The problems in Rwanda run far deeper than the political, economical, and social stereotypes that the western world would like to slap on the country. We are used to seeing problems in the world and quickly labeling them based on the society that we live in. Here in the United States there are problems of race relations, economic poverty, lack of education, and even hatred for our neighbors. The difference is that there is control. More importantly, large percentages of the American population are not being directly affected by these problems, and actions are being taken to correct them. In Rwanda, and much of the surrounding continent of Africa, these problems are the backbone of society. There is nothing else. People are poor and starving, their homes consist of decrepit shacks and tents, and ancient tribal hatred has developed into political and social separation that seems impossible to resolve.

This separation is truly what defines the culture of Rwanda. Rwanda, containing two major tribes, harbors a constant struggle for control. The Hutu and the Tutsi have a long history of bloodshed. For a long time, the Tutsi maintained control of the country and this allowed the hatred to fester in the minds of the Hutu majority. When the Hutu finally revolted and took control of the country, the same system of oppression was set up. A minority of Hutu elite maintained political control, and used a half-century of hatred to turn the 'peasants' on each other. One million Tutsi were slaughtered, nearly half of the native Tutsi population. One account of killings details the brutality and mindlessness involved.

"The children came out first and had only just reached the door when [the Interahamwe] started macheting them. When they saw what was happening to their children, the mothers who had tried to get up instinctively fell to the ground. I was underneath one of these women, still naked. The Interahamwe came in and started beheading the women. One of the heads fell on my back. They went around to see if anybody might still be breathing. If they found someone alive, down came the machete which ended their life ... Since the rest of me was soaked in blood, they thought I was dead ... I looked around and realized that I was the only survivor in the dormitory. There had been between forty and fifty people, mainly women and children." (154)

The basic problem in Rwanda is that nobody cares anymore, or knows any better. All of the generations over most of the last century have grown up seeing this hatred, and learning that it is the way of life. People don't remember when it started, what it was about, or why it continues. It just does. All of these problems of the past have been contorted to fit the political problems that the country is currently facing, and this political unrest has turned into the genocide of the Tutsi people. What the rest of the world is doing in Rwanda is not helping to resolve this.

The United Nations has been involved in Rwanda for some time. Their efforts, however, are heavily restricted and limited to a small scale. What they and all of the aid agencies are doing is not what needs to be done to help the Rwandan people, Hutu and Tutsi alike. Feeding and clothing them is only catering to the most basic survival needs. These efforts, in many cases, only perpetuate the killing.

"And then I realized something I should have understood from our very first step into the camp. It is not the aid agencies or the UN or the Tanzanian government who are in control here. No, the vast city of huts and tents is the province of the Hutu warlords." (107)

Here in a refugee camp where much of the aid is taking place, the architects of the massacres going on throughout the country are who control the distribution of food, clothing, and medicine. They are only going to help their own kind, the killers who are at their side.

What needs to be done in Rwanda is a demolition and reconstruction of the entire society. "In all wars things have to be destroyed. In order to rid this country of the genocidal forces there are things that have to be destroyed. This is a war against evil" (129). Nothing is working now. The people who are in control are constantly plotting to maintain their position, and the remaining majority of society consists of peasants who are sick and dying. In between changes in power, murder continues to be the way to maintain what shaky power the elite have. Foreign countries need to be alerted to what is really going on in Rwanda. I believe strongly that the governments already know, but choose to ignore it so as not to get involved. Involvement is crucial here.

"A London based correspondent wondered out loud why we should care about disputes in obscure countries ... I answered by saying - and I hold passionately to this view today - that we should care because we belong to the same brotherhood of man as the citizens of seemingly remote African countries. It is not the political reason and some may call it naïve. That is their prerogative. For me, however, the conclusion is unavoidable: genocide killing in Africa diminishes all of us." (30)

How can the people of the world sit back and allow millions of people to be slaughtered by their own hatred and ignorance. The world allowed a horrific genocide to take place during World War II, and we can't allow it to ever happen again.

The most pressing issue that must be dealt with is the anarchy that reins over the Rwandan society. The killing needs to be stopped. An international body needs to take forceful action to end this murder and genocide. The tribal divisions in Rwanda need to be made physical and not just mental and emotional. The Tutsi need to be separated from the Hutu. The people in each of these tribes hate the idea of the other. Being thrown together the way they are forces them to feud. Once separated the reconstruction of the country can begin. The best option, I believe, is to separate the country into two. One designated Hutu land and the other Tutsi. Then governments can be erected that don't need to fight against another culture that craves power.

