The security-threat-community

Abstract

At the height of 'the Troubles' in 1976 social-housing in Belfast was in a crisis situation as communities consolidated along ethnic boundaries, often with violent consequences, with some communities becoming drastically overcrowded and others falling into abject dereliction. Using declassified government documentation this paper examines how these events legitimised an emergent confluence of housing and security policy which brought into being the security-threat-community; a socio-material construct where every person is a potential insurgent and every dwelling a potential security-threat. Crucially, the paper problematises the complex entanglement of political, military, paramilitary, economic and ideological forces which shaped its formation. The discussion traces a descent through contingent events within a wider dispositif and reveals the formation of the Standing Committee on the Security Implications of Housing, a confidential government body which assessed the viability of social-housing procurement within communities in terms of the securitythreat it might present rather than the housing-need that it would address. As a complement to post-9-11 discourses concerning increasingly 'globalised conflicts' the security-threat-community reinforces the complexities of local discursivities. The paper makes visible the sophisticated socio-material effects of these operations and illustrates how they remain embedded within contemporary community structures. The paper concludes by reflecting on how this permits conflict-era forces to remain active, but largely unacknowledged, within the postconflict era. Ultimately the paper argues for a 'revaluing of the value' of this conflict-architecture within post-conflict policy frameworks.

Civil society, solidarity and collective action: Conflict-related displacement in Northern Ireland's Troubles, 1969–1974

“…Some welcome and notable exceptions, however, have either explicitly incorporated displacement as part of their overall thematic analysis or in some instances, alluded to its importance. The role of housing, segregation, territoriality and identity in the perpetuation of ethno-sectarian antagonisms is well established and remains a feature of Northern Irish life despite the advent of the 1998 peace accord (Boal, 1969;Coyles, 2017;Poole and Doherty, 2010). Shirlow and Murtagh's (2006) ground-breaking examination of place and segregation in post-GFA Belfast, documented a distinct mutation from armed violence to everyday forms of sectarianism, and a range of direct consequences including deepening communal polarisation, social exclusion, fatalism and economic truncation.…”

“… 5. Forced displacement caused profound demographic changes and effectively signified the end of mixed residential housing in many working-class districts across Northern Ireland as well as in rural hinterlands close to the border, thus creating unprecedented levels of residential segregation, demarcated territories, and enclaves. The existence of homogenous communities was central to solidifying and mobilising collective identities and interpretations of violence, which were particularly favourable to the growth of militant republicanism and loyalism, leading to the unprecedented direct involvement of the British Army and RUC personnel in social housing policy from the mid-1970s onwards (Coyles, 2017). Ironically, the creation of homogenous ethno-religious communities also made them more vulnerable to gun and bomb attack.…”

Hidden barriers and divisive architecture: The role of “everyday space” in conflict and peacebuilding in Belfast

“…10 Whilst these redevelopment processes would directly engage with a wide range of inner-city areas where inter-communal boundaries were contested and where violence was extensive, the passing public reference made to the effects of the Troubles by government officials reflected a longstanding policy orthodoxy which kept housing policy and security policy quite separate in the public eye. To this end, a confidential Standing Committee on the Security Implications of Housing Problems in Belfast was established in June 1977 (Coyles, 2017) to enable a purposefully security-focused management of contentious redevelopment programs quite outside of public view. Operating in parallel to the public redevelopment process, this undisclosed committee brought together officials from the highest ranks of the British Army and Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) police force (collectively referred to as the Security Forces and commonly represented at Brigadier and Assistant Chief Constable level respectively), alongside department heads from the NIO and DoE, to assess proposals in areas where there were alleged security issues arising due to the proximity of Catholic and Protestant residents.…”

Nostalgia for ‘HMP Divis’ and ‘HMP Rossville’: Memories of the Everyday in Northern Ireland’s High-Rise Flats

“…(Legg 2018.The initial Divis plan included seven tower blocks rather than just one and would have sprawled across West Belfast (McConville 2017). What is important here is the way in which this modernist approach to development is impossible to disentangle from the securitization and weaponization of space, and the desire to segregate parts of the city (Cunningham 2014: 455, see also Coyles 2017).…”

“…This is not only a variation of the old regional saying of 'whatever you say, say nothing' noted by many anthropologists (Finlay 1997, Kelleher 2004, Bryson 2007) but also a testimony to the shifting nature of what constitutes the 'domain of the sayable' (Butler 1997:133, see also Newby, this issue) in post-Good Friday Agreement Northern Ireland, where the perceived need to look ahead and focus on the benign aspects of the past enforces a specific restrictive set of 'cultural scripts' (Roper 2000) delineating what can be circulated in public spaces. The interest in speaking about -but also listening to, for these are ultimately edited by community gatekeepers -the less well known (everyday) 'life' of the flats' residents reminds us of the labour of moral calibration carried out by communities facing a double stigmatization: first as dwellers in a territory targeted by security forces as 'security-threat-communities' (Coyles 2017); and, secondly, as residents of estates whose conditions they are blamed for (Crossley 2017).…”