This stimulating volume brings together a distinguished list of contributors to analyse the utility and validity of consociational theory in managing Northern Ireland's political problems. As someone so consociation-sceptic, Rupert Taylor deserves congratulations for assembling an eclectic range of scholars from both sides of the supposed consociation versus integration divide to address the following key questions: to what extent and how successfully have McGarry and O'Leary reformulated the consociational theory first promulgated by Lijphart? Does consociation offer the best means for managing divided societies? Is consociation working in Northern Ireland and, if so, will this success continue? At first glance, these questions may seem a recipe for the re-hashing of tired, static dialogues of the deaf, between a consociational camp accepting of the empirical realities of ethnic division and integrationists demanding the reconstitution of society, but the book is much more than this. It offers nuanced arguments concerning the theoretical refinement of consociation and how its practical prescriptions can be played out in public policy.
There is one spectre missing from the feast: Paul Dixon, who claims elsewhere that consociationalists have revised the rules of their prescriptions so often that consociation has lost its meaning; he does not appear among the antagonists here. In any case, the argument is not whether the Good Friday Agreement contains power-sharing, mutual veto, proportionality in government and community autonomy (it does, although not much in respect of the autonomy bit) but rather, does the thing work, theoretically and empirically?
Ultimately, it is the consociationalists who come off better in the argument, in highlighting, first, that ethnic divisions cannot simply be wished away; second, that failure to acknowledge the existence of such identities is futile and dangerous; third, as the excellent chapter on electoral fortunes by Evans and Mitchell demonstrates, the rise of supposedly ‘extreme’ parties wrongly conflates ferocious historical reputation with contemporary outlook. Operating as ethnic tribune parties, the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Féin offer essentially moderate political discourses amid ethnic valence. Fourth, integrationists are unconvincing that conditions in Northern Ireland have somehow deteriorated into ‘Balkanization’ or benign apartheid. Such arguments are largely specious, for example, calling attention to the undeniable statistic that the number of ‘peace walls’ has risen. As McGarry and O'Leary point out (p. 355), such walls are far more porous these days.
In short, on most empirical observations, the empiricists win. Integrationists tend to rely on theoretical reasoning (often effective) and warm-glow politics (rather less effective), which – at their least subtle – consist of the ‘can't we all live happily together?’ question and overdone criticisms of the supposedly dark primordial view of identity held by consociational advocates. This is not to say that integrationists fail to make some useful empirical observations, most notably in respect of how the limited number of successful international cases of consociation makes perturbing reading. The basic subtext is: if it is so good, why doesn't it work more often? In the book's opening table (p. 6), Taylor lists ‘strong consociational cases’. Quite why Afghanistan is listed under the contemporary cases is unclear, Iraq hardly encourages confidence, neither does Lebanon, leaving Malaysia, South Tyrol, Burundi, Macedonia and Kenya in the list. Moreover, integrationists remain correct in their assertion that consociationalists are vague over the ultimate means of the dissolution of ethnic blocs and sectarianism, the latter never conceptually defined (as usual). The problem for integrationists is that their means are equally unclear.
A republican analysis of the book would assume that consociationalists and integrationists are not as far apart as might be claimed in this book. Both rely upon the diversion of issues of partition, which state governs, territory and sovereignty into less determinate, non-essentialist and vaguer concepts of ‘identity’, cultural diversity and ‘parity of esteem’, to maintain the peace process for which they offer different prescriptions. Fortunately for integrationists and consociationalists alike, most republicans have downgraded constitutional designs in favour of these ideas, epitomized in Sinn Féin's promotion of an intangible ‘Ireland of equals’, meaning everything and nothing. Integrationists, via Stephen Farry's (admittedly eloquent) chapter, fail to explain why a shared future should predominantly be based within a six-county arena, whose maintenance, justified or otherwise, is based upon an explicitly sectarian headcount. A truly shared future, across an island bereft of a (still fairly unpopular) border, is not considered. Consociationalists never quite fully explain how Irishness is adequately protected via power-sharing within a UK state, yet the protection of Britishness might be impossible if a unitary Ireland were attempted. While the sharing of power in Northern Ireland may be laudable, the devolved agreement does not transfer many key decisions, let alone sovereignty, from Westminster. For all the much-lauded popular support for the Good Friday Agreement, governments and parties never dared put constitutional alternatives before an electorate.
McGarry and O'Leary not only have the biggest arguments – across a 68-page section – but also get to have a very substantial last word – another 66 pages – on the friendly and unfriendly fire they receive. They make the reasonable point that some of the critics of consociation have thawed to support aspects of consociationalism, provided they are applied with flexibility. In order of rate of warming, the critics range from Ian O'Flynn's partial conversion to the cause/theory, through Rick Wilford's acknowledgement of positive aspects of consociation, to the still-glacial Robin Wilson and Rupert Taylor. McGarry and O'Leary address their critics in typical fashion, characterized by stridency but enveloped in evidence. Adrian Guelke is accused of creating a ‘straw person’ in accusing consociationalists of claiming solitary responsibility for the reduction of violence. Guelke's other main point, that bi-governmentalism was at least as responsible for agreement as local consociation is not as effectively dealt with, partly because Guelke is right, although disentangling ‘inducement’ from agreement is no easy task. Stephen Farry is charged with offering ‘Alliance Party prayers’ (presumably drawn from across at least two religions) in wanting D'Hondt replaced by a voluntary cabinet. This defence of D'Hondt extends across some cogent points from Rick Wilford's self-confessed ‘liberal centripetalist integrationism’ that highlight how ministers can go on ‘solo runs’– or, to be more accurate, runs on behalf of their ethnic bloc or party – insulated from the effective scrutiny of a more normal system of government and opposition. Robin Wilson comes under particular fire for offering the ‘most extreme anti-consociational chapter’, one which claims that the Good Friday Agreement has ‘produced no good’ (p. 368). Wilson is taken to task for ignoring the level of support for unionist and nationalist parties in his demands for ‘zealous re-integrationism’.
This book ought to appeal to any theorist or empiricist with interests in conflict management and resolution; its impact will extend far beyond Northern Ireland. Effectively a symposium in print, this is one of the most engaging works available, a forensic examination of the contemporary salience of consociation in theory and practice. One hopes that Taylor is recompensed for the rejection of his arguments with a high impact score in whatever forms South Africa's version of the Research Excellence Framework.