Education is the key to solving the problems in Rwanda. The difficult task is reaching a point where education can begin to be administered. The tasks described above are the demolition that needs to take place. No longer can tribal warfare run the country. Only after peace is reached, whether maintained by an outside force or an inner accord, will people be able to resolve their true problems. The new generations, the Rwandan children, need to grow and mature in a culture where death doesn't surround them every day. Fear needs to be taken out of their lives, and they need to be able to see a future that has possibilities and the option for them to be happy. Right now the children of Rwanda see the war that their parents are involved in and grow to be involved in the same. When the new generations can live a life without seeing this death and destruction, their lives will be enriched and the hatred that is prevalent in every Rwandan today, will be erased from the minds of all.

The question for some, "Is Rwanda a lost cause?" is a frightening and depressing question to ask. If left alone I believe that Rwanda is lost and will never save itself. The cycle that the Rwandan people have found themselves in is impossible to break without assistance. The country is buried in the evil that every person on earth is afraid to confront. This is the evil that everyone has somewhere inside of them. Going into Rwanda is admitting that we all possess this evil.

"... the survivors most of all, but also the doctors, the aid workers, the priests, the journalists. We had learned something about the soul of man that would leave us with nightmares long into the future. This was not death as I had seen it in South Africa, or Eritrea, or Northern Ireland. Nothing could have prepared me for the scale of what I had witnessed ... Sometimes the battle was close but I felt there was enough decency and love around to nourish the gift of hope. There will be many who say that I was foolish, naïve to ever have had such faith in man. Maybe they are right. In any event, after Rwanda I lost that optimism." (190-191)

I haven't lost my optimism. Maybe I am Naïve myself, because Fergal Keane lived the Rwandan experience. He saw the killings, he heard, smelled, and touched them. I have not. I can only take what he has told me and draw my own opinions and conclusions. If everyone could understand Rwanda the way I do, I believe the world would take action. There is not so much evil anywhere that good can not prevail. When people finally do begin to understand, the people of Rwanda will receive the help they need to win their 'war against evil'.

- T. Brian Jones

It's not Israel's fault that she is in a position where Arab countries surround her on all sides. Israel fears an attack at any time from any one of those nations. As Hala Jaber attempts to explain Israel's intentions for being the aggressor in an attack against Southern Lebanon, the reasons she gives are completely one sided. Not once does she mention the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attacks on Israel in the 1960's and 1970's. The only reasons she gives for an Israeli attack is a greed for land and the extra resources that Israel can gain from the advancement. The only good part about this book is that it had an ending, so that I did not need to read any more about what this author thinks about Israel. Hala Jaber's investigation should have been focused on the crude intention of Hezbollah and the type of people that would give up their lives to become "human bombs." Frankly, I think that Jaber applauds these individuals that sacrifice their lives and praises the families that give money to the Hezbollah cause. What type of woman is she that believes in this stuff?

It is the terrorist motto that if you kill one cluster of radicals, they shall only come back stronger than the first. Clearly, in Southern Lebanon, Hezbollah has taken over the role of the early PLO in attacking Israelis. When will the Israeli people ever be allowed to live in peace and not worry about some Arab group wanting to eliminate their race? The true reason why Israel attacked Southern Lebanon was to get rid of the PLO. Israel did not care about taking any land away from Lebanon, they just wanted some security in knowing that a bomb was not going to be dropped in the middle of Jerusalem on the holiest day of the Jewish year, Yom Kippur. Oh, wait a second, the PLO did launch a bomb on Jerusalem on Yom Kippur in 1973. Is it not right that the Israelis had a reason to be upset with the PLO? Whether Israel had the backing of the United States or not, they had a right to abolish the PLO.

As PLO officials retreated back to Beirut, a new cluster of radicals developed. Hezbollah was born with a vengeance. This group saw Israel as an aggressive country and their purpose of attack was to rid Lebanese people of the south and populate it themselves. Different members of Hezbollah would take any risk to stop the Israeli cause. They would give up their entire family for the "right" to be able to kill Israeli military members. These "human bombs" believed that they were going to die at some point in their life, so they might as well go out doing something good for others. This type of thinking can only be the result of a long-term brainwashing, which is explained by the Hezbollah school system in the south.

