“Striving to Facilitate the Achievement of the PIRA's Aims”? The Labour Government, the Army and the Crisis of the British State over Northern Ireland 1972–76

IF 0.6 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY History Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.1111/1468-229X.13404
Paul Dixon
{"title":"“Striving to Facilitate the Achievement of the PIRA's Aims”? The Labour Government, the Army and the Crisis of the British State over Northern Ireland 1972–76","authors":"Paul Dixon","doi":"10.1111/1468-229X.13404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article argues that there was a crisis within the British state over policy towards Northern Ireland (1972–76). The Conservative then Labour government pursued a broadly bipartisan and conciliatory policy, culminating in the failed powersharing experiment (1974). By contrast, the New Right within the Conservative Party but also powerful elements in the Army and Intelligence Services, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Unionism opposed conciliation as ‘appeasement’ and even treachery. They claimed conciliation and rumours of British political support for withdrawal encouraged the IRA and undermined the repressive approach that was necessary to win. From this perspective, the Conservative then Labour government were, in effect, ‘… striving to facilitate the achievement of the PIRA's aims’ and so they resisted government policy. The crisis intensified as more troops were killed, and the Army suffered severe problems of morale, recruitment and retention. The Army's emergency created a need to withdraw troops and Ulsterise the conflict. Although this constrained the Labour government's ability to defend powersharing, the Army also appeared reluctant to support the government's conciliatory policy. The crisis of the British state over Northern Ireland (1972–76) provides part of the context in which allegations about the undermining of Prime Minister Harold Wilson and the Labour government in the 1970s should be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":13162,"journal":{"name":"History","volume":"109 386-387","pages":"367-394"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-229X.13404","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-229X.13404","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article argues that there was a crisis within the British state over policy towards Northern Ireland (1972–76). The Conservative then Labour government pursued a broadly bipartisan and conciliatory policy, culminating in the failed powersharing experiment (1974). By contrast, the New Right within the Conservative Party but also powerful elements in the Army and Intelligence Services, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Unionism opposed conciliation as ‘appeasement’ and even treachery. They claimed conciliation and rumours of British political support for withdrawal encouraged the IRA and undermined the repressive approach that was necessary to win. From this perspective, the Conservative then Labour government were, in effect, ‘… striving to facilitate the achievement of the PIRA's aims’ and so they resisted government policy. The crisis intensified as more troops were killed, and the Army suffered severe problems of morale, recruitment and retention. The Army's emergency created a need to withdraw troops and Ulsterise the conflict. Although this constrained the Labour government's ability to defend powersharing, the Army also appeared reluctant to support the government's conciliatory policy. The crisis of the British state over Northern Ireland (1972–76) provides part of the context in which allegations about the undermining of Prime Minister Harold Wilson and the Labour government in the 1970s should be considered.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"努力促进爱尔兰共和军目标的实现"?1972-76 年工党政府、军队和英国国家在北爱尔兰问题上的危机
本文认为,英国国家内部在对北爱尔兰的政策(1972-1976 年)上出现了危机。当时的保守党和工党政府奉行广泛的两党和解政策,最终导致权力分享试验(1974 年)失败。与此相反,保守党内的新右派以及军队和情报部门、皇家阿尔斯特警察局和联邦主义中的强大势力都反对和解,认为这是 "绥靖",甚至是背叛。他们声称,和解以及英国在政治上支持撤军的传言鼓励了爱尔兰共和军,破坏了赢得胜利所必需的镇压手段。从这个角度来看,保守党和工党政府实际上是在'......努力促进爱尔兰共和军目标的实现',因此他们抵制政府的政策。随着越来越多的部队被杀,危机愈演愈烈,军队在士气、征兵和留住人员方面都遇到了严重的问题。军队的紧急状况导致需要撤军并将冲突阿尔斯特化。虽然这限制了工党政府捍卫权力分享的能力,但军队似乎也不愿支持政府的和解政策。英国国家在北爱尔兰问题上的危机(1972-1976 年)为我们提供了部分背景资料,我们应在此基础上考虑有关哈罗德-威尔逊首相和工党政府在 20 世纪 70 年代遭到破坏的指控。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
History
History HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: First published in 1912, History has been a leader in its field ever since. It is unique in its range and variety, packing its pages with stimulating articles and extensive book reviews. History balances its broad chronological coverage with a wide geographical spread of articles featuring contributions from social, political, cultural, economic and ecclesiastical historians. History seeks to publish articles on broad, challenging themes, which not only display sound scholarship which is embedded within current historiographical debates, but push those debates forward. History encourages submissions which are also attractively and clearly written. Reviews: An integral part of each issue is the review section giving critical analysis of the latest scholarship across an extensive chronological and geographical range.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information The Women of Corsican Nationalism: Between Tradition and Modernity (1975–98) A Reassessment of the Military Careers and Writings of Sir John Peyton (1579–1635) and Sir Henry Peyton (c.1580–1623) Sir William Capell and A Royal Chain: The Afterlives (and Death) of King Edward V
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1