The Quebec and Northern Ireland Conflict: the Use of Violence to Promote Independence And/Or Recognition

Politicus Journal

The Quebec and Northern Ireland Conflict: The Use of Violence to Promote Independence and/or Recognition

Harrison Kennedy

This article investigates the use of violence by separatist movements within their respective countries, to examine how effective they are in gaining independence or recognition from the state. The main examples that will be compared are Québec and Northern Ireland. This article focuses on the time period from approximately 1920 to 1980, a time when there were rising tensions among separatists in Québec and Nationalists/Catholics in Northern Ireland. In both cases, led to the use of violence as means to gain independence. The article will show how a group of terrorist organizations used violent means in order to achieve independence for their respective regions. The use of violence would prove to be unsuccessful in achieving independence, but nevertheless would promote the separatist movement to find alternative peaceful ways to achieve greater recognition within the state.

Introduction

This article examines the use of violence, such as bombings, assassinations, or kidnappings, by separatist movements as a means to achieve their ends. It questions both the degree to which these acts of violence were supported by the independence movements, and how effective they were in achieving recognition from the state’s government from which they sought independence. This article will focus on a comparison of Québec and Northern Ireland. This comparison is apt due to the similarities of their nationalist movements and parliamentary structure. Both utilize the Westminster system of government and present similar timeframes of violence during the 1960s and 1970s. The struggles of the movements in Québec and Northern Ireland centred on the respective population's national identity and their minority status within their countries. Québec's people faced the challenge of the French language losing its status as the primary language of the province, while Northern Ireland's struggles involved the Catholic minority, who wanted to separate from Great Britain. This article will ultimately argue that the use of violence was used to

3 Politicus Journal promote independence and recognition, also explaining how the use of violence fueled the independence movements in the comparative cases of Québec and Northern Ireland. However, the use of violence would be unsuccessful to achieve independence for the respective regions. The resolve of the governing bodies had been underestimated, which necessitated finding less violent routes to achieve greater recognition within the regions. This article first explores the background history of Québec and Northern Ireland’s nationalist groups from approximately 1920 to 1960, as a means to better understand the history of struggle and suppression within their respective states. It is important to examine the position of each government in order to understand the difficulties faced by each of the independence movements. Secondly, the article provides an examination of the rise of violence by nationalist movements during the 1960s and 1970s in their efforts to achieve independence from the governing country. This section will also discuss how the respective governments responded to the rise of violence by political and police/military means. Thirdly, after reflecting on the use of violence by separatist movements, this article addresses how violence itself provided the inspiration for them to continue their efforts; rather than giving up their cause. They were determined that their efforts would not be wasted, so they sought other non-violent means to continue the separatist movement during the 1980s. Separatism as a movement would thus undergo a transformation; though violence had been ineffective, in both cases it had strengthened the will to continue.

Definitions

Before going further, it is important to define some key terms. Separatism or independence movements can be defined as minority ethnic or cultural groups pursuing their own nationalist goals, which are different from the main collective of the state’s people ethnically and culturally.1 In addition, violence is the use of physical force against one’s perceived enemy.2 The examples shown in this article will show separatist organizations’ use of violent methods, which include bombings, assassinations and kidnappings. The use of violence can result from a degree of

1 Peter Russell, Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians Become a Sovereign People, 3rd ed (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004), 77, 108. 2 Tommy McKearney, The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament (London: Pluto Press, 2011), 3.

4 Politicus Journal oppression being put on a select group by a state. This in turn is deemed by the oppressed group as justification for the use of physical violence against the state, to challenge its central control. The term terrorism can be understood as “in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause… with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public.”3 These definitions help focus the understanding of these terms, which will be used throughout the rest of the article.

