levels of our society rather than the traditional, narrow view of peace being negotiated by political leaders alone.
I should also like to say a word about mediation as a method of NonViolence. Non-Violence is a belief that you can promote or defend Justice by serving Truth in ways which respect the dignity and integrity of human beings. As proponents of Non-Violent peace-building, mediators assume that in each situation of conflict everyone has a perspective which is valid and needs to be understood. Therefore, mediation is about enabling those in conflict to communicate with each other, to improve understandings and let Truth grow. When Truth is properly served, it does its own great work.
Sectors of Work
The Mediation Network has chosen five sectors in which to work within Northern Ireland society:
The Public Sector:
training officials within state sponsored bodies such as Housing and Social Work.
Politics:
supporting creative dialogue among political activists and developing ideas about peace-building within the political system.
The Justice System:
engaging the Police and Prison Service who are at the coal-face of conflict in N. Ireland.
The Churches:
providing opportunities for clergy to train and improve their capacities to intervene in communal conflict. In this respect it is worth noting that Northern Ireland has the highest rate of church attendance in Europe and, of course, religion is an historic theme of our conflict.
The Community:
again, providing training to the voluntary sector and supporting groups working in areas of Northern Ireland where Catholic and Protestant interfaces have produced a legacy of fear, suspicion and hatred.
We chose these sectors, partly because they reflect our own range of professional competence and partly because they have been the areas which have presented opportunities to develop mediative initiatives. However, we support others in their activities within the school and education system, the youth sector, family life and within the work-place.
Methodology
In Northern Ireland, mediation has four potential functions:
Mediation can address any one of these functions, or indeed, all of them in sequence.
Formal Mediation:
based on a model of mediation primarily developed within North America, with the parties in conflict sitting face to face for dialogue facilitated by the mediator acting as a neutral Third Party. Experience has taught us that our people are disinclined to participate in face to face dialogue with a mediator and that, while this model remains potentially valuable, we have had to develop more flexible ways of practising our trade.
Intermediation: More commonly we act as intermediaries, in situations where for various reasons, the parties to a conflict do not meet. In intermediation, we undertake three tasks:
Information: we bring information about the other party or disputant. This can take the form of a message from them.
Discussion: we facilitate separate confidential discussion with each side. In this discussion we may give analysis. It will be recognised that because of our contact with the other side (or sides) ours is an informed opinion. We are therefore able to infuse a ‘Sense of the Other’ to the discussion and thus encourage ‘Inclusive Thinking’—a capacity to think of the situation from the point of view of the opponent.
Communication: we may take a message from one side to the other. While a ‘communication’ is largely dictated by the disputants, we are careful to elicit maximum positivity and appropriate expressions of respect. The tone of communications becomes crucially important, with the mediator seeking to foster a greater degree of mutual respect between the parties and if communication progresses to the task of exploring accommodations, both sides are able to, in effect, work together in search of a solution which is sensitive to both their needs. We have used an Intermediation approach to our work in addressing the Parades Conflict.
As our experience has grown, I have identified three important factors which help to ensure the effectiveness of Intermediation:
‘Authoritative Engagement’: both sides should feel confident that they speak with authority and can reasonably hope to deliver on any arrangements which might ultimately be agreed.
Reciprocity: both sides should simultaneously engage in actions or undertakings which take the conflict positively forward. These might also be regarded as Confidence-building measures.
Credible Communication: both sides should feel that communication, once established, is beneficial and of value. They should also feel that their integrity is protected.
Mediative Behaviour:
The third category of mediation describes a wide variety of activity, most of which is not formally recognised as mediation. It includes the behaviour of ordinary citizens working effectively as third party interveners in conflictual situations across our society—in marriages and families; in neighbourhoods; community settings and the workplace. In this respect, the Mediation Network affirms those mediative practices which are indigenous to our people.
We resist the tendency to present mediation as something new and imported from abroad. We are simply giving shape to the non-violent impulses of our people and developing methodology which resonates with their inherent wisdom after a quarter century of bitter conflict.
However, it would be arrogant to maintain that we have all the answers and it is only proper to acknowledge the value of teaching those ‘social skills’ which have been so crucial to the development of mediation practice in the USA, such as ‘ paraphrasing’, ‘active listening’ and ‘problem solving.’
