ABSTRACT
The election of new governments in both Britain and Ireland offered a real opportunity to re-launch the peace process in mid-1997. A feature of the conflict in Northern Ireland has been that major changes in personnel have often increased the chance of progress and brought renewed dynamism to the intergovernmental relationship. Given the complicated nature of the conflict, the diverse and conflicting demands of and upon the parties, and the frequency of unexpected events that strain the relationship, changes of leadership can be cathartic. Such changes enable a metaphorical line to be drawn under past events, and problems can effectively be attributed to outgoing leaders. The replacement of Thatcher and Haughey by Major and Reynolds had led to advances in the early 1990s. Both were seen as unencumbered by the ideological and historical baggage of their predecessors. By 1997 though Major's own historical baggage was increasingly weighty, particularly as a result of the problems in advancing the peace process after 1994. Whilst Bruton had only been in power for 3 years, his ideological baggage had become an issue and the apparent lack of progress during his time in office meant that relations between his government and Republicans in Northern Ireland were poor. The causes of the problems in the peace process were not solely the result of the actions or ideologies of Major/Bruton or of The Conservative Party/Fine Gael. The issues that caused the problems were not voted out of office in 1997. But the attitudes of the parties in Northern Ireland to the two governments were taken out of the equation (or at least heavily discounted) when new governments came in. Neither was the government elected on a platform of a radically different policy towards Northern Ireland nor was the issue of Northern Ireland of any notable significance in either state's election campaign. But the arrival of two new leaders onto the stage in quick succession and, vitally, the evident intention of both governments to make the issue a priority meant that an opportunity for advance existed in June 1997 in a way that it had not 2 months before.
