A decade after the UK stumbled into a hurried referendum that split the country and caused disorder, a warning emerges from across the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the similar may happen with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating convulsions for which nobody is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading commentators from both sides of the Irish border who have joined forces to examine the pros and cons of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Ill-Equipped
The author and columnist and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully ill-prepared for a potentially contentious and monumental public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that stuff can arise suddenly and can gain traction very quickly," O’Toole stated. "It is my view that the political architecture of our archipelago remains very unstable."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The team have studied the governmental, economic and societal rationales for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They seek to encourage dialogue on the topic with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everybody, or must worry everybody, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," commented the analyst.
"We must avoid a referendum on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you find yourself with an extremely split population where the losing side are unable to accept losing and the those successful are uncertain exactly what it is that they have gained."
Constitutional Provision
Under the peace accord, the Northern Ireland official should call a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists claim that moment is imminent, and a organisation called pro-unification advocates has built momentum, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists downplay the prospect, making it uncertain if and when there might be a national vote.
Lack of Informed Dialogue
Political rhetoric supporting and opposing unification has hidden the shortage of informed dialogue, stated the journalist.
"Individuals are often for or against the notion but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to realise it has largely not occurred. Much has occurred in academia but scarcely any politicians or activists want to engage with even the essentials. For instance, what type of nation would you want? Centralised? Decentralised?"
Book's Approach
In the book, neither author advocates unification or the current situation. Both writes two essays that seek neutrality in presenting the rationale for a unified Ireland and the argument against, marshalling financial and social statistics, past examples and structural examples.
Debates cover national emblems, levies, health services, elderly benefits, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of unionist unrest. The goal is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the subject but there hasn't quite been a dialogue," stated the writer. "Debate suggests an acknowledgement of the idea that there might be reasonable perspectives on both sides."
Dual Referendums
A public vote in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters claim they prefer unity but oppose greater financial contributions or implementing a different emblem to reflect unionists' British culture.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to work out what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just stating: 'We desire a united Ireland and we love you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Referendum
The journalist believes a national vote in his lifetime is possible and that it might occur suddenly. "It is possible just a irresponsible or a poor or a negligent official who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and pro-UK supporters have plausible, justified perspectives, he commented. "Somebody will succeed on this issue and the other side will ultimately be defeated but all factions has got valuable insights to learn from the other's viewpoints."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster must join the debate, said O’Toole. "This is about Britain. It's a British issue as much as it is an Irish issue."
