Consequences of Bloody Sunday

The 30th January 1972 may not have been the bloodiest day in the history of Northern Ireland's Troubles, but Bloody Sunday's significance in shaping the course of the conflict cannot be overstated.

RECRUITS FOR THE IRA: Prior to Bloody Sunday some young Catholics, like Northern Ireland's current Education Minister Martin McGuinness, had already joined the IRA to fight against what they saw as an occupying British Army. However, the actions of the Parachute Regiment in shooting dead 13 unarmed civil rights protestors immeasurably strengthened Irish republicans' arguments within their own community and provided the Provisional IRA with a flood of fresh recruits for its "long war".

RESENTMENT OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT: (see Direct Rule) In London, some government ministers may have approved the notion of "getting tough with the terrorists" who flouted their authority within so-called no-go areas like Derry's Bogside. The British Government believed that direct rule was the answer to their political disaster. They hoped that the judicial inquiry set up under the chairmanship of Lord Widgery would resolve the legal and ethical questions raised by the killings. It did not. When the tribunal submitted its report in April 1972 it was condemned by many in Derry as the "Widgery whitewash", an impression which only grew stronger over time.

MORE VIOLENCE: Sectarian violence becomes endemic (permanent feature) during the 1970’s. 1972 becomes the worst year of all, with 467 deaths, 321 of those were civilians. This continues until in 1992 the death toll reaches the 3000 mark – with civilians making up 2000 of these.

SOLID DIVISIONS: The violence that erupts during the 1970’s finally cements the problems that had been festering since Partitions began. Distrust, fear and segregation permeate all levels of society and set in stone the mistakes of Partition.

DIVISIONS TODAY: Bloody Sunday still has the potential to divide Northern Ireland's fractious politicians. Few defend what the Parachute Regiment soldiers did that day. But many unionists question the concentration on one incident at the start of what turned out to be the Troubles' bloodiest year. Nationalists argue that state violence, apparently covered up at the highest levels, raises different and more searching questions than the paramilitary killings on either side.