This conference takes the form of regular and frequent meetings between The British and Irish ministers to promote cooperation between the two governments at all levels. On issues not left to Northern Ireland, the Irish government can present views and proposals. All decisions of the Conference are taken by mutual agreement between the two governments and the two governments, in order to make resolute efforts to resolve the differences between them. Adams publicly described this perspective in 1988 in an interview in which he appeared to dismiss the prospect of a military solution to the conflict.27 This set the scene for a series of meetings between Adams and Hume, which culminated in a joint agreement in 1993 containing two important provisions: the agreement came after many years of complex discussions. proposals and compromises. A lot of people have made a great contribution. Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern were the leaders of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland at the time. The presidency was chaired by U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell.  In these circumstances, power-sharing proved impossible to bear. Meanwhile, voters in each community began to turn away from moderate parties, and instead support for Sinn Féin and the DUP grew, supplanting the SDLP and UUP.
For much of the decade following the Good Friday agreement, decentralization was suspended because the main parties in each community were unable to reach a power-sharing agreement. Progress has been made on decommissioning, which was confirmed in September 2005, but a political agreement has remained thoughtless. Finally, the British and Irish governments held crisis talks in St Andrews in October 2006. There, Sinn Féin finally agreed to accept the PSNI, while the DUP agreed to share power with Sinn Féin. Finally, in May 2007, a leader of the DUP, Sinn Féin, UUP and SDLP was able to take office. This time, the institutions created under the Good Friday Agreement should be maintained until the current political crisis of January 2017 has led to the collapse of the executive. It goes without saying that the inclusion of former paramilitaries in peace negotiations does not guarantee such an outcome. In South Africa, the African National Congress party and the apartheid government have created more uniform structures in their peace agreements containing explicit elements of reconciliation.
Nevertheless, it seems fair to say that the shape of the peace process in South Africa has contributed to the success of the agreement and its borders. The lessons of these cases are clear: practitioners must consider the potential long-term costs of a peace process focused primarily on the short-term goal of ending the fighting. One commentator called this the choice between a “no more draw” and “no struggle” type of agreement.114 The agreement reaffirmed a commitment to “mutual respect, civil rights and religious freedoms for all in the community.” The multi-party agreement recognized “the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance with regard to linguistic diversity,” particularly with regard to the Irish language, Ulster Scots and the languages of other ethnic minorities in Northern Ireland, “all of which are part of the cultural richness of the Island of Ireland.” After marathon negotiations, an agreement was finally reached on 10 April 1998. The Good Friday Agreement was a complex balancing act that reflects the three-strand approach. Within Northern Ireland, it has created a new de-elected assembly for Northern Ireland, calling for executive power to be shared by parties representing both communities. In addition, a new North-South Council of Ministers should be set up to institutionalise the link between the two parts of Ireland.