RPL Webinar Takes Lessons on Religion and Just Peace from the Troubles and Good Friday Agreement

The Religion and Public Life program at Harvard Divinity School held the third public conversation in its Religion and Just Peace series exploring how an expansive understanding of religion can inform just peacebuilding. It was hosted by David Holland, Interim Dean of Religion and Public Life. It featured David N. Hempton, Harvard University Distinguished Service Professor, and Alonzo L. McDonald Family Professor of Evangelical Theological Studies.

“There are no moral miracles in history. Justice and peace are not absolute categories, but they’re always works in progress.”

With this insight, Hempton opened his talk by reflecting on lessons from the Troubles in Northern Ireland, and the fragile reality of peacemaking worldwide.

The Troubles were a violent conflict in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s to the 1990s, rooted in tensions between the predominantly Protestant unionists seeking independence, and the predominantly Catholic nationalists seeking reunification with Ireland. Sparked by civil rights discrimination, the conflict included paramilitary groups, the British military, and police forces engaging in decades of bombings, assassinations, and street violence, leaving over 3,500 dead and deeply dividing the society of Northern Ireland.

Having grown up in the Troubles, Hempton holds an astute awareness of the complexity of conflict. It forced him to take history seriously and engage critically with different narratives, realizing that conflicts are never monocausal and should never be interpreted as such. Those who are convinced of their own righteousness often do so by only recognizing one side of injustice. Yet, opposing sides can each have internally consistent worldviews that make complete sense within their own frameworks. True understanding comes not from reinforcing one’s own position, but from grappling with the nuances of multiple perspectives. Hempton explained that the coherence of your own perspective can be a barrier to peacemaking, which requires acknowledging the legitimacy of competing stories.

“One thing I learned very early on is that the respective narratives that sustain conflict are often internally cohesive and coherent. They just happen to be incompatible with other narratives that operate from a different set of presuppositions.”

For the Troubles, the roles of historical grievances, economics, politics, and identity all intersected to create a complex mix of different presuppositions. Yet, Hempton stressed that this complexity does not mean we cannot recognize common patterns across the world. While the Troubles provides a specific case study, similar patterns emerge in the Balkans, the Middle East, and beyond.

Hempton also warned against the dangers of stereotyping and violence. Stereotyping distorts reality and fuels violence, creating a self-sustaining cycle of revenge. The Protestants stereotyped Catholics as being uncritical, mindless loyalists to their church, subversive of the State, and prone to having large families. Whereas the Catholics saw Protestants as rigid, dominant, discriminatory colonists who were humorless.

“Both sets of stereotypes had just enough truth in them to make them work, but not enough for either side to understand the complex dynamics that sustain them.”

These complex dynamics, and the work it takes to disentangle them, make peacemaking a process rather than an event. To illustrate this, Hempton spoke about the Good Friday Agreement, which succeeded due to leadership, external support, economic investment, and public fatigue around the ongoing violence. Hempton attributes much of the success of the Good Friday Agreement to the identity accommodations made for the citizens of Northern Ireland, the power citizens had to choose their future, the prioritization of institutional creativity and power sharing, the disestablishment of key instruments of violence, and the recognition and respect for both communities.

Amid the discussion of the Good Friday agreement, Hempton stressed the role of American Evoy Senator George Mitchell. Mitchell successfully mediated for peace in Northern Ireland, and was described by Hempton as a wise, disciplined, morally determined, and patient leader. In the end, it was a simple appeal to humanity and a desire for the future that inspired him to work towards peace. For example, after learning how many children were born in Northern Ireland on the same day his child was born, he was resolved to make their future better.

Yet, Hempton noted, the peace remains fragile and contextual. Sectarian divisions persist, and Brexit has reignited tensions within Northern Ireland. Notably, the same strategies that George Mitchell used to mediate for peace in Northern Ireland were unsuccessful when he tried to mediate for peace in the Middle East. Peace is challenging and full of cultural nuances. Challenging stereotypes, particularly those linked to religion, comes down to trust and complex emotions.

“The most difficult obstacle to overcome is lack of trust… to change what is in people’s hearts and minds takes very much longer.” –George Mitchell

Most importantly, Hempton specified, the emergence and maintenance of peace requires the collaboration of multiple actors all doing their part—women’s groups, legal professionals, educators, artists, and grassroots organizers all create a culture of hope. While history can often be pessimistic, change is possible through hope.

Hempton concluded that if we are to take away anything from the Good Friday Agreement and the Troubles, it is that just peace is something that requires continuous work. It is not settled with one agreement or one policy. It demands the investment of economic resources, the direction of morally determined leadership, the building of trust, the changing of perceptions, and the work of mending a deep-seated desire for revenge.

“Peacemaking requires empathy, compassion, creativity, and generosity of spirit, as much as political will and clever policymaking.”

After the lecture, the conversation shifted to a fruitful Q&A moderated by Dean Holland. The questions delved deeper into the challenges of peacebuilding and conflict resolution. Holland raised the question of what motivated individuals to act in good faith to work towards peace - even when the conditions around them discouraged generosity. Hempton pointed to the crucial involvement of economic opportunity, leadership, and a shared sense of hope. Where economic investment sustains peace, the shared hope fueled by significant leaders is what catalyzes individuals to act on change in the first place.

Hempton also remarked on the role of leaders and institutions, arguing that universities should be responsible for fostering critical engagement with history and identity whilst recognizing their own limitations and positionality. At the end, the conversation turned towards how individuals and societies can progress beyond rigid, stereotypical narratives. He drew parallels between Northern Ireland and other global conflicts, describing how media can discourage building trust while cross-community initiatives can conversely stimulate a willingness to engage with complexity to create opportunities for dismantling harmful narratives.

Hempton reminded the audience that while history can frequently be a pessimistic exercise, peace is always possible with persistent, collective, patient effort sustained by political and economic support alongside the courage and hope of communities. Hempton shared Seamus Heaney’s poetry as a reminder that peace, while never guaranteed, is always possible.

“Hope for a great sea change on the far side of revenge.

Believe that a further shore is reachable from here.

Believe in miracles and cures and healing wells.”