Ten years after the UK entered into a hurried referendum that split the nation and triggered disorder, a advisory is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Policymakers and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering disturbances for which nobody is ready.
That represents the warning from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Institutions Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and The Northern Ireland editor, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are gravely unprepared for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole remarked. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our region remains extremely volatile."
New Title Aims to Provoke Discussion
The pair have examined the political, financial and cultural arguments for any structural alteration in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the issue with a series of lectures that will lead them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts all parties, or should haunt all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We must avoid a national vote on a binary, vague proposition whose results have not been spelled out because then you land with an extremely polarised community where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the people who have won don't know exactly what it is that they have achieved."
Governmental Mandate
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland secretary of state is obliged to schedule a referendum on Irish unification if it is indicated that a majority would approve.
Sinn Féin and other nationalists claim such a time is approaching, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has garnered backing, but both governments and unionists downplay the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there will be a national vote.
Insufficient Substantive Discussion
Partisan language supporting and opposing unity has hidden the lack of substantive discussion, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A great deal has gone on in universities but very few government figures or activists are willing to participate even with the basics. For instance, what sort of state would you want? Centralised? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the publication, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. Each composes two pieces that strive for neutrality in detailing the rationale for a united Ireland and the rationale against, gathering economic and social data, past examples and structural examples.
Debates cover national emblems, duties, medical care, retirement funds, public liabilities and the danger of pro-UK militancy. The aim is to inform and provoke discussion.
"There's huge interest in the topic but there is still lacking a discussion," stated the writer. "Discussion indicates an acceptance of the concept that there could be reasonable perspectives on each side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters report they prefer unification but refuse greater financial contributions or implementing a alternative symbol to reflect unionists' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin must work out what the proposal from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We seek a unified Ireland and we love you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his era is possible and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a reckless or a ill-advised or a incompetent government minister who states: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, legitimate arguments, he commented. "Somebody will prevail on this issue and the other side will ultimately be defeated but both parties has has important lessons to acquire from the other's positions."
Call for More Extensive Dialogue
Westminster should engage with the dialogue, said O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It is a British issue equally as it is an Irish issue."