In Southern Lebanon, most families could not pay for their children to go to public schools, so instead they sent their children on a life long commitment to Hezbollah schools. Although the author did not make any mention of this in the book, this type of education can be viewed as recruitment for new members. Families would feel obligated to Hezbollah and donate any amount of money that they could to possibly let "Hezbollah buy a bomb with their name attached to it." Obviously Jaber is not going to make mention of that in this book because Hezbollah is just trying to do the right thing. She sees Hezbollah as just defending their country and protecting their people. That is exactly what Jaber wants people to believe when reading this book. It is sitting right there for everyone to see that every country in the Middle East feels that Israel is a thorn in their economy. Without Israel, the Middle East could become one whole Arab nation and be more powerful than ever.

Right now, whatever goes wrong in the Middle East, the Israelis take the heat, since every country uses them a scapegoat for their problems. What needs to happen is the PLO and groups similar to Hezbollah need to be eliminated for the Israeli people to feel safe. Without radical groups, the Israelis can pull out of any country and a buffer zone would no longer be needed. In words this all looks good, but the removal of all PLO like groups would never occur, since Jerusalem is the third most religious Muslim city. The Arabs will always believe that they have a right to populate their religion into a country such as Israel and therefore Israel must always fear attacks at any time. Israel is always on the defensive and the best defense is offense. For these reasons, buffer zones must be used and peace will never exist as long as so many different religions are mixed in such a small area.

- Jon Hatton

Reading Hezbollah: Born with a Vengeance, by Hala Jaber, I began to appreciate how difficult it must be to cover a conflict that involves terrorism. Terrorism is one of the most ill defined words in the English language. Some acts are easily identifiable as terrorism, the Oklahoma City bombing for example, others, such as Hezbollah's Katyusha attacks against Northern Israel or the genocide in Rwanda, are less clear cut. Few deny that the genocide in Rwanda was evil but there is argument over whether it qualifies as terrorism. In many conflicts, such as in Northern Ireland and Southern Lebanon, both sides accuse the other of using terrorist tactics. A successful reporter, or author, must not rely too heavily on one side's interpretation of events. While Jaber's finished result was fairer to both sides than some books covering the Israeli-Arab conflict it did not meet its full potential.

The Israeli-Arab conflict is one of the most propaganda-saturated conflicts in the world. The Israelis and Arabs accuse each other of negotiating in bad faith, sponsoring terrorist organizations, and plotting to eliminate their enemies. Until very recently the views of the majority of Israeli and Arab historians closely mirrored the views of the government that represented them. The reasons, excuses, and necessities, for Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon, like almost all conflicts, are rooted in history. The Zionist movement, the founding of Israel, the CIA installation of the Shah in Iran, the PLO's presence in Southern Lebanon, Security Council Resolution 425, the Iranian Revolution, are all essential pieces of history leading to the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. Each of these periods of history have been examined, twisted, and distorted by both Jewish and Arab historians. To write a successful book that did not get buried under the immense weight of previous propaganda, Jaber needed to reexamine each of these events not only in light of how they helped Hezbollah to form but also whether the interpretation that Hezbollah uses is fair. Rebel Hearts, a book about the IRA, by Kevin Toolis, was able to successfully examine both the motivations of the IRA and the worlds opinions of their actions. Most notably, Toolis did an excellent job of examining the IRA's justifications for attacking targets in England and London and the lack of support for these operations from normally sympathetic people. Hezbollah is not as successful as Rebel Hearts at examining the accuracy of the group's statements. Jaber does confront the future of Hezbollah after the Israeli withdrawal but she does not otherwise examine the group's charter and philosophy.

Hezbollah was as much an examination of the flaws in Israel's military actions in Southern Lebanon as it was an overview of Hezbollah the organization. Jaber briefly covers Hezbolah's famous human bombs, what is known of the organization's structure and leadership, the group's humanitarian efforts, and its ties with Iran. Much of one chapter of the book describes the hostage crisis yet Jaber leaves the reader uncertain of Hezbollah's role in those events. However, Jaber devotes much of her energies describing the civilian casualties and suffering caused by Israel. Jaber makes it clear, correctly, that Israel's presence in Southern Lebanon keeps Hezbollah an active part of the country. Jaber uses many broad generalizations and relies on unnamed experts for her critiques of Hezbollah. When she does give concrete evidence it is often about groups affiliated with Hezbollah, not Hezbollah itself. While there are many interviews with Hezbollah officials, few of the people Jaber talks with reveal much new information or powerful emotion.

