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

Load more