A decade after the UK embarked on a rushed public vote that polarised the country and unleashed turmoil, a warning is issued from beyond the Irish Sea: it might repeat.
The government and citizens sleepwalked into Brexit and the same might transpire with a national vote on a united Ireland, triggering convulsions for which nobody is prepared.
That is the message from two respected commentators from each side of the Irish border who have joined forces to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of Northern Ireland leaving the UK to form a different country with the Republic of Ireland.
Political Institutions Ill-Equipped
Fintan O’Toole and Sam McBride, have found that the government bodies in Ireland and Britain are woefully unready for a possibly fraught and transformative public vote.
"The key takeaway of Brexit has gone unabsorbed, which is that developments can come out of the blue and can build support rapidly," O’Toole said. "I would suggest that the institutional structure of our islands remains extremely volatile."
New Title Intends to Provoke Discussion
The duo have examined the governmental, financial and societal reasons for any structural alteration in a book, For and Against a United Ireland, published by the Irish Royal Irish Academy.
They aim to provoke discussion on the topic with a series of speaking events that will take them to Westminster early next month.
"What haunts all parties, or ought to concern every person, is the Brexit referendum of 2016," stated the analyst.
"We do not want a referendum on a yes-no, ambiguous question whose implications have not been clarified because then you find yourself with an extraordinarily divided society where those defeated are resistant to defeat and the those successful lack clarity precisely what it is that they have gained."
Governmental Mandate
Under the Belfast Agreement, the Northern Ireland secretary of state must arrange a public vote on Irish unity if it seems probable that a majority would support.
Nationalist parties and other pro-unification groups say such a time is approaching, and a non-profit named pro-unification advocates has rallied support, but both governments and pro-UK factions minimise the likelihood, resulting in ambiguity if and when there could be a referendum.
Insufficient Informed Dialogue
Ideological statements for and against unification has masked the lack of informed dialogue, said the journalist.
"Many are supportive or opposed the concept but the detailed consideration which might go beyond that to realise it is mostly absent. A great deal has gone on in scholarly circles but very few elected officials or advocates want to engage even with the essentials. For instance, what sort of state would you want? Centralised? Federal?"
Book's Approach
In the volume, none of the commentators advocates unity or the current situation. Each writes two pieces that strive for objectivity in laying out the rationale for a unified Ireland and the rationale opposing it, marshalling financial and societal statistics, previous instances and structural examples.
Discussions range over national emblems, levies, health services, retirement funds, sovereign debt obligations and the risk of unionist unrest. The aim is to enlighten and encourage conversation.
"There is significant curiosity in the issue but there has not yet occurred a dialogue," commented the writer. "Debate indicates an acknowledgement of the notion that there could be valid points on each side."
Parallel Votes
A referendum in Northern Ireland would additionally cause one in the Republic of Ireland, where the electorate report they favour unification but refuse greater financial contributions or adopting a different emblem to recognise pro-UK communities' British identity.
"Policymakers in Ireland does need to establish what the proposal from pro-unification movements is beyond just stating: 'We desire a unified Ireland and we welcome you'," remarked O’Toole.
Likelihood of Public Vote
McBride considers a referendum in his era is probable and that it could happen suddenly. "It is possible just a reckless or a ill-advised or a feckless secretary of state who declares: 'Let us proceed and settle the matter.'"
Each of the nationalists and unionists have reasonable, legitimate arguments, he stated. "Somebody will prevail in this matter and somebody will eventually lose but all factions has possesses valuable insights to learn from the opposing viewpoints."
Call for More Extensive Discussion
Westminster should engage with the discussion, urged the analyst. "This is about the United Kingdom. It is a UK matter as much as it is an Irish matter."
