A decade after the UK embarked on a hasty referendum that split the country and unleashed turmoil, a warning comes from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Authorities and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating disturbances for which nobody is equipped.
That represents the warning from two prominent journalists from either side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly fraught and monumental referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator stated. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Aims to Stir Debate
The team have analysed the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a volume, The Case For and Against Unification, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of public talks that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everyone, or must worry every person, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We do not want a referendum on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily split population where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the victorious side lack clarity exactly what it is that they have gained."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups claim that moment is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions play down the prospect, making it uncertain when or if there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has masked the lack of serious debate, noted McBride.
"Many are for or against the concept but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. Much has taken place in universities but very few politicians or campaigners want to engage with even the essentials. For instance, what type of nation would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the book, none of the commentators endorses unification or the current situation. They writes two essays that strive for neutrality in detailing the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument against, marshalling financial and societal statistics, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Discussions range over national emblems, duties, health services, retirement funds, public liabilities and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to inform and stimulate conversation.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there is still lacking a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Debate indicates an acceptance of the notion that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where citizens say they support unification but oppose greater financial contributions or introducing a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin should work out what the offer from Irish nationalism is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a referendum in his generation is possible and that it could happen unexpectedly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a feckless government minister who states: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the pro-unification advocates and unionists have credible, valid arguments, he commented. "One side will win in this matter and somebody will in the end lose but all factions has has valuable insights to gain from the opposing viewpoints."
Request for Wider Discussion
Westminster must participate in the debate, urged the analyst. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It is a British issue as much as it is an Irish matter."