Ten years following the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that split the country and unleashed disorder, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is ready.
That is the message from two leading commentators from each side of the Irish border who have collaborated to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to create a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially contentious and seismic public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that events can emerge unexpectedly and can gain traction very quickly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our islands remains extremely volatile."
Book Publication Intends to Stir Debate
The team have analysed the governmental, financial and societal rationales for any constitutional change in a book, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to encourage dialogue on the topic with a roadshow of speaking events that will bring them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We should prevent a referendum on a binary, unclear proposal whose consequences have remained undefined because then you land with an extraordinarily divided society where the losing side are not reconciled to defeat and the those successful are uncertain exactly what it is that they have won."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim this point is approaching, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the prospect, making it uncertain if and when there could be a national vote.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unification has masked the shortage of substantive discussion, noted McBride.
"Individuals are often for or against the notion but the concrete planning which may surpass that to realise it hasn't for the most part happened. A great deal has occurred in scholarly circles but hardly any elected officials or campaigners are willing to participate even with the basics. For instance, which kind of country should be desired? Centralised? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, no writer supports unity or the existing arrangement. Both authors two pieces that seek impartiality in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling financial and societal data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Arguments cover national emblems, levies, medical care, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the danger of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and encourage discussion.
"There is significant curiosity in the topic but there has not yet occurred a debate," commented O’Toole. "Discussion indicates an acknowledgement of the idea that there could be reasonable perspectives on each side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would also trigger one in the republic, where citizens report they support unity but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Policymakers in Ireland must establish what the offer from Irish nationalism is aside from just declaring: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride thinks a referendum in his generation is likely and that it may take place suddenly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a bad or a negligent official who states: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and pro-UK supporters have plausible, legitimate arguments, he stated. "One side will prevail in this matter and the other side will ultimately lose but all factions has possesses valuable insights to acquire from the other's viewpoints."
Request for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should participate in the debate, urged the analyst. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish issue."