In Ireland, Toolis had considerable luck talking with both major IRA leaders and entry-level soldiers. Toolis's interviews helped reveal the emotions, and often the lack of thought, that drives the IRA's members. But at the end of Hezbollah, the men behind the world's "most secretive and deadly organization" are still a mystery. This is a shame, Jaber obviously resents Israel's actions and to a certain extent identifies with Hezbollah. Yet with Hezbollah's attacks against the Marine barracks in Beirut and their continuing call for the destruction of Israel and the West, it is difficult for a Westerner to empathize with the group. A human picture would have helped significantly. The story of Salah Ghandour, the human bomb, and his son, Mohammed, is a powerful example of how the Islamic faith is used as a weapon against Israel. But once Ghandour's story is told the human motivations of the conflict in Southern Lebanon are largely ignored. The political aspects of the conflict are important but in almost any other region of the world a similar conflict would have ended years ago. The powerful dynamics of Israeli and Arab hate are now the driving forces behind Israel's presence in Lebanon. Jaber, however, never examines this. Instead, she continues through a slanted recitation of facts. Facts brought about only because of powerful emotions.

Season of Blood, by Fergal Keane, which is a recollection of the authors journeys in Rwanda near the end of the genocide there, showed some of the devices used to spread hate in the country, like Radio Miles Collines, and documented the effect of these devices on the Hutus very well. Interviews with Gacumbitsi, one of the regional governors that orchestrated the genocide, university leaders, who showed a shocking amount of detachment over the killings, and descriptions of militia men, with their raw hatred towards the Tutsis, all helped to show how Rwanda degenerated into tribal warfare. In Lebanon, history helps us to understand why hatred has filled the country but it would still be helpful to hear the Lebanese themselves.

Hezbollah, it seems, really is the world's most secretive organization in the world. While the group granted Jaber considerable access to officials she was still unable to a capture a new angle of the conflict. If Hezbollah wishes to gain the support of the international community it must understand the importance of a human picture. The west feels sorry for the civilians killed in Lebanon but still sees the masked men of Hezbollah as people to be feared. Hezbollah and the West are likely incompatible but both sides still suffer from ignorance of the other.

- Andrew Woodward

Terrorist groups attack their own people by dissipating family bonds. They inflict social and economic casualties on themselves and those around them in order to achieve their own selfish political goals. When a society as a whole, allies itself with such an organization, it is up to the leader of that organization to determine what is right from wrong. In both Rwanda and Northern Ireland the leaders of these terrorist groups, have decided that the widespread use of evil is the only way to achieve their goals. Terrorist groups have been very effective in dissolving the power of family, and thus have coaxed their countries into embracing evil. The people of Northern Ireland and Rwanda have been stripped of family values and as a result have become brainwashed by terrorist propaganda.

The strength of I.R.A recruitment, lies in its ability to attract youth to its political machine. The I.R.A provides youth with a sense of belonging and thus strips them from the grips of their families. "Peer pressure can be a terrible influence on a young lad who has nothing to look forward to in life, no job, no prospect of a job, who maybe has no self esteem and feels the community does not esteem him." (Toolis 203) Why should teenagers go to school or maintain jobs when they can riot and throw homemade bombs at "the enemy?" Martin Finucane was able to explain why so many Northern Irish children pledged their allegiance to their new Republican family. " You just got involved because you were all caught up in it." This was a simple enough reason for them to join. The Finucane family was especially torn apart because of their I.R.A evolvement. Patrick their most successful son had actually not become a member of the I.R.A. In fact Patrick had made a life for himself as a defense lawyer. He was clearly an exception to the vicious cycle in Northern Ireland. He did, however, defend I.R.A men and this resulted in his murder. The other two Finucane brothers Martin and Seamus were imprisoned because of their I.R.A deeds. Despite all of this horror the Finucane's mother was proud of their sons and supported their Republican activity. There is something seriously wrong with an organization that glorifies the destruction of family.

Hutu war leaders were also able to attack family structure in order achieve their political goals. Much like in Northern Ireland, Rwandan families were torn apart by terrorist propaganda. Rwandan children had no job prospects, or any meager forms of education. The only way out of such dire poverty seemed to be joining the army. The army offered steady meals as well as a sense of unity and purpose. If they did not join the army they were seen as "the enemy" and seen as traitors and targets. In going against the government, they would be ensuring their own loss of life. In a sense they really didn't have a choice. Like Martin Finucane said "You were either one of them or one of us." In separating children from their homes they were able to manipulate their minds and train them to kill. Once caught in the mob mentality their values were easily twisted to fit those leading the militias. In offering an evil alternative Rwandan terrorist groups stripped a generation of hope.

