Ten years after the UK stumbled into a hurried public vote that divided the country and caused turmoil, a advisory is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it could happen again.
Authorities and voters entered unwittingly Brexit and the similar could occur with a national vote on a unified Ireland, sparking upheavals for which nobody is equipped.
That is the message from two leading writers from each side of the Irish border who have teamed up to scrutinise the pros and cons of Northern Ireland departing the UK to form a fresh nation with the Republic of Ireland.
Governmental Institutions Not Ready
The author and columnist and The Northern Ireland editor, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unprepared for a possibly contentious and monumental referendum.
"The crucial insight of Brexit remains unheeded, which is that developments can arise suddenly and can gain traction swiftly," O’Toole stated. "It is my view that the governmental framework of our archipelago remains highly fragile."
Book Publication Seeks to Encourage Dialogue
The pair have examined the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any constitutional change in a book, Examining Irish Unification, issued by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They hope to provoke discussion on the issue with a roadshow of lectures that will take them to Westminster soon.
"What haunts everybody, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," said O’Toole.
"We must avoid a national vote on a yes-no, unclear proposal whose consequences have remained undefined because then you end up with an extremely polarised community where those defeated are resistant to defeat and the people who have won are uncertain precisely what it is that they have won."
Constitutional Provision
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland government minister should call a referendum on Irish unity if it seems probable that a most voters would vote in favour.
Sinn Féin 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 minimise the likelihood, making it uncertain if and when there will be a national vote.
Absence of Substantive Discussion
Ideological statements supporting and opposing unification has obscured the lack of informed dialogue, said McBride.
"Many are for or against the notion but the concrete planning which may surpass that to achieve it hasn't for the most part happened. A lot has gone on in universities but scarcely any government figures or campaigners are willing to participate even with the essentials. For instance, what sort of state should be desired? Unitary? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the book, no writer endorses unity or the status quo. Both writes two essays that aim for impartiality in laying out the argument for a united Ireland and the rationale opposing it, assembling financial and social statistics, historical precedents and structural examples.
Arguments encompass identity markers, duties, health services, retirement funds, national debt responsibilities and the threat of loyalist violence. The objective is to enlighten and provoke discussion.
"There's huge interest in the issue but there is still lacking a discussion," said O’Toole. "Debate implies an acceptance of the notion that there might be valid points on either side."
Dual Referendums
A referendum in Northern Ireland would simultaneously prompt one in the Republic of Ireland, where voters say they prefer unity but reject greater financial contributions or introducing a new flag to acknowledge pro-UK communities' British identity.
"The Irish government should determine what the proposal from Irish nationalism is aside from just stating: 'We desire a united Ireland and we value you'," remarked the commentator.
Probability of Referendum
McBride thinks a referendum in his generation is likely and that it might occur abruptly. "You could have just a irresponsible or a poor or a incompetent secretary of state who declares: 'We should proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have plausible, valid points, he said. "Somebody will succeed in this matter and the other side will ultimately lose but both parties has possesses something to learn from the alternative arguments."
Call for Broader Discussion
Westminster must join the dialogue, said the analyst. "This is about Britain. It's a British question as much as it is an Irish matter."
