A decade following the UK embarked on a hasty public vote that split the country and unleashed disorder, a warning emerges from beyond the Irish Sea: it may occur once more.
Policymakers and electorate entered unwittingly Brexit and the similar might transpire with a referendum on a united Ireland, initiating disturbances for which no one is equipped.
That conveys the caution from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to create a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Administrative Structures Not Ready
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are gravely unready for a potentially fraught and transformative referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," the commentator remarked. "In my opinion that the political architecture of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Released Volume Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The duo have examined the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, released by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to stir debate on the topic with a roadshow of public talks that will lead them to Westminster in the coming weeks.
"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern everybody, is the Brexit vote of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We should prevent a national vote on a binary, ambiguous question whose consequences have not been spelled out because then you land with an extremely divided society where the losing side are unable to accept defeat and the those successful are uncertain quite what it is that they have achieved."
Legal Framework
Under the Good Friday agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it is indicated that a majority would support.
Nationalist parties and other nationalists argue such a time is approaching, and a non-profit named Ireland’s Future has rallied support, but authorities in Dublin and London and unionists play down the possibility, leaving it unclear if and when there might be a national vote.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unification has hidden the lack of serious debate, noted the journalist.
"People tend to be supportive or opposed the notion but the detailed consideration which could extend past that to achieve it has largely not occurred. A lot has gone on in scholarly circles but hardly any elected officials or advocates want to engage with the basics. As an example, what type of nation would you want? Centralised? Federal?"
Volume's Strategy
In the book, none of the commentators supports unification or the current situation. Both writes two pieces that strive for objectivity in laying out the argument for a unified Ireland and the argument opposing it, assembling economic and social statistics, historical precedents and constitutional models.
Arguments encompass identity markers, duties, healthcare systems, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The aim is to inform and stimulate dialogue.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," commented the writer. "Debate suggests an acceptance of the notion that there might be valid points on both sides."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the republic, where the electorate claim they favour unification but reject greater financial contributions or adopting a new flag to recognise pro-UK communities' UK heritage.
"Authorities in Dublin does need to work out what the offer from Irish nationalism is beyond just saying: 'We want a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked the commentator.
Probability of Public Vote
The journalist believes a referendum in his era is possible and that it might occur unexpectedly. "There might be just a reckless or a poor or a feckless official who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Both nationalists and pro-UK supporters have reasonable, legitimate perspectives, he stated. "One side will succeed on this issue and somebody will in the end not succeed but all factions has possesses valuable insights to gain from the other's positions."
Call for Wider Debate
Westminster must engage with the debate, urged the analyst. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a British question equally as it is an Irish question."