Historical Background of Quebec and Northern Ireland

Québec struggled with its identity significantly in the early half of the 20th century, especially as a result of the challenges to the French language and culture within the Federation of Canada. The 1920s to the 1940s saw the rise of industrialization in Québec, but Québecers had difficulty coping with this kind of expansion, due to inadequate education and training. 4 More importantly, the French language was not an integral part of the business, industrial or technological fields, which were dominated by English-speaking people. There are many examples of French workers striking due to this unequal treatment of the French language and culture, such as the Asbestos strike in 1949. French Canadians developed a defensive attitude against English Canadian domination.5 The Québecois people formed the majority in Québec and lived in their own province within the Canadian Federation. Québec’s Government, under Maurice Duplessis from the late 1940s through most of the 1950s, created little change in Québec society and arguably Duplessis lacked progressive intentions. Progress in Québec would not improve until his death in 1959 and the rise of the Québec Liberal Party in 1960, leading to a new age for Québec.6 Northern Ireland faced its own struggles during the same timeframe, though different in some ways to those of Québec. Northern Ireland is a state in which a fight for domination exists between two groups. Ireland was partitioned in 1920, a move which was ratified with the Anglo-

3 Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 83.01. 4 Laurier LaPierre, “Quebec: October 1970,” The North American Review 256, no. 3 (1971): 24- 25. 5 Peter Desbarats, Rene: A Canadian in Search of a Country (Toronto: Seal Books, 1976), 89-90. 6 Luc Bernier, “Chapter 7: Who Governs in Quebec? Revolving Premiers and Reforms.” In Executive Styles in Canada: Cabinet Structures and Leadership Practices in Canadian Government, ed. Luc Bernier, Keith Brownsey and Michael Howlett (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010), 133-134.

5 Politicus Journal

Irish Treaty in 1921.7 Thus the southern part of Ireland became a free state with dominion status and a Catholic majority, whereas Northern Ireland would remain a part of Great Britain with a Protestant majority and a minority Catholic population. It is important to understand that in Northern Ireland the population had two factions, the first being the Unionist/Protestants, who were loyal to the union with Great Britain. The second faction was made up of the nationalists, who were mostly Catholics seeking to reunite all of Ireland.8 Northern Ireland developed into a “particularist regime,” a state where one group of people imposed hegemonic control over all other minority groups within the state, in this case the Catholics.9 There was a great deal of discrimination by the Unionist/Protestants against the Nationalist/Catholics. This included limitations on Catholics who could vote in elections, discrimination in employment and difficulty obtaining housing; Catholics generally had fewer skills compared to Protestants.10 The oppressive use of police and security services increased with the Special Powers Act in 1922 which enabled authorities to intern people without trial, removed the need for warrants, established curfews, prohibited inquiries (i.e. into authorities killing civilians) and authorized the use of force to obtain information.11 This would continue over the decades and led to the rise of protests as well as eventual violence.

Rising Nationalism and the Use of Violence

The 1960s saw the rise of a strong nationalistic movement in Québec. Part of this was called the Quiet Revolution, which was a major political event with the Québec Liberal Party coming into power.12 Québec became more defined as a nation, with the purpose of the Québec government shifting to be more involved in the protection of French Canadian values in Québec. In addition, the Quiet Revolution resulted in Québecois realizing they were able to control their own destiny through the Quebec government’s reforms. However, there would also be the rise of Québec

7 Jonathan Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 2nd ed. (Routledge: New York, 2013), 15. 8 Ibid., 3. 9 Brendan O’Leary and John McGarry, The Politics of Antagonism Understanding Northern Ireland, 2nd ed. (London: The Athlone Press Ltd, 1997), 108-109. 10 Ibid., 119-120, 129-130. 11 Ibid., 125-127. 12 Laurier LaPierre, “Québec: October 1970” The North American Review 256, no. 3 (1971): 25.