I.R.A leaders created a false sense of purpose in order to attract youthful followers. Their goals allowed them to harness teenagers natural urges of rebelliousness for what they were told was good. It was up to the leaders of the I.R.A to determine the line between good and evil. Take for example Frankie Ryan: "It was not easy to sympathize. Frankie had gone to a country with the intention of killing bandsman and civilians, but had inadvertently blown himself up." What kind of purpose does killing a band and some civilians serve. Obviously the I.R.A hierarchy approved this hit. Too bad Frankie had to sacrifice his life for what would have been such a great hit. The poster boy and morals leader of the I.R.A, Martin McGuinness was nothing more that a common street thug. He rallied them by telling them that they needed to rid Great Britain from their country, then unite Ireland. Believing one man's ideals to be the correct ones, hundreds of Volunteers have sacrificed their lives to make these distant dreams come true. "Die hard republicans pulled out the old ideological cloak of Irish republicanism, with its myths of continuous rebellion, and reworked the siren call of the rebel heart."(Toolis 103) People like McGuinness, who encouraged youth to draw up arms to solve their problems, were stealing from the people the claimed to protect. "...so statistics dictate that virtually every I.R.A member from the chief of staff to the lowliest Volunteer has spent some time behind bars." I.R.A leaders were promising unrealistic goals, but what Volunteers got was the promise of being either incarcerated or killed.

Like the Irish, Rwandan warlords pitted economic disparity on another group of people. This call for Hutu's to exterminate Tutsies, tore families apart, and in turn created a breeding ground for evil. At first, it was the promise of a shiny uniform and a new Rwanda. Then, it was the promise of steady meals, then the issue of a liscense to kill. The warlords gave these people encouragement to unleash such pure hatred on the enemy Tutsies that it was nothing short of evil. The vicious thing about this situation was that the warlords had absolute control over the people. This enabled them to determine what who lived and who died in Rwanda. These horrible leaders were able to manipulate a population in order to achieve their own desired personal power. The only way they were able to do this was through extensive propaganda campaigns and the systematic destruction of family bonds.

In attempting to achieve rash political goals, terrorist organizations tear apart the unity of the people they claim to be fighting for. The problem with taking families out of the social picture is that there no longer is something sacred for a youth to belong to. They are not held accountable by their parents to be the best people they can be. They are not encouraged to stay in school or find a productive occupation. In pledging allegiance to a terrorist family they are being stripped of hope for a better future for themselves. Instead this hope is replaced with the hatred and false motives of the people that run these terrorist groups. Until the importance of family can be restored to Northern Ireland and Rwanda there will continue to be premature funerals of their country's sons. Also the leaders who lure sons away from their families, with false goals and ideals must be stripped of their power, If Ireland and Rwanda are going to have any hope for the future they must reject the evil that they are being fed, and run for the shelter of their families.

- Lee Peno

When working for peace in Northern Ireland, the worst thing one can do is believe that one side, either the British crown or the Irish Republican Army, has a stronger moral cause. Renewed violence has been destroying Northern Ireland for the last thirty years because neither side is willing to concede the validity of any of the opposition's major principles. While Great Britain did agree to negotiate with the Irish terrorists, the crown refuses to compromise on any of its core beliefs unless the IRA agrees to simultaneously disarm, an action the terrorist/freedom-fighting organization consistently scorns.

Since the very beginning of the seventeenth century, when the concept of a peace-loving nation had not even begun to develop, the forces of London have occupied Northern Ireland. For more than three-hundred years Protestant immigrants suppressed the native Irish, depriving the Catholics of the land and resources that were theirs for countless generations. Even in the twentieth century, after segregation in America and apartheid became things of history, Protestant domination of Northern Ireland continues. But now, unlike three centuries ago, the Protestants are the majority and the Irish Catholics are seen as the aggressors. For a short period of time, groups of Catholics fought Crown forces on an open battlefield, but the Republicans have a long tradition of resorting to bombing and shooting police officers and civilians. In the blurring fog that is history, it is hard to determine when the IRA ceased to be seen as freedom-fighters and became terrorists.

