Ten years following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that divided the nation and caused chaos, a warning comes from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and voters sleepwalked into Brexit and the same may happen with a referendum on a unified Ireland, triggering convulsions for which no one is prepared.
That is the message from two leading commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to form a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Establishments Unprepared
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have concluded that the political establishments in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a possibly tense and transformative referendum.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can gather momentum rapidly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the political architecture of our islands remains highly fragile."
New Title Intends to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have analysed the governmental, economic and societal arguments for any governmental shift in a publication, The Case For and Against Unification, published by the Dublin-based Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to stir debate on the matter with a series of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a national vote on a thumbs up-thumbs down, vague proposition whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you end up with an extraordinarily polarised community where the losing side are unable to accept losing and the people who have won lack clarity precisely what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim this point is looming, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, leaving it unclear if and when there could be a national vote.
Absence of Informed Dialogue
Partisan language for and against unity has hidden the absence of serious debate, stated McBride.
"Individuals are often 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 academia but very few elected officials or activists seek to involve themselves even with the essentials. For instance, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Publication's Method
In the book, no writer advocates unity or the status quo. They writes two articles that aim for impartiality in laying out the case for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling economic and societal figures, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Arguments range over identity markers, taxes, healthcare systems, pensions, public liabilities and the danger of loyalist violence. The goal is to enlighten and encourage discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the issue but there hasn't quite been a discussion," stated the writer. "Discussion suggests an acceptance of the concept that there might be good arguments on either side."
Simultaneous Plebiscites
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where citizens claim they support unification but reject greater financial contributions or implementing a alternative symbol to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland should establish what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just stating: 'We seek a united Ireland and we love you'," stated the commentator.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride considers a national vote in his era is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "There might be just a mad or a ill-advised or a negligent government minister who says: 'We should proceed and resolve it.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, legitimate perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will prevail here and the other side will in the end be defeated but all factions has has important lessons to learn from the other's arguments."
Request for More Extensive Debate
Westminster must engage with the debate, stated O’Toole. "This concerns Britain. It's a UK matter as much as it is an Irish question."
