Devolution and the politics of development in Northern Ireland

The reintroduction of devolution in Northern Ireland is widely interpreted as the working out of the Belfast Agreement (1998) which aimed to embed political consensus in shared institutions of the state. However, such analysis tends to be limited with regard to wider political economy readings of the devolution project and historic struggles to find an appropriate institutional fix to manage different
forms of crisis. Peace and stability have, it is argued, permitted Northern Ireland's reentry to global markets and circuits of capital with new governance structures being assembled to reconfigure `post- conflict' economic space. We argue that the onset of devolution has promoted a mix between ethnosectarian resource competition and a constantly expanding neoliberal model of governance.
Devolved neoliberal structures that sustain social polarisation may perpetuate strategies of resistance that could cut across and challenge ethnosectarian politics and deepening social segregation.

Denial, Silence and the Politics of the Past: Unpicking the Opposition to Truth Recovery in Northern Ireland

There has been considerable and protracted debate on whether a formal truth recovery process should be established in Northern Ireland. Some of the strongest opposition to the creation of such a body has been from unionist political elites and the security forces. Based on qualitative fieldwork, this article argues that the dynamics of denial and silence have been instrumental in shaping their concerns. It explores how questions of memory, identity and denial have created a ‘myth of blamelessness’ in unionist discourse that is at odds with the reasons for a truth process being established. It also examines how three interlocking manifestations of silence – ‘silence as passivity,’ ‘silence as loyalty’ and ‘silence as pragmatism’ – have furthered unionists’ opposition to dealing with the past. This article argues that making peace with the past requires an active deconstruction of these practices.

Transforming the Irish Presidency: Activist Presidents and Gender Politics, 1990-2011

The election of two energetic women in succession to the office of President of Ireland challenged the notion that the presidency was a long-service reward for retiring politicians. Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese broke the male domination of the office, interpreted its functions in a more dynamic manner, and utilised the ‘soft power’ of the presidency with skill. Yet, as individuals they were very different in political focus, experience and ideological disposition. This article charts their respective backgrounds and discusses the context in which each woman came to the presidency. It explores their vision for the office. Focusing on the potential for harnessing the soft power of the presidency, it argues that Robinson adopted a classical representative view of the office, whereas McAleese chose a facilitatory style of leadership. The article concludes that in their different ways, Robinson and McAleese contributed to reshaping the office, utilising its symbolic potential and soft power to make it a more meaningful and fit-for-purpose political institution for the twenty-first century. © 2012 Political Studies Association of Ireland.