It is difficult to argue that the Irish-Catholics of Northern Ireland do not have a powerful historical argument for the creation of a united Ireland. Similarly, it is difficult to claim that the British government does not have the right, as a sovereign nation, to attempt to enforce order in Northern Ireland, a part of the United Kingdom that has democratically reaffirmed its desire to remain part of the UK. Yet, with all of the strong moral arguments that support both sides, it would be a drastic mistake to believe that either the crown's or the IRA's methods are proper; in the midst of hundreds of years of rhetoric lie thousands of dead bodies, bodies not only of invading crown troops and violent IRA men but also of civilians, both Catholic and Protestant, who have been needlessly killed. Both sides have bombed or shot their way into unsupportable positions.

Eighty-eight percent of Northern Ireland is ready for the Troubles to end, for the attacks on British troops and the assassinations of unarmed IRA members to stop. Neither the crown nor the IRA, though, seem ready to make the difficult sacrifices necessary for a lasting peace to be achieved. Men like Martin McGuinnes must realize that Northern Ireland is not yet ready to become part of Ireland and that bombing civilians will not increase Protestant support for a united Ireland. Elected government officials like Tony Blair and David Trimble need to understand that if it was Bloody Sunday, thirty years ago, that started the Troubles, then the crown must make the first step towards a lasting peace.

While individuals on both sides block the path to peace, the biggest obstacle is the fact that Northern Ireland behaves less like a single society than a pair of mob mentalities, one Catholic the other Protestant. Both Protestants and Catholics see themselves as besieged by their opponents and are driven to kill political opponents and random civilians, in either drunken drive-by shootings or cowardly bombings, in an attempt to bring about change. As long as children are teased until they throw stones at soldiers, or the sons of construction workers see their fathers carrying MP5's instead of sledgehammers the psychology of culturally-acceptable violence will perpetuate itself with little regard to the underlying political realities. The average IRA man can do little more than repeat the justifications that his Sinn Fein ally has told him, and the protestant civilian knows only that he is part of a majority under attack by a violent minority. All of the violent Catholics and Protestants must realize the cyclical nature of the Troubles and work to stop extremists from derailing the peace process.

One of the necessary components of a Northern Ireland society that could embrace peace is a workforce in which Catholics and Protestants work side by side. Only by ending the informal segregation of Northern Ireland will large numbers of Catholics and Protestants be able to work together for peace. Eighty-eight percent of the country may be ready for peace, but the level of contact between Protestants and Catholics, on a day-by-day basis, is not large enough for a strong pro-peace coalition to form. The inclusion of Catholics into the economy has proven to be difficult, the areas in which Catholic unemployment levels are highest are often the places where the IRA is at its strongest. IRA violence leads to greater Catholic unemployment, as Protestants become fearful of the Catholic population, and this in turn leads to greater violence. Both Protestants and Catholics demand that the opposing population must make the first steps towards peace, and neither group is willing to take that step. In another country, a dedicated government could implement a powerful Affirmative Action program, within its departments and offices, to help bring the two groups together. In Northern Ireland, though, the last thing a Catholic wants is to work for the British government. Still, an Affirmative Action like program may be a viable solution to the problem of segregation in the private-sector. Even if legally-required Affirmative Action proves to be infeasible, the international community could help support the peace process by investing in companies that will hire any citizen of Northern Ireland.

To achieve peace, the IRA and the RUC must no longer be the default leaders of the Catholics and Protestants. The IRA, and even the RUC with its paramilitary style armament, are based on violence and are proving to be incapable of doing little more than punishing others for perceived wrongs. If compromise is necessary to achieve peace, then, among other things, the IRA must ensure that men like Gerry Adams can work for peace, without being called a coward, and the Protestant community must develop a powerful civilian organization, other than the Orangemen. Furthermore, the RUC must stop treating every Catholic like a member of the IRA until proven innocent. The RUC and the SAS are the IRA's greatest enlistment officers. The crown should strive to preserve order, but its current methods do little more than encourage Catholic resentment.

The Crown needs not only to decrease its harassment of the Catholic minority, a behavior mimicked by many business owners, but also to prosecute extreme Protestants, like the ones that killed Patrick Finucane. The conflict in Northern Ireland can often be described as random vigilantism; one side attacks the other and the opposition strikes back, but not at the original perpetrator. Both Protestants and Catholics believe that the Crown is not taking sufficient methods to protect them, and so these two groups take matters into their own hands. Thanks to informers, the Crown knows most of the participants in IRA hits, but the lack of immediate arrests encourages Protestants to take matters into their own hands. Conversely, the crown seems to have immense difficulty in even identifying which extreme Protestants are suspected of committing violent crimes. The Crown must find ways to stop this vigilantism.

