A decade after the UK stumbled into a rushed referendum that divided the country and caused disorder, a advisory comes from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and electorate sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical might transpire with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking disturbances for which no one is prepared.
That is the message from two prominent journalists from both sides of the Irish border who have collaborated to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to establish a new state with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Establishments Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are extremely unready for a potentially tense and seismic referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit hasn't been learned, which is that stuff can emerge unexpectedly and can gather momentum very quickly," the commentator said. "It is my view that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains very unstable."
Released Volume Aims to Stir Debate
The duo have analysed the political, financial and cultural reasons for any structural alteration in a volume, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to stir debate on the matter with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What troubles everyone, or should haunt everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, ambiguous question whose implications have remained undefined because then you end up with an extremely split population where the losing side are not reconciled to losing and the those successful lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."
Legal Framework
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a public vote on Irish unification if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue that moment is looming, and a group called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but both governments and unionists play down the possibility, leaving it unclear when or if there will be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Partisan language for and against unity has obscured the absence of informed dialogue, stated the journalist.
"People tend to be for or against the idea but the actual thinking which might go beyond that to achieve it has largely not occurred. Much has gone on in academia but hardly any government figures or campaigners are willing to participate even with the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Federal?"
Publication's Method
In the publication, none of the commentators advocates unity or the existing arrangement. They writes two essays that strive for neutrality in presenting the rationale for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling economic and social data, historical precedents and structural examples.
Arguments range over national emblems, levies, healthcare systems, elderly benefits, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there hasn't quite been a discussion," said the writer. "Debate implies an acknowledgement of the notion that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters claim they support unity but refuse paying higher taxes or adopting a alternative symbol to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to work out what the offer from nationalist groups is aside from just declaring: 'We desire a united Ireland and we welcome you'," said the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
The journalist considers a national vote in his generation is probable and that it could happen unexpectedly. "It is possible just a mad or a ill-advised or a feckless official who declares: 'Let us proceed and resolve it.'"
Both pro-unification advocates and unionists have reasonable, justified points, he said. "One side will win on this issue and somebody will ultimately not succeed but both parties has possesses something to gain from the other's positions."
Call for More Extensive Debate
Westminster needed to participate in the dialogue, stated O’Toole. "This is about the United Kingdom. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish issue."
