Abstract

The Oslo Accords (1993) are widely held to have been a failure, and their collapse in 2001 is uncontested by scholars and politicians alike. In negotiations, Israel had the clear upper hand, and Palestinians were expected to make equal if not greater concessions from a starting point that was stacked against them. Palestinians refused to concede more of their territory and rights to Israel, and many use these reasons to explain the failure of the negotiations without seeking to understand the wider circumstances. Alternatively, the deleterious effects of the Good Friday Agreement (1998) are often covered up by its advertised success. Though the agreement was signed by the conflicting parties, it failed to reconcile or reverse over 400 years of British settler colonialism in Ireland, while also exacerbating inequalities. The British occupation of Northern Ireland was fortified, and to this day the civil rights of the native Irish remain under assault.

This paper compares the Oslo Accords and the Good Friday Agreement and is based upon an analysis of unequal power relationships during peace processes. It details the impact of such inequalities in negotiations on life after they end. Additionally, it provides a comparative lens through which to view the Oslo process and advances a fresh perspective on the 1990s era of peace processes. In doing so, it emphasizes the similar lived experiences of people who witnessed different formal outcomes.

Modified Abstract

This project compares the Oslo Accords and the Good Friday Agreement and is based upon an analysis of unequal power relationships during peace processes. It details the impact of such inequalities in negotiations on life after they end. There are many similarities between Northern Ireland and Palestine/Israel in the realms of settler colonialism, majority/minority power dynamics, and the lived experiences of Palestinians and the Irish. Despite these similarities, Ireland’s peace agreement is seldom used to compare to Palestine’s Oslo process. This paper provides a comparative lens through which to view the Oslo process and advances a fresh perspective on the 1990s era of peace processes. In doing so, it emphasizes the similar lived experiences of people who witnessed different formal outcomes.

Research Category

Political Sciences/Philosophy/History

Author Information

Padraigin O'FlynnFollow

Primary Author's Major

Political Science

Mentor #1 Information

Dr. Joshua

Stacher

Presentation Format

Oral

Start Date

April 2019

O'Flynn Bio.docx (11 kB)
fullsizeoutput_3205.jpeg (2634 kB)
headshot image

Research Area

Comparative Politics | Diplomatic History | International Relations | Political History

Share

COinS
 
Apr 9th, 1:00 PM

Different Peaces, Similar Lives: Power Relations, Peace Agreements, and Lived Experiences in Palestine and Northern Ireland

The Oslo Accords (1993) are widely held to have been a failure, and their collapse in 2001 is uncontested by scholars and politicians alike. In negotiations, Israel had the clear upper hand, and Palestinians were expected to make equal if not greater concessions from a starting point that was stacked against them. Palestinians refused to concede more of their territory and rights to Israel, and many use these reasons to explain the failure of the negotiations without seeking to understand the wider circumstances. Alternatively, the deleterious effects of the Good Friday Agreement (1998) are often covered up by its advertised success. Though the agreement was signed by the conflicting parties, it failed to reconcile or reverse over 400 years of British settler colonialism in Ireland, while also exacerbating inequalities. The British occupation of Northern Ireland was fortified, and to this day the civil rights of the native Irish remain under assault.

This paper compares the Oslo Accords and the Good Friday Agreement and is based upon an analysis of unequal power relationships during peace processes. It details the impact of such inequalities in negotiations on life after they end. Additionally, it provides a comparative lens through which to view the Oslo process and advances a fresh perspective on the 1990s era of peace processes. In doing so, it emphasizes the similar lived experiences of people who witnessed different formal outcomes.