Mediative Behaviour has three key concepts:
Of course, there are dangers with this work. Each side is normally suspicious of ‘outsiders’ and, especially suspicious of those who spend time with the opposition. In this respect, we find it helpful to work in pairs, one Catholic and one Protestant, and utilise our respective ‘tribal’ instincts to establish and maintain a rapport with each side.
Practitioners
The Mediation Network believes that mediation practice can best develop in Northern Ireland with the help of three groups of people.
Language
Obviously, language is the staple diet of a mediator. However, in our experience in Northern Ireland, the use of language presents a range of problems. The jargon of Conflict Resolution, if adopted by one side, can become colonised by them so that ideas about Conflict Resolution can be viewed as part of the ideology of one side. An example of this is where Sinn Fein leaders call for a process of Conflict Resolution with confidence-building measures or when a (Catholic) Residents Group calls for mediation with a (Protestant) marching Order and mediation begins to look like a nationalist demand.
Another interesting point is that, while our divided people speak a shared language, they can often attribute different meanings to the same words. An example is the word ‘Consent’. For many Catholics this signifies ‘respect’ while for many Protestants it implies ‘permission’ or sanction. Nationalists speak of ‘Parity of Esteem’ which Unionists often view as discrimination against the (Protestant) majority. ‘Compromise’ is looked on with universal suspicion. Therefore, as mediators we find ourselves constantly having to steer paths through potentially explosive verbal mine-fields.
In the culture of our people, the use of metaphor is a productive tool of mediation. Recently, a community group tried to begin a mediation process by asking us to deliver details of a final deal to the other side. Observing that the group leaders were building workers, I suggested that starting a mediation process with terms for the final outcome was like a builder starting with the chimney. My point needed no further elucidation.
I should like to make one last point about the language of mediation in Northern Ireland. The terminology such as Conflict Resolution, Intervention, Transformation, Conflict Processes, Third Parties, can be quite abstract for many people. The language of mediation is comparatively new. It is, perhaps, a new way to describe old precepts. However, until mediation becomes more widely respected and becomes more credible in the life of our society, its theories remain abstractions and aspirations. There is, therefore, a need for a ‘middle language’—for mediators to speak the language of ordinary people but also to include some vision and creativity in their words.
The terms of mediation should blend Familiarity with Innovation.
Neutrality
I would suggest that in Northern Ireland there are very few, if any, truly neutral people. Certainly, for those of us born in N. Ireland, we are normally perceived to come from one or other side of the religious divide. I believe that mediators should not feel the need to deny their authenticity as a Catholic or Protestant but, rather, utilise their background in the practice of their trade. Indeed, one’s perceived religious (or even ethnic) identity can be a bonus to the work. As a Catholic, I have found Protestants to be anxious to make themselves understood by me, while Catholics can enjoy a sense of safety when speaking bluntly to someone from their own ‘tribe’. (The same applies to my Protestant colleague.)
While we need not feign neutrality, we do, however, need to remain impartial in our work. As with any other professions, impartiality is an important hallmark of a mediator.
In this respect it is also important to differentiate between empathy and sympathy. Empathy involves a capacity to understand a party’s feelings and to demonstrate this understanding to the party. Sympathy infers that you agree with the party. A mediator (or anyone performing a third party role in conflict) needs to empathise rather than sympathise, even though, privately, the mediator may feel more sympathy for one side than the other.
In my experience, I have found that retaining a mentality of Impartiality, of being ‘open minded’ in my work has often made me ‘other centred’—with more awareness of what others believe and feel about a situation, rather than noticing my own beliefs and feelings. It has sometimes been the case that I have only begun to sense my own feelings when some time has elapsed after working in a conflictual situation. Only then can one feel safe to indulge in the comparative luxury of one’s own attitudes and beliefs.
Intimacy and Proximity
There are many people active in Community Relations work in N. Ireland whose sense of place is to be close to one or other side in the conflict. By living or working almost exclusively in one area or by circulating within one religious tradition, such activists achieve a certain intimacy with that side. This is an important function in our fragmented society where it is necessary for besieged people to have supportive allies. However, one’s intimacy and identification with one side can rule out the potential for an equally close and collaborative relationship with the other side.