6 Politicus Journal

Separatism. In 1960, the political organization Rally for National Independence asserted its main aim as the “outright independence of Québec”.13 During the 1960s, a preliminary report of the Canadian Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism stated that the disadvantage of the French-speaking Canadians lay especially in economic and social terms, including low wages and underrepresentation in government employment and public service.14 As an outcome of the Commission, the Federal Government enacted both English and French as the official languages in 1969.15 However, the nationalism movement was on the rise in Québec and was beginning to use violence to have their voice heard. The Front de liberation du Québec (Québec Liberation Front – FLQ) was established in 1963 as a separatist revolutionary terrorist group to lead worker uprisings, which in turn targeted English businesses and political establishments with the use of “robberies, violence, bombings, kidnappings and selective assassinations, culminating in insurrection and revolution.”16 The FLQ’s actions escalated in intensity throughout the 1960s.17 The FLQ terrorist group’s objective was “the violent destruction of the Canadian Federation – the disruption, through criminal activity, of a country whose population had conferred political responsibility on [the Federal government].”18 The FLQ was not a unified body, but operated as cells, which “were constantly breaking up and reforming because of police raids, arrests, and convictions in court, and also because of differences among the members.”19 April 1963 saw the first death, a 65 year old watchman and war veteran at a Canadian Military recruitment centre caused by an FLQ bomb.20 The FLQ responded: “[u]nfortunately, a revolution cannot be carried out without bloodshed. A man is dead, but the

13 Reginald Whitaker, Secret Service: Political Policing in Canada from the Fenians to Fortress America (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012), 272. 14 Janet Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 26. 15 Ibid., 27-28. 16 William Tetley, The October Crisis, 1970: An Insider View (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007), 18-19, 21. 17 LaPierre, “Québec: October 1970,” 26. 18 Pierre E. Trudeau, Memoirs (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1993), 132. 19 Tetley, The October Crisis, 1970: An Insider View, 21. 20 Whitaker, Secret Service: Political Policing in Canada, 272.

7 Politicus Journal revolution will go forward.”21 There were more than 200 bombs detonated between 1963 and October 1970.22 The FLQ was seen as a growing and active threat during the early 1960s and continued to escalate their activities. The Québec separatist movement started to rise significantly, exemplified by the use of violence by the FLQ during the October Crisis, which started on October 5, 1970 with the kidnapping of James Cross, the British Trade Commissioner. The FLQ demands included the publication of the FLQ manifesto, the liberation of political prisoners, an airplane to transport the kidnappers to Cuba and $500,000 in gold.23 On October 10, Québec’s Minister of Labour and Immigration, Pierre Laporte, was kidnapped by a different FLQ cell and would later be executed on October 17.24 The October Crisis found the Federal Government, the Québec Provincial Government, the City of Montréal and their respective police forces underprepared as they “had never before experienced such a concentrated terrorist action, with kidnappings and sustained confrontation.”25 The October Crisis resulted in a major turning point for Québec, as it was driven into a chaotic period of domestic violence and disorder. Hours after the kidnapping of Pierre Laporte, Québec Premier Bourassa called on Prime Minister Trudeau to enact the War Measures Act.26 Trudeau’s response to Bourassa was that the Québec Attorney General could request armed forces to aid them, but the WMA could not be simply enacted. The federal government also had concern about a lack of intelligence of the current crisis, making it difficult to determine if Québec was actually in a “state of emergency” that would justify imposition of the WMA.27 They both decided to wait and see how events progressed.28 Under specific circumstances the WMA can be used when there is “a state of war, real or apprehended, or insurrection, real or apprehended”; therefore, under threat of a possible insurrection in Québec the WMA was officially enacted on October 16, 1970.29 By the time that Cross was released from captivity in early December, the Police Services in Québec

21 Ibid., 272. 22 Ibid., 31-32. 23 LaPierre, “Québec: October 1970,” 23. 24 Whitaker, Secret Service: Political Policing in, 32, 21-22, 24. 25 Tetley, The October Crisis, 1970: An Insider View, 94. 26 Trudeau, Memoirs, 137. 27 Ibid., 137. 28 Ibid., 137-138. 29 Ibid., 142.

