Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that polarised the nation and triggered disorder, a advisory emerges from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, initiating convulsions for which no one is equipped.
That is the message from two prominent commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to scrutinise the benefits and drawbacks of Northern Ireland departing the UK to establish a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly fraught and transformative public vote.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can arise suddenly and can gather momentum rapidly," O’Toole stated. "It is my view that the political architecture of our region remains highly fragile."
New Title Intends to Stir Debate
The pair have analysed the political, economic and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the topic with a series of speaking events that will take them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What troubles everybody, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a yes-no, vague proposition whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you end up with an highly split population where the losing side are resistant to defeat and the people who have won don't know precisely what it is that they have achieved."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups say that moment is approaching, and a organisation named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the possibility, resulting in ambiguity whether or when there will be a national vote.
Lack of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has obscured the absence of serious debate, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the concept but the actual thinking which could extend past that to make it possible has largely not occurred. A lot has occurred in universities but scarcely any government figures or advocates want to engage with even the fundamentals. For instance, what type of nation should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, none of the commentators supports unification or the current situation. They composes two essays that aim for impartiality in presenting the argument for a unified Ireland and the rationale against, gathering financial and social figures, previous instances and governmental frameworks.
Discussions cover national emblems, taxes, medical care, pensions, national debt responsibilities and the danger of unionist unrest. The aim is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," commented O’Toole. "Dialogue indicates an acceptance of the idea that there might be valid points on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate say they prefer unification but oppose paying higher taxes or introducing a alternative symbol to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British identity.
"The Irish government does need to establish what the plan from Irish nationalism is other than just stating: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked O’Toole.
Probability of Referendum
McBride thinks a national vote in his lifetime is likely and that it may take place suddenly. "It is possible just a reckless or a ill-advised or a incompetent official who says: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, valid points, he stated. "One side will prevail here and the other side will ultimately be defeated but all factions has got valuable insights to acquire from the opposing viewpoints."
Call for Broader Debate
Westminster should engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This involves the United Kingdom. It is a British question equally as it is an Irish matter."