The IRA, too, has many flaws that hinder the peace process. Namely, the group's inability to compromise. The IRA believes that eventually the British people will view the Crown's involvement in Northern Ireland in much the same way as Americans saw the military's involvement in Vietnam. This kind of anti-war movement would have a devastating effect on the will of the government to remain in Northern Ireland, but this movement is not likely to emerge. First, British troops are not dying in high enough numbers to motivate a large portion of the population into action, and second the IRA is seen as a real threat to England, thanks to the bombings of places like Hared's, and this reduces its support among the populace. Without a strong British anti-war movement that sees Britain as the aggressor in Northern Ireland there will not be significant pressure on the Crown to abandon any of its major positions. There is, however, pressure on the Crown to take a hard stance on the IRA. The IRA must allow democratically elected British officials to save face in London, by agreeing to some form of a simultaneous disarmament, something Prime Minister Tony Blair is willing to do, instead of demanding a complete and immediate cessation of the Crown's presence in Northern Ireland. Only when the correct politics, on top of good economic policies, and proper policing strategies, are in place will peace finally come to Northern Ireland.

- Andrew Woodward

The struggle in Ireland is one for a freedom that penetrates more than the daily life of every member of that society. It is a struggle for the people to be free in mind, soul, and body. The battle between the Catholics and the crown has taken on new form as the centuries have progressed. Today the battle is waged to end the fear that festers inside each person in Northern Ireland, and not simply to bring an end to nearly four centuries of discriminating rule by the British. Each member of the IRA experiences this fear during every moment of his or her life. Where can they go where they would truly be safe? That place simply does not exist in their world. Each day they must wrestle with the possibility that they will be arrested and put in prison, attacked, or even killed. The worst fear of all is that a choice they made could result in the death of someone they love, their parents, their bothers or sisters, their husband or wife, even their children. The fight that the IRA struggles with is one of personal sacrifice. To join the IRA is not so much a choice of free will but the only way to fight back against a society that has taken all of one's rights and opportunities to live free and happy.

"Half a million natives out of the total Irish population estimated at one and a half million perished by the sword, plague, famine, hardships and banishment between 1641 and 1652." (16) People who join the IRA have history in mind. Over the last four centuries, the Catholic population of Ireland and Northern Ireland has seen their families torn apart, relocated, and murdered. The effort to survive as a culture has become considerably difficult. Catholics in Northern Ireland have nothing. As a forty percent minority one would only assume that the countries resources, jobs, money, homes, and political influence would be nearly evenly shared among the Catholics and the only slightly larger Protestant Majority. This case is not true. Every day for a Catholic in Northern Ireland is a punishment for being born into a particular faith. The ruling country, Great Britain, does not help the problem and in fact supports the Protestants with their discrimination against the Catholics. Martin McGuinness recalled growing up in Derry: "The minority Protestant population ruthlessly excluded Catholics from all positions of power. Catholic families were corralled into the slums of the Bogside in order to prevent a shift in the narrow voting balances in the city's gerrymandered electoral wards and a subsequent threat to Unionist domination of Derry Corporation." (298) The Catholics of Northern Ireland have no other choice than to support or join the IRA. Their lives are shambles and consist of a constant struggle to get by economically, and to give their families the same opportunities as any other member of Irish society.

When children are young in Northern Ireland they witness the battle for independence every day. They are not allowed simply to sit by and remain apathetic to the problems. From the earliest of age, children are compelled to participate in the battle for their own freedom. ""Are you coming down to the riot?" they would ask. If you refused you would be taunted: "You are nothing but a coward," said a Bogside parish priest..." (203) Children are raised to believe that what is going on in Ireland is the way of the world. They know nothing else. As a child, when someone witnesses his family and friends acting for a cause, that same cause, and any morals that go along with it, is going to stick with that child throughout his life. In Northern Ireland, peer pressure plays a major factor in the choices that young adults begin to make and in the opinions that they begin to form. How could a child look around and choose anything else when this is the only choice he or she has. Parents are poor, older family members are already caught up in the fight, friends talk about it, and eventually everyone begins to understand why they must fight too. "These people were our defenders, although the whole concept of what they were fighting for and why the soldiers were shooting at them was a mystery. We had no idea at that stage why the IRA wanted the Brits out. Every day there were gun battles on the street. You enjoyed it when you heard gunfire against the Brits ... You just thought it was fantastic to hear the roar of gunfire and there was also that hatred, that intense dislike of these people who came in and invaded your area ..." (106) Children looked up to IRA members and the entire culture of Northern Ireland perpetuated this idealization. When these children began to reach an age where they could, they wanted to join the IRA's cause. These young adults saw the IRA as the only way for them to fight back against their oppressors.