8 Politicus Journal had arrested 453 people during the enactment of the WMA.30 In addition, approximately 200 people were arrested prior to WMA enactment. On November 1970, the Québec Government estimated the FLQ had 100-125 men as part of the terrorist group, which was enough to make the Québec Government concerned about the stability of the law and order of Québec.31 In the end, the use of violence by the FLQ did not achieve independence for Québec. However, this did promote independence to be pursued by other non-violent means, due to the strength of the Canadian Government and its military reaction to the situation. The use of violence can also be seen in the actions of Nationalists/Catholics in Northern Ireland, who were the primary agitators for change. The Nationalists advocated for reforms due to the discrimination faced by Catholics in the job market, housing, unfair electoral reform and the stern powers used by the police authorities in Northern Ireland throughout the mid-1960s.32 The actions were unproductive until 1968 and the use of civil rights marches, “which were to become increasingly provocative.”33 Nationalists/Catholics challenged the status quo of Unionist/Protestant domination of Northern Ireland and faced attacks by Unionists and even by government authorities.34 Inspired by the civil rights movement of African Americans in the United States, Northern Ireland saw a similar rise in the advocacy of civil rights during the 1960s.35 The British Army was deployed in August 1969 in order to stabilize the region.36 The British Army’s deployment was to help maintain the status quo of the political power in Northern Ireland, which was a disadvantage to Nationalists/Catholics.37 There were many issues that incited the rise in the use of violence in Northern Ireland at this time, including the internment of Catholics in 1971 by the British authorities.38 Another issue occurred in January 30, 1972, when British soldiers fired

30 LaPierre, Québec: October 1970, 28. 31 Tetley, The October Crisis, 1970: An Insider View, 28. 32 Joseph Ruane and Jennifer Todd, The Dynamics of Conflict in Northern Ireland: Power, Conflict and Emancipation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 124-125. 33 Ibid., 124-125. 34 McKearney, The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament, 3. 35 Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 36. 36 Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War, 20. 37 Jonathan Tonge, Northern Ireland (Cambridge: Polity, 2006), 18-19. 38 Ibid., 44-45.

9 Politicus Journal on a nationalist civil rights crowd of approximately 3000-5000 people in Londonderry; 13 civilians were killed and similar amount were injured.39 The peaceful protests transitioned into the use of violence by the beginning of 1969, due to the failure, by peaceful means, to attain civil rights.40 The Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) was not fully established until 1970. Their purpose was to reunite Ireland and end British rule by violent means, which they hoped would eventually restore balance for the rights of Nationalists/Catholics in Northern Ireland.41 The PIRA continued the legacy of hundreds of years of Irish conflict against British rule and they adhered to the proclamation of the 1916 declaration uprising that all of Ireland is to be an Irish Republic.42 In 1971 and 1972, the PIRA started a campaign against British rule in Northern Ireland, in which it targeted British soldiers and bombed British and Unionist owned businesses.43 In February 1971, the first British soldier was killed by the PIRA, which would start to grow stronger by attaining increased finances and gaining access to modern Russian and Libyan made weaponry.44 In July 1972, PIRA targeted Belfast, which resulted in the deaths of nine people, becoming known as Bloody Sunday.45 These incidents would greatly fuel anger towards the British and Unionist rule in Northern Ireland. A bombing campaign started in England, targeting London in 1973 and also led to the killings of 22 civilians in a Birmingham pub in 1974.46 In response to the violence, the legislature in Northern Ireland was prorogued in 1972 and the British Government established direct rule in Northern Ireland.47 The conflict in Northern Ireland would continue, a conflict that would be difficult to halt, due to the mutual anger and hatred between both groups.

39 Lord John Widgery, Bloody Sunday: Lord Widgery’s Report of Events in Londonderry Northern Ireland on 30 January 1972 (London: Stationary Office, 2001), 1, 23. 40 McKearney, The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament, 1. 41 Tonge, Northern Ireland, 41, 61. 42 Ibid., 41. 43 McKearney, The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament, 112. 44 Tonge, Northern Ireland, 46. 45 Ibid., 47. 46 Tonge, Northern Ireland, 48. 47 Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 76-77.

