Ten years after the UK embarked on a hasty referendum that split the nation and unleashed chaos, a advisory comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and citizens drifted into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is equipped.
That represents the warning from two respected writers from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a potentially contentious and monumental public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support rapidly," the commentator said. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the governmental, financial and cultural rationales for any structural alteration in a book, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of speaking events that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles all parties, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We must avoid a referendum on a binary, ambiguous question whose implications have not been clarified because then you land with an highly polarised community where people who have lost are unable to accept losing and the victorious side are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state should call a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would approve.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is looming, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and pro-UK factions downplay the prospect, resulting in ambiguity when or if there might be a referendum.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unification has masked the lack of serious debate, said McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which may surpass that to make it possible is mostly absent. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but hardly any government figures or advocates seek to involve themselves with even the fundamentals. For instance, which kind of country might be preferred? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, none of the commentators supports unity or the status quo. Each composes two essays that strive for objectivity in laying out the rationale for a united Ireland and the rationale against, assembling financial and social figures, past examples and constitutional models.
Discussions range over identity markers, taxes, healthcare systems, pensions, public liabilities and the threat of unionist unrest. The objective is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"Considerable attention exists in the subject but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," stated O’Toole. "Debate implies an acknowledgement of the concept that there could be valid points on either side."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters report they favour unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a alternative symbol to recognise unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin should determine what the plan from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride thinks a national vote in his era is possible and that it may take place suddenly. "There might be just a irresponsible or a poor or a negligent government minister who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, legitimate perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and the other side will ultimately not succeed but both parties has has important lessons to gain from the other's viewpoints."
Appeal for Wider Discussion
Westminster needed to join the debate, urged the analyst. "This concerns Britain. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."
