Talking to Groups that Use Terror.pdf - United States Institute of Peace
Talking to Groups that Use Terror.pdf - United States Institute of Peace
Talking to Groups that Use Terror.pdf - United States Institute of Peace
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Step 6: Protect the Process from the Effects <strong>of</strong> Violenceovernight; the accuser and alleged viola<strong>to</strong>rs would have thirty minutes onthe following day <strong>to</strong> makes their cases, followed by a question-and-answersession and a general discussion; then the governments would decide. 38Whatever penalties are imposed for a violation <strong>of</strong> the ground rules,they should not be so severe <strong>that</strong> they au<strong>to</strong>matically destroy the process.Penalties might include public criticism, s<strong>to</strong>pping diplomatic contacts,and temporary suspension from participation in the negotiations.Readmittance <strong>to</strong> the talks can be made contingent on the suspended partycommitting no further violence in the interim.Although the temporary expulsions <strong>of</strong> the Ulster Democratic Party (UDP)and Sinn Fein following murders committed by their military wings weredismissed by some as “a spell in the sin bin,” they were the “minimum actionrequired <strong>to</strong> justify claims <strong>that</strong> the Mitchell principles would be enforced. Theacceptance <strong>of</strong> the suspension by the UDP and Sinn Fein, however truculently,indicated their determination <strong>to</strong> remain within the peace process.” 39A media<strong>to</strong>r or negotia<strong>to</strong>r should keep the door open as long as possiblefor a PAG <strong>that</strong> seems <strong>to</strong> have a genuine interest in recommencingnegotiations and for groups <strong>that</strong> have previously opposed participation inthe talks but now have indicated an interest in renouncing violence andengaging in the political process. But the door should be closed firmlyonce a PAG shows itself <strong>to</strong> be unwilling or unable <strong>to</strong> refrain from violence.ETA has entered in<strong>to</strong> negotiations at various times over several decades buthas <strong>of</strong>ten undermined those talks by its attachment <strong>to</strong> violence. In March2006, for instance, ETA declared a “permanent cease-fire” and expressedinterest in peace negotiations, but as those talks progressed ETA under<strong>to</strong>ok anumber <strong>of</strong> provocative acts (such as stealing three hundred weapons andammunition) and then de<strong>to</strong>nated a bomb at Madrid airport, killing twopeople and prompting the Spanish government <strong>to</strong> publicly denounce theexplosion and withdraw from the talks. Four years later, when ETA asked fortalks, the Spanish government rejected the request.The media<strong>to</strong>r must never appear <strong>to</strong> be rewarding violence. Forinstance, do not give the impression <strong>that</strong> violence has succeeded ingenerating a concession. Even if an act <strong>of</strong> violence has, in fact, spurred aconcession, the announcement <strong>of</strong> <strong>that</strong> concession should be delayed aslong as possible so <strong>that</strong> the causal connection is not obvious.87