10 Politicus Journal

Peaceful Means of Independence/Resolution

The use of violence was not successful in attaining Québec independence, but it would help promote the movement through non-violent means, especially through the political field. The Parti Québécois (PQ), which was a separatist party, rose to power in 1976, earning 71 seats in the Québec legislature with 41.4 percent of the votes.48 The major enactment by the PQ was legislating the protection of the French language in order to avoid the dwindling use of French in Canada, thereby protecting the presence of the culture in Québec.49 The PQ was deeply interested in separating from Canada, and developed the concept of Sovereignty-Association to allow equal working partnership between Québec and Canada and to “increase the autonomy of the Québec, but abdicate part of sovereignty to maintain economic ties with Canada.”50 A referendum on Sovereignty-Association was scheduled for 1980. The Québec referendum would ask Québecers to give permission for the government to “negotiate sovereignty for Québec and a new political, economic and linguistic relationship with the rest of Canada.”51 The Québec Liberal Party was opposed to the wording of the referendum question, and challenged that the PQ party did not explain how the economic situation could radically change the relationship between the provincial and the Federal government.52 The rising interest for Québec independence from Canada continued to grow. In 1962 only eight percent of Québecers wanted to separate, rising to 20 percent in 1976, then finally 25 percent immediately before the referendum.53 However, there was a great deal of advocacy by the Federal government for Québecers to vote against the referendum question, in order to allow negotiations to be conducted for constitutional amendments.54 On May 20, 1980, the Québec referendum resulted in 59.6 percent of Québecers voting “No” against 40.4 percent voting “Yes”.55

48 Francois Rocher, “Self-determination and the Use of Referendums: the Case of Québec,” International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 27, no. 1 (2014): 28. 49 Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War, 27-28. 50 Rocher, “Self-determination and the Use of Referendums: the Case of Québec,” 28-29. 51 Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War, 28. 52 Rocher, “Self-determination and the Use of Referendums: the Case of Québec,” 31. 53 Hudson Meadwell, “The Politics of Nationalism in Québec,” World Politics 45, no. 2 (1993): 231. 54 Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War, 28. 55 Trudeau, Memoirs, 283-284.

11 Politicus Journal

The end of the referendum led to constitutional talks with the provinces. Rene Lévesque attempted to halt the progress of the patriation of the 1982 Canadian Constitution and Charter.56 Trudeau saw the final success in the patriation of the Constitution Act of 1982 including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.57 The patriating of the Canadian Constitution and the Charter in 1982 can be seen as a means to bring together the two founding groups of Canada.58 The independence movement did see the benefits of the use of violence in promoting independence by other means through the PQ, but the Québec referendum results in 1980 were decisive in showing the Québec people’s desire to remain within Canada. The Troubles in Northern Ireland saw the use of violence continued into the 1980s in the struggle to force British withdrawal, but resulted in a changing purpose for hope of equality in Northern Ireland, rather than reunification with Ireland.59 In 1984, the Grand Hotel in Brighton was bombed by the PIRA, which was almost successful in the attempt to kill key Conservative Cabinet Ministers and United Kingdom (UK) Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.60 The bombings by the PIRA forced a need to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict, for which the UK and Ireland established the Anglo-Irish Agreement in 1985.61 These discussions were held between Ireland and the UK, in order to find a peaceful resolution that can be implemented in Northern Ireland.62 This agreement enabled the creation of a binational structure in Northern Ireland, to respect both Catholic and Protestant interests. The agreement additionally provided a working relationship to have the UK and Ireland work together on the future of the Northern Ireland peace process, which would continue into the 1990s. They were able to resolve the issue of establishing fairer policies, such as lessening discrimination against Catholics for housing and employment.63 The Unionists were opposed to the Irish Government having a say in internal matters in Northern Ireland.64 However, the Nationalists were content that the Anglo-Irish Agreement enabled support

56 Ibid., 326-327. 57 Ibid., 329. 58 Muller, Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War, 29. 59 Tonge, Northern Ireland, 23. 60 Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years (London: Harper Press, 2011), 379-383. 61 Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 127. 62 Thatcher, The Downing Street Years 396-399. 63 Tonge, Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 138-139. 64 Ibid., 131.

