A decade after the UK entered into a hasty referendum that polarised the country and caused turmoil, a caution comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is equipped.
That represents the warning from two respected commentators from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Establishments Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our archipelago remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have analysed the political, economic and societal reasons for any governmental shift in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the topic with a series of public talks that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What troubles everyone, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We must avoid a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose results have not been spelled out because then you end up with an highly polarised community where those defeated are resistant to losing and the victorious side lack clarity precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a referendum on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would approve.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue this point is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists minimise the prospect, making it uncertain if and when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has hidden the absence of informed dialogue, stated the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but scarcely any elected officials or activists are willing to participate with even the basics. To illustrate, what sort of state should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. Both composes two pieces that strive for objectivity in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument against, gathering economic and social data, previous instances and constitutional models.
Discussions encompass identity markers, duties, health services, pensions, public liabilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and encourage discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Discussion suggests an acceptance of the idea that there could be valid points on each side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where citizens claim they prefer unity but oppose paying higher taxes or adopting a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' British identity.
"Authorities in Dublin must determine what the plan from Irish nationalism is other than just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride thinks a national vote in his generation is probable and that it may take place unexpectedly. "It is possible just a reckless or a poor or a feckless secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and get it out of the way.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have credible, justified perspectives, he stated. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and somebody will in the end be defeated but both parties has possesses something to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Request for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster must engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a British question just as much as it is an Irish matter."
