Ten years after the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that polarised the nation and triggered disorder, a warning is issued from across the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the identical could occur with a national vote on a united Ireland, initiating upheavals for which nobody is equipped.
That represents the warning from two prominent journalists from either side of the Irish border who have teamed up to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland exiting the UK to establish a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Unprepared
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have concluded that the administrative systems in Ireland and Britain are extremely unprepared for a potentially contentious and transformative referendum.
"The lesson of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole stated. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our islands remains very unstable."
Released Volume Aims to Encourage Dialogue
The team have studied the political, financial and cultural rationales for any constitutional change in a volume, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to encourage dialogue on the issue with a tour of lectures that will lead them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts everyone, or ought to concern all involved, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose results have remained undefined because then you find yourself with an extremely split population where people who have lost are resistant 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 official must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would vote in favour.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups argue such a time is approaching, and a non-profit called Ireland’s Future has built momentum, but both governments and unionists downplay the prospect, leaving it unclear when or if there could be a referendum.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unity has masked the absence of informed dialogue, noted the journalist.
"Individuals are often supportive or opposed the notion but the actual thinking which may surpass that to make it possible hasn't for the most part happened. Much has gone on in universities but scarcely any politicians or campaigners want to engage with even the basics. To illustrate, what type of nation would you want? Unitary? Decentralised?"
Volume's Strategy
In the volume, no writer endorses unity or the current situation. Both authors two essays that aim for objectivity in laying out the case for a united Ireland and the case opposing it, marshalling financial and societal figures, historical precedents and governmental frameworks.
Debates encompass flags and symbols, taxes, health services, pensions, sovereign debt obligations and the threat of loyalist violence. The goal is to inform and stimulate discussion.
"Considerable attention exists in the issue but there is still lacking a dialogue," commented the writer. "Debate implies an recognition of the notion that there could be good arguments on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the republic, where voters claim they favour unification but reject increased taxation or implementing a new flag to reflect unionists' British culture.
"The Irish government does need to determine what the proposal from nationalist groups is other than just stating: 'We want a unified Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Possibility of Public Vote
McBride considers a national vote in his generation is possible and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a mad or a poor or a negligent official who says: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate points, he stated. "One side will prevail here and somebody will eventually lose but each side has possesses something to acquire from the opposing arguments."
Request for Wider Dialogue
Westminster needed to join the debate, said O’Toole. "This concerns the United Kingdom. It is a British question as much as it is an Irish question."
