By Julie Harrington, MA Media and Strategic Communications ’23
The border dividing the Ireland from the UK is an international border that has become fiercely important in terms of the EU and Brexit negotiations. Since 2005, the border has been almost nonexistent as the security and checkpoints were removed due to the Good Friday Agreement signed in 1998. The lack of a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland is vitally important for the peace of both countries and the greater UK. Throughout what has been dubbed “the troubles”, or the series of conflicts in Northern Ireland from 1960s – 1990s, bridges and roads were closed and patrolled by police with comprehensive security checks that disrupted daily life and restricted those who lived close to the border. Most bombings, shootings, and violent acts took place near the border and a policing culture shaped the area for nearly 30 years. A soft border has ensured peace among all parties.
Policy debate regarding the border has risen recently. There are several narratives that are being contested in the media by the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Great Britain, which are all examined below. Each country is promoting their own desire regarding the border, with deep histories underlaying their messages.
The Irish Narrative
The Republic of Ireland believes that the UK has always involved itself in Irish affairs when it is not welcome, and there is a long history of abuse that leaves most Irish people believing that UK involvement is never welcome. The President of Ireland cites British imperialism frequently, as it is a vital component of their past and therefore current relationship.
Great Britain Counter Narrative
The British Parliament and non-state actors have publicly said several times that the UK does not intend on installing a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, and they want to maximize trade among the three countries. Nobody outside of Britain seems to believe this is true, thinking that Britain will take any loophole it can to somehow hinder the relationship between Northern Ireland and Ireland by disrupting the lack of border and the Good Friday agreement.
Northern Ireland Narrative
Northern Ireland projects the fear of a hard border the loudest in the media; they claim the border is a highly volatile place for the trade and security purposes, and both Ireland and the UK have means and intention to exploit Northern Ireland and the on-going policy debate for personal gains. Political party representatives are extremely vocal in the media, with rallying cries in the papers as well as protests happening in cities and on border lines.
Aspect of Narrative Contestation | Irish Narrative | GB Counter-Narrative | Northern Irish Narrative |
Formation/Content | The UK has always meddled in Irish politics and trade and should leave Ireland alone | The UK does not intend on installing a hard border, and wants to maximize trade with Ireland/Northern Ireland | The border is a highly volatile place for the island of Ireland. Both GB and Ireland could try to exploit it for their personal gains. |
| Projection | Irish politicians such as the President speaking about this only when asked | Non-state actors such as professors, business leaders, etc. publicly speaking upon this narrative | Political party representatives (ie, unionists, democrats) putting forth rallying cries in the news and protests. |
| Reception | The Northern Irish are weary of Ireland’s messages, thinking that Ireland is trying to secretly advocate for a United Ireland | Most people believe that the UK will not try to disrupt the Good Friday agreement | Their message is received broadly as the UK and Ireland pushing NI out of the way for trade purposes |
In sum, it is a complicated clash of narratives for a few countries with dark, complex histories. Where there really should only be two narratives (The UK and Ireland), there are three, due to Northern Ireland’s own history as part of the UK. The intricacies in messaging around this policy issue are sensitive, and state agents need to navigate this conflict carefully to not evoke a hostile war of words.
The narrative within Great Britain must be one that holds empathy for the very recent political trauma that plagues both Northern Ireland and Ireland. The people who experienced the political warfare and terrorism at the border are still alive today, and the “UK as an interventionist” narrative has not yet ceased. The same narrative advice can be applied to Ireland; they must speak with caution, understanding that Northern Ireland is still slightly volatile due to modern history. The most encouraging narratives to these countries will be narratives that promote collaboration, allyship, and free-trade; narratives that paint all countries as winners and none as losers will promote peace and prosperity in this tumultuous policy discussion.
For more on the topic by the author, please click here.
The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.
Your summary of the three sides of the conflict is quite useful for those unfamiliar with the intricacies of the Ireland-Northern Ireland-UK tensions. It is quite interesting how the Northern Ireland narrative views both the Republic of Ireland and the UK as potential sources of tension while the Republic focuses mainly on the UK. Your conclusion about potential options for narratives to pursue is insightful given how mainland UK is viewed as being capable of resorting to any means necessary to disrupt the relationship between The Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. I wonder why Irish politicians only speak on the issue when asked.
Julie, you did a good job of analyzing the narratives being used by Ireland, Northern Ireland, and the UK regarding the current border issue. A lot of times, in the U.S., I see just the narratives of Ireland and the UK projected but as you mentioned, Northern Ireland’s own history requires its narrative to also be included. I had not thought a lot about what Brexit would mean for the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, so this was a very informative piece to add background to the complexity of the issue.
I am curious, in your research, does the religious clash seem to be as much an issue in border security as it once was? At one time, the dominate narrative was the clash between Catholics and Protestants but since the Good Friday Agreement it seems like the narrative shifted from religious conflict to sovereign rights. I think you’re spot on when you mention the narrative of “UK as an interventionist” as still being very much around and that the pathway forward should focus on allyship, collaboration, and free-trade.
Julie, I find your article quite elucidating, but I wonder why despite the British Parliament and non-state actors having publicly said several times that the UK does not intend on installing a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, but intends to maximize trade among the three countries? Nobody outside of Britain seems to believe this is true, thinking that Britain will take any loophole it can to somehow hinder the relationship between Northern Ireland and Ireland by disrupting the lack of border and the Good Friday agreement. Could this be a result of the UK master narrative?
The peace brought by the opening of the borders between Northern Ireland and Ireland and the UK illustrates how the narrative can be applied to resolve nearly thirty years of impasse, and a culture of policing around the borders of Ireland and the UK. The UK should go further for a more peaceful relationship with its neighbors by using its system narratives that the UK will abide by the Good Friday agreement to help its reception.
Hi Julie – I think this is a great piece discussing the intricacies surrounding a complicated multi-party issue. I really enjoyed your chart and thought that it gives a clear-to-follow explanation of how each of the three groups would react to several potential steps in the border formation process.
I wonder if you believe a period of narrative reparations between Ireland and Northern Ireland would be a promising tactic to get all citizens on the same page about the border – and if so, what kinds of identity and master narratives would you recommend political leaders leverage?
I really enjoyed how you illustrated the history of the narratives and how there are actually three perspectives to consider in this situation. I think it would be really interesting to learn more about how the living people who lived through violence at the border feel today. It is very understandable why Ireland is hesitant towards the UK given the past abuse they have been shown, and it may take more acknowledgment of that by the UK for Ireland to feel comfortable. Northern Ireland’s heavy media presence on the issue is also notable in the framing of the issue, because they may be able to influence a broader set of opinions, especially in the international sphere, this way. Do you have any suggestions on messaging strategies the three countries could take to show that there are no winners or losers in this situation?
Julie, I really appreciated the background you provided before illustrating the three distinct regions’ viewpoints. Northern Ireland’s perspective was particularly interesting to me, as the region seems torn between its dual identities as Irish and a part of the United Kingdom.
Your messaging recommendations are spot on. Emphasizing collaboration and allyship rather than harping on historic tensions is a positive way for the regions effectively speak to one another’s interests. I do wonder how the religious tensions still play a role in border discussions today.