A mediator, on the other hand, should not strive for intimacy with one side. Rather the mediator’s function, his ‘sense of place’ is to be in proximity to each side. Proximity requires the mediator to maintain a relationship with each side and to stay ‘close’ enough to the conflict to remain sensitive to it.
The Use of Outsiders
I should like to comment on the use of outsiders or foreigners as practitioners in the Northern Ireland conflict. Again, I would divide them into a number of categories. Firstly, tourists—those who come to see and go on their merry way. Such people are not usually troublesome, though they can consume valuable time. Secondly, fixers or missionaries—people who come to sort us out and solve our problems. Such people are met with polite hospitality rather than honest rejection and it can take such an individual some years to learn they are not being taken seriously. Thirdly, pilgrims—people who come with a genuine sense of respect for our people and our conflict. These are most useful and have four vital functions:
The Difficult and the Possible
One of the biggest difficulties with mediation is that it is so often confused with negotiation. Of course there are profound differences.
Negotiation gives primacy to the issues of the conflict . Mediation gives primacy to the relationships.
In negotiation the sides set out their demands. In mediation, they express their needs.
Negotiation is, perhaps, more efficient. Mediation is, ultimately, more profound. People in conflict want to ‘get to the meat’ as quickly as possible, but there is a better chance of real progress if time is taken to establish mutual respect first.
In negotiation, compromise is the goal. In mediation, compromise is an option.
Facilitating dialogue among politicians is an example of the kind of formal mediation practised by the Mediation Network.
It is difficult to win and maintain credibility as a trusted outsider. Politicians are members of a fairly exclusive club. Like Luftwaffe and RAF pilots, they are opponents but are bonded by their common exposure to the same dangers. Mediators are ground crew, outside the fliers’ circle. A mediator can plot a suitable course for the pilots, regarding the theme of dialogue and the questions asked. Like any good air traffic controller the mediator must think about their safety at all times—after all, who is going to trust a controller who is responsible for a mid-air collision? The mediator must also remember to let the politicians do the flying and resist the urge to take over one of the planes.
Another important point in formal mediation is to minimise the physics and maximise the chemistry. In other words, avoid too much technique when facilitating political dialogue; the mediator should concentrate on creating the right atmosphere. In my experience I have found that sometimes all the mediator needs to do is make the tea!
Intermediation
A useful example of the difficulties and possibilities of Intermediation is the funeral of INLA 1 leader, Gino Gallagher in February 1996. Gino Gallagher was murdered in the first round of an INLA feud. As his funeral cortege formed up outside his home, the police concluded that a paramilitary show of strength was about to take place. The police moved in and struggles broke out between them and the mourners. A number of people sustained injuries. The coffin was taken back inside the wake house. The IRSP 2 and the Gallagher family declared that the police would not be allowed to interfere with this republican funeral. The police re-iterated their determination not to allow a paramilitary display. The funeral was postponed for twenty-four hours. A stand-off had begun. I was made aware of the situation at 5:00 p.m. that day. I contacted the police and offered to help. I was invited to meet police commanders in Woodburn R.U.C. station at 6:00 p.m. Therein lay my first difficulty.
Going into the trenches—among the opposing sides. I had to go in and out of the police station without looking like a collaborator to republican observers. Later in the evening I travelled to the wake house to meet with IRSP members and faced the same difficulty—looking like a collaborator to police observers.
In my first meeting with police, they welcomed any help I could give but warned me that the situation seemed hopeless: there would be no change in police policy relating to funerals. Here lay another difficulty -
Moving beyond positions. As I met with each side I was careful to ask them questions which elicited the humanity of the situation—a tragic situation with a young man being murdered, made worse by the traumatic events of his funeral that afternoon. The situation began to move by enabling each side to communicate their regret about the fracas and their agreement on the need for a dignified burial. Throughout this time I had to cope with a third difficulty -
Maintaining Impartiality. As a Catholic I found it personally distasteful to behold a funeral being disrupted. Yet I felt equally strongly about the INLA’s use of violence. In this respect I knew I was not neutral. The important thing was to be aware of that personal reality and to act professionally impartial.