As adults, the pressures of daily life in Northern Ireland begin to take full effect on one's life. There are no jobs for Catholics. There are no nice homes. There are no free choices. There are no opportunities for any Catholic to advance his or her status in society. Short of being enslaved and forced to work for the Protestants, there is nothing to be taken away from the Catholics. So they support the idea of separation from England, and the IRA is the only body that is showing signs of accomplishing this. When one joins, they make the choice to give up their life, and any hope of ever achieving the freedom for which they are fighting, for themselves. "...Statistics dictate that virtually every IRA member from the Chief of Staff to the lowliest Volunteer has spent some time behind bars." (151) Participating in the actions of the IRA is generally illegal, because bombings, assassinations, and terrorism are all daily activities for members of the IRA. The freedom to live a relatively normal life is also stripped away. "Frankie and Patricia should not have died on a cold November night hundreds of miles away from their families, from those who loved them and cared for them. They should not have had to huddle in a darkened doorway handling explosives in alien and hostile territory to them. They should not have had to live secret lives, live away from their families and their friends; they should not have had to be introduced to weapons of death and destruction, have had to bend their minds to that end, to steel their will against the call of ordinary life for the difficult life of an IRA Volunteer on active service." (263) Each Volunteer knows that just around the corner there lies the possibility of death. Even though the possibility of peace seems relatively far away, these people put themselves through hell for a cause that they might never realize.

The fear for an IRA member reaches far beyond his her or her own life. "Finucane's killers and his many enemies in the police and the British Army did not recognize any division between his professional conduct and his private beliefs and personal relationships. They saw no difference between being an IRA man's brother, defending IRA men and being an IRA man." (88) The SAS and other paramilitary groups, many presumably and secretly supported by Great Britain, don't care who they target as long as it hurts the IRA's mission. This is where the greatest fear forms, and where the greatest tragedies take place. People who are merely connected to the IRA through family ties and friendships, must live with much of the same fear that the IRA members themselves must live with. This causes increased anxiety for the members too. Their choices are resulting in the death of innocent people. "The police were always reminding me about my wife. They could bring her in at any time ... It was a really big hold they had over me. The fact that they would do her. It shattered me. If it had just been me it would have been al right." (200-201) This psychological strangle that the British and Protestants have over members of the IRA is an intense and tiring attack. These people are fighting in what used to be their country, for rights that we in the United States believe should be granted to everyone. It breaks down ones mind. It forces one to question the deepest intentions of the soul. And it makes ones body weak and tired. "Hogan ... was defeated; He was living in the wake of a catastrophe that had overtaken his life, waiting for the stasis in his life to end, waiting for today to become tomorrow because there was no hope in today and maybe something might happen tomorrow to make it less like today. He was ... full of remorse for having betrayed his brothers ... for ruining his own life ... At our meeting his eyes continually flickered around the room searching out potential enemies, and on the other side of the bar ... there was a minder he had brought along to 'watch his back.'" (246) Not every member of the IRA reaches a point like this. Too many don't live long enough.

The battle that the IRA is waging doesn't seem worth it when you look at it from the standpoint of the current condition of life in Northern Ireland. Over the last century violent fighting for Northern Ireland's independence has been going on, and independence has not been attained. Why don't these IRA members, and all of the Catholics in Northern Ireland, simply surrender? They could return to where the constant fear of death doesn't surround every action. The Catholics can not do this because they would rather die that live a life of oppression, a life exempt of any of the liberties that God grants Catholics and all human beings. The psychological strains that are put on each member of the IRA is nothing compared to the guilt they would feel if they let England run their lives and control their fate. "I am not so foolish to say that if we stop, everyone will stop and we will all live happily ever after. It won't work like that because it will start again until there is justice." (137) Justice is what every member of the Irish Republican Army is willing to die for. Justice is what will bring peace. And Justice is what Northern Ireland deserves.

- T. Brian Jones