12 Politicus Journal from Ireland, including that of an Irish identity connection.65 Ultimately, the PIRA’s use of violence would not lead to the independence of Northern Ireland, but would bring greater attention to discussion for attaining peace, especially between Catholics and Protestants, since the use of violence did not result in unification of all Ireland.

Conclusion

The use of violence can be seen to promote independence movements in the cases of Québec and Northern Ireland, by providing encouragement for the struggles faced within their respective countries. Ultimately, the use of violence led to both independence movements to find alternative ways in order to find a successful means to advance their causes. However, the use of violence can be seen to have had a greater and more sustained impact on the population of Northern Ireland than it has had on the population of Québec. In Canada, the French language is recognized as an official language after the Constitution Act, 1982, though Québec symbolically did not sign the Constitution due to the resistant PQ Government.66 Northern Ireland would make gains towards resolutions to create a more stable government, to respect both Unionist/Protestants and Nationalists/Catholics, but would not allow the Catholics equal participation until the 1990s. Although the use of violence had been condemned by the respective governments, it did give rise to greater recognition for the independence movements that were oppressed or marginalized within their states. The use of violence can be seen as being used when a group of people of an ethnic or cultural group are greatly marginalized within a state. In the end, the use of violence for independence or separatist movements seems, from these examples, likely to achieve little more than finding an alternative for a more peaceful dialogue with the central government of the country.

65 Ibid., 135. 66 Trudeau, Memoirs, 326-327.

13 Politicus Journal

Bibliography

Bernier, Luc. “Chapter 7: Who Governs in Quebec? Revolving Premiers and Reforms.” In Executive Styles in Canada: Cabinet Structures and Leadership Practices in Canadian Government, ed. Luc Bernier, Keith Brownsey and Michael Howlett, 131-154. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010. Criminal Code. R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. Desbarats, Peter. Rene: A Canadian in Search of a Country. Toronto: Seal Books, 1976. LaPierre, Laurier. “Quebec: October 1970.” The North American Review 256, no. 3 (1971): 23- 33. McKearney, Tommy. The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament. London: Pluto Press, 2011. Meadwell, Hudson. “The Politics of Nationalism in Quebec.” World Politics 45, no. 2 (1993): 203- 241. Muller, Janet. Language and Conflict in Northern Ireland and Canada: A Silent War. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. O’Leary, Brendan and John McGarry. The Politics of Antagonism Understanding Northern Ireland, 2nd ed. London: The Athlone Press Ltd, 1997. Rocher, Francois. “Self-determination and the Use of Referendums: the Case of Quebec.” International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 27, no. 1 (2014): 25-45. Ruane, Joseph and Jennifer Todd. The Dynamics of Conflict in Northern Ireland: Power, Conflict and Emancipation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Russell, Peter. Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians Become a Sovereign People, 3rd ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. Tetley, William. The October Crisis, 1970: An Insider View. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007. Thatcher, Margaret. The Downing Street Years. London: Harper Press, 2011. Tonge, Jonathan. Northern Ireland: Conflict and Change, 2nd ed. Routledge: New York, 2013. Trudeau, Pierre E. Memoirs. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Inc., 1993. Whitaker, Reginald. Secret Service: Political Policing in Canada from the Fenians to Fortress America. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. Widgery, Lord John. Bloody Sunday: Lord Widgery’s Report of Events in Londonderry Northern Ireland on 30 January 1972. London: Stationary Office, 20