Winning trust was another difficulty—with the police, that I would not undermine their sense of responsibility about the rules for funerals. With the IRSP and the family, that I would not undermine their sense of dignity and loyalty to the deceased and his supreme sacrifice. In this respect, I was helped by having a relationship with individuals on both sides. People with decision-making roles on both sides already knew me and, therefore, trusted my integrity.
Finding stamina is a challenge to those who engage in intermediation, either over a long period of months (night after night) or over a long period of hours in crisis situations. In the case of the Gallagher funeral, I finished my last meeting at 6:30 a.m. on the second day of the stand-off. I travelled home for an hour’s sleep and returned to continue working in the hours before the funeral.
Withstanding criticism is one of the greatest difficulties for a mediator. At 1:00 a.m. outside the wake house, a Sinn Fein councillor said to me: “Brendan, I hope you’re not going to foist some kind of compromise on these people.” This was an example of what can happen when mediation becomes visible. Paranoia grows quickly among those on the ‘near outside’, looking in. Perhaps the best response is to face the criticism and challenge it. In this instance, I called the Sinn Fein person back and affirmed my role in clear and simple language. Of course, facing criticism requires a degree of self-confidence and self-awareness. Self-awareness requires the mediator to be vigilant about the twin dangers of either manipulating one of the parties or being ‘colonised’ by one of the parties and serving their agenda.
Bearing Witness. In my experience of disputes which arouse a high level of public interest, it has been necessary, as a mediator, to assure all sides that in the event of people reneging on commitments or misrepresenting the mediation process, I would bear public witness to the truth.
Gino Gallagher’s funeral provided an illustration of the difficulties involved in bearing witness. In the middle of the night, when both sides had agreed the basis for acceptable funeral arrangements, the question arose of how to ensure that both sides kept their part of the bargain. I then agreed that if either side dishonoured the understanding I would contact the media and release details of the mediation process. This presented me with uncomfortable possibilities. If the police reneged, I would have to step forward in defence of the IRSP and, by association, the INLA. This would endanger my reputation and that of my agency by conveying a sense of the Mediation Network as pro-republican and anti-police. Similarly, if the IRSP reneged, I would have to step forward in defence of the police and thereby create an impression of being anti-republican. Either scenario could do long term damage to our work in N. Ireland.
Nevertheless, I was prepared to accept that risk and the parties’ confidence in my integrity was an important means of under-writing the funeral arrangements. In the event, of course, the funeral passed off peacefully and indeed, with a degree of goodwill between the two sides, in spite of their deep enmity. Bearing public witness remains one of the more controversial aspects of my work since it goes against more orthodox views of mediators as people who are not seen and not heard. However, the Mediation Network have been developing the practice of mediation in disputes with a Community Relations significance. In a sense, those in dispute—the actors in the conflict—are surrogates, acting out a conflict which ultimately involves all of our wider society. Therefore, at times it is necessary to address that wider audience about disputes which have societal significance. In addition, there is an on-going ‘mission to explain’; a need to educate our society about the concept of mediation as a process. Public understanding and goodwill open up a much greater potential for those engaged in conflict.
Nevertheless, there is a danger of being seen as self-serving; of seeking publicity. Therefore, as a general rule, I have been disinclined to accept invitations from the media.
Being an ally to all sides is an essential function of the mediator but also a significant difficulty because, in our culture, people often expect everyone to take sides. But, mediation is a method of Non-Violence and Non-Violence is about serving Truth which each side possesses. Mediation helps them to share it especially with the opponent. After all, it is the truth which will set us free.
I should like to mention one last difficulty:
Being a non-anxious presence in situations of extreme anxiety. This is especially difficult when in addition to being a mediator, you are also a citizen, a native, wrestling with a problem which affects your life and the lives of those whom you love. However, it is fundamental to effective mediation. Staying out of anxiety can be difficult when the conflict begins to move away from the mediator. But it is foolish and fruitless to chase after a conflict. In any case, conflict is a living thing with moods and swings and, while it might move off in a non-mediative direction, the mediator can only ‘wish it well’ and know that, if appropriate, the conflict may swing back, providing further opportunities to serve Truth again.
Endnotes
Note 1: Irish National Liberation Army Back.
Note 2: Irish Republican Socialist Party Back.
Email this citation