Ten years after the UK entered into a rushed public vote that divided the country and triggered chaos, a caution is issued from across the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
Policymakers and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, sparking disturbances for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a potentially tense and transformative public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can build support swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our region remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the governmental, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a publication, Examining Irish Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to provoke discussion on the issue with a tour of public talks that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What concerns everybody, or must worry all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have remained undefined because then you end up with an highly polarised community where those defeated are resistant to defeat and the people who have won are uncertain precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a referendum on Irish unity if it appears likely that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue this point is approaching, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists play down the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there might be a referendum.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Partisan language for and against unity has obscured the absence of serious debate, said McBride.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the actual thinking which may surpass that to make it possible has largely not occurred. Much has taken place in scholarly circles but scarcely any government figures or campaigners are willing to participate with even the fundamentals. To illustrate, which kind of country might be preferred? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, no writer endorses unity or the existing arrangement. Both authors two pieces that seek impartiality in presenting the argument for a united Ireland and the argument against, assembling economic and social statistics, past examples and structural examples.
Arguments cover flags and symbols, duties, healthcare systems, pensions, public liabilities and the risk of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and encourage dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there has not yet occurred a discussion," said the writer. "Dialogue implies an recognition of the notion that there may exist reasonable perspectives on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they support unification but reject greater financial contributions or introducing a new flag to recognise unionists' British identity.
"The Irish government should determine what the proposal from pro-unification movements is other than just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist thinks a national vote in his generation is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a reckless or a ill-advised or a feckless secretary of state who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have credible, valid arguments, he commented. "One side will succeed in this matter and somebody will in the end not succeed but all factions has possesses something to gain from the opposing positions."
Call for More Extensive Debate
Westminster must join the debate, stated the analyst. "This involves the United Kingdom. It's a British issue equally as it is an Irish issue."
